pylon500

This will be a taildragger, with the fuel in the wings. It may not be painted gold? It will also have folding wings.

Only if you are sitting on the CofG, if you are sitting out front then side by side becomes a problem. Staggered gives you a few benefits; Narrower than full side by side, Usually no 1-up/2-up CofG problems, One instrument panel, Good pilot visibility, Plenty of shoulder room, Can still relate to your passenger. But, It looks a little weird, so people tend to shy away from it? Convention can be so hard to break away from.

Just a bit of technical cleaning up; Float plane, Sea plane? OK, a float plane is an aeroplane fitted with floats, allowing it to land on water. A Seaplane is a broad (american?) term that can cover anything that lands on water regardless of layout. The Catalina at the top has a 'Floating hull/fuselage', more usually referred to as a 'Flying Boat'. Early seaplanes (hull or floats) were typically only capable of landing on water, until the idea of retracting undercarriage was introduced, whereupon they were then regarded as amphibious. As for the first video, yep, totally staged with stuntmen, but also shot with a strong telephoto lens, making the plane appear closer than it was. However, if you watch for the shadow, it wasn't THAT far away

Generally referred to as 'staggered seating'. Not very common, but quite logical for a 'forward seated' aircraft. Mainly done for simplified CofG situations, shouldn't need to carry adjustment ballast.

You probably know more about it than I do...

Roy Fox may be interested in these to go with his planes... The aeroplanes and what's it all about! - The Missions 1937

SV-200? I'm assuming you are talking about the two seater? I think the single seaters were serial numbered SV-2, being the 447 powered version with turned down tips, as opposed to the SV-1 with a KFM-107 and flat end tips. The first two seater (pictured behind the red one above) was just a wider pod on a standard airframe, but with the wing extended an extra four feet. There was some embarrassment when CASA was invited to watch the testing of the first extended wing, only to have the dummy centre section collapse, which then damaged the test wing. A new engineer was taken on and the two seat program was basically redesigned from the ground up, having virtually no commonality with the single seater. I had moved on by this point and didn't get to see most of the lead up to a standing airframe before the company closed down. Last I heard the two seat airframe had been sold to someone who then decidied to redesign it again, but got it up to taxi stage, maybe even a test flight? All the tooling (for the single seater) has changed hands a few times, and is now with Ray Tolhurst, as above. Interesting note, I discussed l this a few years ago here; Sadler make Vampire two seater

Yep, started with them when they were in a furniture factory just off Milperra road, then we moved onto Bankstown proper. After that fell through, I worked in the hangar next door for the next 17 years. That's not me (I took the shot), I think it was the bosses son.

Actually, 30ish years ago, a mate and I bought a Dick Smith FM radio 'bug' kit, little microphone with a weak FM transmitter. We used Carl Goldberg Nyrods to the rudder and elevator in a Bridi 'SoarBirdi', so we could seal the whole rear fuselage. We then stuck a capillary tube into the rear section and placed the bug microphone in front of the tube. The plan was to have a small transistor radio in our pocket and listen to the sound of the air coming out of the rear fuse 'capacitance', blowing on the mike. If we could hear it roaring, we were in lift. Problem was, the overall wind noise around the aircraft, the twangy noises from the rubber bands and the buzzing noise of the servos made it near impossible to tell what was going on. We did hear a magpie attack and peck the nose on one flight though. Also the other glider pilots were not real happy with our arrangement.

Hi HITC. Yeah, don't know how much things have changed from my days, but most gliders have 'auto couple' controls, which anyone could rig, the usual thing was to then have someone double check before signing the DI sheet. I can't remember if that was our club policy or GFA policy? Probably more complex today... As for the Trail, I thought it looked the part (mainly because it looked like my Stollite), and even managed to have a look at it at Oshkosh back around 2013. Even showed the designer photos of my Stollite! The only thing that concerned me a little (and I can't remember if I mentioned this before, or just refrained), but I was a little worried about the top end wing/strut attach point.. Most aircraft set the attach systems up to use bolts in shear, as does the Trail for most of the wing, except the top of the strut. To facilitate the folding system, a bolt is used in tension, and it is used through two diaphragms (technically). It's OK if this is done with a complete 'overkill' of materials and hardware, but from memory, it just looked like a 3/8th bolt through two pieces of 1/8th plate just under an inch square, welded to support brackets. Probably well strong enough, just left me a little concerned.

