Birdseye

Yep, crap like Facebook and Twitter have a lot to answer for.

Looks like a leisurely jaunt down the river to me. Seems it doesn't matter what arm of the Daily Mail; same crap they peddle.

<Sigh>, at least they didn't call it a Cessna.

Spin?

The main issues were most likely that the selection and training processes failed to identify unsuitable traits in the first place. However, there also comes into play any question of procedural deficiencies in the ATC system and procedures. I have also seen situations where a controller with limited experience was placed in situations that were predictable and should have been dealt with by a more experienced one. I'd like to know more about the "During the evaluation, four incidents occurred", as if the controller was being correctly monitored, there should have been zero incidents. Without a link to a substantial report, the original post is quite worthless.

Reality is that stall spin incidents may be fatal if the conditions are right (or is that wrong). The Piper Tomahawk was involved in a number of incidents, but if the correct recovery actions were applied and maintained, it would come out of the spin OK ( I have spinned a Tomahawk on more than one occasion). Some suggestions made at the time were that anti-spin recovery actions were not continued long enough, because people had become conditioned to aircraft like the Cherokee which would recover at the slightest hint of correct recovery actions. The failure to respond immediately lead people to try alternative methods, often to their cost. I've no interest in hypothesizing as to what exactly happened in this event and I suggest that the speculators wait until there is something definitive.

LPG also results in some incredibly long lasting motors that are internally very clean.

Rolls Royce did quite well making engines in the 1000 to 2200hp range .... Not sure that tetraethlylead had much to do with the numbers of manufacturers building engines, I suspect it was more to do with the economics.

There have been a number of issues in the past where aircraft with low fuel states have failed to convey the urgency (often due to language issues, sometimes due to unhelpful US controllers) of their situation. I'm guessing that this is the response from ICAO. Bear in mind that they have to cater for the worst case scenario of language and technical appreciation. However, I still think its a misuse of the Mayday term. I don't know who taught Ian, but they were incorrect from the international position.

Great video.

Having endured a few days on jury duty, I can say that it is one of the most ridiculous systems I have ever encountered. Ditto iBob, the UK selection is far better. Want to avoid getting on a jury? Just wearing a collared shirt and tie should ensure that one of the bottom feeding parasites will object to you.

The original text based article: 'Waiting for someone to get killed': No answers over mid-air engine failures

Odd but appropriate typo: "A series of engine failures are lead to be because of a change in aviation fuel in the Northern Territory ", as apparently it may be related to a reduction in lead content and an increase in aromatics in the fuel.

I'm sure that the lycra bicycle types will love it until it pisses with rain. In fact very well suited to Fremantle.

As I intimated, the story of the aircraft was far more interesting than the aircraft itself.

Some people will do anything to help sell their crappy apartments. Another quiet news day?

As far as I can tell the rego with the 'X' wasn't valid.

OK, Allied A-2 "The Allied Aircraft Company was one of the over fifty aircraft companies that have been at Wichita, Kansas, USA, some produced one and others built thousands. Allied was formed in 1946 by a six-man team headed by Harry Ragland, the others were Phillips, Walt Davies, Al Landas, Ron Albertson and Ken Haddock. Designed by Phillips the A-2 featured an all-metal construction with a V-shaped tail, a manually retractable landing gear with a castering nose wheel, and a forward sliding windshield. Powerplant was an 185 hp Continental O-470. Some 35,000 engineering man-hours went into the project before the A-2, registered NX3153K (c/n 21), was flown for the first time by Ragland on April 9, 1948 from Municipal Airport to Wilson Field north-east of downtown Wichita, where about 180 hours of test flights were made. However, a fire destroyed company's workshop, including the production rigs and two A-2s under construction. The following financial difficulties forced the company to close down. The aircraft was sold to a person in Oklahoma, subsequently owner was Walter Baker in Alva. After a number of years in disassembled state, in 1972 the aircraft remains were sold to Thomas 'Tom' Jackson Balentine of Copan, also in Oklahoma. The aircraft was missing the engine, wings, tail and windows, so it took Balentine a considerable number of years to rebuild the aircraft, the new engine was a 210 hp Continental IO-360 SER. Reregistered N312TJ and designated Thomas/Edra Balentine TJ-2 (c/n 2) on October 11, 1984 (Edra was Tom Balentine's wife), the aircraft made its second maiden flight about a year later, receiving a new CofA on January 11, 1986. In October 2012 the aircraft was flown to Wichita, and on April 5, 2013 the aircraft was registered to the Kansas Aviation Museum, under the initial registration N3153K. Subsequently two new aircraft were built by Balentine, under the designation Allied TJ they were registered N504WM (c/n 022) to Balentine's friend William S. Martin and N312TJ (c/n 023) to to himself. Balentine flew the N312TJ on his 86th birthday, September 30, 2014." (Source: 1000aircraftphotos.com)

True.

That aircraft has an interesting history.

Seems odd that having claimed 55 hours flying the empty weight and cruise speed are still shown as estimated.

Perhaps the more valid question is, "why did the pilot not undo it?" I'd expect that checking trims (elevator/aileron/rudder) would be in all pre-start procedures. In a different scenario, would you be asking why the previous pilot did not put sufficient fuel in for a later flight that ran out of fuel?

One of its original selling points was runway performance, balanced t/o distance required less that 5000' and landing less than 3000' for average conditions. A quick measure on Google Earth showed 19 at about 5300'.

Glad that at least one other read the report before commenting :-)

A "thought", that is fanciful, unlikely and not based on any fact.