Thruster88

You need to get the maintenance manual from the manufacturer. From a new pilot learning to fly perspective I would operate it as a fixed pitch unit until you pass the flight test. There is enough to take in without messing with propeller control.

Calibration is done with a correction card, like a compass card. 1/4 =20litres etc.

I would say it is a different wedegtail.

I would appear that the Cessna 182 intended a landing at the oaks and had joined the down wind for runway 36. Why there were no comms from the 182 will probably never be known. Radio failure, wrong frequency, it may have given the pilots a false sense of security hearing nothing on the ctaf. Not a fan of left and right circuits like we now have at cowra on 15-33 with all traffic to the west potentially going head to head. Traffic on a screen, could be a life saver or three.

The tecnam p92 has a nice very light fibre glass airbox that encapsulates the two air filters and has inlets for cold and carb heat. I can’t remember if it is mounted or just hanging. In your quest for performance and efficiency a cowl flap may be required. Climb wide open into the cool air, close and go fast.

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2024/report/ao-2024-058 I will say this again in light of the evidence. The published stall speeds are very unrealistic for an aircraft with 800kg MTOW and only 110 sq feet of wing. Could it lead pilots to fly at unsafe airspeed during manoeuvring? 110 sq feet of wing area, same as my RV6a....

The other issue is many aircraft don't use their registration as the call sign. All RPT for example.

Perhaps this is why BrendAns instructor said not to use the centre of the runway.🤔 If only the hapless pilots friend had said something like, "see that cessna with the big flaps that you are rapidly catching, he might exit on the left at A3. Pass on the right like you have been trained to do". The numerous cracks in the instrument panel was unusual.

Have not experienced interference with the musketeer or RV, have had the SkyEcho2 on both sides of the aircrafts.

My understanding is if the pilot has the endorsement and maybe medical? and the aircraft is suitably equipped with transponder if required and instruments that are current with CAO 100.5 then it is all good. Might be something to add to the FAQ list.

More work and cost for RAAus (members) amending the operations manual and syllabus and then getting it approved etc. Or anyone wanting a controlled airspace endorsement could go right now and get the RPL and the add on endorsement. The training will be required either way. A lot of schools now have aircraft with numbers and letters and instructors that can instruct in either type.

The engineering order for the tiger probably cost as much as the prop, that is what people get miffed about.

As you would know, the DH 82 tiger has to be fitted with the correct propeller or get an engineer order to fit something different. Nowadays RAAus is no different. Same same just different words.

Yeah but the Sensenich may not be approved for your aircraft, then you will need a marup and another $600. 🤨 I miss the good old days.

The RV15 now has a conventional horizontal stabilizer and elevator. Would be interesting to know if it was market forces or aero dynamic forces that prevailed.