River

G'day Darren and Gang, <?:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" /></v:stroke></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:ulas></v:path><?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:lock aspectratio="t" v:ext="edit"></o:lock></v:shape><a href="http://ultralight.net.au/forum/smileys/smiley1.gif" target="_blank"></v:></v:shape> I'll throw my two-bobs worth in here too... Yes, the Lightwing is more costly but it is built like the proverbal 'brick err, outhouse' and will take quite adeal of ‘rough handling’, especially the taildragger model. I've seen some landings with Lightwings that would have broken a Jab and yes I’ve also seen a landing where a Lightwing was reasonably damaged but was flying again with-in ten days. Dropped it from 20 feet with full flap onto a bituman runway, ouch! :black_eye:. If it had been a Jab, I’d venture to say a new fusl*ge and wing would have been in order at a minimum where-as a repair to the undercarriage and some associated minor airframe/cowling, etc had the Lightwing back in the air in just over a week... The Jab is better priced brand new but they are both different aircraft. Youcould say the Lightwing is a utility type general purpose aircraft where-as the Jab is more a faster touring styled plane. The Jab's a glass compersite build ship with both the fuselage and winf being glass where the Lightwing is a very strong metal tubing built, fabric covered overal. Their both quite good aircraft and I'd saythe $20K extra is for way in-whichthe Lightwing constructedwith considerable welding required, etc to build the aircraft... Ballooning, hmmm - more flap.. That'sthe best I can offer at this time of night err, morning. ;) Cheers, Rodger

G'day Ian, thanks for your reply (and that of the others too ). My comments were not ment against this excellent site.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> I was just asking the viewers as to what they read in the way of aviation magazines. In my business, information, especially qualified information is ‘gold’, and I have been a little disapointed with the varity and quality of aviation magazines stocked in our local newsagents that both the aviation community and that of the general public can view/purchase… Looking at 30 year old GA aircraft reviews/warplanes that have been reviewed ten times around and many a article on everything but our current aviation scene does not leand itself to enthusing new entrants into our aviation community. As a point of interest, yes, the internet and forum sites of the likes of are a great benefit to our aviation community and it’s not unusal for myself to send up to 80 hours a week with internet related business activities but I also read (subscribe) to quite a number of magazines and journals and it’s not usual to have read some 20 or so magazines and jounrnals a month too. To all, keep aviating and enjoy this forum site… It’s by far the best in oz! Cheers team, Roddger

Wondering as to what viewers read in regards to the monthly aviation magazines, if any. Looking through the newsagents stands on aviation there appears to be a large amount of magazines covering just about everything but... our current aviation issues. The only magazines I personally read/subscribe to are the AU magazines; Australian Flying, Pacific Flyer and of-course our RA. Of the overseas listings; they are the US Kitplanes and from the UK; To-day's Pilot and Flyer. I find thesemagazines just about cover all our current issues with usualy good information. The rest, andthere are many, cover re-hashes of old aircraft, airliners, war'ies and otherinfo.. Cheers, Rodger

G’day team, To give further ideas and views on using a camera for aerial use I use two cameras usually when flying. The first is a Canon digital IXUSi5. It’s a very small (9 cm x 4.5 cm x 2 cm) though highly spec’d unit with a 5 megapixel sensor with a fixed (no zoom) lens of 1:2.8 f-stop. Does all the usual things a modern digital camera does, stills, video and sound, etc but the main reason I use it is for talking the ‘quick unplanned pictures’ no focusing or setup… just shoot. Plus with this cameras panorama and stitching capability allows one to shoot 180 degree panorama shots one handed in the cockpit quickly. Also with its size is only and weight it fits into my top shirt pocket with ease and with a 1 gigabyte card… that’s a lot of shooting. The second digital camera is my very well worn (but still highly reliable) Minolta DiMage 7i digital SLR camera. This unit has every bell and whistle that one could ask for and is even able to shoot at frame speeds up to 15 frames per second! It uses a 5 megapixel sensor too as above but the image quality is far superior by a country mile… to the Canon unit above. It’s quite heavy on battery use but it does produce quite high quality prints. The lens if my memory is right has 17 glass elements in its construction and allows up to 7 x zoom. When using this camera in places where there may be camera shake, vibration or considerable movement I usually set the camera to aperture priority with a manual shutter speed usually quite high, say, 1000th of higher which allows for a sharp image capture. One area I have found a problem is the using the small compact digital cameras are their lack of image sharpness. I’m talking here of high quality imaging, not your happy snaps. Of-course there’s always the fall-back position of using one’s mobile phone inbuilt camera too… A good camera review site is: http://www.dpreview.com/ Cheers, Rodger

