K-man

Today's Age motor section has an article titled 'False Economy'. The pollies are sprouting that this is a win for the little Aussie battler, cheaper fuel. The Age team compared Reg ULP, Premium ULP and E10 (Reg ULP with 10% Ethanol). The drop in performance of E10 meant that to cover a given distance the cost of fuel was almost the same for Premium and E10, both about 5% more expensive than reg ULP. The positive for us is that we use Premium ULP and most of that will still be Ethanol free. The companies will have to supply 20% of their fuel with ethanol and 80% will stay as is. My reading is that most of the Ethanol will be in the lower octane fuel. i_dunno

 

 

Mate!! Were you in my class? Remember all that just like yesterday. So-o-o true. :big_grin: :big_grin: :big_grin:

 

 

Since EPIRBs were first available we carried one in our 4X4 even. It's not a matter of being a survivor. We can all be that. What it means is the saving of everyone's time and effort, not to mention the needless expense if we are overdue through misadventure and concerned people have to search for us. As an RA pilot I still get hammered by GA people because some of our number don't have radios, and I must say I have to agree with some of their points. EPIRBS fall into the same category. The GME you bought seems to be a good unit, we bought the same model.:thumb_up: So good luck with the Tocumwal Lass. She could end up in the NES if Big Pete or the Captain get to hear about her.

 

 

Congratulations. If you'd like to have lunch at Yarra Glen one day, I could meet you at Lilydale airstrip. Lovely flight from YLED down towards Barwon Heads, over Port Phillip Heads, GMH to YLIL. Home via Kilmore, over Bacchus Marsh or if the confidence is up you could fly Coastal Route past the CBD. Approx. 2.2 hours round trip. Coastal misses Moorabbin airspace if you plan it right.

 

 

 

Ouch! :thumb_up:

 

 

Pat on the back for all those who put some great information on this thread. I reckon that this has been a really good discussion. Thanks guys.

 

 

Ian, I used to do what you did, nose down back to the airfield = less hours until I read "Stick and Rudder" by Langewiesche - he more or less covers this subject.

and says .... ?

 

 

Now I'm getting confused. Just as I was being convinced Vne refers to TAS the pendulum seems to be swinging back towards IAS. :confused: In this case would it be SAFE to suppose that, unless there is a 'Barber's Pole' or a table supplied with an aircraft such as the Pipistrel and that under the new rules we are not likely to be flying above 10,000', we could use IAS to avoid passing Vne? :thumb_up: Maybe yes, maybe no.

 

Part of Michael Coates post read:

 

"Suffice to say that flutter relates to true airspeed (TAS) rather than equivalent air-

 

speed (EAS), so aircraft that are operated at or beyond their VNE at altitude - where

 

TAS increases for a given EAS – are more susceptible to flutter..."

 

New Zealand CAA’ Vector Magazine (full passage at page 5 of http://www.caa.govt.nz/fulltext/vector/vec01-4.pdf)

 

"The critical flutter speed depends on TAS, air density, and critical mach number. The air

 

density factor is almost canceled out by the TAS factor; and most of us won’t fly fast

 

enough for mach number to be a factor. So TAS is what a pilot must be aware of!"

 

Bob Cook, Flight Safety International

 

Unfortunately this link did not lead to the article refered to.

Youngmic wrote:

 

"VD/MD are IAS values, VD/MD can be no greater than 0.9 VNE"

I can't find that written anywhere either, apart from the RA-Aus article referred to below. Certainly not in FAR 23.251 which is accurately shown in youngmic's post. :confused:

 

In our aircraft, at cruise, our TAS is often getting up towards Vne. A quick calculation of cruise speed 130kts (at sea level ) plus 2% per 1000' (compounding?) gives 161.64 kts at 10,000'. Vne is 162kts. Now we drop the nose a fraction on descent and we are over Vne. Add some high temperature and turbulence and ??

 

Now having said all this my thoughts are with TAS as the safe way to look at Vne.

