rollerball

Hi Frank, I have an IMC rating, admittedly lapsed, so I wasn't too concerned about continuing with the vis as it was in the first part of the vid. However, as you can see it suddenly got worse and that's when I decided to call it a day. It's all a matter of judgement I guess and I reached my point of no-go maybe after some others would have, plus up to that point I had the option of turning right 90 degrees and running with the fog front, albeit in continuing low vis, until I got out of it.. I was flying with a pal in another slower aircraft who left a bit before me and we were both heading for an airfield further north where we were due to meet up for our evening cook-and-brew-up and nightly camp, but pressing on to meet up with him didn't come into it. Although our plan was to fly right up the western coast of France next to the sea, which is what I was doing, he stayed more inland and wasn't affected by the fog. However, he decided on a precautionary at Arcachon to check on his fuel and had a merry game. Arcachon is the main GA summer weekend destination for pilots from Bordeaux and the manager there only wants people with pips on their shoulders and not grubby ultralight pilots like him, and especially coming in non-radio when it's 'obligatoire'. To start off with the manager insisted that he wasn't going to be allowed to take off again and that he'd have to trailer his aircraft out, but my mate being a retired Dutch air force pilot wasn't going to have any of that. It all got sorted in the end But returning to your question, yup, I accept what you're saying. Some may have decided to pack it in a bit sooner than I did but I was happy until I reached my personal limit and for me it was then a no-brainer, and it worked out fine. The important thing I think is to recognise when you've reached that point and act upon it immediately and not to try and push your limit beyond what you know, not think, you can cope with.

About 1½ hours by road from me. Was at the Villeneuve Air show back in May which was my last 'event' of the year before my health problems hit. Have been grounded since but got the welcome news a couple days ago that they've now been sorted so will be back flying in the spring, with a flight into Villeneuve high on the list. Only 30 mins in the Savannah. That's French roads for you I agree with IBob - before you junk the idea make sure you talk to someone who's done it.

I won't hog this thread which I apologise for already changing the direction of a bit but fuel management is a subject very close to my heart. At around the time I mentioned in my earlier post there's a confirmed story of 4 folks in a Cherokee from Biggin who arrived later than expected in Amsterdam I think it was. The PIC decided not to refuel because he wanted to get back to Biggin before it closed and so set off for home with only partial tanks. He was in radio contact with ATC right until the aircraft hit the water and neither it nor its occupants were ever located. As I say, sorry for the thread drift but I think it's a lesson that new pilots need to take on board - and old ones often become a little bit blase about.

If you need something to suck up the last few tiny drops of fuel in your tank, methinks you're flying a bit too close to the wind. Allowing for inadequate fuel reserves is one of the most scary things you can do, as I know to my cost. Back in the 80s I was a member of a Cherokee 180 syndicate and used to fly it occasionally from Biggin Hill to Zurich on business with the costs being met by my then employer (BA Club Class fare). So it was a good opportunity to take my now ex-wife along, put her into a separate hotel to the one I had to go to for business reasons and then take a couple days holiday in Zurich before heading off back home. On the day in question I'd filed my flight plan and got held up - by nearly an hour - but didn't want to mess around cancelling and refiling it. And then, of course, there were stronger than expected headwinds, so I upped the engine revs a bit to stay within the flight plan ETA. My wife kept pointing out during the flight how quickly the gauges were dropping, but me being the 'experienced' aviator that I was airily dismissed her concerns, saying that aircraft aren't like cars and that we do detailed fuel calculations so as to avoid any problems. My approach into Zurich was via Bremgarten in the SW of the city where on previous occasions I'd had to hold before receiving clearance. Luckily that day I was cleared straight in and tracked across the city centre towards the airport where I landed safely and followed the Follow Me to GA parking, where I left the aircraft until the Monday morning. When I came to refuel I found that from the volume of fuel that I took on board I had used fuel from the wing tanks that is described in the Pilot's Operating Manual as unusable. I was horrified when I thought what could have happened during the last few minutes of my flight. From that day to this I can say with hand on heart that I've never, ever overstretched my fuel reserves.

