RFguy

I'd like to see rotax wiring and looms built with Tefzel and Mil27500 series shielded wire....etc You can get multi colours in tefzel, also. it's not all just white.

You cant really 'cleanly' monitor two radios at once without some electronics, IE if one turns off it will load the other down. You can use a couple of resistors in series with each radio ' combine' - say 100 ohms but there will be quite alot of annoying interaction. try and find an low cost intercom panel. Should have my radio shipping nend of year, I'm on a promise with a few.

part owner.

this wire that failed- did it fail due to insulation cracking (maybe due to continuoue expose to solvents) ? did it fail because it was rubbing / chafing on something else? Was it subject to repeated bending, even very small amounts????

"Compared the the Sportstar, they both feel like dump trucks though with regards to handling." LOL. yes. The J230 is a real sports car compared to my Archer. And a Jabiru J120 is a sports car compared to a J230 ... and they're all dump trucks compared to Thruster's RV6. and I am sure Nev's F-27s are dump trucks compared to the Archer.

fantastic. How do you find the Warrior /Archer difference ? Is the instructor heavy ?

2700 approx inc GST which includes the extra $300 for the extra PL required for larger airports. same for the Piper and the Jab..... ahh I think the Jab is a bit cheaper 2200 I think, but insured for similar. That was a broker from Insurance House. Geoff Tonkin, easy to work with. recommended

Great to hear. Isn't that hard, is it.. Except the paperwork is pretty full on.

(180) Oh I did check the seat locks. OMG - not even I can reach the pedals all the way back LOL. locks on one side only . controls have beautiful balance and weight.

"Don’t you have GNAV or GLS to maintain the runway track after T/O instead of the runway bearing?" It's in a big pile to do. Designers never thought of avionics people when they designed panels and access. Except in the Lanceair. I could look at Oz runways but at the critical moment of first 1000', bumps, wind, traffic, I am looking out the window.... and at my critical gauges.

Cowra - Went out for a hot one late this morning. 31 OAT, Flew out of busy circuit down to Young, 20 kts at 3000' tail, 15 kts on the ground at Young. Significant bumps in circuit in the hills . No fun at all. But not difficult. airplane upset 30 deg roll late final and including application of full power late final to counter a vicious sink. Lesson learned : Might come in a bit higher and a bit steeper on that one next time. Would provide a little more room for such phenomena... Yeah it's been since last summer since I have flown in hot and gusty weather and I am rusty !!! Climb out from the T&G was 1500 fpm initially. got a great thermal climbing out. Other notes- I did not hold off the 20 kts of NE blowing across my runway heading departure track when I departed Cowra . It's clear I drifted significantly. Tut Tut ! . (as reviewed on my flight data) . This is something to think about, since you can't see ahead , and cues are otherwise difficult. Need to consider before departure and add to heading . Only a little wind at ground level, but the GWPT data which I DID review before flight - it did say 19 kts @ 2000'- (so why didnt I use it ?!) I have not thought enough about it in recent times. I will need to do this with precision when departing Canberra. what else - Flew in a 1959 Cessna 180 (tailwheel) yesterday. Now that was different !!! wow landings are different...... Other thoughts - the 1500 fpm I got (about 750 fpm boost ) could have easily been -750 fp sink, and that would have been tough. good reason not to T&G but land, and backtrack to the start of the runway to give myself some more climb room on the high DA departure.

valve seat recession : I'm sure there is more to this story..... Seems valve recession had coincidence with use of UL94. But that's all we have right now, the controls on their 'experiment ' are NOT tight enough to deduce causality. IE that UL94 caused the recession. Danny- dual fuel- yeah when available it's how I roll...(it does have a MOGAS STC). There is no detectable change in EGT, CHT, RPM when switching between fuels at ANY power level.... A change in the burn rate would show up as EGT change...

article .. I guess when they mean 'dry tappet' they mean they remove and bleed the hydraulic lifters right down. Since it's not like a solid lifter engine. Thruster ????? could just be they ran the engines hot ? or ran high CHTs ? I wonder. will be interested to see if Lycoming releases the numbers, since the Lycoming factory guidance is different to this results UL94 is a bit different to the proposed GAMI100 unleaded. (Lycomign O-360) I run 100LL for TO, climb and landing (left wing) , and Premium98 (right wing) for other (cruise) ops at 70% of max HP.

I only open the nipple a crack and consider the liquid a reasonble seal in the thread....

Hi TurbAero. That's a high range of ops requirement- IE cruise/Vs. The std Jab prop pitched less than 2800-2850 static will perform very poorly on TO roll. So pitched at 2400 wow it must be a real dog. My 1st suggestion is move to more blades. Going from two to three blades means each of the blades are not so loaded (think of it as more effective AoA) for a given poor efficiency scenario , and in the TO roll, this WILL translate to better performance . 3 vs 2 wont cost too much in cruise but that depends on the blade profile. Maybe try a four blade from Bolly- They do have one and will sell it if you really want it. 2nd- The airmaster is a good solution and there is a guy Marc Halcomb with an Arion Lightning in the US i know with one on his supercharged 3300 that he flies over the rockies with. But- be aware the Airmaster moment of inertia exceeds the Jabiru maximum spec by 'quite alot' . Now, FWIW, I dont know if there is any science to the Jabiru specification- IE maybe it is just what their propellor is ! That is what I think, however, this would be treated, in my opinion (I am not an aero engineer) with some care because the Jab prop hub / flange is a bit of a weak point AND the engine normal operatign conditions DO NOT assume a big heavy prop- this affects vibration behaviour.... Nevertheless Marc with his Arion has not had any trouble so far. If you would like to be put it touch let me know. https://www.kitplanes.com/supercharger-for-jabiru-3300/

