Methusala

A friend had access to a Long-Eze years ago and I had a trip to Holbrook in it. It went like a scalded cat, about 170kt and climbed well also. Because of the high speed, the angle of climb was perhaps not so awesome but all aircraft are a mixture of compromises. They are designed as a fast traveling machine and the Long-Eze even had a bit of room for 'stuff' in the wing strakes from memory. Honestly, I think the biggest problem is that they are so comfortable (made of "plastic", the engine noise and vibration is well isolated from occupants and the seating position is glider style semi recumbent), one could go to sleep! Because they are so slippery (Very little frontal area), descents need to be well anticipated and they're only designed for very smooth and relatively long strips. Rutan was a very innovative designer and his work in space launches puts him in a select group of pioneering genius'. Don

Short answer to Metalman "YES!"

G'day all, I have followed this forum agenda when I have had the time and would like to ask a question of those posters who have excused Runciman's projected absence from the AGM. I would like to ask whether anyone knows the nature of his Defence job. It is true that some part of the Defence Force are "at the pointy end". However many are simply managers and administrators whose jobs can be covered by their peers. It rings a little falsely to me that at a time of acute personal embarrassment, the president is (perhaps too conveniently) MIA. I know that some will see this as a personal attack but I think it behooves the president to front up to answer members' questions. Don

I am a GFPT trained private pilot but have done the most flying by far as RA A. I think that one of the answers to controlled airspace incursion is to tailor the airspace to that which is needed. I have flown into Sydney many times on RPT's and don't think that Victor 1 needs to be so restrictive. I am not an expert but have also flown around Albury from Holbrook on towards Mt Beauty. The terrible terrain that is flown at low altitude in order to avoid airspace - well I don't think that they need all that space to approach in a sophisticated aircraft. I realise that many will disagree but this is my belief. Don

I saw one at Narromine Natfly one year that was powered by a 34 hp Continental opposed twin from a lighting-set generator that were all over Vietnam apparently when the American war was on. He said that he found the engine DUMPED!!!! at Geelong tip. It wasn't fast and it was noisy because the exhaust echoed off the blades of the prop. But he was satisfied with the reliability and the low fuel burn. Don't know what happened to it - only saw it that time. Cheers, Don

Thanks for the suggestions, Bob. Don

G'day Flyers and All, I wonder whether there are some open-hearted people out there who belong to an aircraft sharing group and have a written agreement or M of Understanding that they may share. I have been thinking of points and these are the ones so far thought of :- 1. 1. All decisions should be by consensus. However in the event of a disagreement a simple majority vote will be binding on the syndicate. 2. 2. Only syndicate members with current qualifications to act as pilot in command. 3. 3. All costs of normal (non-flying) operations are to be shared equitably between all syndicate members. 4. 4.The syndicate will pay rent to the owner of the land on which the aircraft is based. 5. 5. A dedicated and complete set of accounting records shall be kept by a person authorized by the syndicate. 6. 6. A dedicated bank account will be maintained to receive and disburse funds involved in syndicate operations. 7. 7. Pilot in command accepts all responsibility and consequential liability both personally and materially related directly or indirectly to his actions while he is operating the aircraft. 8. 8. If a member wishes to dispose of his share, the other members shall have first refusal in purchase of that share jointly in the first instance or else individually. 9. 9. Any application from another person to purchase a share in the syndicate shall be put to a vote of existing members. A majority decision by the syndicate members is required to allow such purchase. Any further suggestions or (grrrr...) criticisms welcomed. Kind regards to all, Don

A good rule in Thrusters is to maintain 50kts till 200ft or so. This way you will have a little more elevator authority if the engine stops. The tail is blanketed a bit by the pod and so elevator control is assisted to a greater extent by propwash than in other types. This and the well documented problem of wing angle of incidence make them challenging to fly until as Pud says you get used to them. Then they're a delight. You can pull the engine to idle and almost stand them on their nose and still not exceed the 80kts Vne (make sure you have plenty of height and experience). Best climb speed is around 40-42kts. Always have a good paddock selected for landing if the engine should commit hari cari. Don

