jetjr

Raa have little to do with it other than assist and give finacial support Its essentially as a not for profit event by volunteers Contact the organisers Yes you could walk out airside and wander through aircraft wasnt very hard

I thought I heard the new layout was desgned to control public entering airside areas without some oversight, and no doubt paying up. But a strong criticisim from regulators was free access to live prop areas This fence is a std and cheap way to do this

ERJ135 looses steering on landing Brisbane last night In landing roll, nosewheel control appeared to fail, fast hard turn onto taxiway and 90deg turn Had to be towed to gate Could have been serious and not uncommon in this model jet it seems

A lot of rain but gentle, Gauge shows 33mm Finished by mid afternoon so Saturday will be nice

Isnt that original work all done at factory - not many would have worked in here even kit builders. Where do you stand with LSA status if you dont repair to manufacturer schedule Its a serious repair so hope you know what you are doing.

Swap meet is happening i think All other suggestions, whilst good, involve giving things away that others have to pay for. Some seem to think admission should be free too Who exactly is to pay for the insurance, fencing, cleaning, setup, etcetc? My experience sees things given for free are valued similarly. Bottom line is they need paid exhibitors and participants to cover overheads.

The golden goose....... are you kidding? It nearly folded a months ago due to sponsorship tiff We have to pay or it wont happen. Even then id have thought is a tight financial deal. I think is $45 for the 3 days or $30 for one Everyone seems wants things paid for by someone else. Yes I think heres more exhibitors this year and had a quick look at setup today its looks very professional and well put together Weather is the unknowwn for friday

Maybe youre thinking about aircraft with mixture control. Bing are self adjusting - sort of - and dont do much over 5000, so doubt you will see too much fuel savings at altitude They are a very simple system setup to do most things, unfortunately not very well

Pretty sure in the POH, Jabiru correctly claim being LSA or experimental every Jabiru aircraft is different and performance varies

Theres a good reason why ASA supply weather info just 24 hrs ahead, anyhing beyond that is a rough guess

one of the previous complaints was families werent coming so neither did others These events need people to turn up to make it worthwhile to get exhibitors and food people to arrive

Yep just like the others The hydraulic lifter versions were astm certified I hope it works out well too but theres a long path of promises and too many poor outcomes to ignore

However some of the problems seen are not adressed directly at all in new models like valves, pistons and flywheel attachment. Theres some good changes for sure but still sourcing low cost parts. All new manufactuers and suppliers for key parts cant assume quality of previous ones. In some ways the new version could have totally new problems with areas long ago sorted out. Fuel distribution also remains as it was

Maybe if major engine development is still happening, they dont want to sell many especially accross oceans. Better to have a few based locally and service well than expand too fast. Locals dont need much marketing. Its also possible early marketing attempts were to test market support for the idea to obtain funds or just confidence in taking next steps.

Good info and those thoughts are behind the changes CAE included in their versions. Under piston cooling, thermostatic oil cooling, better materials . Time will tell if Jabirus approach to fixing broken throughbolts is sound. Resonance and temps is a simple explanation for complex failures. Truely hope I am wrong

Caught up with similar problems with the same regulator Id guess

Did some research on LEP, Local Environmental Plan, in a particular council in regional NSW,. Seems the standard LEP clearly indicates "airstrips" (and they have a pretty solid definition of one) are only allowed on RU1 zoned land at all and even then needs consent and DA etc to achieve that. Key info they want is impacts on environment and neighbours. Many councils have new LEP in last few years so the process is largely untested and no one much knows what pitfalls are.

Maybe not their idea but they allowed RAA to develop and promote the concept internally then decide put it off until sometime in the future. Its not the first time its been presented and it seems no decent explanation this time either of why refused. If there was no chance of it succeeding why meet and discuss. Waste of everybody's time.and our money. Has little to do with new designs, although would in the future, today there are plenty in RAA and light end of GA which can handle higher weights safely within design limits. Only those designed and tested for the higher weight would be allowed to - exactly as it is now. Large Jabirus operate to 760kg elsewhere in the world without changes The 600kg and 45kts stall are arbitrary limits based on understandable safety reasons. In this case there are plenty of 762 kg, 50kts stall, 2 seat aircraft out there with millions of hours up. I think regulators should have to show WHY NOT to a change like this.

