flyvulcan

The Presidency of the SAAA changed hands a few of weeks ago, with the outgoing President citing benign and completely understandable reasons for his resignation. As a result of Jarrod Clowes taking over the Presidency, I anticipate there will be a reorganisation of the National Council to facilitate Jarrod's movement from his NC portfolio into the Presidency role. It must be remembered that all the NCs in the SAAA are there in a voluntary role. SAAA workload/demands, other commitments, just plain interest and the individuals satisfaction with the role they are playing and perhaps the direction of the organisation are all factors in determining if individuals will continue to serve on the NC and what role they may play. One of the few salaried positions within the SAAA was addressed yesterday in an email sent to members by the President. The content of that email is as follows: "This is to advise that Mr Mark Rowe’s tenure as General Manager has been terminated and he is no longer employed by SAAA. We do not wish to prejudice any possible outcomes on this matter. From a legal standpoint (we) are unable to disclose further details, and ask for the members understanding on this." So yes, there has been movement within the SAAA management recently. One of the improvements evident in the SAAA recently has been the flow of information to the members. Regular newsletters are sent to members outlining news and issues, so that members do not have to wait for the quarterly magazine to be updated with what is going on. Consultation with members is being undertaken, such as the recent questionnaire about members preferences about the organisation buying the facility at Narromine to be established as the National Headquarters for the organisation. We have some very proactive National Councillors and with the upheaval that is going on within the SAAA at the moment wrt change in roles/portfolios and with new faces likely to be seen, we need to encourage these folks to continue their efforts to make our organisation a better one for the members. No doubt, it will take Jarrod a few months to get into the swing of things as the new President and with any NC reorganisation, new incumbents will have to settle into their new roles, but personally, I anticipate that the strategic plan for the SAAA will be reviewed and amended by the new management team, and that by the time the AGM comes around, members will receive an explanation of what is occurring within the organisation and what the future plan is.

Have you seen the Simonini range of engines? http://www.simoniniusa.com

As if I don't have enough on my plate (Komet jet build in Australia and Lightning Bug rebuild in the US), I've now started an Airdrome Aeroplanes 75% Fokker Dr1 triplane here in the desert of the Middle East to help pass the time here. I am building the aircraft in partnership with a fellow Ozmate who is flying for a local airline. To view information about the kit, check out the Airdrome Aeroplanes website at Airdrome Aeroplanes ~ Holden, MO Our first build session only lasted 1 hour and we knocked up a jig for the rudder. We traced a full sized template onto a sheet of MDF and cut some small blocks which we screwed to the pattern to hold the aluminium tubing in place. The next day, we marked and drilled the required holes in the rudder main spar for the ribs and rudder bow. After drilling the holes, we filed them to tidy them up and removed all burrs in and around the holes. This took around 2 hours. Robert Baslee who sells the kit does this all in a much shorter timeframe, but we were being quite pedantic about alignment of the holes, and finishing/deburring of all holes. We want to do this build as well as possible. All holes are now finished. All ribs and bows fit nicely into their slots. Next, we will bend up the bow and attach all ribs/bows to the spar.

A closer inspection of the current radiator has determined that it should be serviceable for a while at least so we will use it for initial testing. We will need to see how it copes with the demands of cooling the Rotax 912ULS in place of the AMW808. Lanny has the engine back in and the latest puzzle to solve is that at the base of the engine is an oil system fitting that I believe is a return line from the engine to the tank (I could be wrong on that but Lanny knows what it's for). This fitting needs to sit lower than the structural keel so Lanny has cut a small slot in the keel. We now have to work out how to run the line from inside the wheelwell, out to the oil tank. Lanny will be sorting that problem today. The new custom prop has been trial fitted. We have increased the prop diameter from the original 54" diameter to 62" on the new prop. We have also increased the pitch from 88" to 93". I can hear your gasps already! However, we will need 93" pitch to get 200 knots with the Rotax engine (yeah, we're probably dreaming!). 93" pitch will have a pretty well stalled prop in the static situation. Static thrust is anticipated to only be in the vicinity of 100lbs and up to around 200lbs at 50 knots. It then improves as the aircraft speeds up. It is estimated by the prop manufacturer that best climb speed will be around 120kias. Prop clearance is only 6.25" but Lanny moved the nosegear strut attach point to a lower position and this has stiffened up the nosegear spring appreciably. Lanny has bounced all his weight on the nosegear and it gives around 2" so hopefully we have adequate ground clearance with the prop. If I post photos of a broken prop after the first test flight, we will know that we were wrong :-(

John, There's a project for sale in WA at the moment. It's on the RAAus members market. You could get a real head start. Cheers, Dave

Hi Bex, The cowl cheeks will be glassed to the existing cowling, not riveted so no corrosion problems. As for the radiator, on the Bug, the radiator is enclosed in a duct. We will be modifying the setup to allow the radiator to be slotted in to the duct to facilitate easy installation and removal. Consequently, we need the radiator to be of a specific size and with specific layout for the inlets/outlets.

