bilby54

Hi Pud, Tony and TOSG have been at this for a long time and given their credibility within the flying community, I would doubt that you would get a bum steer from them. Give Tony a call and get the good oil from him

You could try the Xcom 760 if you want it to fit in a 2 1/4" hole. I am less than impressed with their performance but it may work for you

Hi Baron, Would you mind supplying a bit more info on the aircraft such as the type of engine and whether it is mounted with the heads up or down (inverted). The other thing is the terminology as to what you are describing to reduce any confusion. I can measure all of the angles on my aircraft but it wil be a few days before I can get back to you. A picture would help Cheers,

Hi Farri, This is a real insight into the resons for the 300 TBO and blokes like you should be congratulated for the early years of ultra-lighting. I had always considered that it was a liability issue rather than an engineering decision which is a pity really. This would tend to make it easier for Rotax to sell parts and engines rather than develop them further, especially the crankshaft bearings that seem to be the problem. I would think that the 582 would be the engine if it could run out to sensible TBO hours. :thumb_up:

Allowing sufficient warm up time is the best thing that can be done to extend engine life and should not be rushed even in summer. I have an oil injected 582 with 350 hrs on it run on Castrol TTS and normal unleaded fuel with and it is as good as the day it was fitted. The gearbox on the other hand has caused me no end of grief and was the cause of at least three forced landings with bearing failures.:yuk: Interesting that the trike can be run out to 400 hours but the Rotax manual states a "general overhaul of engine" at 300 hrs. There is a certain amount of grey area in that statement!:confused:

Thanks for the reply, Pity that the aircraft is locked up as I would be interested in it. Do you know if it had any interesting handling characteristics at all and what was it like to fly compared to the T300? Bill

Hi Tony, Have you had any feed back on the 'T' model at all? Mustering and property work would definitely sort out any bugs. Cheers, Bill

Hmm, now that should get things moving!! :big_grin:

The last quote that I received from Bert Floods was AUD $26,400 + good old GST. Sure it wasn't the other way round?:)

I have a 582 with over 300 hours that has never been touched except for the usual plugs and fluid replacement. The bore still has honing cross hatch marks on it and it starts first go every time. I would like to extend on Seb's post and ask why there is a 300 hour limit on a 582 for training aircraft? Was it due to a court case in some obscure country that blamed the engine or is it a real problem operating over 300 hours? Is it possible to get 'on condition' engines as in GA as 300 hours seems ridiculously short..... i_dunno

Hi Nick, Great idea here. A couple of things that you might like to consider about checklists in general. If the current aircraft that you are flying is going to be the only aircraft that you will ever fly from here to eternity, then your idea will work well. But what if you just happen to fly another similar aircraft or one far removed from what you are training in now? Consider what you would do in an emergency situation where the carb heat control is in a different position. Checklists should cover the safe operation of the aircraft and not the exact position of a particular switch or instrument. How would you handle the situation if the school brought the next model aircraft and your computerised program was different? Many pilots learn to fly on different aircraft with the same school - I learned on two different Warriors, a 140 and a 172. Learn checklists to get you safely off of the the ground but when the proverbial hits the fan, know instinctively what to do. My old instructors started with a scan of the panel from left to right then top to bottom - whatever the mode of flight. Have fun learning and cheers,

Have a chat with with Bert Floods but you will find 912 A's (80 HP) at nearly $30,000 inc . No wonder Jab 2200's at $14,000 are begining to take hold!!! With the current economic situation starting to bite, I have difficulty in paying that much no matter how good the opinion of the engine is. Seems a bit like Holden and Falcon to me. I will probably get a thread going in the engines section to find out why everyone likes 'their' particular engine brand.

