Jump to content

geoffreywh

Members
  • Posts

    1,002
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by geoffreywh

  1. Jake........But isn't that just the point. The BRS is your last gasp. Something has gone horribly wrong , for whatever reason, instead of dying in the middle of a scream. You kiss your aeroplane goodbye and pull the handle. Of course the pilot overstressed the aerobat, or maybe he didn't but the bloke before him did? Or maybe he didn't mean to get lost in cloud over a forest....why does it matter, he's not going to die today. The punishment for a mistake doesn't have to be death....
  2. That sounds exactly like the argument against fitting an artificial horizon, and I believe equally invalid. The wing broke off that aerobatting aeroplane!! ... with the above logic applied the pilot would now be dead. What an odd stand to take....
  3. My suggestion would be , look at the Kitfox site. You can buy in stages, the design is very well known (3500 built) and there are a vast array of engines to fit it, with FWF kits to suit, from Radial 7 cyls plus all sorts of flat fours and sixes at prices from $13000 to $30,000. (plus freight). The kit itself can be a quickbuild version ( 400 hrs reportedly) or the standard one. I did a calculation recently for the kit. As quickbuild as possible ( I'm getting old!) All the bits I needed incl. all the sweet extra's came to approx $23,000. plus GST and freight. So for a minimum of fourty large. You have a Great New Aeroplane. Personally I'm going with the radial as I like to show off a bit! and everyone loves a radial.....Floats are available....
  4. I've never been a fan of BRS. But after seeing these two videos I might rethink my position on them
  5. Several (older) motorcycles that I know of have oil/air seperators consisting of a labyrinth with a 12-19mm inlet ( that would be the breater on a Jab.) a breather outlet to under the bike and a 6mm id return ( to a rocker cover I guess? on a Jab. ) . I am certain that is what the 3300 needs. The 3300 that I take care of is losing/using about 80mls per hour. I think that most of that is ending up in the bottle or under the fuse. I think the drawing shown is incomplete, The body looks right, BUT the inlet and outlet should be on the same (upper) level, seperated by the plates. A 6mm outlet should be a return to a rocker cover. Any pressure coming from the crankcase would be relieved by the (large) (19mm) outlet. Leaving the smaller pipe to collect oil to be returned to the engine. The large outlet from the tank would vent to atmosphere. The trick is to have the whole unit above the crankcase high point. Normally this oil loss would not be an issue but on a planned long flight you could easily lose a pint or two. The Main problem is the crankcase capacity is just TOO SMALL......
  6. " Earlier post From VEV......................You really need to be careful when comparing Aviation octanes to Mogas ... Mogas measured differently to aviation fuels. " I was under the impression that as the minimum quoted octane rating for my engine (87) was lower than 91 (Shell unleaded) Then I would be OK using the 91........BUT someone told me very rightly last week that I was WRONG! .... The tests are different for cars and aviation...So the test that gives 91 octane for mogas is different than the test for Avgas............... 91 mogas equals 84 for avgas! Although I have used 91 unleaded for some years with no ill efects I'll stop doing it now and use 98!.....Just goes to show that not everything is as it seems...
  7. A bit too old? There's plenty of older blokes around. I share a hangar with an 85 year old! I'm nearly 68 and had my pilot's cert. for 4 years now! Don't write yourself off....
  8. So, I am not going to Canberra. But as a very interested reader of the ongoing disaster that is currently the R.A.A. ( My reg is about to runout) I would that my voice be heard. How do I give my proxy to someone who is going?
  9. Looks surprisingly like the "compressed air" engine that has been floating around claiming all sorts of world saving benifits. ... In the fifties I heard of an saying that went "innovate and die" It seems that improvements to engines are made in small increments, following on from what has gone before but a little better. I don't believe that there are quantam leaps to be had. If you look at all the "world beaters" that have come and gone we are still on poppet valves and reciprocating pistons. Sleeve valves never made it, nor did Wankel, Salmson, Sarich, Aspen Valves , and all manner of oddities, some of which are really interesting , technically, but they don't translate into reality, or production...........
