skippydiesel

Back to transporting a small aircraft; Packing: As mentioned polystyrene sheets/boards, Bubble Wrap and packing tape (can be had from Bunnings Aerospace but cheaper from a packaging supplier) are my friends. Try not to get the packing tape on a painted surface. Packing tape is amazing stuff - will secure almost any package (covered wings, fuselage, empennage). Polystyrene boards are used to spread the point load of a tie down strap/rope and between larger sections eg wings. Secure in place using packing tape. Tightly Bubble wrap almost everything and again secure with packing tape. Polystyrene can be returned to original purpose (insulating a structure) if you wish. Bubble wrap - haven't found an alternative use for it at this stage. Use a lot of just secure straps/ropes (if you know how) rather than a few very tight ones to minimise the risk of tightening damage - check for security /load shift frequently

The best "spare" you can carry these days, is a mobile phone.

Your welcome to rebuild it if you wish - might cost a tad more than $5k for me to part with it. I think mine is about 8m inside, so about 10m all up. Yes it's very well built and no its definitely not heavy, from imperfect memory 600 kg plus (all the heavy stuff has been removed). On my 20 hr round trip, I came across quite a few BDdoubles & the like - she never even wobbled. Very nice to tow. On freeway did a 110 kph easy , no problem at all.

Wow! $7.5K that price is a steal, if its structurally sound & registerable - Have you seen the asking price for large "toy trailers"? Double this price would be a good deal.

No insults just "shooting the breeze" and warning the inexperienced.

I agree, in general BUT a "flat bed" trailer has the following potential disadvantages which must be managed; As Nev pointed out the aircraft is subjected to buffeting (passing trucks/high winds) which may cause damage either directly or due to movement against restraints/tie downs. Inclement weather - it is close to impossible to tarp an aircraft - best to wrap & use tape to restrain the covering (before tie down). Gravel impact - as above For items strapped flat on the tray (wings) deck movement/flexing could be transferred to the aircraft structure. (bending/abrasion). Need to secure load while allowing some movement. Strapping damage - Styrofoam sheet/ bubble wrap/etc can be used to prevent damaged from point loading/abrasion Again as Nev mentioned - the trailer (or truck) is designed for much heavier loads, so suspension tends to transmit a lot of jarring (known as shaking the crap out of everything)- low tyre pressure helps a lot to smooth the ride but be careful, lowering the pressure too much will cause tyres to overheat/blow out. I reduced my tyres from 45 down to 30 psi and checked wall temperature twice over the first 30 minutes and about every 2 hrs thereafter. With a bit of planning and a lot of care the above can be mitigated even prevented.

"compatible with any type of carbon steel," What about other metals/alloys??

My observations: All the oil/liquid wax corrosion preventers : Can be applied to almost any dry surface without much in the way of preparation, painted/unpainted - SHOULD NOT BE APPLIED OVER WET SURFACES/CAVITIES as may trap moisture, Dry to a waxy finish (ie not like paint). Finish may attract dust for a sustained period. Self healing ie scratch will close over Have good to excellent penetrating qualities Can be sprayed or painted - most can be thinned (if need be) for spraying with a putty gun. Cavities are best treated with a flexible tube fitted with side jets, on the gun. Durable ie will last quit a long time (could be 10 years + for some - will depend on product & exposure). May require follow up treatment for best protection. Messy but usually minimal toxicity Can be thinned with most thinners (even turps) - follow instructions for best thinner & ratios Cost effective - a little goes a long way May be heavy for aviation use Most can not be successfully painted over Chemical bonding paint types (some undercoats): Need to religiously follow surface preparation & curing/drying instructions. Care should be taken to determine chemical compatibility with surface to be treated. Tend to be expensive Usually toxic - good quality PPE required Light weight Durable but unlikly to be self healing. Likely to last the service life of the aircraft. Top coat compatibility should be checked before purchase. Likely to be a two pack system, requiring accurate mixing ratios. May adhere to spray/mixing equipment making them unusable for other paints.

Yes - Your advisor was/is correct, however I have made good the integrity by installing additional ribs. If you look at the photo with the fuselage inside, you will see blue steel square tubing. These "ribs" plus the rear door frame, attached to the chassis, provide additional lateral rigidity. The original aluminium frame/skin provides longitudinal rigidity. In addition to enhancing vans rigidity (probably better than what the original internal fittings provided) the ribs offer options for loading - components like wing empennage can be secured above the fuselage if required. FYO - Most of the windows were broken/missing - Those that still had a functional frame, I replaced the glass with translucent polycarbonate corflute sheet. I used the removed rear end body work, to fill in/delete the front windows entirely. The van now only has one opening window and the two side doors for ventilation. The three roof vents have been deleted and "patched" with sheet aluminium. I replaced all 12V wiring & lights. Aesthetically she looks a bit rough, being converted in a hurry, but is structurally sound - could do with a lick of paint. The Aircraft Carrier is available for rent or purchase😎

The above "Aircraft Carrier" is a 1975 Viscount Supreme Caravan that I converted in a bit of a hurry to pick up the Sonex. Towed it down to Leongatha, S Gippsland, Vic. Loaded the almost completed Sonex Legacy and returned to The Oaks NSW with no damage/difficulty. It was a 20 hr round trip. Vic roads are awful. The Aircraft Carrier boasts internal tidowns, on each side, about every meter. It has also carried an RV 6. Electric brakes on all 4 wheels and fully rebuilt suspension. Its has NSW registration to near the end of the year. Tows nice & straight - doesnt wonder.