G'day 'Team', Not sure if this (highly edited and cropped) printout example helps in this thread but it's from my Garmin 196 and I'm able to record quite a surprising amount of detailed data especially with a large memory card. I find this high levelof data recording an excellent tool to download and printout in conjunction with the mapping software. I’m able to printout both the tracking route overlaid of the flight map and also have a graphical printout of the flight profile plus all the tracking details for record keeping, etc. Regarding the 196 itself, the hardware internals I believe are quite well designed and robust but I dislike the keyboard usage and the multifunction keys though... If you are using rechargeable batteries be warned though, as the quality and reliability of a number of brands of so-called high-capacity batteries can see you running out of battery power a lot quicker than you planned for. The other point is if you are running the unit through the panel power, ensure you have a voltage regular between the power source and the GPS. Have a power spike or other electrical glitch and you could very easily have a ‘cooked’ GPS… With these few ponderings in mind, GPS is a must have item, I believe, as a secondary navigation/backup piece of equipment to our mark 1 human interface. Cheers. Rodger

Now that's an ace! Well done... Rodger

By chance would the photo 'AD1' be the village of Wooli? Nice photos, thanks... Rodger

Ace photos... Brings back many old memories of my old 'backyard' looking at all those areas. Your photography is excellant. What camera, etc were you using? Cheers, Rodger

G'day Smokey, many thanks for the photos... I'll get back to you as to if I needed the originals. Would be interested to hear as to what opinion is on this aircraft as from the specs the performance appears quite good. Yours in recreational aviation, Rodger

G'day Mark, I was looking mainly regarding the new stol wing and how it's leading edge and flaps are linked, etc... Many thanks. Rodger

G'day 'Utlralights', as I will not be able to attend this years Natfly due again for work commitments. If the new Savannah is at the field would it be possible to take some close-up photos of the new wing, etc and post them on this site. Like yourself I have a serious interset in this new version if it's all up-to-spec as earlier reports state... Many thanks. Rodger

I see viewing the Italian site of the Savannah aircraft they appear to have their new STOL winged aircraft ready for production... Interesting figures they are giving on the aircraft. "Savannah ADV Aircraft Performances Stall speed = 90 kmh / 56 mph / 49 kts Cruise speed = 185 kmh / 115 mph / 100 kts Max speed = 209 kmh / 130 mph / 113 kts STOL performances Stall speed = 55 kmh / 34 mph / 29.5 kts Take off distance = 35 mt / 110 feet Climb rate = 1200 feet/min at 96 kmh / 60 mph / 52 kts Wing data: NACA 23015 Span = 8.0 mt / 26.2 ft Surface = 9.4 mq/101 sq ft Root wing chord = 1500 mm / 4.92 ft Tip wing chord = 750 mm / 2.46 ft Double slotted flap with leading edge slat electrically operated (manual back up) Stress rating = +6 / -3 G at 560 kg Empty weight = 300 kg (284 kg light version*) * small size wheels / special light upholstery / special light peinture / electronic instruments" Appears to have the ability of cruising at 100 kts and being able to bring it in at 30 kts... Rodger

Gee... This is one area that I really wish to 'not wake up the dog'.Though having said that and accidentally kicking the dogI totally concur with your comments Ian. Inan area I work with-in, the military has the C acronym which stands for “Command, Control & Communicationsâ€Â. We (RAA) could use a similar acronym with “communication, co-operation & consideration†as their standard.As this is a subject which could take up all my available spare time, and more... I'll leave it at that for the momment.PS Tony, don't stop batting - Ace efforts, but watch for the slow ball Sincerely,Rodger

