Sapphire Static Port

[ChiefWally]

Does anyone have information about the correct angle on the tube that is used for static pressure sense for the ASI on a Sapphire? We need to repair one that has been accidently filed square!!

 

ChiefWally

 

 

[kasper]

Quite confusing post there - is it the Pitot you want to understand the angle of? Thats the one with the open face to the direction of flight.

 

The Static is not directed in the airflow as the ports are on the side ... on the early ones (95.10) the end of the static (located under the Pitot and 'looking like' it is forward facing) is blocked with a rivet and drilled holes in the side are the static source.

 

Plus of course the angle of the Pitot is different for the early 95.10 with the thick wing to the later 95.25 with the thin wings ... the fuselage sits at different angles.

 

 

[facthunter]

If you have two pipes coming out of it the Pitot head is a bit more complex. You can have the STATIC vents at a suitable place on both sides of the fuselage, usually a flush plate with a hole drilled in it. Nev

 

 

[ChiefWally]

Thanks for the feedback kasper and facthunter.

 

I understand about the forward facing pitot tube. This aircraft has a strange static set up that I have never seen before. The static line feeding the ASI comes out to a short tube projecting perpendicular to the fuselage side with the end filed off on an angle. Totally unknown to me after 40 years hanging around aircraft. Was hoping that someone may have seen one and could clue me in to the angle to be filed onto the end of the tube.

 

 

[Geoff13]

OK guys and gals. My Hanuman has the static tube disconnected. When I mentioned it to the previous owner on receiving the pre-purchase report from the Engineer, he said yeah don't connect that you will get some weird readings. Is there a standard/aftermarket static/pitot setup (that mounts on the wing) that I can use to get things working as they should. Also in the same report the engineer said the ASI was reading 8 knots high at 40 knots. When I pulled the firewall out and got behind the dash, I found the following.

 

Static line disconnected between the wing and fuselage behind the left hand seat.

 

Static line from fuselage disconnect to VSI input broken.

 

Static line input to Altimiter Broken

 

The static line went from the disconnect at wing root to the VSI via a T-piece.

 

The t-piece was broken where it went from VSI to altimeter.

 

The T-piece into the Altimeter was also broken

 

From the altimeter it ran to the ASI

 

There is also a crack in the static line mount under the wing.

 

Any advice please. Obviously I need to replace all the broken parts which I have done other than the mount under the wing. I haven't found a replacement for that one yet.

 

 

[frank marriott]

Geoff

 

Makes one wonder how the previous owner could claim it as airworthy with reference to tech manual 4.2.4 - 6 (Instrumentation)

 

 

[facthunter]

Wally it should work if you get the correct angle and distance out. It could probably be adjusted by rotating it too. Currently I don't know anyone flying a Sapphire. It is probably close to square ( My guess). Nev

 

 

[Neil_S]

Does anyone have information about the correct angle on the tube that is used for static pressure sense for the ASI on a Sapphire? We need to repair one that has been accidently filed square!!ChiefWally

Hi Wally,

 

I know of a local Sapphire - will try to get hold of the owner to see if he knows....

 

Cheers,

 

Neil

 

 

[Geoff13]

GeoffMakes one wonder how the previous owner could claim it as airworthy with reference to tech manual 4.2.4 - 6 (Instrumentation)

I don't actually blame the previous owner. He had the ASI test a month before I purchased the plane. It is possible as it was reinstalled the fittings were disturbed or it is equally as possible that it happened when the LAME was doing my pre purchase inspection. Anyway it should be sorted now that is the main thing. I just need to get a pickup.

 

 

[kasper]

I don't actually blame the previous owner. He had the ASI test a month before I purchased the plane. It is possible as it was reinstalled the fittings were disturbed or it is equally as possible that it happened when the LAME was doing my pre purchase inspection. Anyway it should be sorted now that is the main thing. I just need to get a pickup.

And playing devils advocate here - particularly as the tech manual is not clearly/well drafted - this is a kit built aircraft and not a factory one ... so the owner has the ability to ignore factory schedules etc on periodic if they wish (arguable due to the weak language of 'shall' for experimental/homebuilts and 'shall always' for factory built ... and the fact the tech manual lumps in 95.10 with 55 series kits etc - a field day for legal argument in this area) ... then even if you want to play safe the Xair OZ website has the maintenance handbook ... and that in none of the schedules has inspect/test requirements for instruments (its home-built and this area is very personal/variable so rightly they left it out) ... and then you have the suggested schedules for use in tech 4.2.4 ... everything on there can be crossed out at the discretion of the owner and they can do their own thing.

