farri

Hi Jamiechipp,Welcome,

Before you begin to build you need to identify exactly what it is that you wish to do with your aircraft,once you have done that then you either design your own,if you are capable,to my understanding, this can be done under Regulation 95-10 or you go looking for a design that will do what you want it to do.

I started flying 20 years ago by building my own ,what was then called an Ultralight,

that aircraft was flying until the middle of last year when it was pentioned off,I`ve almost finished a complete overhaul of my Drifter to bring it back to new condition.

If you think I can help,just ask.

farri.

Can we do the flight or not.

Guys,I`m looking for the right figures and answer.

farri.

We are going to do a flight of 120 NM consisting of 2 legs.

The first leg is, 75nm with a track of 180 degrees true and the second leg is 45nm with a track of 165 degrees true.

The w/v (wind and velocity) at 2000 feet is 165/12 and at 5000 is 195/17.

Our total fuel capacity is 60 lts.

Useable fuel is 58 lts.

Burn off rate is 15 lts phr.

We will maintain an indicated airspeed of 50 kts.

Using the least amount of fuel required,how much total fuel do we need to do this flight and can the flight be done without refuling.

farri.

GPS Navigation.

GPS navigation,is it safer?

GPS`s were becoming popular just before I retired from teaching,as an instructor I became frustrated that students who believed that a GPS was a better way to navigate than "dead reconing",which,to my knowledge is still taught in GA,didn`t feel that they needed to understand all that "Dead reconing" involved.

When I decided to try a GPS for the first time over a well known course so that I could gague it`s accuracy I very quickly learnt that batteries go flat,not that I didn`t know this, I had simply overlooked this,had I been in the middle of nowhere with little knowledge of the basics??????.They need to be wired to the aircrafts power source.

A GPS is fine and should be no, more or less, safe, than the conventional method,everyone needs to understand that we humans make mistakes and simply pressing a wrong button could be disaster to someone who doesn`t know they`ve made a mistake.

On the visual and collision avoidence side of it,our eyes are our best collision avoidence instrument and a very good lookout at all times is required and will do the trick, it would be very hard to see an aircraft coming straight at you and not take action.

Remember we must only fly in "Vissual Metrological Conditions" and be "Clear of Cloud",at all times.

farri.

Tony,

Excellent work,you are correct,I hope everyone understood it and I`m sorry about your experience.

I had to become involved in a rescue once when a very experienced pilot crashed from about a 1000 feet on what appeared to be the perfect morning, the gods were with him though and a couple of us were able to revive him but he was quite badly injured and required a fair time in hospital.

Don`t wory too much about political correctness.

farri.

The future ??????????.

I agree that a name change to Recreational Aviation seems to imply, biger,better aircraft, than,so called, rag and tube however the name is here to stay for a while,like it or not.I don`t think the name change is realy an issue though.

What we need to concearn ourselves with is that even if taking on more GA style aircraft builds our membership numbers it will surely take us closer to GA costs.

The Australian Ultralight Federation was originaly formed to get away from general aviation and to try and provide, "Cheap Fun Flying",it was run over by so called progress.

Can we continue to achieve this objective and if so how best do we do it.

farri.

Baldy,

Welcome, I hope you become a pilot and if you truely want to fly for fun try a Drifter.

farri.

Phil,

Your logic is ok and you`re probably right but those of us who started what was then called, Ultralight Flying, and I was one of them ,were commited to keeping the sport as far away as possible from what was already happening in general aviation.

What a lot of guys like myself can see is that we`re loosing that objective and we are slowly but surely giong back to the thing we wanted to get away from.

I don`t think there`s many out there who realy care what type of Recreational Aircraft anyone flies,I belive the more types the better, but I also believe that two wrongs don`t make a right and that right and wrong is relative to the objective and as I`ve pointed out the objective was to get away from general aviation and keep the cost within the reach of the young pilot also,I don`t see too many of those.

I don`t need to be told it`s the way of the world and If everyone out there is happy with what we currently have and the direction we`re going then that`s fine but what I see is a lot of guys my age who can finaly afford to do what they`ve always wanted and so would preffer not to rock the boat.

farri.

Voluntary Membership and fees.

Guys,

I`m not suggesting for a second that the RAA isn`t doing a good job,I`m questioning the whole system.

I can accept that I need to register my aircraft,be licenced and remain current,but should I have to be a member of any organisation to do this.

I have vhicles which I drive on public roads,they need to be registered and I need to be licenced to drive them but I don`t need to be a member of an auto club to do this.