In general I think composite props have a recommended replacement period of about 10 years in normal life. The DUC 3-blader on my Sav was older than that and had some chips on a leading edge that had been very poorly repaired, possibly with baking powder and superglue by the look of it, this being France. I had been agonising over what to do - improve the repair, replace the blade, replace the whole prop - when the matter was taken totally out of my hands when I stupidly bumped into something hard with the engine running, fortunately with no damage other than to the prop itself (all 3 blades) and the spinner. So I ended up buying a brand new 3 blade scimitar prop complete with spinner direct from the Ukraine (copy of Kiev) for half the price of the DUC that had been on there. Unfortunately I was then overtaken by health problems and I still haven't flown the aircraft with the prop fitted (health problems now resolved - hooray!!!) but don't foresee any problems with it. It came complete with s/s edge protectors and a purpose-built pitch gauge too, BTW.

I love this comment from the man in the suit.... Civil Aviation Safety Authority spokesman Peter Gibson said the incident was being investigated. “We’ll be getting a more detailed report from the pilot and reviewing it to ensure the engine problem is fixed,” he said. So until he gets that engine running again he won't be allowed to take off. And that's official!

The thing that immediately changes is wing loading. Messing around with wingspan may, for example, take you outside permitted limits and make you illegal. But the lower the wing loading (higher the wing area) the less lift you need to generate to keep the aircraft in the air with knock-ons therefore affecting stall, climb and cruise speeds as well as engine suitability. A pal here in France, where you can mess about with your ULM (ultralight) almost to your heart's content) stuck some extensions on the wings of his single-seat Weedhopper because he wanted to fly low and slow and burn less fuel. He had such problems floating on his 150 metre strip that he ended up taking them off again This is where I hand over to someone who actually knows what they're talking about.

I don't see how you can keep the manual flap lever where it is if you have a stick between your legs (ahem...) Doesn't the twin stick kit include instructions as to what to do about it? I too wouldn't have anything other than manual flaps on my Sav. I can't see the reason for carrying any more excess weight than is necessary.

Flying into a bank of sea fog in my X-Air while heading north on France's SW coast in 2015. As I said at the time when I posted it, 'D'you think you can hack it?' I was bo**ocked for landing non-radio at a 'radio obligatoire' airfield but when I explained the reason they could not have been more accommodating and sociable. It's not worth pressing on - never.

That's why I came to France in my retirement. Possibly the best country in the world in which to fly - laid back in regulatory terms and great terrain and scenery. Not flown since April because of health reasons but can't wait to get back behind the controls, hopefully in the Spring.

My experience of Rans S6s both here and in the UK are that they have an undercarriage that is designed for operation off long US tarmac runways. The legs are thin and slot into housings that are welded directly to the fuselage framework with no trailing links to prevent them moving backwards eg after a hard(ish) landing on grass. If that happens you can end up with a major repair job requiring (as of one incident in the UK) a complete new fuselage assembly imported with long delay from the US (luckily for the owner concerned, paid for by the insurer). Another friend here in France had a Rans S12 with the same legs. He bent one after a hard landing on a rough grass runway and ordered in a replacement pair from the States. By the time they arrived he had had a new pair fabricated locally here in France - the reason given was that Rans manufacture in short runs as and when they have sufficient orders to make it economically justifiable. If you will operate from a flat hard runway you should not have any problems. If not and you will be flying off rough grass, I personally would not touch one because of the above, despite them being otherwise a pretty little ultralight. Just my opinion.

