Smokey

This aircraft is apparently a significant part of our history which I believe in preserving, how many times have we bemoaned the lack of foresite in our forebears when they destroyed all those beautiful aeroplanes ?

 

My first question here is why was the original registration changed ? Was the aircraft modified to such an extent that the original aircraft no longer existed or was there some other reason that made the original number irrelevant to that aeroplane ?

 

Assuming that the above questions can be answered to the satisfaction of our elected represntatives I see no reason why the registration could not be changed.

 

My next question is where is this number now and if it is in use, is it reasonable to ask the current owner to relinquish a number which they are probably very proud to carry.

 

While it would not be incorrect to have this aircraft with her existing numbers it would also be correct to have her in her original numbers and historically far more significant. Even the major museums are now waking up and presenting aircraft in their own colours at a significant point in their history rather than painting them to represent some 'ace'.

 

an AUF President took 10-0001 (the first of the 95.10 regos) and put it on his aircraft! He got bored with it after a few months and sold it on

If we assume this statement is fact and not heresay, registration numbers were obviously considered a commodity for it to be "sold on" at that time. Add this to the fact(?) that the original 25-0001 was changed, the precedent has been set that registration numbers can be changed, possibly only under exceptional circumstances with board approval but then isn't that what we are talking about ? Or to look at it another way, we are not actually changing a registration but correcting an invalid change of registration number :)

 

My dilema is not about whether the aircraft should be preserved with her original registration but in what condition, do we keep flying it and risk losing it, or do we take it out of its environment and lock it up in a museum ? I don't think we'll ever resolve that to everyones satisfaction.

 

 

Ultralights

 

Just to comment on what Pylon said about the temperature, it may not be that apparent just how cold it can get up there if you're used to staying in a motel.

 

I had a sleeping bag rated about 5 degrees or so I thought, it was actually an 8 degree bag usable down to 5 degrees but not necessarily keeping you warm, just alive:-(

 

Last Easter overnight temperatures in Dubbo were recorded at 10, 2 and 5 degrees, the previous year they got down to 7 degrees. Fortunately I was in a vehicle and I keep some picnic blankets in the vehicle, you never know when they'll come in handy and they did, all of them.

 

This year I have a new sleeping bag.

 

Make sure you have a good bag and a good sleeping mat.

 

Mark

 

PS And an appropriate tent.

 

 

Ten was reporting a small "twin engined" aircraft,

Wasn't a twin engined 5000kg Ultralight by any chance ?

 

 

Try also

 

http://www.ornithopter.ca/index_e.html

 

 

This could be a mere coincidence, but this gets more interesting:

2) The first plane crashing against the Twin Towers was flight number 11.

 

Open Microsoft Word and do the following:

 

1. Type in capitals Q33 NY. This is the flight number of the first plane to hit one of the Twin Towers.

Hmm, same plane 2 flight numbers ?

 

Smokey

 

 

I have a friend, Sean Ables, who is has a phd in thisarea, he works for The Centre for Space Physics Research at

Newcastle uni.

 

there are a collection of papers and thesis abstracts that may help explain the effects.

 

Some of the research is used to predict the effects/damage on communication satellites.

Ozzie

 

Afraid I have a pile of 'must read' on my coffee table about 2 foot hgh, and growing, rapidly. The pile in the study I don't want to think about.

 

These appear to be typically titled scientific papers where the relevance is not always immediately apparent. Do you have any recommendations which of these papers would be of most interest.

 

Mark

 

 

Talking about the phasing out of some of the old nav systems in favour of GPS, something that probably not many people are aware of, as it's only just been identified, is the susceptibility of GPS signals to interference from solar flares. Logical when you think about it.

 

Last year 2 incidents were recorded at Aricebo which revealed a 40% drop in signal strength from the satellite for 70 seconds and 40 minutes later a 50% drop for 15 minutes.

 

The article (ref below) states that these drops were recorded at the receiver but does not state the impact on position accuracy. It does, however, indicate a concern for aircraft operating IFR with GPS as mandated by the US FAA.

 

The flare involved was apparently quite minor and larger flares could result in larger signal drops.

 

There is a prediction that during the next solar max (2011 - 2012) signal drop could be as much as 90% and lasting for several hours.

 

Fixes for this could include satellites with higher signal strength, which would require a redesign of the satellites or modifications to the receiver,

 

which would apparently compromise receiver design.

 

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0609/27gpsfailures/

 

Mark

 

Smokey

 

 

I have found the following article about the use ofMogas (auto fuel) and Avgas in Rotax engines. I hope it is of

some use.

 

Peter.

 

 

 

Peter

 

Could you supply source for this article please.

 

Mark

 

 

AOPA are now putting their magazine on the newstand every other month

 

and calling it GA Pilot. The Nov/Dec issue has a review of a similar

 

piece of equipment, the ZAON MR6 which they call a PCAS (Portable

 

Collision Avoidance System).

 

I can see a few (theoretical) concerns with this equipment.

