mnewbery

Maybe we should mention this thread and leave it at that? http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/promoting-the-drifter-what-have-you-done.130329/

...with a waiting list of people wanting those engines. Full disclosure. They were run on regular unleaded not premium petrol. I have no problem with that.

https://issuu.com/raaus/docs/sport_pilot_56_apr_2016 Engines. Page 67. Might as well read the whole magazine while you are there

Regarding the engine condition, that is where I was headed, thoughts wise. Also the replacement engine would most likely be a blue top not a grey top. I'm not sure a grey top can be had anymore. I personally would be looking to find someone to take the old engine off my hands and see what I could get for it. The drifter 582 plans for around 20 litres an hour burn plus oil and it will run on ethanol free regular unleaded (car petrol) up to 300 hours TBO no problem. Some clubs require premium fuel but it does not appear to affect performance either way. Hot climates will benefit from a bigger engine knocking margin at full power on premium fuel.

Are you going to learn in it? Where is it going to be stored?

Many pilot have got stuck into a build only to discover two (or more) years down the road they have a plane and no recent experience flying. This has caused a LOT of very short periods of new plane ownerships. Cozy and Long EZ examples are well represented. It is not that the models are hard to fly. Quirky, maybe. This is not advice. I would be finding someone who could objectively tell me I was or wasn't safe to fly whatever I just built. I would pay them for their opinion like it was worth something. Relative to the cost of the build its a cheap form of insurance.

Country smell now with 100% more bushfire smoke

Then there's this https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-page/remotely-piloted-aircraft-emergency-situations

Totally agree with all that. Hence the statement about the design (yours) specifying no instruments or not specifying anything in particular. Velcro doesn't count as an installation. Neither does getting ships power from a cigar lighter socket. So that should be an easy one for the tech manager

So the quick and dirty answer is "if the aircraft was built from a kit and the kit documentation says an instrument is part of the submitted design then the instrument is required and regulated". If the design and documentation don't specify instruments or specify no instruments, which does happen, then the exemption from minimum flight instruments is applicable. Please let us know what binding authoritative response you get, if any.

So if you know it's accurate why are you consulting with the RA-Aus tech manager to determine a possible requirement to prove the instrument is accurate every two years? Also if it is not an instrument fitted to the aircraft it can't be regulated as it if was.

CAO 95.55 says ... (Blah blah blah) Exempt from CAR 5 ... But subject to the RA-Aus Tech manual which has its own requirements many of which are also in CAR 5. 95.10 paragraph 5 (f) says it is ultimately up to RA-Aus or HGFA operations manual to state the maintenance standards. A wrist altimeter needs to be off your arm for 20 minutes before it becomes accurate because of the temperature compensation. A skydiving altimeter doesn't have the graduation (in my opinion) to be useful. Ultimately if it's only one guy in a home built flying below 5000 feet MSL, even if the pilot knew his or her altitude accurately it won't make a difference because she is not technically in cruise flight, less than 25Nm from the starting point of her flight. Flying an accurate 500 foot circuit at someone else's airfield more than 25 Nm away from the start of my flight with other aircraft in the pattern ... Hmm

If you think that was heavy going, wait till Part 91 MOS gets its nose under the tent. All the tolerances are different in that proposal to bring them in to line with the FAA document of the same name. Part 91 is the FAA regulation for private operations below 5700 Kgs and 6 occupants or fewer not including aircrew.