I had been following the other big two ducted fan projects; The Dreamer- Ассоциация Экспериментальной Авиации - Заглянул случайно в один ангарчик. The UL39- Gonzo - Kategória UL / LSA And figured a bigger fan would be better, which dictated something powered by centrifugal style jet. I had also worked building Sadler Vampires back in the 80's. Basically, was going to make a fan, mould an intake, expansion plenum, and jet-pipe, then build the aircraft around it. Airframe would be all metal. Toying with the idea of a single (maybe retracting) wheel ala glider to save weight. Only drawings... Very old photo.

Funny you should say that...

Looked through the site and the inflight photos show a lot of down elevator being held, even the landing was done with down elevator! Me-thinks a little tail heavy? (I know the real Spit flies with some down, but that's at cruise) Found a video; Interesting though.

I didn't actually build the Corby. It was built in QLD many years ago and registered as a 95:10, when I checked it, it was 10kg over the limit, so changed it to a 19-. It's an interesting machine with some interesting mods to get the weight down, but other mods that defeat the purpose. The wing is built in two piece (which is a Corby mod), and lengthened for a bit more span. Power is a 50hp Hirth F23, which was capable of flying it, but the prop wasn't really matched to the reduction, hence the work I did in the photos. It was built with small (12lt each) wing tanks and had another 15lt fibreglass tank between your knees, and a nightmare of pumps and plumbing. I didn't like the glass tank between my knees (and had a wing tank leak), so ripped open the tanks, moulded new larger (24lt each) ones and fitted to the wings. The last owner had tried to change a few things in the engine bay, and made a mess of it, so I ended up remaking the firewall. I managed to do about two hours of flying in it, but then had an engine problem. Not major, it just lost a bit of power, but with a two stroke I wasn't going to risk it, so have been waiting for a mate to have a look at it. It flies nicely, but is a little cramped for me at six foot, and just a little tail heavy with my weight. Will climb at 500fpm, but I've held it back to only 75kts so far. Other projects have overtaken it, so it's gathering dust (not really, it has a full set of covers!) in the back of my hangar. Oh, and it's open cockpit!

Yeah, I did the test flying of this install. Being a 230 it flew pretty well, the 100hp ULS give basically all the same numbers,although climb one up was nearly 1500fpm. You could also climb at 60~70 kts and not overheat, but the main improvement was (scratching my memory now) 115kt cruise at 16~17 litres per hour @ 5000rpm. As for the picasa page, google changed things a few years ago and I didn't keep up. Try this link to the archive https://get.google.com/albumarchive/113292981019876413104?source=pwa but not sure if it will work?

Both 55- and 24- are certified level, and if certified with a Jabiru, that's what you're stuck with. If you change the engine in a 55-, it would end up as a 19-. If you change the engine in a 24, you could end up with an E24- or 19-, neither can be used for training. There may be some Jabiru airframes with Rotax engines going or gone through the certification process, but you would have to talk to RAAus tech. JR-230, note E24- rego

Yeah, but chicken sticks were for chickens! Real men (boys) used their fingers, and also learnt to clean the edges on props. Chicken sticks also tended to break props. While modelling in the RAAF through the 70's, I discovered that the engines in the CAC Sabres were started with a material called Iso-Propylene-Nitrate (IPN), was a good 'nitro' replacement and there were still a few bottles laying around.

Most Team racers ran diesels so, they all smelt of caster oil, kero and ether, and maybe a little amyl nitrate.

G'Day Kim, scratching my head trying to think who you are? I'm Arthur, Len's son, and I was in the Mercurians from about 14 onwards, but maybe a few years after you. I know dad was in the club when I was still a toddler.

Possibly just as it seems, although that then means there was three people involved. It looked like he looked at three different bags, but all the same colour and type, while someone was checking a manifest sheet? Who knows...

G'Day Mike, thought you might like this one... (I colourised this in photoshop, taken from a newspaper clipping) Len Armour 1963.

Yeah, it was loosely based on the Nobler, and incorporated some ideas from later stunt designs like longer moment arm fuselages and aerodynamic balances on the elevators. Here's another one I had. Didn't look much like the picture on the box by the time I'd finished with it...

Almost looks like a Monty Python sketch of some sort. Team race was boring, I flew stunt and combat. That was a VERY long time ago!

Have heard now from different sources regarding a windsock being at the crash site. There is a lot of bushland around the airstrip, and although I think I remember there being fences around the strip, there may well have been an animal problem on the strip. Scenario; On approach pilot see animals, initiates go'round, pulls to right of strip to observe animal movement and inadvertently hits windsock? Totally speculation.

So you've still got the Allegro, or still just looking for an RV4?