SilverWing

I don't know what the circumstances of this accident are, so I am not commenting on it. However, I am completely unaware of 'much history' of this type of accident with A32 Vixxens. Like the Foxbat they are a very easy aircraft to fly and land. If the all-flying elevator is 'tight and snatchy' there is something wrong with the maintenance - cables too tight or too loose. The main problem with landing any aircraft is idiots who know better than the factory designer - at maximum weight the A32 should be over the threshold no faster than 49 knots, maybe 45 with one person on board. So many ignorant pilots think that adding a few knots 'for safety margin' - in one case I am aware of an instructor advising students to keep the Vixxen over 60 knots at landing - cause far more landing problems for themselves than the aircraft itself. Sadly, these people get many good aircraft a bad reputation though their arrogant 'I know best' attitudes.

The Sport cruiser and the Piper Sport were the same aircraft. It was rebadged by Piper & AFIK the relationship between Piper & Czech Aircraft Works went South for some reason & Piper stopped rebadging. There is a striking resemblance between the Bristell & Sportcruiser which may be a bit like the reason the Zenith & Savannah look the same.

The reason the Piper Sport, Sport Cruiser, Roko and Bristell look similar is because they were all designed by the same person - Milan Bristell. In an earlier job he was to some extent also involved in the design of the EuroStar/SportStar/Harmony but this aircraft has a distinctly different fin, rudder and tail plane configuration - and has been fully spin tested for EASA Certification.

Very very sad

Hope they are both okay.

 

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/pilot-trapped-in-moorabbin-airport-plane-crash/news-story/1f1ad73a83869c033b87d5270b18ca54

 

Actually a Bristell, not a Foxbat. Hope they both get out OK.

Thank you to everyone for your responses. In the main, mostly confirm my own thoughts and those of plastic sheet suppliers.

The screen in the photo is a brand new polycarbonate sheet (with less than 5 hours flying time), installed as a replacement for the original screen. The factory used to fit polycarbonate as standard, but now also fits PET screens, which are more pliable but are a little more prone to scratching. The owner says that no fuel or other chemicals were spilt or used on the windscreen.

Hmm... I am no expert (and someone else may add) but that looks like stress cracks. If the out and in and are still smooth, then it's obviously internal.It looks similar to what happens when you heat and cool plastics rapidly. like this image...

 

http://www.annealingplastics.com/glass.jpg

I recently noticed this damage to a polycarbonate windscreen. Definitely not stones - the screen remains smooth to the touch inside and out. Questions: (a) anyone any ideas as to what's causing this? (b) Is it dangerous - ie might the windscreen break in flight? © How to prevent in future? All helpful comments gratefully received!

Foxbat Australia Pty Ltd are authorised Matco suppliers in Australia and we hold stocks of certain items used in Foxbat aircraft. However, many common items are available through Aircraft Spruce and all items via Matco themselves.

As a point of interest, Vans have just introduced the 912iS in their RV-12 as the standard engine for this plane, although the ULS is also available. A few weeks ago they flew both their 912ULS equipped RV-12 and the iS version side by side from Oregon to Oskosh. The ULS use 60 gallons for the trip and the iS used 45 gallons under as near identical real world conditions as you could probably get.rgmwa

HiI am about to purchase an Aeroprakt A22LS Foxbat Kelpie. Comes with the 100 hp Rotax and can be optioned with fuel injection. My question is what engine choice to make and what options to get. My main priority is to reduce pilot workload and have high reliability and safety. Having high performance and/or low fuel consumption is not important. Having to use carb heat is an anathema to me (!#$@ it's 2017 $!@#$). The operating conditions will be low humidity and temps -2 to 45 C, but it could move anywhere in Australia, which includes tropics I suppose in the future. I expect it will be VH registered but will have glass cockpit so should not need a vacuum pump, but I might just be ignorant about that.

 

I expect I will get the model without manual carburetor heat. Fuel injection does not seem to be worth it if it weighs 7kg more, and delivers about 7% increase in fuel economy (just carry 7kg fuel in a jerry can). But if it was a 30% increase in fuel economy then that *might* be different.

 

Do I need a bigger oil radiator? Coolant overflow bottle? What about these thermostats people keep adding?

 

Thanks. And Thanks for reading the long post.

 

P.S. duplicate post from Rotax Owners.

To help you out - the Aeroprakt factory no longer offers fuel injection as an option. If you don't like the manually operated hot air system for the carburettor engine (which, by the way, allows the engine to develop full power through using cooler air from outside the cowling), some Foxbats have been fitted (admittedly quite a while ago) with UK Rotax dealer-supplied 'hot coolant'-fed rings round the carby throats. I believe these can be fitted with a valve to open or, in summer, close the coolant flow through the rings. Because the rings move the carby inlets towards the firewall, you have to fit pancake filters instead of the standard cone filters. The main potential drawback of the coolant rings is the number of extra hose connections to check before you fly. A second one is that the carbys can get quite hot in OATs above 25 celsius and may under some circumstances vaporise fuel in the inlets.

