Don’t fly a plane from 1982. If it crashes people will be like “ figures”

Ricardo montalban 1982 is considered newer in aviation terms. I’m training in a ‘72 Cessna 172. I would feel safe flying in a 45 club as long as it’s well maintained and passes all preflight checks.

@@Gameisis Yeah, planes don't age like cars. It's perfectly normal to fly a '70s era plane.

I own a motorglider and I do the same, however, I do it slightly differently. I do the mag check as you'd expect before takeoff. I check the full engine RPM as soon as its applied and watch it closely. Before shutting it down in the air I'll do one more mag check to be sure they both are still working. If I need the engine later, it's nice to know it was shut down in full working order. Note: we never use the engine as a get out of jail free card. Never.

Thanks so much for this great feedback! My goal is to have the viewer feel immersed and onboard with me

FlightChops What's your stance on the Earth's shape? Flat or round?

@@savage101. it's square

O'BEN means a lot man! Thank you!!

Haha, my ears caught it straight away as well. Where are you based Martin? I have a medical booked for next Friday and hopefully start PPL training soon after. I'm in PE.

@martin jy kan so ja! Dis amazing te sien hoe hulle in die States met ons aerie speel

Biltong and hippo poop

I'm a big fan of Eugene Terre'Blanche.. Hope you get your country back. Down with Malema!

@@Bentz5000 where in pe ? Algoa ? Madiba ?

Thanks Gary!

Gary C - I believe you’re wrong about the long distance flyer bit. We have a Sling 2 and a Sling 4 at our aero club (Ballarat, Victoria, Australia). The Sling 4 has taken a family of 4, plus their dog, plus baggage all the way to Far North Queensland and back (over 2,000 miles each way), and down the full length of western Tasmania (again, well over 500 miles) with legs in both cases limited only by “bladder capacity”. The Sling 2 has flown most of western New South Wales and northern South Australia - again with 500 to 800 miles range. Both cruise at about 115 knots. The Sling 2 burns about 19 litres = 5 gallons per hour, with 140 litres = 36 gallons on board; the Sling 4 - 115 HP Turbo Rotax - burns about 25 to 27 litres (6 to 7 gallons) per hour, with (from memory) 180 + litres = 48 gallons (?) on board. Comfortable seating, plenty of room, good overnight baggage storage and 6 hours’ cruise plus reserves on board - what more do you want?

@@warwickkinscher5986 I don't recall the reasoning for the sentiment, but it may have been something other than fuel burn. Other factors to take into account, like comfort can come into play. A Cessna 172 has a 600-700 mile range, but I don't want to sit in it for five hours at a time! But, it's been a year ago since I posted that comment, I don't remember what it was all about, sorry.

Gary C No problems; We also have a Cessna 172 which is a good cruiser. It’s just that I have really enjoyed flights in the two Slings, but Simon has put well over 300 hours up on his Sling 4 in the slightly less than 3 years since he completed it, flying the full length of the east coats of Australia with his family and / or friends. It’s a great all-round aircraft. But I agree - legs on a flight are governed by the needs for food and / or bladder relief rather that the aircraft’s capabilities - as long as one remembers to always check the fuel left and make sure it’s sufficient till the next fuel bowser including fuel for not only reserves but also contingencies (diversions, last light, weather, etc.)

Right on! Thanks for this great feedback. And congrats on your progress! If all goes according to plan June will also be a big month for me - I am hoping to be soloing the Harvard / T6 by then! YIKES! Keep in touch through your training.

That's awesome! hope you are looking forward for June as much as I am. looking forward for the next video! keep up the great work.

Not when you were looking for a proper engine failure and forced landing in a sling , and find this where there is a carb problem at the holding point 🙈🙈 also why did he shut down ? They still need to take it back to the hangers 🤓

BBarnes thanks!

Tyrone van Wyk hey thank you!

It wasn't an ignition problem. It was a carburetor problem.

Skooppa True....it was determined to be a carb problem. Was just making the statement that the issue seem to present itself during the mag/ignition check. Had they not had an engine monitor, it would have been harder for everyone to diagnose the problem. Being a Lycoming guy, I did not realize there were two carbs on the Rotax.

I just can't believe that it's 2018 and carburetors are still being sold in any kind of vehicle that's made to carry human beings, it's insane. There is the 912 iS, but it's probably pretty pricey.

Misinformation is rampant on the internet. Carburetors work, and have worked well for OVER a century in everything from automobiles, to boats, to motorcycles, to airplanes, to lawn equipment & other outdoor power equipment, and continue to do so, and WILL continue to do so. How did the world survive the first 84 years of the automobile on just carburetors? Well, they worked! Carbs get a bad rap from those who don't understand their inner workings, and the ethanol the American government mandates in motor fuel. Ethanol's love for water wreaks havoc on carburetors, yet, is less noticeable in fuel injected vehicles (makes you wonder if this was done on purpose?). That said, mechanical failures such as the float issue in this aircraft, happen occasionally. Would it be any different if a fuel injected aircraft, or automobile, experienced a computer failure, clogged injector, failed fuel pump, or chaffed / shorted wire that killed spark AND fuel? Not really. In a mechanical world, failures happen - that's why pilots train for engine-outs. To tell you the truth, as an auto mechanic, I trust stuff built 30-100 years ago much more than anything built today, at least regarding ground-based vehicles. I can't speak for aircraft ... although the average piston aircraft is WELL over 4 DECADES old in general aviation. Automobiles, outdoor equipment, boats, etc. etc., used to be OVER-built with pride - something sorely lacking in today's vehicles.

Working and working well are two different things. I've not only been working on cars for nearly 20 years, but I started driving when many cars on the road still had carbs, I wouldn't go back to those abominations if you paid me to. Starting was always hit or miss, they GUZZLED fuel (even small, gutless engines), they stink because the mixture is never right, the engines have no power because the mixture is never right, or is inconsistent from cylinder to cylinder, they're cantankerous in varying weather conditions, the electric chokes would fail and stick closed, I've had cars die on me when going over bumps because the carb sloshes fuel from the float bowl into the engine.... the list goes on and on. Carbs should have gone extinct and been forgotten forever. "How did the world survive the first 84 years of the automobile on just carburetors?" We had nothing better at the time that was cheap. When microprocessors fell in price significantly enough, fuel injection was the only fuel delivery system that made any sense. Ethanol has nothing to do with how awful carbs are, and it's *your* lack of understanding that's led you to believe this. I'm not saying that it can't happen, but I've NEVER encountered a failure that prevented the engine from running with a fuel injection system. When built properly, electronic systems are vastly more reliable than mechanical systems. "To tell you the truth, as an auto mechanic, I trust stuff built 30-100 years ago much more than anything built today..." Do you deal with mainly American vehicles, by any chance? Modern vehicles seem to have no issue lasting two to three times longer than anything that was built 30 years ago. Hell, the cars and trucks from the '70s that I drove when I was a teenager didn't even have odometers that went past 99,999 miles, because they weren't expected to last that long. Nowadays, cars have no trouble making to 300,000 miles if properly taken care of.

balancing is a must on the 912. vibration kills engines

How about the Quickie Q1? 😮😅

Hey man! Great video. If you ever want to come fly a weight shift control trike ( powered hang glider) in New York, let me know. I'm a CFI and fly the Adirondacks at Lake George and the beaches of the Hamptons. Blue skies!

Haha - wow yeah - your comment was less than 1 minute after I pressed "publish" :)

Loving your videos! Chuck

Me too. Saw him perform in northern Wisconsin back in the early 1980s when I had just started flying. He flew both the P-51 and the Commander that day. The dude was incredible.