Hi JL, Sorry to hear that you have been crook and might sell your Drifter, don't give up because time marches on. At least you could pinch it from the grandkids now and again:laugh: Do you know how Fish gets the C of G right with the 912 engine as it is around 15 Kg heavier than a 582? Cheers

Hey Nelson, where did you fit the monitor? The idea looks good and might be usefull in other aircraft

I wonder if Bruit2 has got an acceptable answer from all of this? I would suggest that the other part of the matter is the calculation of pressure height. Flight manuals seem to be the most disorganised reads ever published and some 'stuff' can be real hard to find in them. The SP 470 gives an actual a take off distance increase of 115 metres for every 1000' of pressure altitude. Not a huge problem on a strip with a long runway but if it is the usual bush strip that you flew into in the morning for a social outing and you decide to leave in the afternoon when the temps are up..... Temperature has a huge bearing on pressure height and 40 deg is equivalent to 3000' apparent increase in airfield height so add 345 metres to the take off distance required. It also happens on landing. I have have attended a few incidents where an aircraft has gone through the fence purely due to PH. The other point that was mentioned earlier is the performance of the pilot in hot conditions and their ability to react in eventfull situations. The over riding factor in all of this is SAFETY and Motz and others, were right in saying that it is good airmanship to stick with the book. Just for the record, I flew for many years in the desert parts of this country too:laugh:

Your rear seat knee's are further back in a Drifter!! Trikes seem :big_grin: better with an afternoon trip to an isolated spot with the girl/boy friend:blush: Tongue in cheek..... tongue in cheek!!!

I was told by one of the Dalby Drifter people that they had the Jabiru 2200 engine certified on the aircraft. That appealed to me as I am not a big fan of two strokes due to the high fuel burn and low TBO of 300 hours for training operations. I have not heard from them for quite a while but I would think that $55 - 60 K for a two stroke powered rag wing will mean no sales for Drifter. I think that they will have to offer 2200's or 912's to justify the price tag and look good with the big push for a "green" environment.:thumb_up:

Hi Tony, I have a question that deals with both rego numbers and aircraft preservation that you may like to comment on. My non-flying Thruster (25-245) is the last aircraft operated by the so called "legal" mobile flying school. As you know, it will never fly in the condition that a lot of students gained their licences from and was presented as an operational aircraft. Knowing the circumstances behind the aircraft as you do, I applied to the then AUF to have it transferred into my name but was knocked back as the previous owner (I am being extremely polite here) did not provide a receipt for the sale. The tech manager at the time would not let me register the aircraft but was happy for me to apply for a completely new rego for the same aircraft!! Still have trouble sleeping with that decision! The reason for the above may possibly reflect on some dark backroom regulation from the organisation about re-registering aircraft..... just don't know. My other concern is that 245 is in such a horendous state that it would cost a big bunch to restore to flying condition and I am uncertain as to how to proceed with this. I am reluctant to bring it back to its original condition as it would be cheaper to buy a another flying example. I wonder if it would be better left as is as a tribute to all of the students who unknowingly risked their lives while they trained in this machine? As a non-flying exhibit, this would be the creme de le creme!!!

This is a great post Pioneer. I have had two total engine failures in flight and a few manageable ones. To keep with your questions I have answered them as you have asked. The first was a sudden shutdown on a long cross country flight that was possibly caused by carby ice but I am not sure and the other was during cattle mustering. 1. Were you at a manageable height to carry out the forced landing? Less than 300 feet AGL while mustering but manageable for the operation. I had a cleared lane area between to very large electrified fences to land and there was no way that I was going to hit one - believe me!:black_eye::black_eye: 2. Were you flying over landable terrain? Mostly, mustering operations do require operations over undesirable terrain but carefull planning should take this into account 3. What plane were you flying? Drifter with 582 Rotax 4. What engine/what happened to the engine? The main shaft input bearing on the gearbox failed. This had happened once before and is why I am not a big fan of gear drive engines 5. Would you have done something differently? Yep, fitted a Jabiru and ban all two strokes!!!:big_grin::big_grin: On another thought, I wish that instructors who turn ignitions off would really think about what they are doing. You are increasing the risk of exposing people to dangerous situations that may or may not turn out successful. If the exercise turns into an accident, who is responsible?? In this day and age, who pays for your mistake? From a commercial point of view, if you scare the student and they do not come back, what have you gained? Bugger all! The grape vine could well work against you in that case and cause both your school (read income) and our organisation to lose members. My thoughts entirely but it would be damned hard to live with a death or permanent injury on your conscience so why do it? Engine failures are infrequent but good instructors can find better ways of teaching engine failure beside switching the ignition off and exposing you to a possible non restart.thumb_down

