greggf

After my 912 has carried me safely for 1,500 hours (recommended tbo) I shall bury it with full honours and gratefully buy a new one. For $15 (or so) per hour, it is cheap life insurance. Gregg

My 912 powered Drifter has only ever been fed BP or Shell (usually BP) premium unleaded mogas. I have no complaints at 406 hours. Clean plugs and smooth running. One 912 owner swore to me that nothing but Optimax would ever suffice. Another 912 owner told me NEVER under any circumstances to use Optimax. Who do you believe???? I wish I could find a REAL authority on fuels. Gregg

Good to hear positive feedback on Rotax support. I have a 912UL and am about to do a 100 hourly, to establish a baseline as I recently bought the aircraft/engine (previous owner wasn't good at record keeping) I found the guys at Bert Flood's very helpful and supportive when I phoned for parts and advice. Service was fast, and price reasonable. So far, so good!

... and wherever Avtur is available, it's a lot cheaper than diesel or avgas.

Extract from a previous contribution (about 5 up in this thread) >Putting heat shrink over a swage is ill advised as it will hold moisture and promote >corrosion.>For more detail goto;>http://bosunsupplies.com/NicopressSwage.cfm>Or if you can read German, (some good diagrams);>http://www.schmidtler.de/html/ht_technik/seile.htm I suggest that the heat shrink did more harm than the "aluminium" swage. I'm trying a new technique on my drifter. Well, new for me, anyway. First I thoroughly cleaned all visible surface ageing (verdigris) off the swaged cables by scrubbing them with detergent solution and a brass wire brush. Then rinsed thoroughly in clean water and let them dry all day in the hot sun. Then I sprayed them thoroughly with an automotive underbody sealant wax. I was careful to ensure as complete a coverage as I could achieve. This leaves a brown translucent waxy layer over the metal. When the wax was "dry" (doesn't completely harden) I coated the cables and fittings with Lanox, as I usually do. I'll report on success or otherwise in months to come. Problem is, I live and fly in a very salty warm humid atmosphere (beautiful Port Macquarie).

It strikes me that the process of swageing, as described, is pretty feral. As the cable is, effectively, just turned 180 degrees around the thimble, there is likely to be a fair bit of linear load carried through to the swage. I thought, if the cable was wrapped 540 degrees around a modified end-fitting, and then swaged as before, the turn-and-a-half of termination should remove all but a bare trace of linear load from the swage. Ie. the swage would be holding the cable end adjacent to the cable under load, but there would be virtually zero load trying to pull the cable end from the swage. Has this been tried?

I must start by saying that I have had no adverse experiences with RAAus, administration or Board, but as an active member I am concerned by the many expressions of dissatisfaction I've been reading on this and other forums. One can be forgiven for gaining the impression, based on the content of many complaints, that the RAAus is being run by an aloof elite as some sort of gentlemen's club, where mere members are treated rather disdainfully as the unwashed herd who exist to pay the bills. I don't know whether this is an accurate summation of the situation, but it is certainly one that is being publicly aired. That this should be so is of concern. Recreational aviation in Australia is no longer the province of a fringe minority who can operate in relative obscurity. It is a big, and growing, business. An increasing number of people and organisations stake their livelihoods on its good governance. If the RAAus Board really is aloof, uncommunicative and unresponsive - and I repeat, if - then they need to be tumbled and a responsive group put in their place. If, on the other hand, the situation has been misrepresented, then the Board needs to communicate more effectively with its members to clarify the situation. As a member, I would like to know what is happening and be able to decide what I as a financial member want to do about it. The Board's arbitrary closure of the previous discussion forum (with pretty piss-poor justification in my humble opinion) did little to help me to see the Board's pov. In the current national atmosphere of government-inspired FUD, more than ever we need a strong, responsive and communicative leadership for this (potentially) excellent organisation. My 2c. Gregg

I guess if RAA is out of the question, the next best bet is VH-experimental.

I just discovered something else... ref http://www.amtjets.com/gallery_real_plain.html The Cri Cri could also break some new ground by being the first turbine on the RAA register ;-)

Howard, while I don't question your interpretation of the existing regs, this case does highlight apparent inadequacy of our current regs. From what (very little) I know of the Cri Cri, it is certainly adequately described as an ultralight (nanolight might be even more apt), and its performance puts it right in the middle of ultralight range. It's a single-seater, home-built. If we can't register it as an ultralight, then there appears to be something fundamentally wrong with our rules.

