Jump to content

rodgerc

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    197

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

 Content Type 

Everything posted by rodgerc

  1. rodgerc
    All of a sudden I’m questioning my long term support for self-declared medicals. 😳
  2. rodgerc

    elvis's jetstar motorhome

    rodgerc commented on red750's gallery image in Other Photos

    elvis's jetstar motorhome
    Low aspect ratio wings…I bet it rolls like a dice
  3. rodgerc
    It probably won’t kill you, but as your mother warned you, it’ll likely send you blind.
  4. rodgerc
    If you have a crash and it’s determined you didn’t declare a (known) condition that contributed to the accident, irrespective of whether you’re flying on a Class 1, Class 2 (incl. Basic Class 2) or a Class 5 medical, you’re in strife.
  5. rodgerc
    Well I think we still need the Australian Defence Force….
  6. rodgerc
    Looks like a very nicely built aircraft CharlyT. 👍
  7. rodgerc
    Photos taken inside the hangar at night….No power connected to the hangar just yet.
  8. rodgerc
    Whilst I never pass up an opportunity to take a shot at CASA, the system worked flawlessly for me....Easier than ordering a Sunday night pizza from Uber.
  9. rodgerc
    Stress free
  10. rodgerc
    Well that was easy enough.
  11. rodgerc
    Move over ROTAX…..move over PEUGEOT
  12. rodgerc
    There is no blanket requirement for TSO’d instruments in 19-XXXX amateur built RA-Aus or experimental GA to fly in controlled airspace. Here’s a reference: https://raaus.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/raap-14-can-i-fly-in-controlled-airspace.pdf
  13. rodgerc
    It’s likely aimed at the owners of C150’s, Tomahawks and Air Tourers who have had recent exchanges with CASA medical staff.
  14. rodgerc
    The precise wording on the RA website is: “There are currently 3232 active aircraft in the RAAus fleet.” Since registrants are invoiced annually, I’d interpret “active” to mean “currently registered”, but I’ve been wrong before today.
  15. rodgerc
    3,232 as of 26 January 2024
  16. rodgerc
    They become unsecured creditors and wait in line with all the other creditors for a refund.
  17. rodgerc
    The Oxford Reference Dictionary’s entry for “Legend”: A traditional story sometimes popularly regarded as historical but not authenticated. On that basis he likely qualifies, although I’m now going to look up “Popularly”. Move along please folks, there’s nothing to see here.
  18. rodgerc
    JG3 is active on this forum
  19. rodgerc
    Just reread my post and realised I used 790N instead of 700N….Despite the error, the outcome remains the same.
  20. rodgerc
    If it were me, I’d initially keep life simple by sticking with all 22001 dimensions except the OD. Some (very) basic stuff assuming a 70kg engine and prop combo….Call it 700 Newtons for simplicity. Original mount net area 790mm^2 x 4off = 3,160mm^2. Compressive stress = 790N/3,160mm^2 = 250kPa With a 1-1/2” OD the total bearing area increases to 4,216mm^2 or 33% more. So compressive stress decreases to 790N/4,216mm^2 = 187kPa. By implication, the compressive strain on the mounts will also be decreased by about 1/3 and along the way, you’ll have increased the surface area to dissipate all that vibration (kinetic energy) heat into the aluminium mounting rails. Naturally, the back-up washers will also need to be increased in diameter. It’s pretty easy to cast urethane and there’s a bunch of videos on YouTube showing people doing it at home….Search “casting polyurethane bushings” and pour yourself a drink. If you’re still unsure of your ability (it’s easy) then pop over to 33 Holloway Dr Bayswater and talk to Melbourne Polyurethane.
  21. rodgerc
    Would you be able to crib an extra 1/4” on the diameter of the mount? (I.e. Dimension A) If yes, then personally I’d try that by having a custom set cast in 80A durometer PUR before switching to a stiffer (higher modulus) compound….It would improve the vibration dampening characteristics of the engine mount. When comparing the dimensions of the 22001 rubber components with the Lord mounts used on a (albeit considerably heavier) Conti 0-200, it does seem to be rather a big ask.
  22. rodgerc
    I’d be inclined to look at a larger mount rather than a stiffer compound. Simply on the basis of force/area = pressure. (Stress) For information only, the (during construction) pics below are the RANS bed-mount installation in my Raven. After ~90h flying over 18 months they are standing up very well with no noticeable compression set/sag. I suspect they are natural rubber of around 80A durometer.
  23. rodgerc
    For what it’s worth, my AeroVee powered Waiex’s engine mounts were replaced at every annual, because after a year and 25-35h flying they were pretty well shot. I suspect they were EPDM of around Shore A, 80 hardness. Given thermoset urethane is readily available and easy to cast in a silicone mould, have you considered casting your own larger mounts from polyurethane to spread the load?
  24. rodgerc
    I can see the threshold of an airport from my front door where hangars cost 6 times more than the one that I drive 1 hour to/from at least once a week. Happy to drive.
  25. rodgerc
    Well that little indulgence will account for at least $5 of the next levied fee increase for each and every member of RA-Aus.
×
×
  • Create New...