M61A1

35 minutes ago, Methusala said:

Do you want to do the work yourself - I know that it can be done successfully with care and underpinning skills..

You may well be competent, but for the crank overhaul Rotax have specified that it must be done by a Rotax approved facility, so doing it yourself does not comply with the maintenance schedule.

Of course this is irrelevant if you aren't LSA or Training.

4 hours ago, Thruster88 said:

AD/ENG/4 Amdt 11 spells it out very clearly, private and aerial work(flying school, agricultural etc) aircraft in Australia do not need to comply with the manufacturers recommended TBO, TTIS or years. Presumably RAAus aircraft would be covered by this legislation.  

Except that RAAus has specifically excluded operating an engine "on condition" in LSA and flight training. 

Tech Manual 12.6.2

“On-condition” is not available for LSA unless the manufacturer states otherwise.

and

12.5.2

5.2 Moving an aircraft from “Privately Operated” to “For Hire and/or Flying Training”: Any Factory Built 95.32 or 95.55 Aircraft which has been operating privately with an “on condition” engine, must have that engine overhauled or replaced prior to that aircraft being used for hire and/or flying training. The replacement engine must be either: (a) A factory new engine (b) A factory (or factory accredited over-hauler) overhauled engine and has a completed RACR (Recreational Aircraft Condition Report) inspection done by an RAAus L2.

20 hours ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

After I have cut power and waited three seconds, my speed drops to about 45 kt

The whole idea of training for this event is to do away with the delay. It has been an issue in several crashes I have read about, where the pilot did exactly as they practiced in a real emergency with a bad result.

In any case if you ae more than a couple of hours into your training, changing the AoA with varying thrust should be pretty much instinctive. Meaning that as the power comes off (doesn't matter whether it's because you reduced it of it failed), you automatically maintain the correct AoA for safe flight.

I believe that any instructor that teaches you to wait to do anything  after power failure may be unwittingly setting you up for failure.

Practice what you will actually do.

10 minutes ago, facthunter said:

There will always be people who say" I would be able to handle it".. It's more than feel. No one was filled in on the system or trained properly because it would affect sales It's serious pitching forces with the position of the engines being the basis of the problem . The roller coaster recovery is not really applicable as an option.  It's too slow.. Significant numbers of pilots aren't convinced that it (this plane) is a good thing.. Blame the pilots is as old as the hills and the easy option. IF it was so simple, why has it taken so long? Boeing's reputation is shot and justifiably. There's plenty of other evidence of corner cutting. TRUST will take a long time to return. Nev

While I don't care too much for Boeing, this whole has been nothing more than a witch hunt, promoted by a heap of lawyers and people justifying their jobs, like many other "scandals" in current times.

It's about politics more than anything else.

The actions of the Ethiopian crew were inexcusable as the AD was released addressing the very issue  before it occurred. Finally when they got around to carrying out the correct actions and had it under control, they undid the corrective action.

It has nothing to do with what I "could have handled" and a lot to do with the fact that several other crews have experienced it and and it was a minor occurrence, including the previous crew  prior to the crash on the same aircraft.

10 minutes ago, facthunter said:

It is a faulty design if it needs all that control augmentation. . Nev

According to Juan Brown MCAS was there to make it feel like the normal 737 to avoid further type training. The procedure for "Runaway Trim" has been in the flight manual the whole time if I understand correctly and the second crash occurred after an AD  regarding this procedure, which makes the incompetence of the pilots inexcusable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhSVtLXtIrw

8 hours ago, kgwilson said:

I have never attempted it myself and never will.

You will find a thread on this site started by Maj Millard saying  the same thing.

No problem at all really unless you use a third world airline and in that case it really doesn't matter what aircraft you are getting on. 

26 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

How long have you had the UltraEfis ? - any niggling problems? good points? bad points?

Had it about 2 years. It does what it's supposed to do. It's a bit small, but that was also the point of buying one. My only real criticism is that it could be a bit brighter, but I could probably fix that with a little sunshade. I use the HSI screen a lot.

On 24/12/2020 at 11:32 AM, onetrack said:

And one of these works just fine, too! I learnt long ago, to never pay $100 for a speciality tool, when you can source or fabricate a cheap one that does the same job! Particularly when you might only use that tool, 3 times a year!

