Dieselten

I would suggest to any student - or qualified trike pilot - they should buy the combination of base and wing they can afford to purchase, operate and maintain, based on their realistic evaluation of how many hours they are likely to fly per year and what sort of flying they wish to do. I would endeavour to ascertain these basics before recommending any wing and base, and I would point out the advantages and disadvantages of each combination. I would also strongly advise the prospective purchaser to consider carefully the "cycle of ownership", because the very act of purchasing anything automatically also brings the problem of what to do with it when it is no longer suitable or needed. Once I had a better idea of the pilot's expectations and his approximate budget, and having considered his level of experience and currency, only then would I venture to suggest one particular wing may suit him better than another. However, I would also make him aware he is perfectly at liberty to buy whichever wing he feels will reward him most in his flying, and if it was a wing on which he had little or no experience then I would earnestly suggest some dual conversion training before he attempted to fly it solo. This applies equally to someone who trained on a "fast" wing who then buys a "slow" wing and vice versa. A significant part of an instructor's job is to produce competent, safe and confident pilots who will go on to be good ambassadors for our sport and it is therefore my pleasure to invest my time in doing so. All other things being equal, I would point out that the future of trikes in the long-term lies in the four-stroke engined models (with wing options as available from the manufacturers), and that the additional cost premium is well-recompensed by the reduced maintenance, lower fuel-burn and superior performance of such machines compared to their 2-stroke kin. However, I would fully understand a first-time buyer being on a necessarily limited budget and would give them the best and most impartial advice I could. I would also brief them on what to look for in second-hand machines that might reveal a hard and stressful life and hope this would at least forewarn them against a machine which might be mis-represented, whether by intent or ignorance. So, the decision very much depends on each individual's budget, experience and expectation. My task would be to mentor the student to see him safely through any conversion training required and able to fly his chosen wing safely and competently.

Garmin's GTX327 transponder is TSOd, but I am not sure their 320 is. If you have a certificated aircraft that may be important. Your encoder should also be TSOd for a certificated aircraft, or else at the biennial encoder/transponder test the service organisation may write your aircraft up as "not complying".

What is the theoretical maximum number of codes that can exist? At the moment the CASA register has 12845 registered aircraft on it but I assume not all will require Mode S codes because many will already have them anyway if they are Mode S equipped. Ultimately I also assume every CASA-registered a/c will need a discrete Mode S code. 5000 RA-Aus codes...will this be enough for future growth in ultralight and RA-Aus regsistered LSA types? Also, I assume this would leave enough for the HGFA to issue for their weightshift microlights and any other HGFA-registered aircraft that may require Mode S in the forseeable future? Can aircraft in different countries have identical codes? (I am assuming the maximum number of codes is in the millions so the problem of actually running out of codes is purely academic.)

Any instructor worthy of the term will train you on whatever wing you have - if you already own your own trike. I have trained students on Streaks from their first flight, on Edge Executive wings, on the Pegasus Quantum wing and on the Wizard in all its incarnations. They did their first solo without any problems at all, and the issue was never in any doubt. All became competent pilots on whatever wing they ended up buying, even though most (but not all) did their initial training on the Wizard. Training a student on the Wizard wing implies nothing about the student's capabilities. Students are sent solo when they are ready and have fulfilled all the pre-requisites for first solo flight, irrespective of the wing they trained on or the organisation (HGFA or RA-Aus) under which they were trained. Now, in those cases where the student doesn't own his own machine, it is my preference to start them on the Wizard because it's very pleasant handling characteristics will give them the fundamentals and build their confidence from an early stage - a most necessary aspect of learning to fly. Should they acquire their own machine during their training, then I have no problem converting them to a faster wing (if that is what they bought) on the simple premise that a student will feel more comfortable flying their own machine. After all, that is what they will fly for their solo flying until they sell it and move on to another trike, so why not use it for their training? There is no reason at all not to do so. I don't consider the Streak any more, or less, difficult to fly than the Wizard, or the Quantum, or the Edge Executive wing, if it comes to that. They are all good. The basics don't change; all that really changes are the control forces (especially in roll) and the fuel-burn per hour. Nor do I consider the Streak - in any form - to be a particularly fast wing. The British-made Quick is the fastest trike wing I know of but if you have to go that fast then I really think you would be better served by a different aircraft in the first place. (BTW I would not advise the Quick for ab initio training - and Pegasus-Mainair would probably agree with me. How fast do you really need to go on a trike anyway?) The fact the Wizard has been in continuous production for the best part of a decade now is an indication how well-regarded it is by the trike community in general, not that it is outdated and anachronistic in any way. Many of the Mark 1 Wizards are now reaching 1000 hours and being retired due to age and accumulated flying-hours rather than failing the Bettsometer test. The same can't be said of the earlier Edge Executive wings, most of which are now failing the test with well below 1000 hours on them. Sneering at the Wizard because it is old and slow is doing the wing a great dis-service and shows little appreciation of the great contribution it has made to further the cause of trikes in Australia (and elsewhere) during that time. It continues to do so. Whatever wing and base you buy, provided you have been properly trained and undertake any conversion training your instructor feels may be appropriate, you will be able to handle it competently and safely, which is what really matters. Buy whatever base and wing suits your pocket and ambitions - but learn to fly it well and get as much out of your training as you can because that is the foundation upon which you will build the rest of your time flying.

