Methusala

1 minute ago, Garfly said:

So, Vladimir Vladimirovich has been working to a rational plan, after all.    ;- )

I hope so.

I wrote recently, in another thread here, that Boeing relied for its manufactured titanium components on a Russian company , as did Airbus. I apologise - I got that partly wrong. Truth is that Boeing stopped relying on them in March but Airbus still do. Boeing stated that there were enough parts in stock to satisfy current demands. Sooner or later they will use all of this stock and, perhaps by then, they expect Russia to have fallen to the US planned Russian capitulation. Good luck with that.

This is an example of the real effect of western "sanctions" on the non-western world. Really is a case of "shooting oneself through the leg".

https://thesaker.is/the-serial-production-of-the-tu-214-has-started-in-russia/

https://www.rotax.com/en/news/latest/detail/statement-from-brp-on-the-alleged-use-of-rotax-engines-in-mohajer-6-drones.html

"Nobody lied in concocting this (cover) story. We remain committed to the EU's plan to commit suicide by divorcing ourselves from the only sufficient, reliable  and affordable source of energy left in the universe."

I think (Occum's razor) that they merely purchase what they need. Boeing have a 50% share in a Russian company that supplies titanium components for their airliners. We don't know much about what goes on. Why would Sweden, Denmark and Deutschland refuse to share information about the damage to Nordstream 1 & 2 with Russia? Search me!

Rotax could easily denote engines supplied for military purpose as a different model and apply a different serial no. There is a world of difference between military and civilian trade.

Weapons trade is draped in secrecy. I imagine that if Bombadier had a contract to supply engines to Iran for drone power they would not be at liberty to publicise any details regarding numbers of units or anything else for that matter.

Truth does not reside in one person's stated view or another. Information is promoted by either side and, as I have written,"You must read widely if you wish to analyse what exactly is going on. It takes both sides to make anything happen and the truth is very difficult to know."

Russian missile manufacturer Almaz-Antei last October said that the 9M38 surface-to-air missile was launched by the BUK-M1 air defense missile system from the vicinity of Zaroshchenskoye settlement controlled by the Ukrainian military.

It was noted by the Russian side that the 9M38 missiles were removed from the Russian Armed Forces service in 2011, and the BUK-M1 system has not been produced in Russia since 1999.

No point in continuing with this. 2 sides and one believes what one does. Don

MH-17 was bought down over the Ukraine. Remnants incl. a serial no. identified the BUK AA missile wreckage as a version supplied to the Ukraine by the Soviet Union. This weapon had been superseded  a long time ago by Russia but was still in service with the Ukies.

 The very westy on-side Dutch conducted the investigation and concluded that it was fired by so-called Russian supported 'rebels' from east Ukraine who were defending themselves against deadly Ukie attacks. Russia had radar tracks showing that the  airliner was being shadowed by a Ukrainian fighter. No Russian participation was allowed by the Dutch and no Russian evidence was admitted.

In these geo-political games there are no rules and the western media dutifully reports the western story.

You must read widely if you wish to analyse what exactly is going on. It takes both sides to make anything happen and the truth is very difficult to know. Don

1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

This is a political, not an engine topic - please transfer it to a general forum for debate

Nothing to do with engines. Just some virtue signal about weapons.

Darkly amusing to think that Bombadier would display any more scruples than say, Raytheon, General Dynamics, BAE or any other arms dealer. Money is money...war is a scam. Who supplied the weapons used to kill 15,000 Russian speaking Eastern Ukrainians between 2014 and 2022?

Grand Rapids Technology make a brilliant instrument monitors cht, egtx2, revs, hrs, volts etc. Programmable limits warning and not affected by vibration as are mech gauges. Had one in my T300 and weighs very little. :-) Don

 This is how we moved the Karatoo, Bungendore to Sydney. Don

7 minutes ago, Damien said:

thanks don do you know if your still able to get new skins for these ?

Damien, I no longer own my Thruster. Suggest you ask Stuart (Thruster 88) or Extralite ( Craig, I think).

3 hours ago, Thruster88 said:

 

 

Damian, your plane has the Swift pod developed by Tony Hayes. It attempted to reduce some parasitic drag and be a little more aesthetic. Nice to see you re-building, have fun, Don

I suggest an bolts as originally installed. High tensile bolts are great in tension but are brittle in shear. You don't want to find this out the hard way.

Rego of my T300 Glen.

Glen, my comment was wrongly attributed to Teckair. Your comment is correct, very well expressed. Don

On 07/10/2022 at 8:18 PM, Teckair said:

Any aircraft is dangerous if mis-handled. I'm adding my experience as a Thruster pilot over 30 yrs. All in my logbook.

On 05/10/2022 at 4:41 PM, Arron25 said:

Converted attached

Hey Aaron, is that 393 in your hangar?

11 hours ago, Teckair said:

Yes I agree the early Thrusters with the 503 would crash if you lost power on take off. With the 582 you could climb out at 65 kts which gave you time to get the nose down but you still had to be quick.

Never in 100 lifetimes would any Thruster climb at 65kt. I've had power failure in a 503 with no problems maintaining control. We always maintained 50 till 250ft then 42.

So,so sad when these inexplicable tragedies occur.

A bit like using Y designations for locations. JPEG's are universal so why not?

Great idea, means you can remove the pod without disassembling the airframe. Maybe related to the "Swift" project.