 

I just use a solid set of snips.... cut the rolled seam off the end and it just comes apart.

Why not disconnect the alternator phases before the regulator?

I can only offer experience with the Skyview Classic, and it's terrific, but costs more than my whole aircraft.

I have an UltraEfis fitted in mine and I like it.

46 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

Have been looking at EFIS  recently.

 

Would like the Forums opinion on the merits/otherwise of what is out there.

 

Must be able to fit (or come close) into an existing instrument hole/space.

 

Dynon D10 and Garmin G5  are probably the most reputable examples but am willing to hear all opinions (particularly those who actually have firsthand experience)

Are you replacing your UltraEfis?

16 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

I for one, am not so blessed.

Are you sure about that?  Mine flies with me regularly, sometimes I wish she wouldn't.

1 hour ago, Cosmick said:

I read 12.6 re Piston Engines and Condition reports but have been advised by Manufacturer and RAA must comply Rotax Schedule. Is factory built but not Training aircraft. Advised still adhere Rotax Schedule. 

Is it different for experimental and Home built ? Many aircraft engine out there especially 2 stroke beyond years.

 

According the tech manual it is mandatory to follow the manufacturer's schedule if it is LSA (factory built) also mandatory if the aircraft is an older 25 or 55 rego AND being used for training. With homebuilt and experimental, the builder effectively writes the maintenance schedule.

In short, you can run your engine on condition (following the manufacturer's operating maintenance schedule at the correct intervals- oil, plugs, filters etc) unless it's being used for training or an LSA.

Check section 12.6 of the Tech Manual

It tells you about what is required for engine maintenance

4 hours ago, Yenn said:

I have well over 1000 landings in my Corby and amongst them I have I think 3 deadstick landings. The last one being on my most recent flight, notice I didn't say last flight.

I nearly always cut the throttle as I turn onto base leg, or sooner and then attempt to land without having to apply power.

On those deadstick landings I could not detect any difference from when I had the motor on minimum rpm. There is a theory that a stopped prop has less drag, but it was not apparent to me.

I think Nev is correct when he says it varies between aircraft. I couldn't pick the difference with a 582 powered Drifter. A Verner powered Drifter with a 70" prop definitely glides further with the engine stopped. A 95:10 I had wouldn't glide as far without engine, even just at idle.

1 hour ago, Bosi72 said:

My apology for returning those messages back to you, but we all know what can happen when the engine stops for real.

 

Stopping engine for real, and on purpose, to establish a speed which varies +/-5 kts from POH depending on circumstances, is again beyond my comprehension.

 

No need to apologise.

Yes things can go badly very quickly, but you make your own luck to a large degree. What a lot of people call "bad luck" is often nothing more than poor airmanship, but sometimes it really is down to luck as to how it all goes.

There were no subliminal messages.

I really don't care how others fly, as long as they accept that the consequences of their actions were entirely theirs also.

I'm not suggesting that anyone go breaking the law and stop their engine in flight, but it has nothing to do with establishing best glide speed and everything to do with not being surprised by the change in glide performance and aircraft handling qualities at a time when it really matters.

We have had a few crashes where an engine failure has  resulted in more damage than necessary because the aircraft was handled poorly after the engine stopped.

59 minutes ago, Bosi72 said:

Engine doesn't know if it's flying over populated city or over the mountains.

You are correct, but I'm not sure what your point is. 

All I was getting at is that is that it's the pilot's responsibility to make sure you have somewhere to land when the engine stops unless you are happy to accept the consequences. ( No point flying over tiger country then blaming the engine if it goes to pus)There is no infallible engine, but some are more reliable than others, so it ends up a numbers game...The more you do it, the more likely it is that something will eventually go wrong. You might get away with it your whole life, or you might not.

A sign over a certain military flightline desk used to say: (words to that effect)

"If you fly a single engine aircraft over water often enough for long enough, sooner or later you are going to get wet"

1 hour ago, Bosi72 said:

The fact there are number of accidents related to >simulated< engine failure tells me enough this is not a joke.

There have been more actual engine failures that have ended badly because they were handled poorly. Perhaps they would have been handled less poorly if they had actually flown the aircraft beforehand with a stopped engine.

42 minutes ago, RFguy said:

My guess is that the reduction in tail authority might become  detectable in the glide if the air  speed gets low enough. 

