facthunter

IF you cared to read what I've posted over many years, you would be   aware of my consistent approach to this topic. Your last line is a CHEAP shot unworthy of you. The Part of my post you quoted WAS   information that I hoped would be useful. You could have built on that. OR ASKED A QUESTION .... of me  if that's what you actually wanted.  Nev

You had a bit of luck riding with you. It used to be called "scud" running.  Nev

If you've done much Instrument flying you wouldn't need me to tell you what's wrong with the "technique" bit. Limited Panel is difficult and also tiring. You need at least one gyro instrument.  If you have a good Full panel  the artificial horizon makes it relatively simple to know which way is up. It was originally known as ATTITUDE Instrument Flying.  Nev

Instrument Meteorological Conditions IS indeed the correct term.  Conditions permitting VFR flight are covered above. VFR at night requires special training and has extra risks associated with it for obvious reasons.  Nev

I would not use any forum as a reliable source of information on this subject  The "Technique"... Is  real  BS.  Nev

Not a lot of planes have the facility of fuel dump systems. Mostly the larger stuff when the max landing weight is well under the Max take off weight. IF it's urgent you land overweight(carefully) and the plane  has to be inspected, if it's not a squeaker landing.  Nev

I don't think I said it was a sim. The shadow would not be there as it was, in a sim. Nice fin and rudder on that plane. Makes it easier to control.  Nev

Plenty of people seem to think there's nothing to it.. Nev

"Thought s and Prayers" don't cost much. Payers  are different.  Nev

Plenty don't seem to know how much they haven't been taught but how would they? It's neglect of a duty of care by the system. Nev

Don't blame ME . It was like that when I got here, Boss.  Nev

Have to be  a very good flight sim..  Nev

The modern equivalent would be his UTE..  Nev

It was at Corryong. I think it's sealed. Involved with the castor setting. . (On the Citabria I had). Wrecked the tyre in no time.   Nev

When mine decided to shimmy I had to lift the tailwheel up..   Nev

It includes his ass.  Nev

I wouldn't reckon the post I responded to was a critical one. It's when they ARE that the thrust of the debate can be  lost.  Nev

Thou shall not covet thy neighbour's benches.  Nev

We digress. Head sealing is not the issue being discussed but is a problem generally with many engines. That's why many are shrunk and threaded on semi permanently or have a lot of bolts. .  Nev

Very large aircraft have higher efficiency due to scale effect (Reynold's number). Reverse thrust on jets is mostly effective at higher speeds. Get them in quickly after touchdown.   Nev

Can be something like 30 minutes. A normal descent is on flight idle.   Nev

The CAUSE of the problem here is the uneven  thermal expansion of alloy  and high tensile steel over a fairly large distance and the stress it places on the studs. Nev

People have accepted the alleged safety of TWO engines.. That means you will occasionally fly on ONE. (or none).   Nev

Bit of a thread dredge but not good. Having all of the cylinder made of aluminium means heat will impose a greater load on the stud. This is not an unusual problem with  such a layout. Operating with a failed stud is not helping the rest of the engine but how to you know?  IF it's stretching it's exceeded it's yield point. Nev

 Sales "pitch" was a play on words. Prop efficiency can be determined  in various ways and there have been plenty of them  of high efficiency  already produced perhaps not so much for what we fly . You can't invent thrust or get over 100% efficiency. Matching it to the Plane is always important. You can certainly play around a lot and get nowhere..  I'm not intending to bag this prop. I thought the Kiev prop was a great performer in a past experience  with a skyranger.  Nev