 

But, there's more. :big_grin: (time for a coffee break before the best part, still to come) :big_grin:

 

FAR.19 Operating limitations. The Airplane Flight Manual must include the

following limitations--

 

(a) Airspeed limitations. (1) The maximum operating limit speed VMO/MMO and

 

a statement that this speed limit may not be deliberately exceeded in any

 

regime of flight (climb, cruise, or descent) unless a higher speed is

 

authorized for flight test or pilot training;

 

(2) If an airspeed limitation is based upon compressibility effects, a

 

statement to this effect and information as to any symptoms, the probable

 

behavior of the airplane, and the recommended recovery procedures; and

 

(3) The airspeed limits, shown in terms of VMO/MMO instead of VNO and VNE.

and (just the relevent bit):

 

Sec. 23.1505 Airspeed limitations.

© .... VMO/MMO must be established so that it is not greater than the

 

design cruising speed VC/MC and so that it is sufficiently below VD/MD and

 

the maximum speed shown under Sec. 23.251 to make it highly improbable that

 

the latter speeds will be inadvertently exceeded in operations.

Now, because it would be easy to inadvertently exceed Vne based on TAS, especially if you did not have an instrument to show TAS, and if your aircraft manual should show VMO/MMO instead of VNO and VNE if airspeed limitation is based upon compressibility effects and your aircraft manual actually shows Vne, then Vne should be based on IAS!! Youngmic and the RA-AUS article below have it right. :thumb_up:

 

Don't fly real fast

 

Vne is based on IAS unless otherwise stated. I rest my case.

 

 

Pilots flew their machines at reasonably high altitudes but at very high speeds. One of them deployed airbrakes (spoilers) at the speed of 285 km/h (155 kts), the other was flying at 3000 m

 

(10.000 ft) at 270 km/h (145 kts) IAS.

 

They both encountered severe vibrations caused by flutter.

 

What was the reason for the flutter causing both accidents?

 

Both pilots greatly exceeded speed which should never be exceeded, the VNE.

 

With the IAS to TAS correction factor taken into consideration, they were both flying faster than 315 km/h (170 kts)!

I know this thread began with Va but Michael's post raises an interesting question regarding Vne. The problem outlined shows that in those aircraft inadvertantly exceeding Vne caused catastrophic failure. IAS was below Vne, TAS was higher.

 

We have an EFIS in our aircraft and I have always kept an eye on the TAS. It does get up close to Vne on occasions. After reading the post I tried to find further reference on the internet but apart from a reference to the RV aircraft and the above mentioned Pipistrel problems I did not find reference to other aircraft manufacturers warning of the problem, although some aircraft have a 'barber's pole' which gives different Vne at different heights. Mostly these heights are over 10,000'.

 

What I did find was this. Vne is a speed that is 90% of the demonstrated divespeed of that particular aircraft. Unless someone deliberately sets out to test an aircraft to destruction this speed is likely to be conservative. In that case, if an aircraft was exceeding Vne (TAS), but the IAS was less than Vne, the pilot would be blissfully unaware of any problem, and in fact may be well within the safety envelope of that aircraft. Obviously the Pipistral aircraft had an accurate Vne and the higher TAS was critical.

 

As most RA aircraft probably don't have instruments that show TAS, my question for discussion is this. Is this a problem in RA aircraft and if so what do we do about it?

 

Required reading Don't fly real fast

 

 

Saw the pictures on the Corowa link. That makes two for Australia. I have flown in my friend's Dynamic, a beautiful aircraft. His has fixed undercarriage and I see the new one is retractable. Any idea of its cruise?

 

 

Lilydale is going to construct two new hangars, probably next year. Unfortunately they don't allow construction of private hangars. Apparently, Coldstream has no room for more hangars.

