Grassfield wrote:
Of course done in FAA and not EASA land…
I don’t see why you couldn’t do that in EASA-land. I’m sure the aircraft is experimental and not certified in the normal category by FAA!
The developers of the Farnborough Aircraft / Kestrel turboprop project (the one which had the Epic spin-off after a big bust-up) reported that they could not get permissions for the various prototype development / test flights in Europe, so they went to the USA. I have no detailed information though and the real reason may have been different. One of the people was on here a long time ago.
Doesn’t surprise me. It’s just a different mentality regarding aviation in the US compared to Europe. Sorry for the generalization… Anyways, great project of the Yak 110, and impressed they could get it done relatively quickly!
You guys do realize that the Yak 110 is an RC model, right?
Negative, it actually flies, not sure if it has been to an air show…or a very well put together hoax. There is a longer video of the full build.
Confusingly the video has both an RC model and an actual plane, no?
Affirm :)
Very recent Piper Navajo crash short of the runway.
left engine failed after take off, turned left downwind and stall spun in on short final..
Peter wrote:
Isn’t that partly reporting bias i.e.most twin engine failures in cruise are not reported
No, not really. The fatal accident rate in twins (from all causes) is about 2.04 per 100k hours. In a single, the fatal accident rate (from all causes) is 1.63 per 100k hours.
Therefore, statistically, twins are quite a bit more dangerous than singles when it comes to the fatal accident rate.
It stands to reason: we all obsess about engine failure but it’s not the leading cause of GA crashes anyway, and many twins crash with two perfectly functional engines. When a twin crashes, it has a LOT more energy than when a single crashes – it is both heavier and faster, and has significantly less structure in front of the cabin to absorb impacts. When an engine actually does fail, the twin has a greater risk of a loss of control, and given the probability of survival is inversely proportional to the angle of arrival, losses of control are terribly dangerous. (Consider an engine failure in a single: the single retains its good flying qualities with the exception of being able to maintain altitude or climb. On the other hand, a twin’s handling goes from good flying qualities to absolutely dreadful flying qualtities with one engine stopped, and if control is actually lost, it can take a lot longer to recover due to the extra mass, much of it out there on the wings far away from the axis of rotation. The flying club I was in in Houston had a fatal accident when a student and instructor spun in from 5000 feet – they literally couldn’t recover with all that altitude, after a single engine flying exercise went wrong. Even in many badly behaved singles, with poor spin recovery technique, you can recover from a spin in that sort of altitude.
