spenaroo

28 minutes ago, spenaroo said:

hah, I thought I had heard of Zongshen before....

this isn't just any Chinese manufacturer.

They manufacture engines traditionally for cheap European motorcycles.

the Piaggio group (Vespa, derbi, aprilia) use them. they also have manufacturing agreements with Harley-Davidson

 

and the agreement seems to flow both ways, as they are launching several liter bikes that use the Aprilia engine and frame

(they also entered some bikes in Dakar a few years ago, and competitive in superbike racing)

now anyone want to guess who the manufacturer of aprilia engines was prior to the Piaggio group taking over........
 

.... that's right Rotax

now admittedly here in australia we think the bikes are absolute garbage, and the workshops I was in refused to touch them...
but that had nothing to do with the engines, and more to do with the lack of any support. and the rest of the bike being built as disposable... 
cheap importers who wanted to make a quick buck, never brought in parts and would then disappear after a year or so.
not an issue if you live in the developing nations that these are actually built for - where anyone with basic skills will keep going with dirt cheap parts (why rebuild a shock, when the replacement is the same part as a Japanese manufacturers seal kit. same with a carburetor, why clean and rebuild when a new ones $40) to keep them going, weld the frame if it breaks etc..

but would recommend the engine to anyone with a dead postie bike

Wonder if its the same story here,
wont disrupt the traditional expensive players.

But if you were in a less regulated place like india or africa and wanting to keep a fleet running with little downtime.
could keep a spare engine instead of rebuild parts for the same cost...

hah, I thought I had heard of Zongshen before....

this isn't just any Chinese manufacturer.

They manufacture engines traditionally for cheap European motorcycles.

the Piaggio group (Vespa, derbi, aprilia) use them. they also have manufacturing agreements with Harley-Davidson

and the agreement seems to flow both ways, as they are launching several liter bikes that use the Aprilia engine and frame

(they also entered some bikes in Dakar a few years ago, and competitive in superbike racing)

now anyone want to guess who the manufacturer of aprilia engines was prior to the Piaggio group taking over........
 

.... that's right Rotax

I wouldn't be sure....
 

This is the YouTube age, where people believe you can teach yourself anything from some online tutorial a random posted.
(which you have no idea if its the best practice or not - but everyone just assumes it is)

already had a few jets stolen as some clout chasing pilot's posted videos on how to start them.
 

it always amazes me the confidence these guys have.
no way would I think I could do a cross country trip at 30 hours....

let alone with a passenger - I still dont want to take anyone up with me

but then I did do some navigation challenges with an instructor - despite not having any prior training with navigation.
was a fun experience and taught me how much I don't know.

If id just been solo in the circuit I might have thought I was pretty much there.... I don't think there is enough weight on the difference between first solo, and area solo.
one is your okay to not kill yourself getting airborne. the other is that you are competent to be airborne

maybe it should be encouraged that we have humbling experiences, not just confidence building while training.

to be fair....
I wouldn't want to fly in an experimental helicopter

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

A Plane really needs to be put to work. They never were for "Ordinary' folks.  I spent the equivalent of HALF of a HOUSE getting my  Commercial + Instructor rating although a  Commonwealth scholarship at about 100 Hrs helped a bit. . Most people who had planes were well off and had businesses that helped support their hobby or were ex WW2 blokes that had the bug still. There weren't many of those either.   Nev

True,

in my case it was a house deposit to get the license,

but it seems that the days or recreational aviation are dwindling.
everyone I went through training with was using RAA as a stepping stone for bigger things. especially commercial or PPL, almost certainly using it for passengers and transport.
I seem to be in the rare zone of only ever intending to circuit bash, or do a afternoon coastal flight as a weekend treat.

don't even intend on getting the navigation endorsement. ill get around to a passenger one at some point... but its my fun

had an interesting talk with an instructor once about it, day with strong shifting wind and getting frustrated as I couldn't nail one issue free landing.
with the debrief he reminded me not to worry about it - if I'm not enjoying the flight stop.
was a reminder I'm only doing it for fun, and wouldn't be flying in that stuff anyway if it wasn't training. If solo, I would have landed instead of continuing touch and go's

(also a reminder that it applies with go-arounds etc... with my decision making - since that chat I call everything much earlier and don't try to save as many landings)
from talking with them, I get the Idea that I am an outlier - no goal or purpose, just having fun.

46 minutes ago, CAV0K said:

I agree it is getting too expensive, $300+/hr for hire and fly is crazy. What do you currently fly? I note your info says RPC, if youre flying RAAUS you can get a bit cheaper, however if youre flying GA then less than $300/hr is not easy.

well....

I currently fly a champ,
but don't have the tailwheel endorsement. so need to fly with an instructor....
(literally just need more time, don't have the consistency to be signed off just yet - have the ability and fly great on a good day, but a bit lacking when the confidence gets shaken)

and now I've flown tail wheel, I don't want to go back to a tricycle gear for the 1 hour every month or two that I fly.
it feels so much more rewarding and involved to fly

which is a moot point

as both flight schools I've used that hire out aircraft have a 30-60 day check ride policy.
which means every flight would be a check flight with an instructor anyway with the hours I fly.
 

I think ill do 6 hours this year...
and it will almost be $2000.

as a single, 31 year old with a mortgage, its just too expensive.
I would like to fly more. but I simply can not afford to. not with the mortgage costs (and I have a small 2 bedroom unit, at the lowest end of the housing prices)

Similar story with my girlfriend.
She would like to get a license, but try justifying the cost while keeping a healthy finance situation on paper for mortgage applications

On 29/06/2023 at 8:29 PM, danny_galaga said:

I really feel it's too late in history to didn't too much time and money reinventing the wheel. Best thing is incremental improvements of reciprocal engines. The last bastion for them will be ships I reckon. 

nah, they are similar to trains now.
run electric propulsion through the azimuth pods.
use a turbine to generate the electricity.