The Wizard wing is a superb training wing. It doesn't bite a student if they are ham-fisted, and when they aquire skill it will reward them with some marvellously precise manoeuvring in smooth air. It will also make you work very hard to land it well under tricky conditions, and you need to be able to land well under tricky conditions when you fly trikes, irrespective of what wing you fly. I suggest finish your training on whatever you are flying, then get some time with an instructor on the Wizard and see what it can do. Trikes are not for hard-core cross-country work, they are a short-range recreational machine for sightseeing and genrally getting airborne for little capital outlay and low operating costs. The debate between Streak, Cruze and Wizard wings is a bit academic. If you really want to do 80 knots for hours on end then buy something other than a trike. Whatever you buy, if you buy second-hand make sure it is airworthy. Second-hand aircraft are like second-hand cars. There are bargains and there are lemons and you need someone who knows what they are looking at to assist you make your decision. Seatbelts are rated for ten years only, then they are junked. The Airborne Edge-X model needs a new mast every 500 hours - mandatory replacement according to the factory. A trike wing over ten years old or with more than 1000 hours on it is also worn out. Older Edge wings are now failing the Bettsometer fabric-test - new wing required as Wingtech won't make skins for old technology wings, and rightly so too. Buyer beware...but there are genuine bargains out there, provided you know what you are looking for and are prepared to be patient and not rush out and buy the first trike you see. As for engines, the Rotax 503 is possibly the most reliable, bomb-proof and economical engine ever to come out of the factory. However, load it up with a lot of weight and it too will display an appetite for fuel that is eye-watering! I have seen 22L per hour on a 503 with two people and extra fuel in panniers. If you are going to carry pax or additional weight in the form of camping gear or fuel in drums in panniers, the 582 is a better option. The 912-engined trikes are a different dimension in triking - and cost.

Nothing definitive as yet, still in the hands of the forensic investigator and insurance companies.

Instructing will do two things for your flying - it will make you put back into the sport what you have taken out of it, and it will teach you more about flying than you thought you could ever know. If you are serious about your flying, the instructor rating is worth the effort.

I for one will be very glad to see every official aircraft associated with the APEC airspace fiasco depart and never darken our skies again. I wish their aircrews an exceptionally speedy journey anywhere, as long as it is a long way from here. Never again! Those of you who got fed up with this rubbish better think very hard about your vote at the forthcoming federal election.

My Wizard was a Mk 1 with one hole only. Later Wizards are best flown on the middle hole. Solo my fuel-burn was 9.5L/hr, two-up it varied around about 12-12.5L/hr. The Streak is not a good wing with the 503 Rotax. The engine will be working way too hard and the fuel-burn will be a real eye-opener.

Every Wizard I have flown (Mk 1, Mk2 and Mk3, and I have over 800 hours on Wizards) flies in trim at 39-40knots only. Yes, you can fly your Wizard at 45 knots. You'll need to pull the bar back as far as you can into your stomach and apply more power - enough to raise your fuel consumption per hour significantly. 45 knots is what I use for safety-speed on landing approaches - I always fly in trim at any other time, and that's 40Kts maximum on any Wizard you are likely to encounter. Anyway, you can achieve 45 knots on your Wizard using the procedure outlined above. After ten minutes of this procedure your arms will be so tired you'll wish you'd bought a Streak. Moral: Wizards cruise in trim at 39-40 knots.

A trike pilot I know did just that, put a Streak Mk1 on his 503-powered Edge X base. It chewed through fuel at a prodigious rate because he was continuously running at about 6200RPM just to stay level. At those sort of RPM the normally-frugal 503 can consume fuel at nearly 22 litres per hour, depending on weight. After a few weeks he put a 582 on the base. Now he had a trike that only burnt 15 litres per hour, two-up. What's more it could climb, cruise and had a useable rev range that made it much more fuel-efficient. A few months later he sold the entire lot and "defected" to GA. We haven't seen him since. Moral? The Streak and 503 is not a good combination, even for solo flying. If you want to fly the Streak Mk2B, then get a 582-engined base. If you want to go faster still, then the 912-engined XT with the Streak 3 is your best option.