Nah.... too busy cutting my toenails. Or do you mean the rugby league? As you're 'a real man' and a pilot to boot you must do. Sadly where I live I can only get Freesat TV so I don't think it was covered. Since learning the result I have managed to drown my sorrows and although touch and go, I'll probably survive in the certain knowledge that there's always next time. And after slaughtering you in the ONLY game that matters, rugby union, we have to let you win something because we know how important pride is to you guys

No wonder Nicola Sturgeon is such a sourpuss, eh..... Mind you, the other lot would have done the same if they'd got the chance.

ah, you've spotted the anomaly - not really, it's just that I'm retired now and wanted to come to somewhere that I have fond memories of as a young man, that's warmer than the UK and where life is much less hectic. Living in the rural Dordogne is like the UK back in the 60s - lovely friendly people, not a lot of traffic, and neighbours who care about you and you about them. It helps to speak French of course

Bolshy lot you Aussies, aren't you. Start a punch up out of any old thing. Pity you aren't full of peace and karma like us Poms DO NOT talk to me about cricket because then there will be trouble.

Can't speak for the Aus Telegraph of course. I was referring to the UK Daily Telegraph,a centre right publication owned by the Barclay brothers. Need to be careful with terminology especially on a non-political forum like this, because anyone who disagrees with their opinions or political stances refers to various newspapers as 'rags'. But I don't think that's for discussion here, eh.

Yup, and great to see that he'd shut down the left engine too and probably ended up saving that as well. Well done that man.

Is it the stolspeed conversion that retains the original wing cord and profile with just the slats cut off or the 'official' one that has a changed profile and slightly larger wing area with a completely new leading edge?

There was a very good analysis of why Monarch went to the wall the other day on the DT web site. It was primarily due to the fact that the tourist markets they served had become terrorist hot-spots - Sharm el Sheik, Tunisia, Morocco etc even Turkey to an extent that tourists just stopped going to and they couldn't get competitive slots and hotels etc in the ones that people still visit - Spain mainly. So the writing had been on the wall for some time - costs up, passenger numbers down. It also perhaps didn't help that Monarch was owned by a private capital group and if it had been an independent company under agile management it might have been able to respond quicker, but that's just speculation now. But what is for sure is that its demise had nothing to do with Brexit - it was failure in it business model.

You land to pick up some fuel and have a couple vodkas with your mates, then go to take off like you always do.... and now you've gotta explain to the wife why you're gonna be home late. That's just rank bad luck.....

Not quite. Some years ago we had an aircraft with an engine failure setting up to land on a golf course fairway, only to notice a couple of golfers strolling away right in the wrong place. They showed no notice of his approach and he had no way to warn them, so he diverted to land on a nearby highway and was killed in a collision with a 4wd..... Take your point and genuinely sorry to hear that. But respect to the pilot - at least he did what we might have expected of him, unlike apparently the chap in Portugal. It's a vexing question though as we'd be adding what might be regarded as unnecessary weight to aircraft that would in the great majority of cases never need to be used. BTW like your avatar pic. That was going to be me around rural France this year with the pop-up but have been unfortunately grounded, hopefully not permanently, by dratted illness.

Those amongst us who are less respectful of authority could possibly fit a set of Colonel Bogey air horns

Metal polish on polycarbonate is a no-no as it will create bloom in the affected area

'Theiss chosen because of their huge expertise'. I can only say that I'm deeply unimpressed by this. I'll keep my eyes open for when Aus has any navy assets to dispose of - presumably by then Theiss will have developed huge expertise in digging really, really big holes.

I think that the last thing any pilot would think about while in the middle of an enforced or emergency landing would be sounding his horn! But the problem on this occasion seems to be that the pilot in question put his own safety before that of 3rd parties when we should be doing precisely the opposite. He elected to forced land on a crowded beach, no matter if the people he killed wandered in front of him at the last minute (which may or may not have happened) when he could have ditched in fairly shallow water close to the beach. As a high wing design, even if the Cessna had inverted, there would have been precious little impeding the exit of the occupants and in any case, their chance of survival would have been much higher than that of the poor unfortunates that they hit, which was precisely zero. So interesting though this thread is, it doesn't have much purpose in the real world, IMO.