Bats

A friend bought an aircraft that had been registered in Switzerland; it came fitted with an extended exhaust which included a small muffler and he was told this was a condition of the registration to address noise. I don't know how the Swiss did their noise testing, but can only say that I could not discern any difference between his aircraft and others of the same model in the circuit, nor from inside the cabin. Eventually the extra chunk of stainless steel was discarded at an annual. Similarly, I recently travelled to Sydney towing a large trailer and of necessity travelled a bit slower than usual. I was twice overtaken by Teslas on the highway and found that there was little to no difference in the sound experienced through my open window, between them and a couple of large saloons which passed at about the same time - it was all tyre and wind noise, not exhaust. From my experience I doubt that there is much effective noise reduction to be found through the use of an extended exhaust etc on an aircraft.

As the man said; "Two out of three ain't bad"

I seem to recall an earlier, long running thread on this subject (F-T weren't you involved?) My only involvement with a flying BMW was an older boxer that proved a little problematic, but I have followed various build threads with interest over the years and I have to say, no-one seems to have found it as straight forward or cheap as you make out. Even Europa who were hellbent on finding an alternative to the 912, eventually threw in the towel after investing quite a few pounds and manhours on the project.

I reckon someone is going to get this right sooner than later - Viking may even have done so on a technical level for all I know, it would just take a lot to convince me to do business with them. There is a lot to admire about the new generation of small car engines and there is already some cross over in for example Honda outboards, an application that is not dissimilar to aircraft usage in that the engines are frequently run at 75% plus power for extended periods and they have an excellent reputation for reliability and longevity..

Google "Jan Eggenfellner" and hold onto your hat!

There is/was one flying in a Morgan out of Jacobs Well. I guess until we have reasonable numbers of them flying and piling on the hours, there is an element of trust involved and that's where the opinions come in.

So did I, but the "my daddy's bigger than your daddy" response didn't add anything to the discussion, hence my invitation to contribute in some meaningful way. Being instructed to consult Wikipedia didn't really do it for me either to be honest.

Very true, it seems that the odd photo we see of an aircraft stuck up in a tree is very much the exception, the more likely scenario is getting tripped up by the top of a tree and being deposited nose first 150' straight down. That sort of thing tends to sting.On a lighter note, remember this brain surgeon? [MEDIA=liveleak]cf8_1437953280[/MEDIA]

Perhaps you could educate those of us who don't have a horse in this race then? Personally, I find statements backed up by facts and evidence a lot more convincing than the old kindy slapdown.

Designed by the well known aeronautical engineer, Heath Robinski?

Investigation: AO-2017-024 - Collision with terrain involving B200 King Air VH-ZCR at Essendon Airport, Victoria on 21 February 2017 Prelim report out, but other than confirming a few things, there is little that's new. Both engines turning, take off run appeared longer than usual and mayday after lift off.

Hi Bolero - in my case a good mate and I were using up the last of the afternoon ridgelift on a coastal dune before adjourning for a debrief at the pub below. My mate, who drives airliners for a living, when not also playing with his RV, turned in close behind me to take some photos, believing that as his wing was a good half span above mine, he was clear of any turbulence. Got his attention in a big way when a chunk of wing collapsed, whilst he had the toggles loosely in one hand! The clunk when the penny dropped was clearly audible....

I suspect so, presumably any atmospheric disturbance that would result in wake turbulence or vortices ascending, would also dissipate it. That said it was one of life's little disappointments to learn that wake turbulence is to be found close behind and above a paraglider flying in smooth ridge lift.

Sling is a great aircraft, but why not consider converting to something else - they all have something to teach you. Something like a Tecnam Sierra would be closest to what you're used to, but why not step right out of your comfort zone and try say a Eurofox or Foxbat?

Dutchroll, here is another, I note that there appear to be a couple of washers on the opposite side to the apparent nut. I wonder if the photo isn't a bit of a red herring, with the ATSB being part way through removing the flange when the journos stuck their oar in? The flange was certainly missing when the prop was photographed before being loaded onto the truck.

A lie as in "untruth designed to mislead"? Pretty bold statement to make and I fail to understand what the crew would gain by it. Been reading Ben Sandilands' flights of fancy by any chance?

Another report said that an additional 5 had been grounded, over and above the damaged aircraft. 2 of them are Pel-Air freighters.

Ouch, there's a cautionary tale if I ever saw one! Unfortunately all this stupidity drives people to cheat the system - use multiple doctors and ensure that none of them subscribe to the central medical database that is supposedly "for our protection". I suspect most of us know people, who on the face of it, live pretty unhealthy lifestyles and yet renew medicals with apparent ease, playing the system as it were.

Bruce, I don't have the stats to hand, but my recollection is that the FAA stats excluded inline twins, which are obviously more benign. One of the heavyweights from Flying did an article on the subject (Collins?) and it seemed that conventional twins killed people by going over on their backs shortly after take-off where the asymmetric thrust was mishandled or speed too low, but also on approach when pilots got behind the aircraft as they started adding drag. I read a lot about the subject because a mate built a Zenith 601 and we were both rather taken with a twin version, until the realities of a short-coupled twin with smallish tailfeathers and fixed pitch props dawned on us.

Making an engine failure into "an inflight procedure" may just be over-simplifying things a little. It is not for nothing that the fatal accident rate for light twins was (is?) worse than for singles for many years now. In my view, other than those aircraft where the impact of asymmetric thrust has been minimised, they are horses for experienced hands, not weekend warriors.

The only one I've flown did have rudders, interconnected with the aileron control on the yoke. I believe some were retrofitted with conventional rudder controls via pedals.

Incidentally Anthony Fokker is credited with being the first to use the twin fuselage concept in 1915 odd and the Germans are supposed to have toyed with an Me-109 in similar configuration to the Twin Mustang.

Geez you guys are quick off the mark today!

No not at all, but you do need a duplicate inspection before you fly, after re-assembly.

Slight jog off topic, but WTF is this caution button about? Seems to be used as some sort of passive-aggressive way of disagreeing with people without actually sticking your neck out and making a statement which can be debated in turn. Grates my gears to be honest.