Can anyone help in my search for a Level 2 to conduct an aircraft condition report in the Proserpine area? I am prepared, of course, to pay for this service. You can PM me on this site for phone details or with your contact. Thank you for your time, Don

G'day All, I was at Goulburn airport about 10 or 12 years ago having a look at a VP-1. Dick taxied up in his Stampe, it was a low hanging cloudy day about noon. I went over , introduced myself and asked did he do joy flights? He replied, yes and invited me into the front hole. As we taxied out he asked whether I fancied a $10 or $20 dollar flight? I replied avidly, a$20 one. We took off and climbed about 800 ft to cloud base and he asked did I wish to do a loop? I replied very eagerly, yes! We then dived to pick up speed and began about 15 minutes of very gentle loops, rolls, stall turns and the like. When I thought that we would be heading back he descended to about 200 ft over the Lake Bathurst area and we spent another 1/4 hr chasing ducks off ponds and generally having enormous fun. Eventually we did land and as we climbed out of the aircraft I asked him what sort of money he wanted for such a splendid 40 or so minutes. Completely straight faced he said $20! What a jewel of a bloke - we shan't see the like of him for some time. Vale Dick Nell indeed and we salute you. Regards to all and his family as well, Don

Yes, I agree with Millie. Many of us fly RC as an extension of our more "regular" flying. So I think that we would have an interest in like minded flyers, rather than go visiting sites dedicated to full time RC modellers. In my limited experience such types view real pilots as oddballs. Just my tuppence worth. Regards, Don

G'day Nev, It is amusing to read this post (I still can't believe it was 2 years ago). Of course I don't take any offense. But I still stick to my guns on this one. We have been trying for months to sort out the inlet mal-distribution on a carburetored VW. Ah the joys of this wonderful passion, regards, Don

Hey Robin, maybe an X-Air is more comfortable. Don't like going to Goulburn much - maybe you can come to our place sometime and I can see what flying in a Thruster with a training wheel is like? Regards, Don ( I have done a bit of touring in my VP-2, but it does have more room.)

G'day All, X country in a Thruster is not really a natural combination. We have done Temora (2.something hrs each way) but a little too long in the saddle. Thruster is a great aircraft for local flying and it will teach you all you need to know about flying. Great fun and built like the proverbial.... I think that the key to the "incident " the other dayn is that I usually carry a little power into the flair as insurance. This day I came in with lots of height in reserve and, with the gusty conditiouns was not conservative enough. We (hopefully), live and learn. Best regards, Don

G'day All, Hard for me to write this post but - yesterday took a friend for a flight in the local area. Wind was S/E and strip is 090/270 and flat to the West but into wooded terrain and ridge to East. We took off into the East and turned at 50kts and 150 ft t0 stay clear of trees. Flew for 25 mins then approached from the West. All was normal, approaching at 50 and descending at 500fpm. We touched down in 3 point and as I planted the tail the upwind wing lifted and we ground looped! I have about 1500 hrs acquired over more years than I wish to reflect on. Almost all in tail wheel a/c. I am very current in Thruster and this has me worried. I suppose that we got a strong gust from the S/E just as the stall occurred, lifting the wing. Only damage is a bent u/c spring so very lucky there. Don't ever get complacent, especially in a t/w aircraft. Don

G'day Pud, before this story is put to bed there are a couple of things that occur to me. One is that we have remarkably parallel experiences. We both replaced grey heads with blue heads, not because the greys were dead but just "tired". Secondly, I didn't have coolant temp problems but I had previously "upsized" my radiators. When we mounted the existing propeller we found that the max revs had fallen to 6,200 from 6,500 with the grey head engine. Also the blue head was equipped with a rotational damper which the grey head wasn't. It seems that perhaps the blue head may have been de-tuned to produce a little less power. Some of the earlier engines had suffered cases of crankshaft failure. I wonder whether this may reveal the truth of the matter? Occum's razor has something to do with the most obvious answer often being the most correct. (By the way, the rotary valve is capable of being installed either side out - I don't believe that I have installed it incorrectly but I will check.) Regards, Don

