pylon500

These guys used to do their spin training just near The Oaks airfield (my home club and field). It was interesting to watch the recoveries, just as demonstrated, by using rudder only. Actually a bit of a concern as the aircraft would be in a stable spin, then the rotation would slow and the aircraft would pitch down into a vertical dive with some of the residual yawing motion converted to a rolling motion, giving the appearance of an uncontrolled spiral. Many recoveries looked to be very close to VNE... The Robin 2160 (now known as the Alpha 160) is noted for it's large rudder, which will tend to 'blow over' in a spin, thereby maintaining rotation. However, the 'hands off' spin is a bit of a worry as it shows that the all flying tail has little tendency to recover extreme pitching events? Still, a good little aerobatic trainer.

Regards the prop; Direction? Number blades? Ground or in flight?

If you remember correctly, when turning an aircraft; •The ailerons only roll the aircraft for the turn, •The rudder helps overcome the adverse yaw of the ailerons, •The aircraft only really starts to turn when you apply pitch (elevator) while in the bank, thereby adding angle of attack to the wings. If you apply flaps (normal or even more-so flaperons) while turning you are adding more angle of attack, and thus likely to be overpitching the wing. If you have flaperons and pull flaps while turning, you will possibly lose speed while at the same time notice the nose tending to go down (flap pitching), and instinctively pull the stick back to compensate, losing more speed, and adding more angle of attack. It's about this time you will want to roll out of the turn so you apply opposite aileron and, if you're lazy, not use enough rudder to balance the rollout, leading to stalling the inboard flaperon thence wing. Aircraft rolls onto it's back into the turn, end of story, plane and you.

Guess I'll have to use this until the BOM gets their dartboard fixed.....

Can't find any evidence on the web, but I remember someone doing this at Bankstown back in the 90's. May have even been an Aerostar, could have been a Seneca? He was doing a powered touchdown, heard an antennae scrape and powered on and went around. His props touched before reaching full power and he came back with 2" Q tips.

Maybe the opposition leader can rein them in...

Makes a substantial difference. Gazelle oil tank is fairly high on the firewall so nearly 50% of the oil can run back into the engine. Foxbat tank is fairly low, it will burp in one turn of the prop. I think your Gazelle problem could be if you're using a low viscosity synthetic, could be running back as fast as you pump it? I had heard (if it's not in the POH) to start the engine for a minute, shut down, then check the oil. Not real clever in my books.

Normally if a bolt and nyloc nut are done up somewhere, as a permanent fixture, it can be regarded as a set and forget item. However the bolt in question is possibly clamping a lead mass weight, and with time and vibration, lead can creep allowing the bolt to lose tension. Loose enough for the bolt to fowl the controls? Probably not, and very noticeable signs of the looseness would be apparent before the bolt had enough movement to bind.

Should be a drilled head and lockwired...

45° in pitch, 60° in roll...

Hope the fin doesn't melt off.......

Probably better off with something like a Foxbat. 30lt fuel, 1500+fpm climb, big sideslip back down. All within the confines of the airstrip. Maybe a GR912s Lightwing would be better, harder sideslips .

If Spruce is short of stock, they usually give you the choice of holding the whole shipment until complete, or sending stock on hand, followed by the delayed item. Problem is, if you do it the second way, you pay two postages. Having said that, if you had a $5k order, paying for a second shipment probably wouldn't worry you. Also, you probably now know that orders over $1000 (including postage) will incur GST.....

Cant understand the use of bladder tanks? No-one's going to be shooting at it (we hope), which is the prime reason for bladder tanks. I know many Cessna's use them, but just as many Cessna's don't, having sealed wet wings. All the Cherokees have wet wings, and Mooneys. Typical users of bladders are Beechcraft, and they're a pain in the a$$e. That would be nice, but I suspect the nose gear 'hole' is actually the outlet for the cowling. I see your comments about ducting out via the dummy exhausts, but I'm explaining to those that missed the point.. Still love the look of it, and would also like to win lotto to get one and add the T-51 and Hurricane (also on the wish list).

I could be wrong, but if an engine in a 25-, 55-, 24- aircraft is at TBO (either calendar or hours), and NOT being used for hire and reward, the engine can be run 'on condition'?

Some what reminiscent of the Millenium Master; Looking for the same aerodynamics and performance tends to lead to a similar appearance.