In my opinion we really have to step back from moving the entire RAAus fleet into GA and all the regulation that goes with it and say 2 core things:

 

1. unless its factory built and maintained to the required certification level to be used as for hire/reward we must EXPECT that its buyer/user beware because each plane is experimental ...even if it came from an advanced kit and

 

2. on purchase you have an option to get your own pre-purchase inspection to let you know what you're buying and then you MAY have come-back against the person who did the report if reality is not reported to you BUT the 'condition report' to transfer has NO binding on the purchaser and you have no comeback on the L2 who did it if they disclosed what they saw on the day.

 

No. 2 is only in there because a lot of people think L2s condition reports are guarantees - they are not - they are point in time inspections and an overall statement by the L2 against listed items. Just remember an aircraft condition report can say the aircraft is unsatisfactory in certain areas and indeed is un-airworthy ... but the transfer of registration processes with that and the registration is not even suspended as a direct result of that report ...

 

Geoff appears to understand that and doesn't blame the prior owner ... and also is seeking clarification from the wider 'x-air' community on what is 'usual' for the system in this airframe.

 

cheers

 

 

[Geoff13]

And playing devils advocate here - particularly as the tech manual is not clearly/well drafted - this is a kit built aircraft and not a factory one ... so the owner has the ability to ignore factory schedules etc on periodic if they wish (arguable due to the weak language of 'shall' for experimental/homebuilts and 'shall always' for factory built ... and the fact the tech manual lumps in 95.10 with 55 series kits etc - a field day for legal argument in this area) ... then even if you want to play safe the Xair OZ website has the maintenance handbook ... and that in none of the schedules has inspect/test requirements for instruments (its home-built and this area is very personal/variable so rightly they left it out) ... and then you have the suggested schedules for use in tech 4.2.4 ... everything on there can be crossed out at the discretion of the owner and they can do their own thing.In my opinion we really have to step back from moving the entire RAAus fleet into GA and all the regulation that goes with it and say 2 core things:

 

1. unless its factory built and maintained to the required certification level to be used as for hire/reward we must EXPECT that its buyer/user beware because each plane is experimental ...even if it came from an advanced kit and

 

2. on purchase you have an option to get your own pre-purchase inspection to let you know what you're buying and then you MAY have come-back against the person who did the report if reality is not reported to you BUT the 'condition report' to transfer has NO binding on the purchaser and you have no comeback on the L2 who did it if they disclosed what they saw on the day.

 

No. 2 is only in there because a lot of people think L2s condition reports are guarantees - they are not - they are point in time inspections and an overall statement by the L2 against listed items. Just remember an aircraft condition report can say the aircraft is unsatisfactory in certain areas and indeed is un-airworthy ... but the transfer of registration processes with that and the registration is not even suspended as a direct result of that report ...

 

Geoff appears to understand that and doesn't blame the prior owner ... and also is seeking clarification from the wider 'x-air' community on what is 'usual' for the system in this airframe.

 

cheers

Exactly Kasper. I understand that I purchased a homebuilt aircraft. On top of that I am the third owner. Not for 1 second do I expect to have a 100% guaranteed perfect piece of machinery. It is just not possible nor feasible at the price I bought it.

 

By the same token I had a pre purchase inspection done. This was done by a Lame. He listed 10 items that he felt needed attention, none of which were critical or were worthy of grounding the aircraft but all were listed and explained to me in simple laymans terms. Again I had a third party assess that report to validate the findings against the feasibility of flying the aircraft home to allow further inspection/rectification. Not for a second did I expect the aircraft to land in Caboolture after 11.5 hrs (which at that time was almost 15% of the aircraft flying time) in the same condition that it left down there. (Even though I flew it myself and with my 100-150 hours experience at the time am absolutely perfect and nothing should have worn out or broken:roflmao:). So no not for one minute am I saying the LAME under performed quite the contrary I was very happy with some of the things tested and the completeness of the report. He in fact found the static disconnected and the ASI reading high.

 

The previous owner explained the reason the static was disconnected was due to a crack in the static assembly on the wing strut and he found that he got more accurate readings with it disconnected below and behind the pilots seat. Verified using GPS etc hence his warning not to reconnect.