Our fees may well be less than other sections of aviation but we are not comercial operators,we are supposed be sport aviation and I believe our fees are still too high and will keep getting higher,as the RAA keeps getting more members they keep getting more money,what is happening to all this money,they have become a profit making organisation.

Why does a twin seat aircraft cost more to register than a single seat,do they not take up much the same amount of sky,and how much does it take and cost the RAA to keep records,anyhow,I would have thought that the more aircraft registered the lower the cost of registration should be if the system was realy trying to look after our interests.

Is the system realy within it`s legal rights to demand we be members of any organisation,should it not be our choice to do so,would we cowboys simply because we were not ?????????.

farri. :hittinghead:

I remember back in the early 80's, we had a new type of aircraft began appearing in our sky's.The ultralight had arrived, & was spoken of as a boon for economical flying.

Being mostly rag & tube,they were cheap to buy.

 

You could build to your own design.

 

You could maintain your own aircraft, they were simple enough so an engineer wasn't needed for most work, thus saving a lot of money.

 

It was expected some form of licensing would eventually be required, & it would be less restricted than a P.P.L.

 

But, time moves on & so does technology.

 

We now see some wonderful modern plastics, being used to build magnificent craft that comply with ultralight Regs., but prices have jumped from say $20000 to around $120000.

 

Many now see all ultralight flying as a pastime for more affluent people, & in many cases walk away.

 

Do we need to seperate them to say ultralight & recreational flying?? thoughts please

 

Roger

I started flying back in the early eighties by building my own rag and tube Chinook and using some of my own design then learning to fly it,I later jumped all the hoops and obtained an AUF CFI rating and ran a school for 12 years all up.

I used an Austflight MAXAIR Drifter for the training and I was totaly committed to keeping the cost of recreational aviation,then called Ultralight flying,to a level that kept it in the reach of most people and could still be seen as fun.

I really don`t know the answer to your question other than to say,it`s a pity it has gone that way and if we were to start another organisation,which could be done these days,would we find enough guys willing to do all that is needed, and would the overall costs be less???.

I still have my original Drifter and am almost finished a complete overhaul to bring it back to almost new condition,I worked the system of the day and obtained a Level 2 maintenance authority.

Check out my thread in the RAA section,titled, Voluntary Membership or Dictatorship.

Cheers.

farri.

Hi Guys,

Don`t get me wrong,it`s great that we can continue to do what we like to do most which is Recreational Flying however I take issue with the RAA for claiming that membership is voluntary.

If anyone wants to fly a Recreational Aircraft,what we used to call an Ultralight Aircraft, they first MUST become a member of the RAA, All instructors MUST be members and be approved by the RAA, All schools MUST be approved by and teach, on behalf of the RAA, everything must be done with membership,should your membership expire,you become illegal and can not fly,FULL STOP.

In my opinion it becomes very easy to obtain membership this way and increasing membership is nothing to brag about.

Can anyone please tell me if I`m wrong or if I`m just plain dumb.

farri. :hittinghead:

Tony,

You are right,we have never met but I have known of you from the begining and you were always held in high esteem by me and those I knew.

I congratulate you for the courage to speak your piece publicly,you are right about the machine but I don`t think it can be stoped,it`s gathered too much speed and us blokes have got tired of trying to stop it,the best we can do is try and work within it.

I`ve said it before on this forum,"THEY`VE REINVENTED THE WHEEL".

I agree with you also that the guys who are the real recreational pilots simply want to enjoy their flying with the least amount of cost and fuss.

I still have the strip in the middle of the property and I`m almost finished on a complete overhaul of my Drifter,it will be back to almost new condition however I`m not farming anymore which will give me more time to fly.

Take care and keep enjoying what you enjoy most.

Regards,

farri.

Ryanm,

Good on Ya,Try a Drifter if you havn`t already.

farri

Hi Tony,

I am RAA member 993,so that shows how long I have been a member.I was president of the ,Far North Queensland Ultralight Association, for several years,this clubs name has now been changed to ,(Atherton Recreational Aviators).

On the issue of going to the Board through the local area Rep,We went through our,then,local area Rep several times on several issues,I cant ever recall getting a positive outcome, because, our Rep would be outvoted at meetings,how does this represent the individual member?.

The area Rep for NTH QLD is listed in the RAA mag as being ,Andrew Hicks,Oak Valley Queensland.,no one up here wants the job anymore because of all the B..S.IT

On the issue of the Operations Manual,we pay quite a large membership fee,therefore I believe the Ops manual and any amendments should be free of charge and in book form because not every member has a computer,I`ve just learnt through this forum that a new Ops manual will be in CD form,convenient for some but not acceptable as a way of keeping every member notified, the RAA mag is not an acceptable way either and I dare say that the RAA has a duty of care to keep everyone fully notified.