You're correct of course Nev but the Jab style engine is a sensitive thing and in this area comparisons to other engines has to be done carefully. I recall material limits on their heads is just 180 C or so and CAE are a little higher. With regular operating temps just 20 odd deg below this , not much has to change to have long lasting problems Old solid lifter engines had baffles on top, many refitted below. CAE versions has larger ones underneath and whilst they didnt make any dramatic difference i reckon they stabilised temps significantly. I am yet to see a good adjustable cowl flap setup on a Jabiru, Id say it would work well but is another thing for basic pilots to manage and simple things like cowl removal etc gets harder. Cutting two pivoting sections into lower cowl wouldnt be too hard but how to actuate or hold them in position?

I saw some attempts, lots of time and achieved Nil. My 2 cents (and only a current opinion) is that getting air out is the key. Good to see all the pictures I have spent huge amounts of time and effort on this and can summarize 1. Get temp probes sorted - under plug rings changed depending on each plug removal, also had cold junction in the engine area, finally had head temps 90-120 changes to Jabiru between head push in probes, temps jumped to 120-140, ended up with CAE probes and temps stable at 130-140 - same cowls and ducts (different engine) 2, As per Jabiru USA tech tip on top deflectors, this really works but takes time and doesnt help left to right bias Learning from my trials and pics here that cowl exit is a BIG factor, notice pics here it is much larger and Jabiru have several versions of lower cowl and seems the big ones work. 3. Oil cooler inlets stuff up flow.and mean process has to be looked at again. 3, EGT, spread is a massive problem with every airframe being different. Actual temps are sucessfuly adjusted with jets or leaning valve. Air box and inlet NACA do induce swirl and RAM pressure, which Bing seems especially sensitive to. Newest hole inlet is next to be tried or at least running with cowl hose off. A small amount of carb heat really makes a difference to EGT spread, not because of heat but disruption to flow. A pod filter would do similar. Almost a black art but critical to get engine working right A catch up at YNRM is possible, I have a place in hanger there

I understood 750 or similar was all RAA were looking for at this time? Some seem to mix up dreams with actual proposals. The problem with the RPL is that it competes with RAA sized aircraft and its funded and run with RAA members/taxpayers/fuel levy .......money. CTA was always to be a separate endorsement inc. training and should have been simple as it would simply bring RAA into line with other catagories priviledges. I dont think it was ever expected you could get CTA endorsement without a C2 medical. CASA have found and excuse to do nothing as the more the more the proposals are laid down the more it exposes inconsitancies in regs and its hard to argue why.......so put it off.

Only adsb OUT is mandatory, to get reliable IN costs extra and its all only as good as the GPS signal Pretty sure it fell over a few months ago and does give rough results often

Factory or designer mandated or optional major modifications need not be approved. Such modifications must incorporate only the approved parts and utilise the approved instructions and procedures. Owner generated (Not the original builder under 51%) major modifications must be approved. Factory, designer, or owner generated minor modifications generally do not require approval, though owners may need to be prepared to justify why a modification is not considered to be a major modification. The key here is the definition of major and minor mods Minor mods cover some big changes, simply need a form sent to RAA and they indicate if they have concerns and its done or they request inspection, hours, L4 inspection A phone call covers plenty of minor thongs

Id suggest they dont want to invest in a 50 year project with public and political pressure against them including billions in subsidies to help your competitors. No matter how much sense it makes or helps manifacturing businesses.

Best to stay quiet here it seems I did word it poorly, no annual airworthiness docs other than logbook, but there is an annual inspection which is done by an L1......ie almost anyone in RAA. MARAP is used for major modifications, minor is done via notification If what you say is true are 19 reg not able to be modified other than by original builder? What if they are gone?