Hey... What's this about us Queenslanders having 'too much spare time'... arr just a moment.. had to get another tinny from the esky, now back to this debate about... err wait a bit... could not trype with hands full of mud crab meat... Ok, moving in for the kill over us having too much time... oops! hold it, just a bit more sun tan lotion their thanks young lady.. oh an what say a another round of oysters eh!... And it's 24.5 degree's just a the momnet and not a cloud to be seen here at Stradbroke Island's pub (Sorry, could not resist ) Cheers 'team', Rodger

Thanks Tony for your efforts, Rodger

Dose anyone know of a recreational/ultralight aircraft that may be similar to the GA version shown here in the photograph? I’m aware of highwing versions of the likes of RANS, Fisher and Storch examples but so far I have not been able to source a lowlight version… ? Anyone know of any? Rodger

Thanks for the info... Alas, I am aware of your comments with Google’s Earth program but as my work have serious security enforcements with internet activity I not able to use the program other than at home and (of-course) I was trying to use the works bandwidth... Just as a matter of interest, one of the reasons why my work will not allow the use of the Google Earth program at present is there 'appears' to be a commercial key logger with-in the program which has been causing certain security oriented programs alarm. So until this little area of interest is sorted out as to whether or not there is a concern as to data logging I am not able to use it at work. :-<> I'll check the GPS Ref. to-night though, cheers. Rodger

G'day 'team' , I'm updating my GPS database and ask if anyone could indicate the GPS position of the Canungra 'International' airfield sited just north of the township of Canungra, south east QLD. I have the aerial photo/sat. image of the strip, quite a good image off the Google Earth program but just wish to confirm the details. Yours in recreational aviation, Rodger

G’day Ian, On you point as to whether you buy an internal EPIRB and have it fitted to your aircraft I believe the costs would be through-the-roof and as we are talking of recreational aircraft I’d have to say that, that idea would not be an option. As to having a unit err… just laying about stowed somewhere inside personal area of an aircraft again I believe this would cause you major headaches as it’d very easily ‘go missing’ or be activated by someone wondering what this neat little “black-box†does causing all sorts of additional heartburn to yourself as owner of the aircraft. On the balance of responsibility, etc I’d say there may be two options, (a) Have a unit that you can hire to the individual but that would possibly require you to give suitable instruction, etc, etc which would have to be padded into the hire fee… or (b) Have written into your hire process the caution/request that it is the pilots responsibility to ensure he/she has a PLB. This option though I can see has problems assicated with it as how many student or new pilots have a PLB with them? Operations under water… hmmmm Reading up on the tests done by a major yachting journal a while back it would appear that even the so-called top of the range models when thrown into the sea and used as per the instructions of the various companies saw serious operational difficulties and major loss of signal performance and that was with them on the surface of the water. They are most certainly better than nothing and given good luck (well, you did survive the ditching eh! ) having any EPIRB or PLB must be a plus. Actually when you think about it, either way there are many areas of concern with your orginal question… :-<> Your thought as to the possible bulk purchase of like said items, as has been pointed out elsewhere, there are issues and I am of the belief that it comes down to ourselves as to what we do in this area. Ok Ian, that’s my twenty cents worth and like you am interested in what other may have to say on this subject too. Cheers, Rodger

G’day, Paul, Many thanks for your input and thoughts. Yes, I tend to agree with you now with the PLB as 2009 is still quite a way off and yes, our government has been well known in stretching dates. Just look at the digital TV stuff-up. I also checked out another locally produced PLB which, on paper, appears to give better performance but the down side was at is more bulky which is an issue with recreational aviation. Your comment re pre-flight checks and PLB’s is a VERY good point indeed! As for carrying items, myself, I use an old photojournalist vest which has many pockets, pencil slots, holders and zipped holder compartments, etc in-which I carry just about all my navigation bits an pieces, notebooks, ready reckoners, small food bars, spare glasses, a back-up compact GPS unit and of-course a soon-to-be PLB… I know it may sound like a lot of materials but most of it has been specially chosen for size and light-weights, etc and this way one dose not have to worry too much if some turbulence or it one opens a window for some photography, etc, the wind wont start causing pit dramas. Also I then know where everything is too... Yours in recreational flying, Rodger