  10. Quote from a previous post............. "The pilot who can't handle more than 30 deg angle on bank will be a gonner doing a tight turn around after engine failure"....That is soooo not a good thing to even speak out loud......................, There is a whole chapter in the new mag on why that kind of thinking will probably kill you.....................
  11. that's going to be a bugger of a job to change the belt! you'll have to go to a chain?
  12. call him, I dont know
  13. the vessel with the pessel has the pellet with the poison, the chalice from the palace has the brew that is true!
  14. Congratulations! How nicely written. I bet anything you like your views reflect those of most of the RAA members. Personally I get fed up being called " apathetic" because I don't vote. I would vote, But for whom to vote? Which party are they? Will they reflect my views of "What I want in RAA management?" ................I am of the previous poster's ilk....Thanks.
  15. My mate, retired pilot/paraplegic, has some new unused Glasshouse thruster parts in his hangar, interested call on 58562154
  16. FT Quote......." Why was he moving the battery? Did the engine manufacturer fudge the engine weight?....................Ha ha ha . Obviously hell hath no fury like a bigot scorned....I exit stage left
  17. Does the maximum rpm have an effect on the specific output ? Yup, if you want lots of power then you must burn lots of fuel, lots of rpm will do this. example GSXR 1300 = 180hp at 10,000rpm. and that's stock out of the box..... , the highly tuned version is something like 800hp at 20,000rpm Homi Homini Lupus.
  18. Now read the website FT................. The European version (100hp) is LIMITED to 4900rpm The Australian version is rated at ( 107hp) 5400RPM .......... Obviously you don't like Jan and his products but stop spreading dis-information. People without good (automotive) mechanical engineering background might take some of it onboard..................PLUS for your information 120hp from 1,5 ltr, = highly tuned ? you are kidding right? 3 0r 4 hundred hp from 1.5ltr I would consider reasonable these days......and all day long....Get with the program
  19. Quote " One of the differences between AN and other bolts is that AN have rolled threads" ...............No it's not................... All bolts of any half decent manufacturer have rolled threads. .... Just don't use stainless bolts in high strength applications please.....(Galling issues ect ., )
  20. Quote from above .............. " Jan shuts it off ( Variable Valve Timing) ) and still claims his engine is making the same power"................................ And so he should ! The Variable Valve Timing is to increase lower -mid range power at no cost to maximum power. Whilst I don't believe he is changing the face of aviation I certainly believe he is offering a brilliant solution to affordable power plants for our type of aircraft. And at approx half or less the cost of comparable units. Rotax, UL power, Jabiru ( don't take me too literally) D-motor, Continental 0-200 and Rotec and at very nearly the same or less flying weight. I really don't care who makes it if it is good.
  21. My engine has a real plop when turned over cold, but is stiff to turn over when hot...? can't really say why. It has to be piston/ring related, But it's not jab3300? sorry
  22. For students there is a very important thread in General Discussion called "Human Reaction Time" I should have named it " Human Factors" and placed it here, Please read and learn, it's VERY entertaining.....
  23. I think you are right. I thought about what I had seen and heard overnight and came to the conclusion that the information contained in the video is very important in decision making. I also thought about what he said ..."First train, then practise what you have trained for".....The "hit in the nuts" would work very well as an example for an instructor. Divert the trainee's attention to outside the aeroplane then close the throttle.......I also add the definition of Hick's Law....Hick's Law is simply a reference to show how decision-making time is impacted by the amount of choices we have available. If we have time to ponder them- fine! If not, if time is critical, then simplified options, fewer options improves reaction time............................Maybe Ian can rename the thread?
  24. I just watched a very interesting you tube video about gun fights, and, believe it or not it relates DIRECTLY to flying training. I was amazed that I have not been taught about this during instruction in Human Factors for instance. Have a look at tell me what you think of it. The video can be found under The OODA Loop -Human Reaction Time......Scary/Funny as well...Geoff (see post #3 below for video - Ian)
  25. "eggenfella uses his customer base to test his products. maybe wait until a few engines have made the 1000 hour mark" So what else is new? The max hours at the moment is over 600....
×
×
  • Create New...