Agreed Micgrace, Howie builds mighty tough aeroplanes. I had a good crawl all over the Speed at Narromine. Very roomy. Looks very strong, even a bit agricultural (by comparison with the plastics). I thought it looked much better in the flesh than in the photos I had seen. It certainly had the prototype look about it - a few rough edges, etc but I was seriously impressed. Howie's onboard navigation system, with its 68cm touch screen (well, it really looked big!) is very impressive. I don't know the pricing for a factory-built certified model, and I'm less than enthusiastic about the turbo Rotax (914). Says more about me than about the engine. I just don't like turbos. Too many more bits to go wrong. I'll be interested to fly it in due course, to gauge a feel before I decide on my next purchase. I jes LURV Lightwings. And if I am ever unfortunate enough to be in an aircraft accident, I pray that I'm in a Lightwing. Gregg

Further to the issue of a new-generation Lightwing. I would love to: Buy a plane from Howie (to know it was built "right".) Have the strength and reliability of a Lightwing. Enjoy Lightwing ease of flying and stability. Stretch out in the nice wide roominess of the Lightwing. With... 100 kts cruise, composite curves (vs tube and rag boxiness), local manufacturer support, ready availability of spares, high wing (I know, it's just a personal thing). I like the look of the CT2K, and I just lurv flying the Foxbat. If only Howie could come up with a compromise between them. Gregg

Some astute observers may note a resemblance between my avatar and my navigator... He has also moved over with me from Lightwings to Drifter. Gregg

Lots of happy memories of flying Lightwings at Ballina over the years. My first instructor on ultralights was a young Lee Ungerman, in a Lightwing at Ballina many years ago. A couple of photos:

Really important! Make sure you can navigate by first principles - ie compass, clock and prayer wheel. Then use GPS to make life easier. But when GPS fails, you can fall back on your first principles knowledge. A bit like autopilot, really. If you have one, it would be silly to do a long flight manually. But it's important to be able to fly manually. Problem is, the modern attitude seems to be (in all sorts of things) I don't have to know how... the machine will do it for me. Great while the machine is working. Not so good when the wheels fall off.

From memory (56 years and less than 2k bytes) I think the Texan and the Sting are both currently rated at the standard European 450 kg mtow.This will change, and I am assured that something sensible - like 600 or 650kg - will happen shortly under SLA. The European manufacturers just have to be reminded that there is a big potential market that is not hamstrung by their European regs.Re: Nosewheels. This is an issue we (Hastings District Flying Club) are aware of with our Foxbat. We encourage pilots to raise the nose gear asap on takeoff roll, preferably before 30 kts, and hold the nose gear off until slowed right down on the landing roll. This is very easily done in the Fatbox, and should help preserve nosegear mounting points. I know that if the nose gear is held on the ground past 40 kts on a smooth runway, a noticeable shimmy is evident after takeoff as the (unbraked) wheel gradually slows. Unfortunately, getting such a small wheel/tyre dynamically balanced is really difficult. My (very friendly and helpful) local tyre dealer doesn't want a bar of it. He is certain his (automotive) gear can't handle the 6" wheel.I agree that the results of gear failure are a big incentive for tail-dragging. Hmmm, great!!! Something else to ponder.

Gees you're quick with the moderation Ian. I was definitely more than just "excited" with the Polaris.

I had a chance to have a good look at Howie's Lightwing Speed at Narromine. Looks MUCH better in the "flesh" than in its photos. Still pretty much a prototype, in that the finish is a bit rough, but a very impressive machine nonetheless. Very roomy. Looks just as strong as its predecessor Lightwings, and Howie's glass cockpit navigation system is brilliant. The lines are pleasing, without being really sexy. I do find the vertical stabiliser dated (but that's a subjective thing). But.... Will it sell alongside the increasingly flash european plastics???? I'm agonising over it myself. My head says Lightwing, my heart says Sports Star or Texan. (mind you, my wallet and bank manager in chorus say - forget it!) The Polaris is one of the sexiest machines I've ever seen. Looks like a Ferrari with wings. I got "excited" just walking around it. Unfortunately the price heads in the same direction as the Ferrari. The CT is unique, quirky, has heaps of performance, but I'm looking for low wing this time. The Sting Carbon is VERY attractive. I'm a little sus about the massive bubble canopy without bracing. How strong is it? The Sports Star is beautiful to fly - thanks Peter! - and is a well established machine, with Silverwing's excellent support and backing. It also looks sexy and the bonded plus riveted metal construction means mucho strength. Also, I believe the Sports Star is likely to be the first LSA rated machine on the Oz register. Finally, the FlySynthesis Texan is just so roomy, pretty, strong and well designed. And the NSW Texan dealer, Ian Loveridge, is a good guy I've known for ages. Ohhh, my head hurts. One thing I know is that I want a Rotax 912ULS and a 3-blased composite prop. Scimitar would be nice. Around 100L fuel capacity means a useful range between fills (not necessarily between comfort stops), and UV proofing for the canopy is a given. Living and flying coastal, carbon/composite seems a good idea. Trying to compare apples with apples is bloody hard. Everyone quotes a base price for an aircraft you wouldn't want because it has nothing in it. Then most suppliers quote astronomical prices for components that we know can be purchased elsewhere for 50% or less of the dealer's quote. Each manufacturer also uses different jargon to describe basic components. If a bloke is not careful he will compare apples with raspberries and coconuts. I think it's going to take me 3 months with a spreadsheet before I'm close to ready to make a decision.