Lanny has now removed the engine to do a final check of things before the engine goes back in for good (hopefully!). He has hooked up a number of the systems, i.e. The nosegear retract system, exhaust etc.. The nosegear retracts and extends as it should. And the exhaust has been squeezed in nicely. We are currently sourcing a custom radiator for the installation, plus resolving a few other small issues. Hopefully, we aren't too far away from that first engine run.

Thanks SDQDI. It certainly looks fast. We hope that translates into going fast as well! The top shot posted by Speeddog7 (a big welcome to the forum for the guy doing all the hard work) shows the lines really nicely. The new cowl cheeks should have minimal impact on performance over the original configuration. Hopefully the slower turning Rotax with a larger diameter prop can give as much or better performance as the original AMW. Time will tell, but we'll keep everyone posted here on our results, good or bad (hopefully the former!).

The custom exhaust system has been squeezed in and is now fully welded up. Lanny has done a really good job to fit it all in.

The new cowl cheeks have been fabricated from carbon. They have been clecoed in place on the cowling and doors have been cut into them to facilitate working on and removal of the engine. Here are some pics. Due to the slightly higher positioning of the prop shaft with the Rotax installation combined with the new spinner that we have to suit the installation, we shall need to build up the upper surface of the cowling where it meets the spinner to fair it all in nicely. This is only a minor job so won't take long.

Yes, the iS was considered but with the substantial price differential over the ULS, we went for the cheaper option (for now). Of course, being experimental category, the kit builder can put whatever he wants in the Bug so the iS is always an option for the Bug owner. However, we are aiming to provide the best possible reliable performance for the lowest price, so we are starting with the ULS.

Hi Bandit, The current design has the one piece wing bonded in place so they are not removable. That said, a redesign of the wing is being undertaken that will facilitate easier manufacturing/builder assembly and also increase g/Vne limits to aerobatic at 850lbs and 300 ktas (so the same wing can be used in the follow-on jet product). The team doing the design have asked whether I would like to include wing attach fittings and I am very tempted to go that way. It may end up with stub spars that slot into the fuselage and are pinned like many gliders. So what you are suggesting certainly has merit and is being strongly considered.

Yes, I cringed when it was cut in half as well. But we weren't game to risk flying it out with the problematical AMW engine that was fitted to it. Fortunately, Lanny Rundell who is doing the work on the Bug has built 3 of them and knows them back to front, and he also used to build Quickies which has just such a join as standard so he has experience in doing the join. The new Bug kit will come with the join pre-done so that the back just bolts on to the front. Making the aircraft trailerable will help many builders who can then complete building the aircraft then take it to the airport to fly, rather than reaching a certain stage in the building, then being forced to take it to the airport it will fly from to insert the wings and do then do the finishing.

Thanks Bex, It is looking more and more like it will be a good performing and good looking aircraft. We shall know soon just how successful the Rotax 912/Lightning Bug airframe combo will be. Cheers, Dave

Hi Mike, The Lightning Bug shown above is being rebuilt in the US which is where the business will be based. We had hoped to get it to Oshkosh this year but it looks like time has beaten us. There's only a slim chance of it getting to Oshkosh now However, we have a Bug under construction in Adelaide which you could have a look at. I'd just need to tee it up with my Bug business partner who owns it. You'd be welcome to look over my Komet as well which was based on a Bug kit. We can make contact via pm to tee something up Cheers, Dave

It can be seen from these plugs that the new cowl cheeks are quite minimal and we expect them to have negligible impact on performance. Since these photos were taken, we have taken the molds from these plugs and new cowls have been fabricated. When I get the photos, I'll post them here.

The Rotax 912ULS has now been mounted to the two aluminium angles that can be seen bolted to the structural keel in the above post. With the Rotax being of horizontally opposed configuration, we have had to add some small cowl cheeks to contain the engine. Here are some pics of the fabrication of the cowl cheek plugs. Firstly, the original cowling had to be trimmed to allow the Rotax to be lowered into place. Next, the cowling was put back around the engine and plugs for the new cowl cheeks were built.

And a couple more progress shots. The canopy frames have been completed and I was given a throwaway canopy by local canopy maker Ian Linke to trial fit onto my rear canopy frame. I trimmed it up and installed it and it fitted nicely, as you can see in the attached photos. Ian will be able to use the mold from this canopy to make me a nice new tinted one. We have also mocked up the front canopy and hopefully, both canopies will be done for me in a few months (no rush at this point).