I believe that the RAA has become big buisness and may be loosing sight of what, I ,and others like me setout to achieve in the first place,which was,Safe,affordable,minimum requirement,flying.

Regards.

farri.

HI BaronVonEvil,

I`ve never seen a Lockwood Drifter so I don`t know about the differences,can`t help with that.

I`ve had an Austflight, Maxair Drifter, for almost 20 years and believe it or not, it`s had 1,Rotax 503 and 4,Rotax 582, I found the 503 a bit under powered for training so went to the 582.

From the research I`ve done recently,I`ve found that the Rotax 503 is considered the best in the 50 horse power range,as I`m no longer teaching if felt I didn`t need all the extra power and accepted this, I will find out shortly as I`ve fitted one but it hasn`t even been run in yet,I would assume they are much better than the first one I had.

Regards.

farri.

G`day Rynam,

Welcome,Have you an aircraft and if so what type.

Cheers.

farri.

Ian,

You make sense,to me.

Regards.

farri.

This one usually raises a bit of a debate.You'll likely find that a combination of both is often required, particularly in higher winds as the rudder for example in strong winds won't have enough effect on certain aircraft.

 

As for which one happens first, the rudder or wing, that's the pilots preference and the end result should be the same.

Absolutely.

farri.

Hi Ian,

The objective is, we need to hold off Drift.

I would say that the method used should be relative to the conditions at the time and the type of aircraft being flown,again the objective is to get on the ground saftely,pilot prefference.

farri.

Max1090for2,

Glad to help,just ask.

farri.

Hi Max10900for2,

Welcom,I think you`ve made a good choice for affordable fun flying,I flew a 503 Maxair Drifter, on floats,many years ago,the floats were huge compared to the aircraft and even with a Rotax 503 engine,it still performed beautifully.

Have fun.

farri.

Hi Merc,

Welcome,it`s great to see that there are still some people prepaired to admit they fly a Drifter.

I`ve flown many types over years and I still choose to own a 95-25 Maxair Drifter,great for recreational aviation.

Regards,

farri.

Hi Shane,

Welcome, What aircraft do you fly.

I`m just down the road at Deeral,you may have flown over my strip,it`s just north of where the Mulgrave and the Russell rivers meet.

I`m a recreational pilot and own a Maxair Drifter.

Regards,

farri.

As an add on to the Ground speed vs Air speed, I was silly enough to go for a flight today, the wind at take off being marginal. After a very rough, not pleasant flight, I turned onto final at IAS of 50 knots. On the GPS my ground speed was showing as 25 knots. The stall speed for the Xair is of 29 knots. Needless to say my airspeed was fine but when the IAS and the ground speed intersected at touchdown, the roll out was very short. Just my 0.2c worth. Remember, ground speed for ground people, airspeed for real people.:big_grin:

Robinsm,

If the aircraft encounters a sink, it will travel downwards as well as forward therefore the "RELATIVE AIRFLOW" is now coming at the aircraft from below and the "ANGLE OF ATTACK" has increased bringing the aircraft closer to the "CRITICAL ANGLE OF ATTACK" and a stall.

On final approach the airspeed should be high enough to allow for any unexped sink and wind shear,wind shear being "Any change in wind speed or direction"

A good airspeed to use is,"The stall speed of the aircraft + 50% of stall speed + 1/3 of the wind speed" this should cover most situations,Never use your ground speed,keep the GPS for navigational use.

farri.

farri. My questions and comments were very much tongue in cheek. I don't care what anyone says all this talk of critical angle of attack is pure theory. Foe an ultralight p;lot the way to prevent a stall is by monitoring airspeed, attitude and feel. Airspeed and attitude are not necessarily 100% correct but they may be the best we have.

I`m very pleased at what you have said,you had me worried for a while, had this gone on any longer that is exactly what I would have said,leaving out the bit about "Pure Theory",however.

Because this section is for student pilots,also,it is extremely important that they thoroughly understand the definition of the stall so they can understand why it occurs and hopefully avoid it.

Theory only helps us to understand what is happening,it does not fly the aircraft,the pilot does, and a complete awareness and understanding of the situation and the aircraft,by the pilot, is required to fly saftely,this is easier done with a clear understanding of the theory involved.

Let`s not say we don`t care what anyone say`s about the critical angle of attack because there have been too many deaths because of this,in the time I have been flying,I would like to try and reduce the numbers.

farri.