rrogerramjet

So I wonder if there is a formal instructors course for CFI's ? Should all instructors be required to do a Cert IV in Training, at the very least? Beyond being a good pilot with the right hours in the logbook what else certifies a CFI as someone who can effectively instruct?

I have a breadth of experience with various 'instructors' and most of them have been adequate because I'm still hee today. I found this tonight and putting aside the specific of the lesson I think if I had a CFI with this much skill I'd be both a better pilot and massively reduce my hours to test / endorsement. The communication the setup and the guidance is a skill itself. I touched on this in another thread but didn't get the message through. There's people who make a $ trying to teach people to fly and then theres real instructors....

Hi No I haven't read all your replies and it is comments about boats and canopies on 4wd's (yes Im guilty too) that don't provide any useful information for any of us to make a reliably informed decision about aircraft, and was clearly excluded in the set of requirements to drive this thread. To that point, noone has yet (or have I missed it?) clearly stated they have a glass plane they leave out in all weathers and 20 yrs later it is good to fly.. Maybe those owners are too busy running station ops to be mucking about on this forum..? There is a J170 I see parked outside at YMER with the ubiquitous 2ft grass underneath and to my surprise it was gone the other day, I presume for a fly, so I must go speak to them. (and have a look at their plane) Totally agree - and not just book figures, from real flying demos. cheers Ramjet

Now flying heavy GA with noticeable difference in response and weight to throw it around and the noticeable authority all the way to the ground I (think I) know what you mean about light controls. I have also come to like the 'steering wheel' in front of me and now wonder how I ever learnt to fly with that faux PC joystick in the middle ! Ramjet

Who can say no to the opportunity of reply to someone who opens up with 'no offence intended'.... So, with all due respect.... Performance claims are a general measuring stick, are you going to tell Rv9 owners their 140+ knots are simply a result of poorly calibrated instruments? That numerous Morgan owners are just liars? I don't have an entrenched view on composites, only my own experience, as I freely admitted. Nor do I think they've been making 'dodgy' Hilux canopies in Indo since the early 90's. Indeed the makers badge on the side is in the shape of Australia. Lets talk about those 'entrenched views' sometime, shall we. For those far too obtuse to see my challenge, it was to draw, real, evidenced comments which attest to the durability of composite craft, rather than biased and unvalidated vox-pop along the lines of "I have one therefore I am smarter than most and all the other materials are a bit crap".... To suggest that metal fabricated craft are from a bygone era is encouragingly forward looking and I applaud your grasp of the future of aircraft. When Boeing launch a full fibreglass passenger jet, I'm right behind them. So other than bag the aircraft options, challenge decades of solid fabrication, and throw 'vague' challenges to my reasoning by claiming them as illogical in return, what is it exactly you bring to advance this conversation in a meaningful way? Best Regards, Ramjet

I am partial, partly because a friend has a Cheetah and absolutely raves about its performance. Bit concerned/confused about specs that have a cruise 130kts but Va90. You're an awful long way North for me to have a look. I might have to take a trip to Camden. So I've got steel options: Vans Rv9 Carbon Cub (pretty sure can't afford one) Morgan Cougar/Sierra Nice, but I probably can't afford one of them either. :-( Tecnam always an option, they seem to be pricey even as 2nd hand. And most models not so fast, close to 120kt is good enough though. And someone mentioned the Evektor Harmony/Sportstar. I've not ever seen one 2nd hand in Oz. Zenith 750Cruzer just fits the bill, have to check on the woofing luggage capability. So, if $$ were absolutely no issue, I'd probably be up the road next weekend looking at someone's brand new Cub EX in Jindabyne. Definitely going to have a chat to Jaytol and see if a Cougar fits. Might even buy one fresh off the blocks if the final price can be made to fit. (Probably, sans motor, wings and panel! LOL!) Thanks for all the views on fibreglass, I'll agree things have moved on technically since we used to layup our own canoes. Still, I've seen some seriously failed glass that's barely 15-20yrs old, one of them being my Hilux canopy and others in the marine realm. Again I'm basing my views my personal experience, - that I have seen with my own eyes. Still need to finish those sums on TCO, I might depressingly find that a 60k 1975 C172 is my best option averaging 150-200hrs/annum. How do I undo that logical boredom to the miss when I'm showing sexy pictures of a beautiful, go anywhere Cub ! So much still to consider, could take me a few more months yet. Which I find amusing when people spend 1mill on a house after a 30min walk through and, if lucky, a building and pest inspection. Crazy I say, as they say the same thing straight back about us in our planes! Fly safe, Cheers Ramjet

I think I meant the solid lifters.. Friday night beers and forum posts dont mix..

Thats encouraging to know. Im not a machine shop kind of guy, but if anyone can do it then I might have half a chance too! If Im blowing a new canopy, I think I might have bigger issues :-) cheers Ramjet

'hangared' - what about outside.? Not fake news, gelcoat has a finite lifespan and is very prone to UV breakdown, which you implicitly admit in your post. cheers R

Thanks @Litespeed Fair points. Im avtually very interested in the 'Ferris wheel fighter' though ongoing spares in 10 or more years might be an issue. 8542? is for sale now. Looks nice. Yes the J motor argument is completely thrown out the window, but I hear good longevity and reliability stories about the 3300 with the hydraulic lifters. As others have pointed out, in longitudinal statistical measures (for these motors especially) it is not an issue. cheers R

Hi @kasper I did that, and the materials. Now we broaden the search and throw in other options. Otherwise from the get go it would have been an open slather free for all. (and J's would have been the default option, we know enough about them) cheers R

So today I found the Arion Lightning. Theres two for sale in Aus currently. Its a composite so doesn't meet the 'all tin' criteria, it also runs a J3300 as standard (which I hear are OK) . What do you think @billwoodmason ? cheers R