I am in the market to purchase a Personal Locator Beacon (PLB) but am in somewhat of a quandary, as if I buy one of the current units which I understand will be phased out in the near future in favour of a newer standard which allows for better response times, different frequency's, a personal ID tag and the use of GPS... What do I do? Yes, I fully understand re requirements and fairdinkum need to carry a PLB, but in buying a ‘current’ unit err tomorrow… means just around the corner I’ll have to throw it away, more costs, an purchase one of the newer spec’d models. The other glitch is the newer units are presently quite expensive and have been wondering as to if and when their unit pricing will come down to a more acceptable level. As a side issue, the calling of these unit as EPIRB's (Emergency position indicating radiobeacons), is I believe, an old and unsuitable phrase, sounds like something a committee came up with... cringe. I'd be interested in the current 'thinking' I this area? Rodger

Thanks for info re Tandy's timer... after checking out the HLP T3 unit it appears to be an 'OK' unit but the Tandy/DSE timer appears quite good too and have a few more features, etc. As they are easily available, reckon I go with one of them. Rodger

Thanks for the info... Re using wrist watches I use a Suunto X-Lander which has time (of-course ), an excellant altimeter which is accurate to some 10 metres, a barometer which allows the setting of area QNH, etc, etc and shows trends, an electronic compass plus various memories... Like yourself I find it makes a great backup unit and according to the company they rate more accurate than some of our aircraft instructments. Rodger

Dose anyone use or know of these timers that could be used in navigation, etc. The HLP T3 Timer, going for around $30. It appears to be and Ok unit but was wondering if anyone has used one?

Hi Ian, Having flown the gazelle a bit too... some further thoughts (hmmm, wanderings of the mind , now where did I put it ) are thethe lack of flaps too. One area which I have had first hand experience with was listening to a number of youths who were all interested in learning to fly and were visiting a Big Boys Toys expo where a Gazelle was on display for all to see close up. Everything look good overall, here’s the aircraft where one could get a very close up view and the training school staff were all appropriately dressed in their ‘commercial pilots’ look-alike uniforms. Damm though did the <i style="">wheels fall off[/i] when they all looked in the cockpit area and observed the instrument panel. Without exception, all the young men made serious negative comment on the way that the instruments and the panel layout, looked and fappeared to them! They all reckoned it must have come out of a snoopy World War 1 aeroplane. They all expressed considerable disappointment and how old the panel looked and the cheapness of some of the gauges, etc. My point here is that with just about every car now days, be it for public use, commercial or even motor sports, the instrument panels arefitted with reasonably new instrumentation and the panel design/colour, etc also looks the part too. As we can see with other RA aircraft coming on line of late most have quite well designed and coloured panelsoften with the current electronic and or a mix of electronic and analogue instruments. This all helps in both bring our RA aircraft up to a perceived and professional standard. Because there are quite a number of training schools using the Gazelle, this is why I’m of the belief the is a market for a newer version of say, the LightWing as I’m of the thinking that no one will be modifying or upgrading the Gazelle here in oz. But, we do have a LightWing manufacture.TheGazelle’s are slowly being retired from time/age reasons… Generally speaking. I believe that our training schools will need to have a replacement aircraft that allschools can, use of a similar aircraft. This then saves considerably on pilots who love flying but are not able to own an aircraft for their own reasons but would be able to move between flight schools a hire the similar aircraft without further endorsement checks, etc… Currently we appear to have quite a number of different brands and model of aircraft avialable which is Ok but it bring back the 'costing'question.OK, enough of my thoughts for the moment, gota get back to some work, (Rats). Yours in receational aviation, Rodger