It's time for the Newspapers to die, who wants to read week old news? Anyway, sent my bit to both the herald editorial and binns himself; Dear Sirs, I feel I need to bring to your attention the grossly incompetent and inflammatory journalism being foisted upon you, and thereby your dwindling readership, by one Matthew Binns. While trying to find more fuel to add to the Germanwings saga, and thereby doing the bidding of the copilot by furthering his wanted fame, this 'journalist(?)' has been granted a sizeable column in which to beat up public fear (already created by the media) about the private end of aviation within Australia. The 'PILOT TESTS CREATE FEAR' article spread across Australia by the Herald Sun, and other peddlers of week old news, is completely out of context, and inferring by default that ALL cars drivers in Australia are borderline psychopaths and incompetents. The private sector of Australian aviation is already under enough pressure from the empire building bureaucrats at CASA, striving for an un-obtainable one hundred percent safety factor. The last thing aviation needs is the uninformed public jumping up and down to politicians about a perceived lack of study or testing of private and recreational pilots in Australia, while we still have the thousand plus a year carnage on Australian roads. I know that the most dangerous part of going flying in Australia, is driving to the airport! Regards, Arthur Armour, Senior Flying Instructor, for the last 28 years.

I would follow the above trim system (added to trailing edge) instead of cutting it into the elevator. A tab mounted to the trailing edge has a better leverage to work as a trim, which means it can be smaller. Cutting into the elevator will mean adding a sub-spar for it to hinge on, adding weight aft of the elevator hinge, and the tab itself would then have thickness (to match the elevator) which will also add weight. This will then require more counter balance weight to balance the elevator, adding more weight to the rear of the aircraft. Although the Jab has a tail and elevator, it doesn't hurt to maybe incorporate a 'anti servo' system into the trim for feel and damping at speed.

So you're going to try and carry four people on an RPL?

Just trolled this one; Makes you wonder about composite blades....

I've been dealing with RAAus electronically for the last two years doing Rego's, ACR's, Pilot Endorsements, License Renewals etc, with no problems.... What have YOU actually done in the last two years? Are those Tornados flying yet? Is your Drifter back in the air yet? Sorry, but I'm busy DOING stuff.......

Looks good on paper, but it's not just Lightwings. The reality is, 3500 assorted aircraft from 220 various types, each with at least one, maybe two option choices for mods, updates, etc. As for factories, a third of the aircraft above no longer have manufacturer support, hence the reason to legitimise repairs, mods, etc via a central authority. I have had a response from Darren showing interest in my proposal, but as you can imagine, this is like opening Pandora's Box, so Barren will be flat out for a while 'till this is under control. His response included getting talks started between Bolly and Rotax, re some form of bulk approvals. I did receive some paperwork from Warp Drive last year describing their work towards (self?) certification, to comply with supplying props to the LSA manufacturers. This paperwork was forwarded to Darren, but it may need an initiative by Wade(?) or whoever now supplies Warps, for a similar bulk approvals. No noises regarding costs yet, but then it is a bit like asking 'How long is a piece of string?'

OK, Now that I've got your attention...., I've been sifting through the MARAP info and, not worrying about the 19-XXXX ambiguity for now, I am beginning to get a feel for it. To that end, it looks like any applications to RAAus, for various mods or changes, could incur individual billing for those mod approvals. I propose that we as a group (Lightwing owners/operators) should pool our requests together where possible, and try to get them approved as block instead of individually. Some changes I would like to request are as follows; • 3 blade Warp Drive props for LW-1's, GR532/582, GR912/912s. • 3 blade Kiev Prop for GR912/912s. • GR912(s) to 600kg. Comment here if you would be interested in any particular request, and/or put up any other mods that could be beneficial in a group application... I have earlier sent an email to Darren, asking to clarify some of the aspects of MARAP, and don't expect a reply till after the weekend, but just thought it might be a good idea to start organising something like the above before we all get too splintered. Arthur.

Now if they had all been fitted with some form of simple harness, they could have been clipped up to the bomb racks, and have the bombardier 'pickle' them over the DZ......

Many things have happened since moving to Taree. I still have the Stollite, which was powered by a 582, when I left. Once here I flew it for a while but one day accidentally blew it up (got too hot during a decent while trying to sort out an airspace clearance problem) I re-engined it with a worn out 912 I got from Howie, still had plenty of power, and flew it like that until I decided I needed that engine for another project. Removed the 912 and am in the middle of installing a BMW R-100, but have been sidetracked by even more other projects.. I'll get back to it one day, but I also have to finish rebuilding my Lightwing (GR-912)