Kiwi303

That's the one they photoshop battleship tanks onto to make Internet Memes...

 

And it carried less that the Lancasters, through more than the Wellingtons. If they had the Tu-95's turboprops, they may have had enough power to make it useful, but with the materials science of the time, to make it strong enough to be that big meant making it heavy, and the lift and drag involved meant the power needed was so much more than the engines of the time were practical to make.

 

 

I wonder if his insurance will replace the cow... or will the farmer have to claim on His insurance?

 

 

I did a little hacking and found the image of babe in a bikini, you can thank me later:thumb up:

And here she is all hot and nekkid! (NSFW, you'll drool on the office computer)

 

 

 

Can we see the hot babe in the small bikini?

 

 

Didn't know that was a thing. My 701 plans show the firewall actually leans backward at the top providing a lovely sharp edge to dig in, but then again it is a high wing.

It came up at one point on the HBA forum, I think it may have been the "Design for Safety" thread, anyhow a number of designs were pointed out that had that sort of setup.

 

Even in a less severe crash, the engine on a plane with a Lyc or Cont or similar flat design is usually mounted fairly high up and theres a lot of space below filled with the carb and such, with just a light cowling that is easily pushed up in a crash to expose the much stiffer firewall which can dig in and apparently has caused flips by digging in.

 

Yes, if the crash is that fast and that severe you're likely FUBARed anyway, but it did seem like a reasonable thing to build in if it wasn't dictated otherwise by the geometry of the design. Just loading the dice that few percentage points closer to survival.

 

 

From the looks it's a plumb square up-and-down firewall rather than slanting rearwards at the bottom to avoid digging the fuselage in after the engine comes off in a crash?

 

 

Possibly they wanted to wait until all fire and rescue trucks had arrived and were stationary, given the chinese girl who survived a crash but got run over.

 

Wouldn't be the first time that Shit Happening caused Cover-Your-Ass policy directives by shiny arsed desk monkeys which are not just illogical, but create a different danger while covering the original danger.

 

 

Pretty hard to work out what is going on there. I guess we will have to wait for the report. Nev

A guess, not an interlligent engineers estimate, just a wild ass guess. But from the way the rear of the engine pod looks solid yellow under the wing and the wing is alight all along the slots, A leak gushing fuel into the hot end of the engine pod seems likely.

 

It looks to me the source of the fire is from the pod, the solid yellow exhaust is coming out like an afterburner, but too much fuel to combust cleanly hence the yellow flames and black sooty smoke. the engine must have stopped, yet enough airflow through the vanes to push it out the rear not the front.

 

It's going to be a interesting report. Airliner with Reheat...

 

 

What jig

 

The one you danced, :happy dance:you know, the one that's going to be on page 1139 of the builders manual

Yep, the one on the spot!

 

I'm a hopeless dancer, You better include step-by-step instructions and maybe a music CD or MP4 with a suitable beat!

 

 

I know were there's hundreds of war planes.I'll swap the address for free flying lesson or an "ebay" license, LoL

spacesailor

I don't think F/A18's count. The airforce would probably object about restoration bods coming and salvaging their wrecks while they're still flying.

 

 

A Jig? Isn't it supposed to be a Jigless build? Isn't a flat table sufficient by itself now?

 

 

 

South Island. I am curently in the Nelson Lakes, not far from the national park... In fact, walk out the back yard through the chook run and the back gate goes straight into a reserve which connects to the national park.

 

Most of the year tho, I am just south of Christchurch.

 

 

Actually for New Mexico USA, I think Barnstormers, as a US site would be the better place. More likely to sell a US located aircraft on a US centric site with various overseas visitors than on a (mostly) Australian site with various overseas visitors.

 

www.barnstormers.com

 

 

no one wants to end up with a gob fulla Sh*^%$.

Then why is that the standard status of a Pollie in front of a camera?

 

 

Well, there are some issues, I haven't gotten a straight answer on whether Parrot Shooting should be done with a 12 gauge, or whether a 20G would work. Budgie Jumping seems a little unreliable as well and I haven't met anyone who can tell me which breed is most effective for Hen Gliding... Should I use a egg breed or meat breed?

 

Actually I bought an Australian translation and modification of a French plane.

 

Frank Rogers redrafting of the Jodel D.11 from Parlez vous Franquois to Gidday Mate, Wotcha upta!

 

Unused secondhand set sold to a Paddy and resold to me when he realised he'd never get around to using them a couple of decades later.