 

So no I am certainly not having a whinge, it is just that in the process of doing my own complete inspection, along with a 100 hourly, along with changing out the Jabiru motor to a Rotax. I have found the items mentioned above and am looking for a workable solution. Obviously the first part of that is to reconnect everything and do my own tests as well as stationary tests as applicable. To reconnect everything however I need to replace the Static tube mount on the wing which is also in my case a dual mount with pitot tube.

 

I mentioned it in this thread because the OP lead me to the thread so I hoped it may lead someone with a possible solution for my problem to the thread as well. Obviously I can go to the manufacturer of the kit/local agent but I thought there may be a simple aftermarket solution out there the someone on this forum had seen.

 

So I am not having a go at the previous owner/s they have been more helpful than I would have ever expected and are taking a genuine interest in my conversion as well as giving advice and assistance with parts. Nor am I aiming to have a go at the Lame who did the inspection. He also did what was asked promptly and at very short notice and gave me a very thorough report which as I have been right over the plane now appears to have been very complete.

 

I am sure a solution can and will be found.

 

 

[kasper]

Geoff,

 

You might have misunderstood my post - I was not saying you're having a whinge in any way shape or form - in fact I was explaining why the Frank comment to your initial post was not IMHO appropriate as there is no requirement on a kit aircraft for it to comply with a heap of GA type regulation at all times and i went into a nit of detail on the xair H to trace that there is no documented maintenance on the pitot/static system to show how the Tech manual may not be all that it might first appear to be. I pointed out that you understood this and was asking for help on here. Sorry if you read it as I thought you were winging, I know you're not

 

 

[microman]

Just thought I would resurrect the Sapphire thread again as I have just managed to buy back a very early 95.10 Sapphire (the one with the short fat wings) that I owned many years ago. I note Kaspar has a 95.10 Sapphire - same model? Cant make up my mind yet what motor to install - it started life with a Rotax 377, but I installed a 503 on it and it performed very well - though perhaps caused a bit of a rearward C of G? I have also acquired a Kawasaki 440 but while it is nice and light I'm not sure if it will do the job performance-wise. Any thoughts from present/past Sapphire jockeys? Any other motors around light enough and powerful enough?

 

 

[kasper]

Good grief - a fat wing 95.10 sapphire with a 503! How much climb does one sapphire need?

 

Yep mine is the same fabric wing very early 95.10 (not even the aileron control runs are the same as the later ones) but mine is still running the original KFM107ER belt drive - 28 throbbing horsepower.

 

Gets the 135kg of sapphire and nearly 95kg of me (fully dressed) into the air at around 35mph and pootles around at 55mph ... climb is like you might expect - I get to circuit height as I turn downwind.

 

Its out of the air at the moment and sitting in the container - I have a Hirth F23 to go into the airframe which is supposed to be 50hp but even if it only really is 40 its a big step up from 28 ... but I am going to strip and recover the wings before I put it back in the air so I will not be flying it for another year or so - moving onto the farm and building a house so the trike will win on flying because its ready to go.

 

Have fun with the Sapphire - love the older ones - very floaty and glider like on approach - could really do with spoilers to dump glide performance to get into shorter fields.

 

 

[microman]

Thanks for that Kasper. Sounds like yours is even earlier than mine - funnily enough I had also considered the F23 - its horizontally opposed and aircooled so ideal for the Sapphire and certainly light enough - only problem is I dont know where I might source one - none came to NZ as far as I know. Anyone out there got one? The Kawasaki is supposed to be 38hp or 42 with twin carbs so maybe it will do the job. It also has belt drive and electric start. One other mod I must do is fit a trim system - I gather most of them had a bungee system, but I thought a servo trim tab would be the best - adjustable from the cockpit obviously. I also think brakes would be good, but would need to change the wheels to accommodate drums/disks.

 

 

[kasper]

I have cable operated brakes - very effective but with the main wheel location and all the weight around the centre a bit difficult to use with any great force ... nose sitting is not a pretty sight in a sapphire - apparently it was very funny from the outside but from the inside it was not so entertaining.

 

I also have fibreglass fairings on the struts and spats plus a second leading edge wing tank (adds 10L in addition to the seat tank).

 

I have not got a trim but I do not like the bungee bias (just a personal thing) and if I were to go for a trim system on the tail-plane I would go the whole hog and fit an anti-servo tab with trim - the stick has absolutely no weight on it at all and wagging the tail all over the place is not unheard of.