You definitely do not need a bigger oil radiator or larger coolant bottle as the Foxbat engine installation is designed if anything to run a bit cool. We fit oil thermostats as standard on all Foxbat and Vixxen aircraft supplied in Australia.

Finally, there is no vacuum pump option for the aircraft. The electrical system is designed for digital 'glass' as needed and can cope with double Dynon SkyViews, transponder, radio, strobes, landing light, UHF radio, mustering siren etc etc.

Don't hesitate to give me a call if you need to discuss any of this.

There for had return line been in accordance with rotax installation manual that would not have happened.Facts are that foxbat did not install return line there for by your own admission you are at fault.

Get with it fuel under presure will boil stop making out that it's not happening ROTAX have had the return line to the tank for more years so for you to say it is not required is bulxxxx so sue me if you recond that that you know more than ROTAX.

 

I am talking ROTAX 912 series motors not bloody GA.

 

What size was the fuze ?neil

Inconvenient as you may find the truth - a fuel return line is not mandatory on 912 engines - right up front, the Rotax installation manual makes it clear that it should only be used as 'a general guide' and that the airframe manufacturer has the final say.

I know you think GA certified aircraft are irrelevant but many of them do not have a fuel return line. RA and LSA aircraft are certified to a lower standard than most GA types.

PS - the more expletives you use, the more hysterical you sound

Like the Foxbat that had a fuel pump fire in an unfused fuel pump. Still haven't got a response from the manufacturer on that one except that they are no longer fitting fuel pumps.So now no return line and no fuel pump.

24 rego does not guarantee safety.

First of all, the Foxbat did not have a 'fuel pump fire'. The solid-state Facet fuel pump fitted to the aircraft depends on a good fuel flow through it for cooling - hence the instruction to use the pump only for start up or in the event of a failure in the main pump. At other times, specifically during engine idle, it is possible there is not enough fuel flowing to cool the pump adequately - particularly in engines like the Rotax 912, which have a very low fuel flow at idle. Nevertheless, I understand it was common practice in this aircraft to leave the back-up electrical pump switched on while in the circuit/pattern.

Second, the pump was fused and switched - the power to the switch (and thence the pump) clearly came via the blade-fuse box on the lower instrument panel. The pump in the incident aircraft did not experience any kind of electrical failure. It overheated because there wasn't enough fuel cooling it and as a result the heat started to melt and scorch the internal insulation. Perhaps through a misunderstanding, the pump was switched on at the top of a long (low fuel flow) descent or had been left on after starting. Either way the cooling effect of the fuel flow on an engine-idle descent was reduced. Because there was no electrical failure, power continued to the pump, which continued to overheat. The fact that the pump continued to run while overheating caused the operator to think there was no fuse - which in fact there was. In spite of the severe scorching on the pump, there was no fire. The pump cooled and the smoke stopped when the pilot switched the pump off.

Third, only three carburettor Rotax engine Aeroprakt aircraft in the world have ever been fitted with electric fuel pumps - all in Australia and all at the absolute insistence of the buyers, with considerable reluctance by the factory. In fact, Aeroprakt, in line with their earlier misgivings, will now only fit electric fuel pumps to fuel-injected Rotax engined aircraft. Of the three carburettor aircraft, the first suffered the fuel pump incident referred to. The second owner has, from the start, observed the 'use only at start up' and has experienced no problems. The third aircraft was optionally fitted at the owners' expense with a non-solid-state Pierburg electric fuel pump configured as for the injection engine, with dual return lines to each tank to alleviate excess fuel pressure, as required by Rotax.

I have considerable sympathy with those who experience serious incidents in aircraft. I have experienced some myself. However, the understandable wish to apportion some sort of blame - occasionally revved up by others with their own agendas - should not allow the facts to be ignored.

now way in hell can I fix the fuel problem when the so called experts cant read installation manualsto be told that return line is mandatory on 912 ROTAX since 2014 how do they explain that rubbish

so far I have not been invited to the bloody court house for false and misleading statements made by me about time aint it

 

question ?

 

the last 4 or 5 incidences have the aircraft engine been fitted in accordance with ROTAX installation manual for return line. neil

"This Installation Manual for ROTAX® aircraft engines should only be used as a general guide for the installation of ROTAX® engines into airframes. It does not represent an instruction for the installation of a ROTAX® aircraft engine in a specific type of airframe or airplane. BRP-Powertrain GmbH & Co KG does not assume any warranty or liability in this context.

This Installation Manual shall in no event be used without fully complying with the specific instructions and/or requirements of the manufacturer of an airframe or airplane (“Manufacturer”). For verification and/or release of the engine installation, the respective Manufacturer must be contacted. Any modifications or adaptations to the airframe or airplane shall be carried out and/or be verified and released by the Manufacturer only."