 

 

Yeah he's a bastard, does more on his aircraft in a week than I do in a year.

Mines still ink on paper sitting in a box covered in Irish stamps.

 

 

I hear you can have a doggone good time in Yulin.

 

A bit gamey for me, but makes a decent stew.

 

 

.. and a few of you guy's breath smells like bait too.

Maybe they have been trying asian cuisine?

 

 

 

It would look a lot tidier mounted below the panel instead of on top. Is the knob removable?

I should have scrolled down. I read this and got busy for a few minutes with MS Paint.

 

I don't have Photoshop...

 

Another post down and I wouldn't have bothered.

 

 

 

While I don't pay much attention to Aussie politics, they're less entertaining and have less impact on the world economy and hence commodities trades and the NZ economy, I'm left wondering if there's an angle in her having a Jab as a flying taxicab, or is that just coincidence? I'm sure she could have got a Cirrus or an Alpi or a Cessna to buzz her around just as easily. But what I know of her from the media she gets over here reminds me strongly of Winston Peters...

 

If she has an angle with having a Jab and is planning some kind of "Political/Bureaucratic Incompetence killing Aussie Jobs, Vote for Me and I'll sort it out" sort of thing pointing to the Jabiru/CASA issues...

 

Or do you guys think it's just a coincidence?

 

 

Join the Canard Forum. There's a whle forum for Open-EZ and related design builders/owners.

 

 

page 7? anyone got TL:DR down to say... three pargraphs?

 

 

Maybe they mean Ground Penetrating Radar?

 

But those are meant to find cold war missile silos, not boxes of obsolete aircraft parts.

 

 

Is that for Plans built or Scratch built aircraft??

I'm confused about the AU regs. I've read some here and some there, but you have more types... 19 reg, 24 reg, VH reg.

 

We just have the VK reg.

 

All planes registered as microlights here are either Class 1 (single seat) or Class 2 (twin seat). 45Kn stall in the landing configuration, flaps up, flaps down, no flaps, all designers choice, just under 45 knt. Plans, Kit, Factory, doesn't matter, weight and maintenance regs are the same for all Microlights. What they are registered as (ML vs GA) determines the regs they operate under, Not HOW they are made.

 

NZ) https://www.caa.govt.nz/Advisory_Circulars/AC103_1.pdf

 

UK) www.bmaa.org/pwpcontrol.php?pwpID=3151

 

The NZ one: from AC 103-01

 

The definition of a microlight aircraft is found in Rule Part 1 and is repeated below:- Microlight aircraft means a basic low performance aircraft designed to carry not more than 2 persons which meets low momentum parameters that are acceptable to the Director:

 

The following specifications are considered as an acceptable means of compliance to meet the definition of a microlight aircraft:

 

any of the microlight specifications called up in the type design standards listed in Appendix 1of this AC.

 

or

 

a 1or 2 seat aircraft whose stall speed in the landing configuration at maximum gross weight does not exceed 45 Knots and whose maximum gross weight does not exceed:

 

For a 2 -place landplane 600 kg; or

 

For a 2 -place seaplane or amphibian 650 kg; or

 

For a single place landplane does not exceed 510 kg; or

 

For a single place seaplane or amphibian does not exceed 550 kg

 

However, sometimes the info given on the site does not always match, see:

 

"2. In the absence of certification to the above standards, an aircraft that meets the specifications below may still be defined as a Class 2 Microlight:

 

a. If 6 or more aircraft of the type been operated and the aircraft type has achieved a documented satisfactory airworthiness history of at least 150 hours of flight including at least 50 hours of flight on one aircraft; or

 

b. If the aircraft is a New Zealand designed prototype, a temporary flight permit has been issued for the aircraft and the aircraft has satisfactorily completed the required endurance test.

 

Ref. 103.207(a)

 

c. Performance and Weight Limitations

 

A one or two seat aircraft whose stall speed, in the landing configuration, at maximum gross weight does not exceed 45 knots, and having a maximum gross weight of:

 

•

 

544 kg for landplanes;

 

•

 

579 kg for a single-place seaplane or amphibian;

 

•

 

614 kg for a two-place seaplane or amphibian. "

 

As in https://www.caa.govt.nz/ga/sport_&_rec/guide_for_micro_importers.pdf

 

Hmm

 

It looks like the old 544Kg may have been lowered to 510 with a 2012 change of the 103 regs.