Thanks for that info Nev at least that puts a clearer picture on the issue. I still don't understand all of the riff raff surrounding the reasoning for the myriad of endorsements that have occured. Perhaps that has been a failing of the organisation in the past to not put the case to members. I am hoping that the emphasis will change with the new president.

Hi SP, Your comments are valid and I think that we have been saddled with a few unnecassary regulations that were not needed or required. I do not nderstand why there is an endorsement for "Nose Wheel" and another for "Tail Wheel" when the old system worked fine. We could also ask why there is one for "Two Stroke Engines" but not for "Jet Engines" or for that matter, "Electric Engines"? How far does the system want to go with all of this endorsement (cost) business? I was told by a few professional pilots that earn their living flying turbine aircraft, that the organisation applied to have a medical endorsement for CTA operations but CASA stopped it - yes, CASA. I wonder how far the pendulum has swung the other way?

I flew a a Cessna 205 for many years out of Tennant Creek NT and only just found out that it was involved in a fatal accident in 1982. The rego was VH-BPQ and was on a flight from Mt Isa to Townsville when it got into trouble and went in. Does anyone know if the wreckage was ever found? Aircraft are aircraft but we do develop a certain affinity for some so any info would be welcome. Cheers,

Have you fella's really understood what Orienteer was saying here? The Cessna was descending through the cloud base without IFR clearance. This is clearly a blatant disregard for the safety rules that prevent this type of accident. Transponders alone do not help with separation but will only work with TCAS. If both aircraft took evasive action and only missed by 300 metres then it must have been a close call. I work with Qantas, RFDS and several turbine aircraft without mishap and without a transponder on a proffesional basis that each one respects. Blasting through cloud is a recipe for disaster and Orienteers Skipper did the right thing to avoid an accident.

You do have an interesting job Tyson and I applaud your skippers early detection and evasion tactics. I can also appreciate that you are keeping with the forum rules of not blaming anyone but the other pilot was very much at fault from your description of the cloud. It never fails to amaze me how a lot of people negotiate flying (life and driving) without giving a real thought to their actions. This is justified by them saying that they have never had an incident when the real story is that everyone else is working their bum off to prevent a situation from happening. Maybe you could give some insight as to what you do in the Dash 8. Cheers,

I had been shooting circuits with a student in the Drifter for some when a Barron pilot from a well known cattle company called to say that he was approaching - good stuff. He also announced that he was going to land contrary to the prevailing wind and contrary to the circuit direction that we were flying. Now we all know that anyone who flys a Barron is obviously a more experienced pilot so I humbly took it upon myself to advise him of both situations. :big_grin: He acknowledged my call and advised that he would change to suit and using purely situational awareness, I watched him descend and land exactly opposite to both the prevailing wind and the runway that we were taking off from!:confused: A downwind landing by a Barron into an into wind take-off by a Drifter and we were going to come off second best so a very low level over the fence departure from us prevented a nasty accident. The other pilot would not answer my calls and by the short time that it took me to get back on the ground to front him, he had locked the aircraft up and shot through. Lesson 1 - Do not believe what professional twin drivers tell you on the radio without checking it first.thumb_downthumb_down I have also operated with Ag planes that have come in unannounced and those fella's know their stuff with a high degree of situational awareness. Lesson 2 - Because someone doesn't use the radio doesn't mean that they don't know what is going on. If you have the choice, go with the radio non-chalent Ag plane over the radio blurber "professional" twin pilot - it might save your butt one day!