Skip, the whole "OPEN bleed niple slightly after the down commences, CLOSE nipply just before end of down." - you dont need to do this ! Just tube it out to a bottle (which of course has end always in fluid) and just pump the first pedal in the system until no more air is present in the 40cm of tube between the caliper and the bottle, lock the nipple off and it is DONE ! No need to check anything.... then pour what's in the bottle back into the resv if you want to reuse it ( or top up the resv weith new fluid ) etc the Piper has 5 cylinders... (park, 4 pedals) .

yeah it just goes around the loop..... I had a problem where I had air occassionally getting into the system around a seal.... so its a quick bleed.. when done, tighten nipple, and holding pitched tube high , let go let rest run back into the resv or bottle. anyway, you get the idea. but but when you use bottom up, you have to watch you dont overflow it.... so the lid is involved?. on mountain bikes, we used to just open the recv up, and pump the brakes while tapping the lines with a back end of a screwdriver, that brought bubbles up the round the loop method I first learned on mountainbikes...

I'm told that a good way is to attach the output of the caliper nipple to a long length of silicone tubing, take it all the way up and (back) into the master cylinder resv. (be sure resv is full). and just pump using pedal/park brake ) around the system around and around until all the air gets pumped out, bubbles going into the resv of course just bubble off. I keep writing resv because the word reserviour etc the spelling has forever elluded me.

That was a very interesting and thorough report, - the wing analysis. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5422ebbb40f0b613460000a7/dft_avsafety_pdf_025533.pdf essentially, the only think that could cause the wing outer to fail was the simultaneous input of pitch and roll, a quickly rotated and pushed or pulled yoke, (putting it into some 2 axis rotation) and then the corresponding 2 axis reversal (that breaks the structure) . "It is, perhaps, less well understood that large control surface deflections, applied simultaneously or in rapid sequence in more than one axis, are far more damaging than such inputs applied individually. When such single or multi-axis inputs are applied and rapidly reversed, even higher loadings result. Although the manoeuvre speed, Va, is described as the speed above which full deflection of aileron or rudder or approach to the stall should not take place, it may not be appreciated amongst all pilots that flight at airspeeds below Va does not provide protection from control induced structural failure. Should excessive simultaneous and/or reversed large control deflections be applied, the results can be catastrophic, as in the case of G-BKCB. This is all the more significant when it is noted that the structural strength of the wing of this aircraft type in download, far exceeds the requirement specified for its certification."

no transmission reported. They were high, has hypoxia been ruled out ?

well, you dont need much, you just need SOMETHING that changes as you get closer to the ground. Rob, my instructor was saying the same thing happens with a glide onto flat or glassy water- no visual clues to descent rate/ height when near to the surface results in " poorer than expect outcomes " When doing water training, abinitio, they dropped floaties onto the water so the pilot could get some idea . Nev, please chime in

Mike, it gets lighter with the rotax.... can have some ballast removed from the tail...

but.. if they permitted rotax engines in their airframes, they'd sell more airframes than they could build.... and apparently there will be no changes. So, perhaps he's not fully informed.

6 circuits. 4 normal + 2 glide. both glides from downwind went well in Xwind. which means the work I did 2 weeks ago on them was useful . (were I failed on the first 3 glides from downwind) . Observation : 2nd glide was onto the grass cross : - feeling of loss of depth perception about 100' up down to flare height on featureless wide green carpet. The grass cross at cowra is 90m wide and 1km long , and the edges are not marked, so it might as well be 500m wide.... . out the sides, you see same green world. Now what is interesting is when you get close to the large wide strip that looks completely featureless -- IE no visual differences in my whole field of vision. - I felt that I lost vertical speed and depth perception when I got close to the flare. Of course, coming down at 850 fpm the ground comes up fast. BUT - compared to coming onto a narrow strip- IE narrow strip with various visual cues, edges, maybe edge markers strip lines, these all assist in providing spatial cues for height and location. IE narrow strip I feel better depth / height perception. Landing was fine, smooth.... there's another weird thing also, there's a (not sure if it is good) part of me that enjoys the rush and adrenaline of the ground coming up quick at the same time you must execute a precision maneuver to get right as you turn straight and throw out all the flaps with a very serious feeling of commitment to land without option. The feeling of it all happening very fast in the last few seconds may be reduced by doing this more regularly. (IE becoming more adapted / current by repetition) .... I do - do glides once a month....

number of satellites is not so important as to where they are in the sky. Think of multiple rubber bands pulling the one item around. and how biases pull the fix - specifically items like ionospheric delay, sat drift, height in the sky. 8 sats is fine if they are well distributed. ....the shading you describe isnt too bad for shading. and horizontal posititive errors are different to vertical position errors. again, diversity of what you can see.