Jump to content
  • Welcome to Recreational Flying!
    A compelling community experience for all aviators
    Intuitive, Social, Engaging...Registration is FREE.
    Register Log in


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


kasper last won the day on July 23

kasper had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,848 Excellent

About kasper

  • Rank
    Well-known member
  • Birthday 15/04/1969

More Information

  • Aircraft
    Homebuilt weightshift
  • Location
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. If you want a flat twin two strike with two power pulses you’d need to either run two sumps or have a blower to pressurise the single sump. Or get really adventurous and us and go for a flat 4 two stroke with stepped pistons and a wet sump. 4 power pulses each revolution and simple plain bearings without the oil in fuel environmental issues of most two strokes.
  2. The McCullough front two pistons go in and out together and fire together ... that’s the only way to get the pressure sump and transfer fuel/oil/air into the pistons. Like the r582 it’s disc controlled from the single carb over the centre of the engine. If you wanted a flat twin McCullough you’re effectively getting a single power pulse each revolution. if you take both pots off one side and leave it as an inline twin you get the same power but two power pulses each revolution - a much smoother engine.
  3. Which half would you like? The McCullough flat four pressure sumped with opposing piston sets - it is a two pulse engine. A half McCullough would be an in-line twin not a flat twin ...
  4. Interesting to see the Romanians do what Rotax started with - a boxer twin 4 stroke. Most people forget or never knew the origin of the 912 was a boxer twin that looked pretty much exaclty like this ... but the rocking couple of the flat twin was not acceptable to Rotax and they used the twin to create the first 912 flat four. Wish them well ... but at only 50hp I think thay have really limited sales ... a big bore kit to get it up to 65hp+ AND give it a bed mount option to direct bolt replace a R582 then you will have a larger market.
  5. Well there is a CH602 model from Chris Heinz ... z-602 with exactly the same specs from a company that started out making a bf109/me109 replica would lead you to the copy/licence development. On the next next one I’ll go for DR109
  6. wolf boredom fighter or Flitzer biplane
  7. Looks like a single seat dominator to me
  8. Rose Parrakeet identified by unusual fin shape and the lift strut on the upper wing as opposed to inter plane wires.
  9. So... If there are 10,000 members And we sell 1750 annual subscriptions to the paper version paying an average of $44pa And it costs $72k to generate content and put into electronic form And it costs an additional $140k to print and post the paper versions Then Members are paying $7.20 per year from membership fees to get a "digital magazine" that is NOT designed as digital mag but is instead an electronic form of a print mag (not the same thing at all) Members are paying $6.30 per year from membership fees to not get a paper magazine In total each member is paying $13.50 towards the magazine If this is correct then around 10% of the member fee $131 is being used to provide each member with a digital magazine that is not designed to be a digital magazine! I use the non-flying member fee as the last we knew the difference between the two was supposed to be insurance costs If we are now at a point where we need to address the subsidy to the paper mag then I think its time to: 1. go back to printed paper for all and acknowledge that this is expensive and either number of mags per year must reduce or costs in membership goes up (or maybe both - I do not know the break even and cost steps that exist fro print and post on this area) ; or 2. we go to digital ONLY and change the production and layout to be a true digital only publication; or 3. abandon a 'magazine' and invest in a digital stories and information repository with a "publication" front end so people could access the full history of content as a database of documents but still have a 'latest months' content update In my iopinion we cannot keep going as we are. But I did not get any survey monkey link so I am not someone RAAus consider they need information from.
  10. Well it depends who built it but it’s likely to be the rainbow aircraft manufactured Cheetah... a sort of copy/development of the original sky ranger. Rainbow closed and the design went through it’s growth and add weight phase and emerged as a much bigger aircraft. The Cheetah design was re-engineered and approved in the UK as the Medway SLA series and has full CAA BCARS certification. Medway closed down but it’s still available from another manufacturer.
  11. Gee Red ... you’ve de-identified it a bit much when you delete the fuselage altogether 🤣
  12. Point ... missed. Its not that I’m a child or don’t want to consider your comments. It’s just that I find your delivery abrasive, condescending, difficult to separate from near personal attack and basically very unappealing to engage with and when I engage it’s never a pleasant experience. Please do not consider it necessary to respond to this post - I’ve decided to use the ignore function within the forum software on your profile.
  • Create New...