The 503 is forced-air cooled via its engine-driven fan whereas the HKS is free-air cooled. This means you will have to make a full set of baffles/ducts etc for proper control of airflow from front to rear of engine to ensure adequate and even cooling of cylinder barrels and heads. In particular the area around the exhaust-valve is going to need a very reliable supply of cool air otherwise that will be a major hot-spot and likely lead to premature valve failure or valve-guide wear and associated oil-loss. A baffle/plenum type of cooling system is reasonably straightforward for tractor applications, but for a pusher, that is a very different matter because there is no prop blade-root to help ram the air into the cowling and through the baffles. Bear in mind you also have the problem of getting sufficient airflow to the oil-cooler as well. Re-engining any aircraft is likely to be fraught with lots of "gotchas", but the HKS is a good powerplant provided the cooling issues can be handled. It isn't a 582 replacement, but it's a little more powerful than a 503 and has very attractive fuel-consumption figures when compared to the 503 at high RPM.

Chris, the partial main-jet blockage is a rapid-onset phenomenon, and it can occur with the 503 as well as the 582. The remedy is same in both cases. Bear in mind the EGT gauge is a very sensitive DC voltmeter basically, and only a few millivilots gets to it from the EGT senders, which are just thermocouples. I measured 13millivolts DC on my 582 (@4000RPM) on a probe which I suspected had failed. The problem turned out to be a slight increase in contact resistance where the sender-wired plugged into the terminals on the rear of the EGT gauge itself. The fix for this is to remove the gauge from the panel (loosen off the nuts that hold the clamp under the panel) and just bring the gauge forwards on the end of its cables so you can see the sender-wires attached to the terminals, and remove, then re-insert each terminal one by one, spraying a little "Electrolube" or similar contact-cleaning compound onto the connectors in the process. This usually fixes the resistance problem. The other potential trouble area is where the connectors on the ends of the probe-leads connect into the wiring that goes to your instrument-panel. Any increase in resistance here can result in highly erroneous readings, almost always a low EGT. So if you see a major imbalance in EGT between cylinders, first flush the jets clear, and if the imbalance persists, check the connectors at the rear of the gague and any connectors in the wiring-harness. Chances are your problem is here rather than an actual engine problem per se.

Flying an F4 through a concrete wall usually results in the wall becoming unserviceable.

Mittagong (YMIG) is diabolical in any sort of westely wind, and we are coming to the "windy season" right now. Cessna twins have been lost off the end of the runway under such conditions. This is definietly an airfield where local knowledge and a healthy respect for rotor-turbulence due terrain is required.

Join the Berry Alliance and see it haemorrhages its plans and policy straight back to the Jaspers Brush aviation community. Never underestimate the value of a well-placed "mole". With careful strategies and tactics, a good mole can cause any organisation to have conniptions. At the very least it can cause the hierarchy of the organisation to mistrust each other, thereby impairing its effectiveness and/or crredibility.

Vote of confidence for the "Blue-Top" 582, a terrific engine provided you keep the maintenance up to it and beware any elevated EGT. Main cause of elevated EGT is lean mixtures (self-evident) but what causes sudden lean mixture? Number one candidate is a partial-blockage of a main-jet. Cure is to land, pop off the float-bowl(s), pull the engine through several times by the hand-starter to flush the main jets clear, then re-attach float-bowl(s), start, ground-run and if all is well, test-fly. 90% of times the problem is solved. Main problem with the Blue-Tops seems to be alternators failing and jamming the engine. Steel caps on the ignition coils can come adrift and jam between stator and rotor and cause what appears to be a siezed engine. As the engine has to be torn down to replace the alternator, it is a good time to "zero-time" the engine with a full rebuild anyway. Have over 1000 hours on Blue-Tops, haven't had a failure yet. But I am always expecting one, on each takeoff, climb, cruise, descent and landing and plan accordingly.

I've done a few 5-mile straight-in approaches in the microlight when on cross-country exercises and the heading of the duty runway was within 30 degrees of my approaching course. Followed all the required radio procedures etc. Apart from making an interesting exercise in managing rate-of-descent and altitude against distance, they take forever. Interesting exercise though. I flew constant rate-of-descent to the runway, which was very satisfying but did require me to be juggling power somewhat whilst maintaining safety-speed throughout. I vividly recall one onto runway 35R at Benalla (from Mansfield) when I overflew a silver Toyota Landcruiser travelling along the road just outside the boundary fence, mere seconds before touchdown. Unfortunately I wasn't able to see the look on the driver's face!

