Tex

It is not weight, rather the compartment.

They are a nice looking aircraft, I now share a hanger with two (I think Scott left the spot for Caboolture?) I like that throttle idea. Only issue I see is luggagibility (yes it's a word... or at least now it is.)

I might make it out just for day on the 3oth. My plane is there but it is also my daughter birthday.

Used for many years on NOTAR helicopters.

Sounds lazy

It appears the heavies set up in crab approach m in X winds. Any particular reason for not getting set up shooting straight the center line with x-control right from the start?

Guy was killed out Western Qld a few years back when starting his Gyro from the side ... when it started it ran past him and he was hit by the prop.

Thanks Mark. I was hoping for some weather to head out late Saturday.

Just don't scare the prison guards.

Well pick your height according to normal procedures but I would fly an arc north of a direct track to Watts; that is track via the low ground into Kilcoy then over the lowest saddle into Watts... but then I fly a drifter!

Agree with Keenaviator, are you sure you can comment...until the cause is identified then how can you do anything but assume. Trikes are as safe as the next aircraft in the hands of competent pilots.

HGFA

Teewah: North shore out of Tewantin. An airstrip sit just off the coast behind the ridge. You might try and contact the Sunshine Coast hang gliding club or Dave Cookman up there who also flies (instructs?) in trikes as well.

I used an Antigravity for years. No issues. Now I use an EarthX; Inbuilt BMS. Not cheap though. I certainly had to have a lighter battery for W and B or add weight else where. I am very specific about how I treat the battery. It is disconnected when not in use to prevent any parasitic drain.... Though the BMS would disconnect if it went under voltage. The EarthX have been used extensively in Snow mobiles (same rotax charging system) and the Alaskan State troopers fit all theirs with them.

AT LAST?

A wholly (or partially) suspended jail sentence does not mean that he may not still go to jail. If he commits any offence punishable with a jail term (most are) within the operational period (2 years) then they return to court and revisit the suspended sentence as a breach (show cause). So it is an effective tool of deterrence (personal and general) against any offending without the expense of imprisonment; but that axe still hangs above his head.

270 is way heavy.... As I said and the others also 250 - 255 is about where an empty SB should weigh ... WB a bit less becaus less sleeving in the wing and stut weight. Theses are Austflight 55 reg I mean. If an aircraft you are looking at weighs 270 it needs to go on a diet or there is something wrong.... That is an example, each AC needs its own WB. Nearly 200kg payload isn't so bad.

SB Faster by about 5kts, at cruise but slightly heavier than WB, still better climb WOT in SB . Empty SB weight about 250. WB not much less (if any) depend on the specifc aircraft but maybe 5kg less. WB is stronger but you would not want to test either to its limit I think they are both +4 -2 both strong enough - normal flying no issue. No need to be ducking wires all the time in a SB a nuisance when loading up the back seat IMO on WB... but not a big deal. SB land a bit longer, float a bit further and so need a bit more work to grease it on - the wires on the WB make it tend to settle on faster (drag). Glide ratio a bit better in the SB because lower parasitic drag. Buy either, I would just depends what is available at the time! THEN Go fly like I am about too... SB or WB doesn't matter just pick a good one. Skins and Engine is the first consideration on cost then overall condition and times etc Still a WB 912 would be my pick! Better economy but enough power to drive it harder and the wires make for better short landings.

Hi TP, I have no particular view on Jabiru engines, this is objective: Thanks for the explanation of what you meant by the 'disclaimer condition'. I know what Volenti means (I did raise it after all) and my original point was a simple one given this threads OP. The letter is directed to establishing it as a complete defence against liability. I appreciate your analysis of the legislation also but your reasoning has drifted off topic and appears to have been conflated with individual negligence. What it is really all about (OP) is relevant to CASA and Jabiuru; The letter brings to the attention of individuals what is purported to be an obvious risk (with Jabiru engines) and attempts to bind the signing party to a voluntary assumption of that risk, so that CASA (and perhaps collaterally, the individual PIC) are excluded from liability. If an individual properly operates, maintains, replaces, prepares or cares for the thing then they are, by definition, not negligent ('Properly' not Negligently). Regardless the real issue is that (and the examples in the legislation are of no assistance), as you would agree I anticipate, the argument (positive on the balance of probabilities) would be that the potential failure of a Jabiru engine is an obvious risk - given the history, discussion and action taken - add a letter signed by the party acknowledging and thereby purportedly solidifying that 'obvious' fact. Ergo: CASA = 'WE have a complete defence from negligence'. Cheers

Hi TP What was the critical disclaimer condition?

Got the version on my galaxy S5... All good.

Volenti Non Fit Injuria

In case you haven't done it before: You have to first save the picture you want to show online somewhere (like here: http://www.recreationalflying.com/media/ ). Then you can add it from your media. If saved elsewhere online; when open and you are viewing the picture online, right click on it - save the image URLs link - put that link in the image URL in your post hope that helps and is correct.

The same as those you now have fitted or are they the ones you took off?