Methusala

A large diameter pipe cutter could work as well. I just thought that anyone considering using a hacksaw would be a little friendly with the bunnies!

Caged bearings are a big no-no! As someone said, "Cageless means more bearing material and no plastic." Splitting the case is not a big deal but requires special tools to service the x-shaft. Can't inspect the main bearings or the big ends without splitting the case. With the new seals in the bluehead coolant leaks from the seals are rare. I used the exhaust manifold to align the 2 barrels. So far, no exhaust leaks unlike before re-build.

Like the photo too, just think the season is far too corrupted and bleh! Bah, humbug.

Hey Nev, don't get me wrong! I had the opportunity to do a days "driver education" courtesy of Lake Constanz Porsche Club and my brother's 944S at Hochenheim ring in 1991. Won in my class and had a blast. Speed in automobiles is addictive. In aircraft it is beyond my thin wallet.

G'day Yenn. Answer, yes. I bought a blue head and was told the big end was shot on one cylinder. Imported a new #99 crank from CPS THEN split the case. Found that the crank was in great shape but the needle rollers had deteriorated in one piston. Got new piston, pin and bearings from Floods and re-assembled it. That was 3 years and 120hrs ago. I fly in the Lake George area and never trust my engine over unlandeable country. The process to reassemble the engine was relatively easy. The previous grey-head had done over 750 hrs and was still pulling 6,300 with a Brolga 3-blade at 16deg pitch. To each his own in this form of aviation. I didn't touch the x-shaft/ water, rotary valve. Mix my own fuel/oil.

There are many descriptions either in written form or video showing dissassembly, inspection and reassembly of 582's. If taken carefully it is not beyond the ability of the average bloke to manage. Engines are not required to comply with manufacturer's (often self-seeking) guidelines. Being conservative doesn't mandate extremes of caution. WE manage our approach to risk.

I'm not highly competitive by nature and so the view I have of aviation is as a gentle and absorbing experience. My shortsightedness in failing to recognise the other, more competitive faction of faster, higher and more extreme forms of activity. I had access to a simple Mk 1 which I enjoyed for its good manners and charm.

Also, I had radio on and was listening to static from ignition. From memory ignition static ceased for the duration of engine miss. Could be something more sinister going on! i have never experienced "icing" in a 2-stroke either. Maybe a fault in the earth connection to Ducati box.

What reason could there be to spoil a beautiful Kitfox with 145hp? They fly perfectly well on 65 (rather small) Rotax ponies via 582.

Anyone had 582 carby icing? Today, at 3,000 and cruise revs I had a brief engine cut (about 1/2 sec). 500 below cloud at 18deg/c. Can't think of anything else it was likely to be. When I landed there appeared to be condensation on the carb bodies.

Lake George on Thursday from the Thruster. Met Peter, a hang glider and paramotor driver at Gearies Gap.

At our strip a Piper Tomahawk, doing circuits elected to fly towards the hill when a stiff easterly was on his nose. Instead of turning x-wind after take off he flew into the downdraft and failed to clear the hill. Expensive lesson but, luckily, in this case not fatal.

The point being made was, I think, how many crashes have there been in the same period of a/c powered by Jab engines? A fair comment because Jabiru has been highlighted by CASA .

Don't know where else to put this, cheers, Don. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-8

Yep, going asymmetric when you don't know the consequences will surely lead to unpleasant consequence, agreed. Don

And this...for RC

Please note, I am not the "first without sin", Just remember this accident and the fact that, as Yenn says,"Over the years I have seen many instructors and many of them are forgotten as they were poor." The Board of Inquiry concluded that the instructor devised a demonstration of asymmetric flight that was 'inherently dangerous and that was certain to lead to a sudden departure from controlled flight' and that he did not appreciate this. https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19911029-0 I'm not wishing to be controversial, a stirrer or indifferent to the suffering of families or others. Just saying. Don

"You idiot! You've killed us all." From memory, the final words of the PIC of the RAAF 707 after the check captain pulled power on both engines on one side off Sale in the Bass Strait. "I've hit the...(Guy cable supporting 2XL's broadcasting mast)." Final transmission from the Snowy's Pilatus Porter, killing the pilot and 2 office girls,as it crashed in ground fog. Cooma Airport, 15miles away was clear. So many preventable tragedies.

Years ago my plane, a VP-2, came with a de-Havilland 60"x30" prop. Its performance was so poor (produced max. 2850 rpm) it was dangerous. I went to Mangalore airshow and measured every prop attached to a VW there. They were about 56" max dia with far less chord and a flatter airfoil with max thickness about 1/4 of the chord. My prop had a Clark-Y type section with max thickness about 1/5 and a blunt leading edge. I attacked, taking 4" off the diameter, removing the brass L/E and savagely reducing the bulk. I placed an epoxy L/E and then had it sprayed white and with red tips and balanced it. When I ran it, tied to a tree with a spring balance, I found the static thrust had reduced from about 150lb to around 120! Well, time to run it along the strip to explore the result. I was shocked to find that the revs had increased to 3600 and it accelerated like a racehorse. I then committed to the air and found that the miserable climb performance had improved to 500fpm. It cruised at 3200 /60kts. I believe that the old prop was acting similar to a fan. It moved more air at zero airspeed giving a thrust figure of about 160. However, the purpose of a propeller is to accelerate the air to a high velocity. It therefore produces more reaction force to the airplane and an increase in performance. The engine was obviously producing more hp and the prop converted this to a more energetic airflow. I'm not trained in physics so am unable to explain in more technically precise language. Simply my experience. (Don't be afraid to experiment, most satisfaction comes from positive experience {or, as Facthunter explains,"Never stop learning."}) Don

Far too adventurous for the management I'm thinking.

A much better plane than the unfortunate Hughes Pocket Rocket I think.

Did my (delayed) BFR last week in a Jabiru. 2 landings and the CFI said that for someone who doesn't fly a Jab they were pretty good .

Wouldn't suit a Cessna driver!! I'd give it a crack 'though.

My mistake...can't tell a bear from a gull:oh yeah: The Rutan SkiGull is an amphibious aircraft designed by Burt Rutan

At around 1230 today we saw a very quiet twin with apparently a T-tail heading S-W over Canberra. This turned out to be a Chaika LLC L65 Seabear. I think that this was designed by Burt Rutan as his ultimate global retirement project. Any comments? Don