6 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Car engines LOAF most of the time.  You also don't run them flat out for the first 5 minutes of every trip. A lot of the problems with aero engines is they don't get used enough and/or do short runs. It takes about 40 minutes of flight to warm the motor right through.. The worst thing you can do is leave it in front of the clubhouse all day and then taxi it to the hangar late in the day and then not fly it for many weeks. .  Nev

Speak for yourself, where's the fun if the the wheels aren't spinning as you exit the driveway.

but yes, there is differences with the constant RPM and varied load

id like to make a point that Ive made before when talking about re-purposing existing engines.
we use hours not distance travelled. but its fairly similar.
 

lets say a harley-davidson averages 50km/h. it needs a new crank at 100,000kms
so 100,000, divided by 50 = 2000
therefore the engine life in time is about 2000 hours. which to my understanding is similar to an air cooled aero engine.

I know the flight school I learned in worked of the budget of 1 Jabiru engine failure per 1000 hours. and later swapped to Rotax.

which brings up another point, how many cars do you see by the side of the road with mechanical issues...
but you would expect a car from the 70's to be more likely to break down then a car built in that last 10 years.
wouldn't the same case exist with aircraft... only id argue we have an older average engine age then that of cars on the road currently

I feel like the "those noisy airplanes" argument is somewhat redundant these days.
when was the last time you were in a building and heard an aircraft overhead that wasn't a low level police helicopter?
jets are getting quieter all the time, not louder

Can we all just agree that we should have the option to go back to the old shotgun cartridge starter (coffman starter).
so much lighter and portable. plus it has that satisfying bang and smoke

as a bonus would probably clear the runway of any wildlife too

No different to Gun reform....

would take some politicians ready to fall on the sword, knowing they wont be re-elected.
knowing it will take years afterwards for the public to acknowledge it was the right thing to do

If only we had an opposition that needs to re-invent itself, and is pretty much guaranteed not to get in next election so can go hard and call the government out on all this......

23 hours ago, old man emu said:

The ideology involved did not come from the Government. It was a massive scam perpetrated to some degree, no doubt, by Chinese organised crime syndicates. It is the same ideology we see here with housing  - investment properties. Here we work to get some equity in the house we live in. Then we borrow against that equity to purchase an "investment property". The hope is that the rent will pay the mortgage on teh investment property and appreciation of property values will generate the money needed later in life to finance retirement. The same concept applied in China. Mums and Dads bought "off the plan", but, although the least expensive part of the building (the walls and floor) was built, the building was never fitted out to become habitable. 

 

Have you noticed in the usual weekend news reports of housing sales that many attendees are Chinese or Indian? At least in Australia when they invest their money to buy property, it is there to be seen and to move into.

not necessarily,
there is a Chinese cultural issue around "used" things having little to no value.
there is a lot of apartments for example in the docklands that are bought by Chinese and left empty.
because if someone moves in then it is no longer a new apartment, and in their eyes devalued. 

This turned up on my facebook page,

captioned as "RSF-1 Aerosub. In 1964, Donald Reid dove it 6.5 ft below the surface, then flew 33 ft high."

further googling makes me believe it should actually be called the RFS-1, but the rest is correct. used scuba gear when underwater. (imagine the limitations with pressure density at altitude)

who knew there was a submarine in the sky?

A bomber in general seems to go against the the whole ethics of our military.
I remember Matt Hall talking on a podcast about having to sit out on certain missions when he was flying the F15 with the USAF,
as they violated Australian laws on warfare (assassination's, bombing the building when the target is inside) 

I like the idea of reading out aloud what the status is.
I.e. oil is 100psi, fuel is 3/4 of a tank, parking brake is off.
instead of the quick, yep that's where its meant to be

2 seat, side by side. with the fuel in the wings is probably the majority of RAA aircraft.
which brings the question of what weight moment can you change?
if its under MTOW then that's pretty much all you can do. (excluding the small overnight bag you may be able to sneak in if your not at MTOW with full fuel load)

I know the J160 couldn't take full fuel with two 90kg people. all the added load of fuel and people was under the wings (center of lift)
Vixxen was similar, but might have the ability to take some sandwiches and water bottles too.

The other aircraft I have flown in RAA is a tandem seat with the fuel in front of the firewall.
once again question is how heavy is the back seater. cant change where the weight is, and no room for more then an overnight bag.

I was taught it all as the theory course I did was mixed with RPC/RPL students.

but with the RAA aircraft it was a question of fuel load, possibly passenger and the density altitude.
MTOW was achieved well before needing to look at balance.

mid flight over the ocean.... don't think that will be an issue

does pose the ethical question, in an emergency do you leave it on or turn it off?

I'm curious at what point was it too late to go around?
when the aircraft struck the runway - we have all done a go-around after the flare but before touching at some point in training

Personally I see the title effects as a plus.

Still believe they should swap the oxygen system for sleeping gas.

Id pay extra to sleep the whole way

Germany during ww2 (mmm panzer chocolate)
USA post war (anyone want some CIA experiments with LSD)

8 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

Most 4X4 driver's are advised to,  ' pull the ABS fuse ' Before off-roading .

As one who couldn't find said fuse " it's bloody awful being thrown side to side each time that ABS detects one wheel revolving more than the other Three. " . ( in sand ruts ).

spacesailor

 

What car is that?
love the off-road ABS button in my Amarok, all the power slides.
especially going down hills where it brakes one wheel at a time