I just received an email from the SAAA that explains briefly the reasons for cancelling AusFly. Man power constraints appear to be the major factor. I have been a member of both the SAAA and AUF/RAAus since their inceptions and since both organisations now have clear roles that do not impinge on each other, indeed, they complement each other for the promotion of recreational aviation, I for one would like to see a new era of much closer cooperation between the two organisations. This cooperation could extend to shared facilities and some administration functions, as well as hosting/co-hosting events etc.. With the recent upheaval within RAAus and with the manpower issues hinted at in the email from the SAAA, I believe that there is an opportunity now for both organisations to review their structures and the way they do business, and to look at ways they could cooperate for the benefit of both organisations and their members. I am not advocating joining the two organisations into one as they both have their place in the system, but cooperation could provide economies and benefits to both organisations and their members. Anyway, here's a cut and paste of the email from the SAAA relating to AusFly. I personally believe that the points raised are valid and that while it is disappointing for many that AusFly was cancelled, the decision was a correct one. Dear Members The Ausfly event is financially underwritten by the Sport Aircraft Association of Australia, but we could not manage to put on the event without the generous support of a number of other associations & businesses. Airshow events don’t just happen – they require considerable funds and considerable amounts of time by our unpaid volunteers to put on a show for one weekend a year. Most of our volunteers give more time to SAAA projects than they can afford – especially those that are still working full-time. They willingly sacrifice family time & business time to give something back to aviation – just because they love aircraft and the sound of lovely engines roaring around the skies. Aviation is in their blood & in their soul. Unfortunately, this year we have had a lot on our plate at the SAAA offices; we have had a recent turn-over of our management team, having burnt out our volunteers almost to the point of breaking them. The SAAA team recently held a meeting in Brisbane, where it became apparent that we were in grave danger of not being able to do all of our SAAA work and run Ausfly at the same time – something had to give. With losing some of our key event-management players, to try and do everything we had planned meant that we were highly likely to fail badly at some of them. Ausfly 2014 would have become a failure in the public arena, which would not be good for any of the people involved or associated with the event. Therefore, after considerable discussion & attempts to kid ourselves that it would all be OK and that the show must go on, the team made the very difficult decision to cancel this year’s event. As a result of the cancellation of Ausfly, the SAAA will be holding a fly-in over the weekend September 13-14 which will allow for the SAAA AGM to be held at 2pm on Saturday 13th this will be followed by a BBQ and trivia night to be held Saturday evening. The SAAA would like to encourage all members to attend the AGM and National Council will be available to answer all member questions. The SAAA MPC course will running 11-12 September. Any enquiries regarding the MPC, please contact the office. Yours sincerely Phil Hale Hon. National Secretary For and on behalf of Sport Aircraft Association of Australia National Council

This is simply an observation (which could be wrong) with no conjecture as to the cause, but if you zoom in to the alleged area of failure of the port wing on the photo at post #92, it appears that the lower wing surface shows a line of rivets running chord wise along what could be the join to the separated outer wing panel. This might suggest a lap joint of the inboard and outboard lower wing skins. However, the upper wing skin in the same area looks to be of a ragged and torn appearance. So, a clean failure point on the lower surface along possibly a skin lap joint with an apparent uneven tearing of the upper wing skin...

There's a video of it going down, probably from around 1500' to impact. I viewed the video on another website. The aircraft is very small in the video but it appears to me to be missing about half a wing. The aircraft appears to be falling almost vertically and spinning/rotating at a high rate rather than being in a loose spiral. I expect that the g forces in such a spinning motion would have precluded any jumpers from getting out any door that was located on the inside of the spin. Edited: here's a link to the video http://www.mtv.fi/uutiset/kotimaa/artikkeli/asiantuntija-analysoi-mtv-n-turmavideon---koneen-sisalla-paljon-g-voimia-/3174490

My highest bird strike was at 9000' in a Macchi. The student was under the instrument flying hood in the back seat (he can't see out at all) and I was giving him a nose high vertical unusual attitude recovery at the time of the strike. I handed control to him at about 120knots and he immediately pushed the throttle to the firewall and the engine just went pfffft and started winding back. We had compressor stalled. We fell out of the UA and set up a glide while I carried out the drill. I remember looking at the altimeter (9000') and the TACAN distance (32nm) and thinking, bugger, a few miles too short to get back to Pearce. Bindoon abandoned was looking pretty good... Anyway, the stall cleared, we landed at Pearce and an inspection of the engine revealed bird guts inside. So don't ever think there won't be any birds that high because clearly, some of them like taking advantage of the view or the jet stream for birds at altitudes where Ultralights rarely venture.

I haven't lived there for 20 years but there used to be a decent strip just outside Bungendore on the road to Gearys Gap at the southern end of Lake George. It was parallel to the road on the right hand side heading out of Bungendore, just before the road starts winding up the escarpment.

The Rans S10 (see http://www.rans.com/aircraft/kits/s-10-sakota.html) might be of interest. Cheers, Dave

I don't have any pics of the fuselage join process at this point so I shall start with the removal of the AMW808. This process only took a day and was quite straightforward. The prop and spinner had already been removed so it was just a case of removing the top engine cowling and getting into the engine bay, which is very tight by the way, disconnecting all plumbing, electrical leads etc. and take the stuff out. Here is how the engine bay started. and Firstly, the engine itself came out (PS Anyone want to buy a complete 100hp AMW808?). And then came out the ducting for the radiator etc. Then the exhaust system was removed and finally, the engine bay was cleaned out. This last photo shows the structural keel that the engine bed mounts are attached to, as is the retractable nose landing gear mounting assembly. The nosegear retracts into this keel. To fit the Rotax 912 in, this keel had to be cut into by around 2 cm, necessitating a change in the geometry of the nose landing gear mechanisms. To be continued...