After inspecting the Texan, and flying the SportStar at Narromine, I'm really tossing up between the two. Then, just to confuse things, there is the German offering - the Polaris, also VERY nice and equipped with fowler flaps. What was that thing on Catalyst the other night about too much choice causing stress. Gregg

Hope noone slings wires over the beaches around here. Not that I would ever fly below 500 feet... ever... no, not ever......

I have to submit the following article to the national press: "Uneventful ultralight flight ends successfully." Port Macquarie, Sunday 14 May. Two Port Macquarie men escaped injury when their ultralight aircraft miraculously landed safely after a 90 minute flight around the region today. Witnesses reported the aircraft sounded fine as it approached the airport and, minutes later it flared and touched down gently on runway 21. Residents of Port Macquarie had earlier noticed the aircraft cruising overhead, apparently under full control, but had been unaware of the potential disaster. Interviewed immediately after leaving the aircraft, pilot Gregg amazed onlookers with his statement that "The flight was very smooth and enjoyable". Despite the media interest aroused by their miraculous escape, the two intrepid aviators have stated their intention to repeat the death-defying activity next weekend. Of course, outside broadcast vans and satellite uplinks will be positioned to capture live next week's uneventful flight. Eddie Maguire is believed to have offered a very large but undisclosed sum for the exclusive rights to the story of "The flight that landed safely". Gregg

Hmm, funny you should write that today Micgrace. I was flying my drifter this morning (two-up) and practiced a few engine failures on downwind. From 500' agl I was very easily able to take my pick of landing spots on the runway. The only point that bothers me with the drifter is at about the 200 to 300' range after takeoff - which usually happens about over threshold of the shortish grass strip I usually use. At 200 to 300' I am below my (called out loud every takeoff) "safety height" of 400' and I have very few options. No remaining strip. Low trees and scrub ahead, and worse to either side. At 400' I have practiced (solo) engine out turn backs and they are pretty straightforward. So I call 400' my "safety height". Every takeoff I announce it out loud to myself as I pass 400' agl. I'm drumming into my head that I don't even consider the possibility of turnback below 400.Above 500', in the drifter, unless I've strayed over real bad tiger country, I don't have a care in the world. From 1,000 feet, a flameout in a drifter is a total non-event. Any higher is just extended boredom.

I spend most of my flying time "coastal" in either my Drifter or the club's Foxbat. There is no doubt at all in my mind. In case of (irrecoverable) flame-out, set down on the sand just above water line. From a bit of on-the-spot research I've found the sand in the 4 metres or so above water line to be firm enough to permit not only a safe landing, but safe takeoff, too, after the problem is solved. Note, research was done on my motorcycle, not by aircraft. For comparison, try taking off from 2 metre deep water, even if you manage to stay upright on landing. Beach every time, and remember you are touching down at around 40 kts (if you do it anywhere near right) so a bit of unevenness in the sand is not the end of the world. Cheers Gregg (and a Happy New Year to forum readers)

Much as I loathe and detest Micro$hafts marketing and (im)moral business practices, I am forced to admit that their FS is the industry leader. There may be other simulators that offer better specific functions, but as an overall package the current FS9 can only be beaten by the forthcoming FSX. The wealth of freeware add-ons for FS9 makes commercial ware just about redundant. An example is the (proudly Aussie and home-grown) Vista Oz, which has set a worlds best standard for FS scenery. It is simply brilliant. Ian, you're right about the demand on hardware, but when you consider what is being done inside the machine to produce a truly life-like simulation of flight, with full flight dynamics, 3D scenery and weather effects, it's hardly surprising. I look forward to your enhanced FS section of the forum. cheers Gregg

He he he...