Rotax write their manuals to cover every possible installation type, not for a specific aircraft. Many GA aircraft (including one of my own) do not have fuel return lines. Aeroprakt aircraft are not dropping out of the sky because there is no fuel return line.

This particular Foxbat had small cracks in the windscreen when the owners went to pick it up brand new, but you already know this. The owner had to wait months for a replacement under warranty which never showed up. You are also aware of this.

PS - I was only made aware of other windscreen cracks after the incident.

I know of one fox bat that no one rushes to fly as fuel vapor locks are there time to time . Know of a different foxbat lost its windscreen in flight no warning I bet RAA has not even told all owners of this? after it,s been reported with photos . Safety ??? what would be unsafe about losing your wrind screen at 85 knots doors blowing off why would let owners know that might scare them wouldn,t make sence to keep owners in the loop . If it was the raaf all off type would be grounded until all check in place? any one agree ?I think there would only be 10 percent of people report there jabiru engine problems we been there and done that and moved on some one else can be a test rig .

A few facts about the above references to the Foxbat may be helpful.

1. There have been no reported cases of 'vapour lock' in the 1000+ worldwide fleet of Foxbats - except for one aircraft in SE Queensland. This is because the wing tanks provide a continual fuel pressure of at least 0.5 bar to the pump, precluding the possibility of vapour lock. Almost certainly the cause for the reported engine misfiring in SE Queensland was carburettor ice: long descent from altitude, high humidity, no engine warming, misfire disappears as the aircraft descends into and remains in warmer air.

2. Apart from one documented birdstrike in SE Queensland, there have been two reported windscreen failures in Foxbats worldwide - one in Kazakhstan and one in SE Queensland. That's a rate of 0.002%. The Foxbat windshield is 2mm polycarbonate sheet, UV-proofed and scratch resistant, manufactured by Veralite in Belgium; it is the same as other polycarbonate sheet manufactured under trade names like Lexan, The product is used because it has excellent weather resistance and remains flexible even after prolonged UV exposure. Both incident aircraft were known to have had substantial cracks in the windscreens before the incidents, particularly along the front edge by the firewall. Cracks can be induced for a variety of reasons - they are most common in flying school aircraft, which have very high landing numbers per hours flown and more than their fair share of heavy landings.

The Foxbat maintenance manual clearly covers what to do if cracks appear in the windscreen, including replacement in some circumstances. Personally, if I found a windscreen crack in any aircraft longer than an inch/25mm or multiple small cracks, I'd replace the screen rather than stop drill the cracks.

The side door access to the baggage compartment is only available on the A22LS 'Kelpie' - a special version of the A22LS Foxbat developed for farmers. Luggage compartment is also fully metal and has a 30 kgs weight limit.

For info - Foxbat sideslip

So far I've delivered five A32 Vixxens in Australia - all of them flew straight without any rudder trim when thoroughly flight tested before delivery. One owner subsequently reported a tendency to yaw to one side if he removed his feet from the pedals for a while, but nothing about spiral dives or wing drops. I suppose most aircraft will deviate from straight & level if you let go of the controls... Although there is no need for a rudder trim tab on the A32 (assuming it is set up properly), there is an optional kit to self-centre the rudder pedals if you have a need to remove your feet from the pedals. This kit has been supplied to the owner of the aircraft which apparently exhibited the yaw problems and I am now ordering the fitment as standard for Australian delivered A32 aircraft. However, it is not recommended that pilots remove their feet or hands from the controls of any aircraft for more than a few seconds unless a 3-axis autopilot is fitted.

There is at least one recorded birdstrike in a Foxbat. See: http://foxbatpilot.com/2014/09/16/foxbat-bird-strike/

Settle down people.It should have the standard tapered K & N filters in the airbox attached to each carb. The airbox wraps around these.

The pic down the inlet hole shows the round disc which is attached to a cable.

 

In the lower position, fresh cold air comes in via the scoop.

 

In the raised position the inlet to hot muffler air is exposed and the cold air shut off.

A mesh like that unless large area is going to affect airflow. Isn't there any foam or paper filter somewhere? Nev

I agree with BoxFat - you can mount a GoPro or similar on one of the vertical aileron tubes using GoPro handlebar clamp or velcro straps. As he says, make sure the controls are completely full and free and that the camera will not slide up or down the tube, or rotate in flight. Because of the extreme wide angle of these cameras, the up/down movement of the tube is hardly noticeable. Another place you can mount is on the horizontal tube connecting the mainspars inside the cabin.

Hi SrPilot - all the air, whether cold or hot, goes through the cone air filters inside the carb heat box, so no need for any wire mesh or other stuff.

Hi Aviaclub Nepal - the USA Aeroprakt agent, Douglas Karlsen, installs USA-made floats on A22 aircraft. Try him on: [email protected]