You'd probably be a bit disappointed with the performance of a Volksplane. I have one which I flew for 11 years from 1995. It's a VP-2 but quite heavy (built like the proverbial brick ****house). Strong and with a 2100cc VW flies alright - 60kts at 3200, 18l/hr. Climb is a bit gradual- 400fpm at 2500 field elevation. It was a good roomy single seater which 2 blokes (not over 70kg) could fly on a good day from about 1000ft elev. Great plank of a wing stall 32kt and powerful elevator and rudder but heavy and not too effective ailerons. It has an enclosed canopy but still looks about as pretty as a bitsa. Strong as hell and taught me a lot about flying - even thermalling. Picturebelow. Cheers, Don

Just for the record, I use Shell 91 ron unleaded in my 582 as Pud does. I think there is a tendency to wish to "spoil" our engines by using more expensive fuels and oils. The Rotax runs fine on standard unleaded and Castrol 2t. Castrol's sole business is lubrication and other associated fluids. It would not be in the interests of such a behemoth to sell anything but the best performing products, I believe. When I bought my X-Trail, I read a lot of what other owners said on chat blogs. I read that if one used the (more expensive) 98 fuel then the extra mileage would easily cover the difference in price. Guess what I found! Not a grain of truth in it. I know that a lot of people believe differently but this is my experience. Cheers, Don. PS. I recently bought a 582 that had run on the green slime. I know that it ran an oil injection system and when I pulled it apart at 350 hrs the oil had gummed up the ring lands to the extent of NO MOVEMENT in the rings! Not a pretty sight.

Thanks for your reply Nev. As you say, "never stop learning". I'm sure that Pud has no regrets in following your advice. Don

G'day Nev, As I say, I am mystified by the outcome. I have checked the timing, plugs mags and so forth. The setting up of the rotary valve is so straight forward as to be (almost) fool proof. The fuel is fresh and 91 ron as specified. When Pud started this thread I thought that surely the answer must rapidly evolve. I believe that the assembly of my engine was carried out carefully and correctly. However something is missing and hopefully in time it will become known. I am grateful for all contributions to this theme. I also thought that the rings should be well bedded after following the Rotax procedure. Just clutching at straws perhaps. Don

I am still baffled by the facts as they appear in both my case and in Pud's. We both have replaced an existing 582 of considerable hrs with a new (in my case re-newed with new seals, needle rollers, de-glazed barrels and rings) engine of the same basic specs. When equipped with carbs jetted identically, exhaust system identical as well as gearbox and prop, we get more heat (coolant temp) and less power (rpm). I have suggested perhaps it is simply the increased friction between the new rings and the cylinder wall. Yesterday I saw 6200 in cruise for the first time since running in some 4hrs ago. I saw a similar effect from my Aeropower conversion years ago. Exchanging radiators for the larger units can do no harm but the rest may settle down as the engine gathers hours. As long as CHT's and EGT's are within limits (I have a Grand Rapids engine information monitor with twin cht and egt's as well as coolant and tach) little harm should be done. Don

Yes Tex, this afternoon my friend and I flew and at 50kts and 5850rpm the egts showed 523 and 552. This is 30 odd degrees but the difference can be up to 50 deg. Also, the rev drop at 3000 is about 120 on one mag and 230 on the other! All very curious. I hope that this information can be of use. The previous engine was a grey head that had done 700 or more hrs although it had been top overhauled twice. I only changed engines because I thought the blue head would be a safer bet. I'm running out of ideas, maybe measure compression for difference between cylinders next. Don