Not me. I am betting that Aug 30 - 10 Sep will be so damn windy none of us will want to fly anyway. I confidently expect the worst westerly winds ever experienced on the east coast, with winds of 275/120 at FL280-600 and heavy chop all the way from 5000feet upwards. 60-90kt gusts at SFC, day and night. I am hoping the APEC delegates get to experience what wild Spring weather on the Aussie east coast is really all about! ;)

Regarding life of wings, Airborne regard a Wizard wing with 1000 hours on it as a write-off because of its sheer age. It does take a lot of flying (a decade or more for most of us) to rack up 1000 hours on any wing. Most trikes have been pranged and written off or retired (or sold six times) before the wing gets to that number of hours anyway. A fabric wing that flies 1000 hours probably owes its owner nothing anyway.

That factory referred to is Wingtech and they make the wing-skins for Airborne and some other makers as well. They should be in the Newcastle phonebook. The problem with really old trikes is they are orphans. Parts are hard to find, sails no longer made (or fail the fabric-test, which is a pull force of 1320gms using a tester called a "Bettsometer" for HGFA-registered trikes) , battens no longer made, no-one willing to stick their neck out and make parts etc. If you go mainstream and buy Airborne, then you have factory support, parts backup, technical advice etc. A different world, but comes at a different price, and the trike market is very price-sensitive. Buy something else and you are in the hands of the importer/distributor...or in limbo if the manufacturer has gone out of business or ceased making that model and has run the stock of spares down to zero. Trikes are terrific little aircraft, but you need to think carefully before you commit to buying one...the ongoing costs of maintenance, availability of parts and support are every bit as important as how much it will cost initially. Ultimately they dictate whether you can continue to fly the trike you have bought, or not.

The Plexus polish is good stuff. Main thing is to read the labelling on any polish you intend to use very carefully. Any mention of Silicone...be wary. There is also an automotive fibreglass polish called Septone, made in a couple of different grades. Might be worth a look, but I am not sure if it contains silicone or not.

This is a bit off-the-wall, but why not try the people who supply tyres for the go-kart racing fraternity? They might have something the right size and speed-rating, profile, tread-pattern etc. Failing that, go to the Aircraft Spruce & Specialty website, see what they have there in the way of tyres (which the Americans insisit on spelling "tires", owing to their determination to re-make the English language in their own image), then contact Australian distributors for AS&S co. Or, just do a web-search for aviation-grade tyres and narrow your search down from there. You could also ring Dunlop, Goodyear and Michelin and ask if they have tyres suitable in the size you are looking for...or just look at their websites. Finally, in absolute desperation, I'd approach other aircraft owners and ask them where they get their tyres from. Sooner or later, one of these options has to "cook-off".

I prefer to wire up trike radios to the output of the voltage regulator rather than directly to the battery. If there are large voltage spikes in the charging circuit (from alternator to battery, usually via a half-wave rectifier diode) then your radio also gets hit by the spikes...and may be damaged. Via the regulator usually isolates the radio from the "raw" DC and AC ripples present in the charging circuit, even after the diode rectifier. A decent regulator (the Key West seem pretty good) does a good job of protecting your radio. You could add a passive DC filter to the power to your radio input power lead if you still want to connect directly to the battery. Similar units are used in some mobile phone in-car kits. They are usually a choke and capacitor arrangement...the choke (inductor) is usually in series to prevent large transient spikes getting through and the capacitor is usually in parallel across positive and negative rails, to smooth the incoming DC. The neat trick is working out the values of the choke and capacitor to give effective suppression of the transients. The reactances of each component (choke and capacitor) are dependent on the frequency of the incoming ripples. Capacitive and inductive reactances tend to cancel each other out (a very useful thing when you wish to make a resonant circuit for radio transmitter) and you'd need to have a good idea of what the values of the ripple and transient spikes are in your supply to the battery to design a passive filter that was effective. What you want is an impedance (the vectorially-summed reactances of both the the choke and capacitor) which blocks the AC ripple and spikes, whilst permitting the DC through. As both frequency and amplitude of the incoming AC ripple on the DC battery-charging line varies constantly, this is no easy feat. Wiring to the output of the voltage reggie just avoids a lot of hassles!

Vortex Ring State is a possibility; apparently there was a tailwind component as well, which would not have helped. The rate of closure between the helo and the vessel was very high and the helo hits very hard indeed, tail-rotor unit appears to shear off, then the bouncing helo is torque-turned over the opposite side. Very dramatic and in all likelihood well outside the manoeuvring envelope of the helo. All our service personnel operate in high-risk environments, and occasionally they pay the ultimate price. Just hope we don't have a repeat.