 

There was a query above as to where these devices get their altitude,

 

this comes from the transponders altitude encoder, assuming the other

 

aircraft has it fitted and in the correct mode (Alt or mode C) to

 

transmit the altitude. Transponders use pressure altitude or flight

 

levels not MSL altitude. PCAS units calculate the relative altitude

 

using the transmitted altitude and your own transponder altitude, if

 

you have one, what it would do if you don't you would need to

 

investigate but presumably you would need to mentally convert between

 

your own altitude and the FL of the 'bandit'.

 

The range information is based on signal strength. This should also be

 

treated with some caution, if the signal is partially shielded by the

 

transmitting aircraft or your own aircraft the reduced signal strength

 

could mean the 'bandit' is closer than the PCAS says it is.

 

Transponders are also reactive devices, ie they respond to a radar

 

signal, so if you are within about 100nm* of a Air Traffic Control

 

secondary surveillance radar the transponder should transmit a signal

 

for you to pick up each time it is swept by the radar but if you are

 

outside that range (Narromine ?) the transponder will have nothing to

 

respond to and will remain silent.

 

* See '6.3 Aircraft radar beacon transponders' of 'Safety and emergency

 

communication procedures' on the RAA website

 

http://www.auf.asn.au/comms/safety.html#transponder

 

Given these concerns it is possible that these units could be

 

misleading if not interpreted correctly and should never be relied

 

upon.

 

When I was in the marine game we had all sorts of toys like radar, Sat

 

Nav (pre GPS), Loran, Decca, VHF radio etc and lumped them all under

 

one heading, they were AIDs to navigation, nothing more. Treated as

 

such these units probably work very well. (Primary navigation tool was

 

Mk I eyeball).

 

Me, I'd be concerned about distractions from the toys and the mental

 

gymnastics working out the altitudes, I'll pass for the moment.

 

Would love to hear from someone with practical experience of one of these units.

 

 

Looking like a good one for flying thisSaturday/Sunday. Looks as though I will be there Saturday. Anybody else

going?Dave?Time to get the Jabiru up in the air again!:)

Yep, looking great in Perth for the weekend. Snigger, snigger.

 

 

So I am now waiting on a 3.5 mm plug to 2.5 mm socket adapter to make the connection complete.

Ross

 

Sounds like you have already ordered one but if it's any help Jaycar carry one PA3536 $2.95. Dick Smith used to carry one but now only seem to have a 2.5 plug to 3.5 skt

 

www.jaycar.com.au-appears they have an agency in Leeton, Ezone Electronics.

 

Mark

 

 

On the XCom Avionics website, the description of the FlightCell states 'Free

 

cellphone adaptors supplied from the manufacturer for popular phones'.

 

Obviously this would only be if you bought a FlightCell.

 

However, if you are looking for adaptors it might be worth giving

 

Micael Coates a ring and see if these can be sourced as seperate items.

 

I've bought a couple of things from Mike and always found him most helpful.

 

http://www.xcomavionics.com & click on Phone Hookup in index

 

Mark

 

 

Rob

 

I'd be interested in seeing that, any chance of getting a copy if I PM my email address ?

 

Mark

 

 

Thanks Darren, I thought you might know where to lay your hands on the frequencies

 

Mark

 

 

Apart from the frequencies published in the ERSA does anyone have any

 

info on what radio frequencies are likely to be used at this weekends

 

Richmond airshow ?

 

While any would be of interest I'm particularly interested in the 'company' frequency the Roulettes, Hawks, 18's etc use.

 

 

This calculator takes prop dia, rpm and temp then returns the tip speed in mach (and mph) and then goes on to state "To produce maximum thrust at full power your tip speed should fall between .88 and .92 mach."

 

They appear to have based this assertion on their own static thrust experiments (http://www.pponk.com/HTML%20PAGES/propellers.html) and are calculating the speed purely on flat plane rotation with no allowance for advance. (Test of 7 propellors in one day.)

 

No mention is made of pitch although reading between the lines they were varying the pitch to achieve max thrust at a particular rpm.

 

The calculator does not make any mention of the fact that it applies to a static test (my assumption), hence by ommission implies it is applicable to a dynamic situation. The calculator also works out tip speed based on flat plane rotation with no allowance for advance.

 

I would seem to me that extrapolating a static test to a dynamic situation and implying that a flat plane tip speed optimum also applies in a dynamic situation is stretching things a little far.

 

Does anyone know of any, more detailed, information on optimal tip speed ?

 

 

Howdy' date=' Do they have a tail dragger on line ? Need to get that endorsement. Cheers[/quote']

 

Hi Thruster

 

Sydney Recreationl FC, have 2 Lightwings, both tail draggers. Thanks to

 

Mr Telecommunications, our bookings are quite light at the moment so

 

now would be a good time to jump in before we pick up again. Bookings

 

0425 251 939 or you could drop Pylon500 a note here.

 

Dave's Flying School also has access to a Lightwing taildragger, sorry I don't have a number for Dave.

 

Mark

From Minchinbury take the M7 down to the M5 and take the Narellan Road

 

turnoff from the M5 and head for Camden, go through Narrellan and take

 

the Camden bypass to your left. You can't miss it, the bypass goes over

 

Narellen Road so you take the on ramp just before it.