 

You will usually find that out when trying to hold off (or flare depending on what you call it) and the elevator has insufficient authority to keep/bring the nose up.

1 hour ago, Bosi72 said:

f you fly at best gliding speed the aircraft will fly the furthest distance. 

 

If you fly faster or slower than best gliding speed, the aircraft will always undershoot. 

 

The same applies when the engine is idling or switched off. The key is to know your best gliding speed.

 

Simulating engine failure by switching the engine off whilst in flight is beyond my comprehension..

Best glide speed is all well and good, but if you are at the point where whether or not you make a landing spot depends on a perfect glide, you've probably made serious errors already.

For those that accept the risk of flying over the tiger country, that's fine, I have no beef with that, but, then that also comes with accepting that one day you will probably get bent if you do it for long enough.

With the engine off, some aircraft will go further, some will not. Do you know that your aircraft does?

9 hours ago, old man emu said:

That's why I suggested pulling the throttle back to idle revs. Keep the engine firing, but not doing much else.

In that case....Yes we do it frequently.

2 hours ago, old man emu said:

Nobody seems to want to simply go out and see if they can emulate the behaviour of an unpowered aircraft i.e. a true glider, just for the sheer fun of it. 

 

Y'all want to get all serious about engine failure during straight and level flight. Lighten up!

Maybe that's because our regulators will get all serious if someone dares to mention that they turn their engine off for fun on a public forum.

You are basically asking people to incriminate themselves.

They wrote an article about the evils of turning off your engine in flight and made rules that prohibit it unless some stringent preconditions are met.

On 01/12/2020 at 11:13 AM, RFguy said:

Brumby610. YCWR

 

--if base turn is 45deg off shoulder  to threshold (normal) , need to wait until about 1/3 way in on base  to make it on a glide.  otherwise will be short.

Engine happy  IDLE  rpm 2400 ish (rotax) . 

 

Flaps only when I know I am ASSURED of making  it. As my headwind assessment is often optimistic. 

 

-- shortened downwind  engine fail  approx abeam of the keys, can make it from downwind, land halfway down main runway.

 

-- Anything earlier than that on  downwind,  (Cowra YCWR )  I use the grass cross strip (03/21) ....

 

-- On upwind departure, >= 500 ' ,  (33/15) , after turning any excess airspeed into height, I will llikely use the cross strip (03/21) with a right steep  descending  turn . that's actually probably the best option since it is only a 240 deg swept turn.

compared to a 300 deg swept turn for the upwind cross. However, right turn , approach will be over the edge of town, a caution.

- cross provides continuous visual of landing point through the turn

-- if cross is unavailable and  more height ,  I will go back to the strip (and land downwind if not windy). cross strip if windy on the main.

prefer cross wind than strong tail wind. 

 

-- adjustment required as headwind /cross wind increases, as you'd expect.

 

-- NO LOW TURNS ,  NO glide stretching.....

I recommend doing some low level training, not necessarily an endorsement, but at least some experience.  Being comfortable turning low is just another tool in the box that may just save your butt.

I took someone's advice and did some LL training. I'm glad I did, Used it in my first engine out, which resulted in nil damage to anything instead of tangled in trees if I followed the no low turns advice.

10 hours ago, sandman said:

Just wandering about the rubber bowl gaskets for a bing 54 carbs, are they the new thing over cork gaskets. Also someone said with the rubber gaskets you have to put some grease on the gasket to hold in place when placing the bowl onto the gasket, what type of grease is safe to do so

Vaseline or technical petrolatum is considered to be pretty much the standard lubricant for installation of fuel system seals.

1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

Just received a humongous Sport Pilot magazine - page 98 "What's Hot" DYMO RHINO 4200 INDUSTRIAL LABEL MAKER, $134 from Office Works. Sounds like it just might be what we have all been looking for.

You may find that the labels made by those machines just revert to their base colour when exposed to  (not very) elevated temperatures. I bought a nice one like that and it made great switch labels for the cockpit, but my spark plug lead labels in the cowl  turned completely black very quickly.

52 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

So you label everything, with whatever system you choose-- before engine removal--- engine reinstalled -- you remove labels as no longer required.😀

Or...Just label it once and never have to do it again. Your choice.