CAO 100.5 says what needs to be tested, when and how and how, not "if". Specific exemptions for registered aircraft will come under their relevant CAO. For example 95.10 aircraft MAY BE exempt from CAR 5 ... depending on the type of operation. Basically for 95.10 if you are more than 500 feet above your own land or over someone else's at any height and the aircraft is registered, the aircraft isn't exempt, the altimeter needs to be present and functioning accurately. CAO 100. 5 Section 4.2 CAO 100.5 Section 4.4 CAO 20.18 says what instruments are required to operate under VFR. Aircraft registered under RA-Aus come under section 3.4 of this CAO. So firstly if your RA-Aus registered aircraft has no air speed indicator (original question was about altimeter) as required under Appendix I of the order, that would be a problem. If it was a hang glider it will most likely be operated inside a Danger "D" area and not be registered. CAR 5 section 3 part 2.3 says the air static systems is to be inspected (not calibrated) ANNUALLY for private CERTIFICATED aircraft. CAR 5 http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/car1988263/sch5.html CAO 100.5 https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2016C00070 CAO 20.18 https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2015C00342 AC 21-40(0) https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net351/f/_assets/main/rules/1998casr/021/021c40.pdf

When taxiing, the aircraft landing and leaving the runway has right of way over the aircraft travelling towards the runway. Doesn't matter which runway if the airfield is uncontrolled. No idea what the rule reference is but I will find it. Came out of the Berlin air lift I imagine

I can't comment on the various operations noted above. My comment is about the $$$. I was learning in a C-150L for a while, at $190/HR after driving for nearly three hours to the airport. That's three hours each way. I thought that was pretty extravagant. If you can get one GA plane and one instructor at all for circa $330/hr, great! Nobody has appeared to mention it in this forum as far as I know but it has been "interesting" to get flight training in Canberra. This is not a reflection on providers past or present, just the state of play. Now that the O-200 and O-235 powered GA fleet is pretty much timed-out, $350/hr is about average.

Ozrunways claims to have a fuel price overlay but I have no need for it and no idea how to activate it

It's a good question. The primary source of information would be the ERSA but the MOGAS availability will come with qualifications like "by prior arrangement" and "from drums". If the data was in tabular format it would be easier to provide but it would be technically out of date in the next ERSA. Clifton YCFN has MOGAS and this is in the ERSA.

They just lost their airline academy tenant apparently it seems http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/royal-queensland-aero-club-in-voluntary-administration.147686/

Same traffic as Clifton or Evans Head I imagine. The WOI website link above has a 3 page pilot briefing which will explain a bit. Visiting YWOL when there is no air show would be a benefit as would be taking someone to help look out for conflicting traffic. Thinking carefully about the last 10 miles inbound helps me a lot. I get the low time pilot thing. I took an instructor the first couple of times to air shows

https://www.wingsoverillawarra.com.au April 30 and May 1 2016 Given the unseasonal weather we have been experiencing this year I'm planning to go but I won't be surprised if the weather gets the best of everything again. Or will it be third time lucky? This note from the website which should be read in its entirety: https://www.wingsoverillawarra.com.au/page/flying-in

Has anyone compared the graphic in post #42 with the MAKS 2011 or Paris Air Show 2013 footage ? Notice any differences?

Norwegian pilot counters leaked F-35 dogfight report 1st March 2016 https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/norwegian-pilot-counters-leaked-f-35-dogfight-report-422552/

The F-35 has Sniper XR modules (same functions as LITENING) built into it. Are you sure this targeting data can't be directly shared with ground troops and must go through a C&C asset? Or is it possible that a VMF220D message with targeting information on one of the 10 simultaneous radio transceivers might actually get to the ground or a ship directly? The reason why I ask is that the Northrop Grumman communication, navigation and identification system is one of the more well documented features. One of the features is that everything is done with software defined radios. Another feature is that there are more than enough antennae for 360x360 degree coverage plus more CNI features than the 27 already available in the LRIP versions that Australia is getting. Of note, the MADL (aka Link 22 or TADIL) is Ku band line of sight and near impossible to intercept. The F-22 missed out on MADL and AN/AAQ-28(V) LITENING IV. It definitely can't inter-operate with other forces that don't have the same radios as the F-22 and can't provide ground targeting information because its job was to find and intercept things in the air. So are you sure the F-35 can't communicate targeting information (or video or still images) directly with ground and ship assets or did you get it mixed up with the F-22?

So you are saying the F-35 doesn't have Satcom and its SINCGARS radios won't work line of sight at FL400?