BurnieM

3 hours ago, Thruster88 said:

Skippy, if rotax has developed this new oil to maintain the reliability of the higher power, higher stress 915, 916 engines then it must also have some advantages in the base 912 engines which we can agree are very reliable. Is it not worth a few bucks to get better protection of your engine?  

My understanding is that it was developed for the heat levels of the 916.

So probably no advantage in using it in other Rotax aviation engines but Rotax says its ok so no harm in using it either.

I suspect the price will be higher than Shell so up to you what you use.

XPS is a BRP house brand that they appear to have been using to market oil for their other engines for 20+ years.

Looks like Lubetech (US) had some earlier manufacturing involvment but now appears to be sourced from Castrol (US).

This new aviation oil was developed for the high temps of the 916 but has now been approved for all Rotax aviation 4 stroke engines.

A full synthetic should handle higher temps without breaking down but I do not see it lowering temps at all.

I always understood semi-synths were used in aviation for their ability to suspend lead (to allow for avgas use) and a lot of the development and testing seems to be about reproducing this feature in the full synthetics additives package. Odd, unless you have a really significant temperature problem.

21 hours ago, onetrack said:

"Branded" oils produced by companies are quite often over-priced - but not always. Purchasers have the security of knowing that the engine manufacturer backs it, and has had input into the oil QC and ingredients.

Many manufacturers know full well the oils and lubricants market is crowded, so they usually don't try to make the financial killing on oils that they would, on their exclusive individual parts and components.

Actually, no.

I had a friend who worked for Caltex then Shell.

Even tho they tried, distributors in Australia/NZ would go out of their way to say absolutely nothing.

Oil formulations here have a number of differences to even the same branded product in the manufacturers home company.

I agree with going with premium brands.

It seems like most 10-40 or 5-50 oils (synth or semi-synth) would work in Rotaxs, obviously no friction modifiers so the car oils are out but all the premium motorcycle oils should work. Unfotunately the mc oils are as expensive as Aeroshell.

Big question; what is the legal situation ? No guesses please.

This blog has some interesting articles and some replacement parts;

https://pointsforpilots.blogspot.com/

912ULS with 2400 hours in 28 years

https://base2final.myshopify.com/collections/featured/products/fly-low-leather-patch-hat

Was that a press release from Garmin .......

Foreflight do not need the product as they already have their own.

So probably they are going after the customer base. Only problem is these sort of takeovers have very mixed results.

2 hours ago, FlyBoy1960 said:

If you read the press release it mentions that the same team will be running of runways, the same support people will be helping everyone and the foundation team still have 35% interest in the business.  That should solve all of your questions.

I'm in the software industry.

Yeah, nah.

50 minutes ago, Kiwi said:

Class 5 medical gives you....

No membership fees, no aircraft registration fees, can currently fly in controlled airspace and up to 2000 kg certified MTOW.

But no good for me as I need to be able to take more than one passenger.

 

Kiwi

While RAA will be getting CTR access 'soon' I do not see us getting more than 1 passenger any time soon so to me they seem pretty comparible (for class G) except on a RPL/PPL you can fly a 4 seater will lots of luggage and full tanks.

Anybody have the numbers on full RAA license/rego vs CASA ?

I hear water can be useful too.

Anybody applied for it yet ?

I believe currently when you get your RPC you can no longer takeoff/land at Bankstown. Can somebody confirm.

BT lane of access and training area are fine but where do you take off from ?

When WSI goes live we lose Bankstown lane of access, Bankstown training area and part of Camden training area and these areas all become controlled. You would require a massive westerly detour if you want to stay uncontrolled. I believe this is a significant part of RAA getting CTA access.

The size of this political problem is why I think owner maintained group A will have access.

Question I have is what equipment requirements will there be ?

ADS-B ?

A harder attitude to 2 yearly calibrations ?

?

You mean Western Sydney International ?

Almost certainly this was a factor.

10 hours ago, LoonyBob said:

CASA is a body corporate, and liable to sue or be sued in its own name. So it need to cover its arse...

LAME maintenance is used for GA singles, which are allowed into Controlled Airspace. by using the same maintenance standard, CASA is observably protecting the peole on the ground from those huge speedy dangerous ultralights crashing through their roof...

It's a legal defence, which is now the primary criterion of all CASA decisions (thanks again, Mr Keating!)

Except that it looks like owner maintained group A will also be allowed into Controlled Airspace so ?

As regards LAME maintained, I suspect this is partly political; 'my GA plane is LAME maintained so why are the RAA guys getting away with cheaper maintainance'.

Same with Basic 5 medical which I suspect will be simialr to us with similar restrictions.

Most of the work has already been done so you have already paid for it.

Wait till they get into MOSIAC 🙂

While this is the current situation the new CTR endorsement and use of it has not been defined. Particuarly, whether we will need more than our current self declared medical to use it.

What happens with Casa basic 5 medical seems to be intertwined with this.

I do not think we will know for another 6 months.

Surely CTA transits are a skill to be taught, learned and practised like anything else.

I can see that people who learned 20 years ago and currently only fly in class G may be taken back but even old b*stards can learn.

Non-standard radio calls from all types of pilots are more of a concern.

 Depends how Basic 5 medical turns out.

Could be that they become so close to the same that nobody bothers.

5 hours ago, raven said:

Yamaha's inline 4 cylinder options like the 100-150hp may be considerable. If a person is designing a light, twin engine machine, consider the ktm 890 twin engine from their adventure bike ...ULTRALIGHT per kw/hp, designed for constant speeds, good torque, bulletproof, efi, altitude compensation, suitable sump design, its radiors go straight across to the airframe, throw on a belt and pulleys and the sound is magnificient. and  yes, 1 on each wing. Serious

Can I point out that many (most?) KTM engines are built by....        ... Rotax.

BMW, Honda, Yamaha, Suzuki and Kawasaki all have the design, testing and manufacturing facilities to build LSA engines but they do not. Why not ?

Have you looked at the mounting systems on other 912 equipped aircraft ?

Something like the Evektor or Sling who have been using 912 for a long while.

Two points;

I have never received complete or relevant information from a company in receivership. Never.

Interesting that Sling Aircraft are addressing their recent massively increased demand by expanding their in house manufacturing facilities.  Yes they are a smaller company but appear to have a more strategic management. Not saying they are perfect.

Lets see what happens with basic 5 medical.

They could end up being very similar.

While current kit builders will pay whatever they have to, I don't see many new kits being sold in the next 2-3 years.

This willl create further problems.

The NSW Fuelcheck app is handy to have on your phone.

It will give you locations and current pricing.