Hi Danny, They have quite a large selection - which one did you choose & why?????

Or Tectyl liquid/sprayable wax used in automotive rust prevention.

Hi Danny_G Would be great if you find that regulater name/supplier and put it on your "Started Spare Parts List"

Temper temper - you may get your way but will never move forward.

You are kind - I am way more cynical - not for us/the great unwashed ("the audience") but for bureaucratic self aggrandisement. In this context ,terminology is much like marketing, which so often descends into" jingoism". The difference between marketing & emergency warnings is - if you fail to purchase a product, only the bottom lie suffers, if you fail to appropriately respond to a warning, you & yours may suffer greatly.

That's the point - there is no level beyond "Extreme" other than the bad english, imposed by some ridiculous committee, wishing to big note themselves. "Not a forecast". A warning, by its very nature is a forecast/prediction. "That's how these things work.." You jest - it doesn't work, or if it does, not well. Warnings, to be effective, need to be clear & precise (as simple as can be articulated, to communicate the message)- ie not needing to be deciphered. Catastrophic/Catastrophe can be past or present tense, never future (unless qualified as in "impending catastrophe") - it describes an outcome. It very like the Crime Scene description - there is no crime, until it has been determined that # a crime has been committed, # in progress or # conspired to. Until otherwise known, it can only be an Incident Scene. I agree that certain incidents, by their nature, are very likely to involve a crime having been committed, it would be fair to describe them, from the outset, as a Crime Scene .

The use of the word "Catastrophic" (past tense) to describe a potential (future) weather/fuel conditions is bad grammar/English - what was so wrong with "Extreme"? Exteem is accurate, to the point and every English speaker (or feigner with a dictionary) will understand its meaning. The addition of "Catastrophic" above "Extreme" is an inaccurate, unnecessary escalation of language - in short - Crap! Just like every accident/incident scene is now a "Crime Scene" - more Crap! This sort of misuse of language, is designed to enhance the status of the organisation, has zip to do with accurate information/communication.

Performance & Capacity Cruise Speed 60 - 70 knots / 111 - 130 km/h / 30 - 36 m/s Stall with flaps 35 knots / 65 km/h / 18 m/s Landing Speed 45 knots / 83 km/h / 23 m/s Climb Rate 1,200 ft per minute / 365 m per minute With no technical knowledge: Those figures just don't look quite right. If it stalls at 35 knots - it won't land at 45 knots. Cruise at 70 knots - I would expect a wing giving this sort of performance, to stall a lot lower than 35 knots Climb rate - doesn't look like MTO

."..........snap that last little bit of elevator to make the nose snap over as we enter the stall." This a new concept to me. My instructor & I did all sorts of stalls (attitudes/configuration/power on & off), no recollection of doing the "snap". Cant see the point and as you say may lead the student to "the wrong impression"

"With two ' hose spigots ' double the leakage '" I stand to be corrected - Every fuel delivery system MUST have an in & out facility ("two spigots"). This won't change whatever filtration system you prefer/use. "I tried two inline filters with two taps . ( and Y joiner)making twelve hose clips " Trying hard to imagine what's happening here and failing. Need more detail. "Now, I'm back to " gascolator " that has a fuel drain / tester ." I too like the fuel drain feature but the rest of the design is so bad, I wonder how they can be fitted to certified aircraft. "Just double " mr filter " all the fuel going into your tank ." Not sure what you mean by "double". I have always filtered my fuel into the tank. With my last aircraft, this meant my in line fuel filters almost never trapped contaminants (even after 100 hrs they were clean but replaced anyhow). My new home built plane is a diffrent matter - only has 68 hrs, despite flushing tanks several times, filtering all fuel in, I am still getting quite a bit of crap (scientific term) on the gascolator gauze. As far as I can tell it's mainly paint & sealing compound . The crap is diminishing, so I hope will drop to zero in the near future.

Payload in kilograms - please.

I have a gascolator in my current aircraft and consider it to be inferior to a quality inline gauze filter in several ways heavier less filter gauze area - will block quicker it's the only contamination "protection" in the whole system ie all fuel goes through it - if it blocks you have no fuel flow checking for contamination/blockage requires removal of the bowl & gauze screen very easy to damage the gauze sealing is by compression of a flat rubber gasket - prone to leaking the one posative, is it will separate (to some degree) water from fuel Quality inline gauze fuel filter eg Hengst H102WK, H103WK https://www.hengst.com/en/products/1155-fuel-filters Baldwin BBF7863, BF7850, BF7725, BF9906https://ph.baldwinfilters.com/baldwin/en/product/baldwin-in-line-fuel-filters/bf7725 light weight very robust will not leak - subject to correct installation easy to view condition compact - can be fitted on every fuel delivery line. Main line contamination blocks filter - switch to bypass and keep going to land safely. cheap - can be cleaned but better to retire to mower duty and fit a new one carry spare(s)

I wear caps a lot, they are cheap, handy and okay with earmuffs/headsets but for our climate, you can't beat a nice wide rim. I always revert to a proper hat when working in the sun.

Once again apathy is the dominant response.