 

Follow the bypass past the traffic lights which turn back into Camden

 

and take the next road on the right (about 200 metres past the lights)

 

Burragorang Road and follow that out through Mount Hunter and The Oaks,

 

the airfield is on the left on the way out of town. The access road

 

gate is on the western side of the strip.

 

There are a couple of groups out there, Daves' Flying School and Sydney Recreational FC.

 

There are a few Oaks people on this forum Pylon500 and I are with SRFC.

 

 

Jack

 

I got onto the 4WD club tech officer and he put me onto a place at St Marys, apparently been there since the beginning of time.

 

I spoke to Earnest this morning, he's to be the one who knows how its

 

all done. Obviously I could only ask general questions but it sounds

 

like thay can do what you need.

 

Better Springs

 

69-73 Christie Street

 

St Marys

 

NSW 2760

 

02 9623 5888

 

It's not too far out so if transport proves to be a problem we should be able to work something out.

 

You should have my number and email on the club list or drop me a PM here.

 

Mark

 

 

On the Mutt Muff stand at Oshkosh

 

 

 

Collective Ahhhh please.

 

Seriously, good idea.

 

 

Ross

 

If I am thinking of the same article you are referring to, I think it

 

was in the RAA mag about 12 months or so ago and it was just a brief

 

article about how to test for ethanol.

 

I think the other thing we have to keep in mind is that we are not just

 

talking about E10. Once that gets established the push will be on by

 

the greenies and other vested interests in going to E20 and so on.

 

In one of the followup letters to Phillip Lockwoods' article he

 

mentions that Rotax approve up to 5% ethanol (doesn't say whether

 

that's in a US blend or if it applies world wide) and that they had run

 

up to 10% without noticing any detrimental effects. What happens

 

when we get up to 20%, who knows.

 

I'm looking from a Rotax viewpoint as that's what I'm running. You

 

mention that Jabiru engines are happy on a variety of fuels I assume

 

that includes ethanol, but up to what percentage ?

 

Mark

 

 

Ross

 

Thanks, it was the Jabs that I'd heard had an issue with sloshing

 

agents (is agent the correct term ?) but I didn't want to name names in

 

case I had mixed it up.

 

Is is possible / practical to introduce another sloshing agent into the

 

tanks to isolate the original agent from the ethanol fuel ?

 

Mark

 

 

Just checked the EAA website and found the Phillip Lockwood article referred to above is available online.

 

Remember that the US may use different fuel blends to Australia which

 

could have an effect on the ethanol impact that we see vs those in the

 

US.

 

http://www.sportpilot.org/magazine/feature/2006 - 06 June - Power On.pdf

 

Mark

 

Smokey

 

 

doesnt ethanol use more energy to refine than itproduces?

 

I think that used to be the case but they have improved processing

 

methods so you get out more than you put in, I don't know to what

 

extent.

 

I read somewhere that putting 10% ethanol into petrol, by the time you

 

took into account everything from growing the fuel to delivering it to

 

the service station the actual reduction in greenhouse gases produced

 

was only 1%. I don't know who worked that out or who funded the

 

research but I'd guess it was the anti-ethanol lobby, regardless I'd

 

take the number with a big grain of salt.

 

Mark

 

Smokey

 

 

Danda

 

I'm not sure that your suggestion that all the comments

 

against ethanol should be lumped together as 'negativity' which you imply is

 

unfounded.

 

There are some real concerns with ethanol as Turtle has

 

commented, some components currently in use are not designed to be used with

 

ethanol and fall apart when used in an ethanol enviroment.

 

The big problem is where are these components ? I have also heard that there is a sloshing

 

sealant that used to be used in fuel tanks which does not tolerate ethanol.

 

There may be aircraft still around with tanks sealed with this particular

 

sealant. I'd also be checking fuel line compatibility. Some aircraft owners

 

could be up for major refitting expenses if access to ethanol free fuel is

 

denied.

 

The politicians and greens will say there's no problem but

 

they have their own agendas and will cherry pick the information they disseminate.

 

The people who are anti are no better. That goes for any

 

subject that is political, not just ethanol.

 

Frankly, I seriously doubt that Johnnie (with his 7% pay

 

rise) who gets a brand new car every year, purchased by you, can understand the

 

bloke who drives a bus for a living, struggling to pay the rent and keep his

 

15+ year old jalopy on the road who then all of a sudden has to pay for a major

 

engine overhaul because the seals disintegrated from the alcohol

 

in the fuel.

 

In June issue of EAA Sport Pilot, Phillip Lockwood attempts

 

to answer some of the questions. There are follow up letters in July and

 

September issues. Phillip professes to

 

be neutral on the issue.

 

The bottom line is, until I get sufficient trustworthy

 

information about ethanol, as it relates to me, I will do everything I can to

 

avoid it.

 

BTW I agree with you

 

about the benefits to the farmers at Gunnedah and reducing the reliance on the

 

oil companies, it gives a wonderful warm fuzzy feeling to everyone but that

 

doesn't help the end user with incompatible gear.

 

Mark

 

Smokey