Jump to content

planesmaker

Members
  • Posts

    579
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by planesmaker

  1. Seems the new "proposal" has no further consultation with industry. Put out a extreme proposal , "consult with industry" then tone it down a little to what they really intended, and without further consultation, implement. Consultation is a farce! Tom
  2. I wrote to Jabiru to suggest that CHT's should be fitted to every cylinder on every aircraft that leaves the factory, I received a reply saying that they are considering it but so far they have traditionally resisted to keep the price down. So there you have it, to provide us with a well priced aircraft. Tom
  3. Thanks for sharing that Deb. Tom
  4. OK , well done! What an inspiration to us all. Thanks for sharing. Howe that is very clever. Tom
  5. FV You are quite right, it is none of my business why he wants to register it with RAA. I am just at a loss to understand why someone would go to a lot of expense and time to build a beautiful aircraft then limit it's usefulness. He can do what he likes I suppose, and he has shown it is allowed by the regs, so there does not appear a valid reason why he can't have it registered. Tom
  6. So you sound quite upset about it? As you have said it is a more useful option in VH anyway. Why specifically do you want it in RAA? What is the advantage? If RAA rego 2 people @ 80 kg will leave you 7 kg fuel about 10 lt enough to taxy on the apron! Let's say one of your kids is 40kg( if not yet, they soon will be at least this) 120kg leaves 47kg for fuel or 67lts or 2 hrs incl reserves. A fairly limited aircraft you would have to agree. I don't understand why you would want to limit your aircraft like this. Tom
  7. Why would you want to register it with RAAus? At that weight it is an expensive single seat, with less than 170kg for people and fuel! 100ltrs of fuel will give maybe 2.5 hrs with reserves for 72 kg, leaves you with single seat. Sorry but RAAus is right to refuse registration for this. VH exp is a very valid alternative. Tom
  8. It is 19 registered and I'm pretty sure it's a j160. Modelled after my installation. Tom
  9. Contact area the same although they have increased torque and no loctite. Bigger nut meant we had to acquire another special tool. Tom
  10. This only covers the wear etc on the piston and basically admits there is little difference and really won't matter which way it is put in. However it does not address possible vibration ,however small , that may lead to the possibility of through bolt breakages.
  11. Dmech, thanks for that information. Tom
  12. All I can suggest is to add a small diode on the signal wire. You can buy one for a coupe of dollars from auto electrician, they use them in alternators. The one I had problems with was a 3" vdo fitted to a skyfox. Worth a try. Tom
  13. I doubt it's fuel related, if detonation is a problem surely there would be damage evidence on pistons. Doesn't take long to start to melt a piston with detonation. Dmech could be on to something with resonance. One thing I am sure of , Jabiru don't know what is causing them to break. I had to just shake my head when they put out a SB changing the nuts for nuts with more thread???? It wasn't the nuts that were the problem. Just fitted new bolts to 2200 and they came with bigger 12 point nuts that required using a 1/2" crows foot(instead of 7/16"). Bolt diameter remained the same, yes that should fix it,really?Tom
  14. What seems to be the problem?
  15. A j230 for 25k that would be a bargain. I would go for that. Yes I would fly it home after thorough inspection. Easily put a 912s in it and register it 19-
  16. Jetjr I invite you to come for a ride in my j400 at gross 700kg I think you will be very surprised. Tom
  17. I don't think the overheating is causing through bolt failures or flywheel bolt failures. 50 years ago 1200 cc VW was rated at 40hp I believe, so I don't think 80hp is a lot for 2200cc. About the same hp/ cc as some ride on mowers! Tom
  18. Good if Garry has sorted out the cooling problems of jab engines and I think jabiru could learn something from him, however Morgans are not used in flight schools, so are not subject to the cyclic loadings that seem to go with the failures.
  19. I don't think what side is of any consequence they are through bolts after all. It was oil filter side, broke off at base of nut. Tom
  20. Jet, speaking from experience I know that 100hp Rotax will definitely suit the 120hp jab fleet, in fact will out perform the jab powered aircraft if fitted with a C/S prop . Tom
  21. Bex, No, I have just replaced thru bolts on 2200 that had broken a top bolt. Flying school using avgas and maintained to the letter. Done about 400 hrs from factory bulk strip / repair where ,if I recall correctly , new thru bolts were fitted. Tom
  22. Quite common actually. The later 6 pin plug units fail in start circuit. So they don't fail while running usually but next flight you can't start the engine. One usually fails at a time but you never know because engine will start on one unit. Rotax have apparently brought out an improved unit now but they have not done anything towards replacing defective units. Very expensive at around $1600 a pair inc freight! Tom
  23. I can't help imagining how well Jabiru would do if they offered rotax power as an option. I feel they would have trouble...... Yes keeping up with the orders! Just saying. Tom
  24. Just read RAAus newsletter, very surprised to see members market rates have jumped over 150%. And no free online. $55 for each online or magazine or $88 for both for 1 month????What else can members expect?
×
×
  • Create New...