planesmaker

That’s more like it

Yes the new fuel pumps aren’t near as good as the old pierburg pumps. I’ve had some failures of the new pumps even as low as 15hrs

I do have to wonder about rotax’s financial interest in the five year replacement especially with their pricing of mandatory replacement parts

Skippy those last few paragraphs appear to protect you as much as the seller, normal contract stuff. Your research and inspection of said aircraft is to be commended, not many go to the effort you have done. A more honest aircraft of the type would be hard to find and I doubt there is anything hidden in the logbook. Seller, I believe answered all your questions as honestly as he could. However if you put yourself in the sellers shoes, would you want the buyer to be able to sue you for anything he might find wrong? He is selling a home built aircraft after all. This is why you must do a thorough inspection and research prior to buying to ensure you are happy with the purchase, which you have done. The contract seems to be standard legal document.

How old is the fuel? Perhaps try fresh fuel anyway I would not rule out fuel quality as the problem.

Broken wires can be intermittent

2mm polycarbonate (lexan) is used for windscreen. It forms around ok yes a little tight in the corners.

Using Mogas in Jabiru’s it’s very important to test for ethanol as it will eat your fuel tank sealer. I don’t trust fuel distributors to not have ethanol, best to test.

Yenn a broken sensor wire?

Just to pass on how to quickly and easily test for ethanol in fuel, a few drops of water based food colour added to clear testing container add fuel sample, if it contains ethanol the whole sample will change colour, if no ethanol food colouring remains as globules on the bottom( can even be used again) cheers

What is group c?

I believe that kitfox was heavy (over 400kg) empty, instead of spending a squillion on more power, it would of benefitted from a diet!

My submission to airservices This proposal will not increase safety, likely to decrease safety, several issues that come to mind, 1) aircraft are not fitted with AGL meters, 500' agl is easy enough to questimate, but 1500' agl is a very vague figure, especially when operating around hilly terrain, just from where or how are pilots to ascertain where the limits are? 2) training schools are required to carry out stall training, according to the syllabus, stalls must be recovered by 3000' agl, in order to comply they will all have to be fitted with a transponder at a not insignificant cost (approx $5-7,000. Not to mention the on going rad47 costs every 2 years) A lot of training takes place in RAAus registered aircraft, most of which are not fitted with a transponder. 3) forcing all non transponder equipped aircraft below 1500' is a recipe for disaster, imagine flying near mountainous terrain and being caught in rotor, or the increased turbulence adding to pilots work load, and also extra airframe loading. With a higher concentration of aircraft below 1500' without hemispherical levels will increase chance of a midair. 3) circuit height for high performance aircraft is 1500'agl any aircraft overflying would also be forced to fly through the circuit area or detour around. Most midairs occur in the vicinity of aerodromes, this proposal increases this risk. 4) there are a lot of recreational aircraft not fitted with transponders, the owners would incur significant costs if forced to fit transponders. 5) Airservices has not presented a safety reason for implementing such a radical change in airspace.

Finally got a reply, seems they are very busy with questions

Let me check my agl instrument!🤔

I asked a question of asa still waiting for a response, hope they can respond before the 14th. I asked if low cost ads-b was suitable for vfr without a transponder? I think I already know what the answer is. As mentioned AGL is too vague to be implemented especially in varying terrain. Imagine training for stalls at 1500' I believe that's asking for trouble. Instead of increasing safety it would actually be decreasing safety, imagine getting caught in rotor around the mountains because you had to fly low! Not to mention the rougher conditions down low, adding stress to both pilot and airframe. Please show us where it is proven to be unsafe in status quo? I can imagine all looking at their skyechoes or whatever to see traffic, but it is never going to be 100% reliable, I can see benefits but also shortcomings. Seems most midairs have happened in circuit area or close to aerodromes, use whatever to mitigate risk but don't forget to look outside and communicate.

Clear as mud! Take it to extreme with rear cg you could be at position to have full forward stick and still not be able to prevent stall. Obviously this would be outside cg limits.

Stall stick position would change would it not with a different cg? If I load passengers in rear seat it would mean I need less rearward stick movement to stalling AofA

Good to know, thanks for sharing

I did have an aircraft with vibrations which seemed to be carb related turned out to be gearbox. Vibrations caused carb flooding.

Seems like carbs are going out of balance, I don't believe it is electrical but carb related

Seal in choke mechanism?

You have now presented more things wrong than a simple ground speed lower than planned which was stated in the question. Are you sure you aren't now employed by CASA?

Understaffed? They have more staff per aircraft than many other countries

If it was carb ice there would be a reduction in revs. GS is outside of aircraft systems.