Fair enough thanks @OZJohn , with a coat of UV protective paint maybe my estimates are a little aggressive. I still would like to hear from someone who can say "I leave my plane out in frost, rain and 40 degree summers and it is still absolutely fine 15yrs later" cheers Ramjet

Hi @billwoodmason I wouldn't say 'a fair crack' at all, indeed I've been rather circumspect but when prompted I responded quite clearly and succinctly about MY experience. I learnt to fly in the J's and have experience with all 3 models and 2 engines, bar the 2200 and 3300 series, I like them as aircraft, they have some great features. My opinion and experience aside, the statistics paint a much fairer picture, I have oft considered the factors behind my own personal experiences and why that may be. To be as circumspect as possible, I think that contributory factors are poor engine management (eg shock cooling) and perhaps periodic maintenance is a direct factor, but again just my opinion. I just don't know. There's been plenty written about that whole debate, engineering questions and indeed a bunch of AD's by J to resolve some of those concerns. We don't want to revisit the ins and outs of that debate here. I want to focus this thread on aircraft choices which meet a specific set of criteria and to date we've had some good options thrown up. Yes, J meet many. (changed DA to AD - I've got house extensions and approvals on my brain) Thanks Ramjet

Thanks I hadnt seen these before. I couldnt find a model listing for the 330. The specs say plywood wing surfaces? That's kinda 'old school' but perfectly serviceable. They appear to have some weight limitations. Are there any in Australia currently? cheers Ramjet

Sounds like a nice plane, however the tin spec comes from mine, and I assume everyones, lifelong experiences with glass is that it weathers, crumbles and eventually comes apart. A tin plane with appropriate maintenance and repainting will, in theory, last forever. The Australian climate will crumble a glass plane to flaky pieces in about 10-15 yrs, if my experience is accurate. Just my estimations of course and I'd be most interested to hear from glass plane owners who can honestly say they've left their plane out in Aus weather and have no issues many years later. cheers R

Ok, we're quickly flat spinning off topic..... Weight limit based on optional registration path, not to ignore RA MTOW. Specs weren't written with Vans in mind at all, just criteria I know can be met by various craft, but it seems I've described the Vans option so clearly that I may have inadvertently already answered my own question? As you have pointed out already @kasper ! I think the mini Mustang I might find a wee bit squeezy. @facthunter I do like the Cub option. Considerations on high wing, fences and long grass duly noted. Good call. And lookin. ..One just up the road, might have to get a tailwheel endo! Jindabyne Aero Club Carbon Cub EX for sale (one of the jpegs shows a Grumman in the background, also for sale) I think it was mentioned earlier, Morgan Sierra meets criteria. Zenith, and I'm sure there's others. I must say, I am leaning to RV9 having checked out the other options (that I'm currently aware of). The missus said I should do all the sums on hourly running costs before I spend big $ on a sweeter, faster, more economical, sexy plane. An old C172 meets the specs (RA reg excepted) and 40k saved is a LOT of fuel, that just might negate the 38lt/hr guzzle. About 18000 litres of fuel in fact.... Cheers Ramjet

I have had one J model inflight failure, luckily I was entering circuit for landing, one overheating incident in a brand new replacement on climb out which I put back on the deck quick smart and wouldn't touch again, someone else managed to fly that thing for another 300hrs or so before it went bang again, and then I turned up to the field to hire yet another one a bit later only the front end of that one was back at the shop because it too had failed. So I have personally witnessed 3 engine failures, in 3 different planes all in my (at the time) 50hrs of flying time. (More for the aircraft obviously) That's why.

I love how folks just 'presume' things and jump to biased conclusions. I have the < sign wrong in only one question, who would want MORE fuel consumption !?? (Well spotted) If you read my response to another post, yes I also mean RA, not just LSA. And nowhere did I say it must be a Vans (unless you misinterpret my later 'rv' response as suggesting that's what I intended, when I meant ra. How easy it is to be lead astray by the presumptions and leads of OP replying! If so, my bad. I simply initially proposed the Vans as one easy option which fulfilled the criteria and get it out of the way to clear the decks for other options. But your good self, and others here, have somehow read my question almost as you describe it above, though I would edit it to read more accurately " Vans is an obvious fit to the criteria, what other craft might also meet it, or come reasonably close?" And from there open up a hopefully reasonable discussion on why other aircraft should be considered, for other factors. Cheers Ramjet

Nice, but fails Q3, even with prior notification! Upholstery wasn't a criteria, but it is blingy. My 2 dogs I have to transit may well pee on it regardless of quality.

I will drop the 'old, bold pilot' saying right on top of this clip. I swear I saw a 95degree bankover in there....

I have a workmate who swears by same, he might be looking at selling but I'd want to take the 'J' brand motor out....

@kgwilson you are absolutely correct, my bad.

Yes, but what model? That was the question.

Hi, Leaving capex limitations out of the equation, for now, if these requirements were given which LSA registerable aircraft would you choose? Can be 24 or 19, with VH option a realistic outcome. 1. Tin skin a must have, some use of other materials ok, but definitely no fabrics or mainly/all fibreglass constructions. (perhaps unfairly sidelining Jab 230/430 here, but there's enough info around on them) 2. MTOW >600kg. (possible RA weight increase in the pipeline or VH reg) 3. 75% cruise speed near 120kts, or any number above. (Note: 105kts is not 'near' 120) 3a. Fuel use must be >30L/hr, prefer low 20's 4. Option for VH reg and potential for IFR rating. 5. No RG or turbo to meet above cruise speeds. For my thoughts I'm tossing in RV9, that meets all the above requirements. Others come to mind? Thanks Ramjet