 

 

Logan McLean flew his Pioneer across from NZ to Aus about 3 years back. Check out Alpi Aviation Web Site . Scroll down and there is an article about that flight. Also Logan's email address is listed on the Alpi site as he is the NZ agent. :thumb_up:

 

 

I agree that jabiru's are one strong little bird. Just go and watch this test highlight video they have on their website http://jabiru.net.au/Video%20Clip/Jabiru%20Testing%20Highlights.wmv

 

It is unreal, especially suprised me the load they drop on the landing gear. And the nose is stressed to 1200kg!!

I did a lot of my training in the J160. After watching the video I wonder why the instructors were always worried about stress on the nose-wheel. ;) None of my landings were ever that heavy! :thumb_up:

 

 

I have friends with 912s who crank the motor a few times without throttle or choke. That has the same effect.

 

 

I don't think I'll post my score, but just what does that percentage mean? It is just one score of many (the only one divulged without payment) and I think it might be that the higher the score, the lower the chance of you stuffing up big time! Any comments?

 

 

The Rotax 912 also has a reduction gearbox. This means that it would be near impossible to start by hand. Agree that all props should be treated as live but with the Rotax, turning by hand is required to accurately check the oil level, as pointed out in the earlier responses. So, for all those who do not want to turn the motor over, don't buy a Rotax. For the rest of us, the Rotax is a very good engine for light aircraft. :thumb_up: :thumb_up: :thumb_up:

 

 

Does anyone else have this feeling of deja vu? When is groundhog day? i_dunnoi_dunnoi_dunno

 

Now I think I really am mad! :hittinghead:

 

 

I've had the same problem off and on. It seems to only happen to me if my access has been through Mozilla. Microsoft Explorer seems to be ok.

 

 

Tezza, you will have a ball. I finished my RA training in that very plane and it is a delight to fly. Not only that, Lethbridge is a beautiful spot to train (when the wind stops) and Bruce is a great source of knowledge. :thumb_up: :thumb_up: :thumb_up: Toe brakes are only what you're used to. When they're not there you just use the hand brake and in the turns when taxiing just leave a little more space. As to the yoke, you won't miss it for one minute, the stick is so responsive. Just remember to trim the nose up a little on final to take the pressure off the stick.

 

 

So if a trike has a new rotax 912 four stroke, dual ignition, transponder and approved altimeter will it be ok?

I think there may also be something about a min. speed of 80 kts. i_dunno That was in the talk some months back. Maybe someone has heard something more recently.

 

 

This makes some interesting reading, particularly the section on new radio procedures near CTAF and CTAF® airstrips and the infomation regarding the changes to CAOs.

 

The CASA Briefing - October 2008

 

 

MrH, I'm with you!! :thumb_up:

 

 

Our AvMap has a nasty habit of doing a similar thing from time to time at the most inconvenient time. You may need to do a RAM CLEAR.

 

Some of the following info is not in the good book but came from the manufacturer. We carry a laminated copy in our aircraft as most times it fails we are in the air. To restore properly you need to back up any new waypoints and have your flightplan backed up as well before you set off.

 

Our AvMap is mounted horizontally. If yours is vertical it won't have to be changed as the default settings are vertical.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I hope to buy/share an aircraft sometime next year and somehow convince the missus to fly with me though it seems that is now going to happen.

My wife flys and the only downside is that I only have half the fun. We take it in turns, go anywhere, support each other and have a great time.

 

My wife started first and I didn't start until she had her ppl. So you do it in reverse. When you get you certificate, shout her a couple of TIFs or perhaps go for a fly with her in the beautiful Waco they have at Aldinga. Then when you are both flying it will be much easier to convince her that you really do need a plane of your own for all those romantic weekends away!! ;)

 

As deskpilot said, the people at Aldinga are fantasic. We flew across to there some months back and at that stage we had an intermittant electrical fault. Everyone put in there two bobs worth and the problem was fixed. :big_grin:

 

The coffee and cake were fantastic too. :thumb_up:

 

 

1. Gazelle ;)

 

2. Jab120 :big_grin:

 

3. Texan or Pioneer 200

 

4. Pioneer 300