jeffd

hey donc7 i hav only just started as well. im 48 but was 47 when i started but am still loving it and i reckon thats the secret u hav got to do it cause u want to. i fly fortnightly but i reckon 1 a week would b better , however money does rule at the moment.no flying advice from me as im still just starting out, except stick at it and enjoy it and yeah u will never stop learning but its all fun

 

 

well done beefy good to hear

 

 

thanks for that info Andrew

 

 

have seen a few sales come up for jab taildraggers and am wondering if any1 has had anything to do with them,or if any owners could put their thoughts and comments on the forum.i am learning nosewheel but will eventually go for the tail wheel endorsement as it will open up other aircraft types.

 

 

BruceI do like the 230's. I think I will upgrade to one of them one day. For now the SP6 is doing what I need it to do.

I hope you and the owner get the plane back in the air soon?

 

Safe flying

 

Andrew

hey jabsp6 is that a taildragger the sp6 just curious as how they go for something different may hav to post this in the general jab area though

 

 

i t

 

I'm happy to just quote your post Aldo; I'm not quite sure what an HSE person is.

i think he is upset with u turbo

 

 

If you have good liarability you might get a job with a decent political party:stirrer:

is there a "decent political party" just askin

 

 

That's fine, just shows dazza isn't a proper noun, just an Aussie bloke

a proper noun sorry i first read it as a proper "nun" i must slow down my reading

 

 

to be able to be involved in the search for that aircraft would be something special.as a student pilot knowing that if the worst should 1 day happen and that like minded people would continue to look for you regardless of the outcome so as to give closure to family and friends i think is something that makes aviators keep doing what they do.most of us fly for the pleasure of it but lots fly because its a job whether air ambulance or commercial or whatever and its good to think that people wont give up on finding u.

 

 

the airframes do seem to b popular and homegrown as well .there seems to b alot of people who like the 160 as a good compromise between them all

 

 

that is true about the collision side of things for sure.i havent heard of any jab 160s falling apart but am interested in looking up bad incidents of the brs ,knowledge is good to have,and of course engine out on any aircraft doesnt mean an immediate pull the cord response.

 

 

For aircraft certificated under BCAR S, it's only 9.0 forwards, 4.5 upwards, 4.5 downwards and 3.0 sideways. As you will appreciate, that's not a real lot; I suspect (but state that I have nothing more than a suspicion here rather than fact to support the contention) that the nature of the Jab. primary structure provides a fair amount of 'boing' flexibility that reduces the ultimate occupant shock load at impact on the harness points. As we all know, it's not just actual loads but the rate of rise of the application of the load that is important and your chances of injury are magnified if you are being tossed around unrestrained...

have u heard any other news regarding brs systems for the jabs oscar.a fellow i speak to from sth australia on facebook has a 160 is upgrading or changing over from another type,and has had no problems with his motors and is very happy with the aircraft.my interest in the brs is purely from structural failure ,collision etc side of things

 

 

Anyone ever seen or heard of a BRS parachute installed in a jabiru?I'm thinking I might like to get one if such a thing is possible.

My jab is experimental class so I can do it if I want. Just depends if its possible.

hey jaba i spoke with bryan from brs hear in australia via email not long ago with that question .he told me he had spoken to jabiru and at this point in time they werent prepared or able to devote what was needed to install a brs .however things may have changed so send him an email directly and c what the latest is.

 

 

The Lightwings underwent a bit of design evolution before they got to the GR912 / GR912T (and perhaps even slightly in the earliest of those).Because of Howie's determination to get crashworthiness into the structure, and Bill Whitney's (legendary) approach to structures, the Lightwing family have significant reserves of strength. This does not mean that just any Lightwing should be taken to 600kg! - the reserves generally aren't that big. They were forced into the - rather unjustified - weight and stall speed limitations of CAO 95:25, then CAO 101:55, which is where the 1000lb (450kg) / 1,200lb (544kg) and 40kts come from.

Lightwing have the build records, and would therefore be able - if they wanted - to determine the MTOW to which each airframe could be justified, outside of CAO 101:55.

 

I suspect that the knowledge gained with the Speed, is being applied to achieving an improved LSA GR-912 evolution; but Lightwings are NOT all identical, and only the factory can determine which pre-existing aircraft could safely be lifted to 600kg TOW - if any. The "new" one should be a fairly useful aeroplane.

ive been in aircraft with both those designations however i didnt find no beer ?

 

 

Hi Mark,Would appreciate the info when you get it, thanks.

Looks as though you have had some nice wx of late so I hope you have had a few more flights and starting to get the hours up, and no more teething problems.

 

We spoke about the 72" prop and by the time I got in touch Tom the 68" prop was under way and we now have it here. Anyway we have plenty of strip here and we will be using the std tires supplied with the kit initially. We are only allowed to use the seal over here even though there is plenty of grass.

get 100 mile an hour tape and go around and around and around an a ar to hell with that go and hav a beer instead

 

 

Why back to 400kg? All others appear to be 450 (aero power) or 480 (912).This whole thing is confusing. Still can't see the difference between 25 and 55 registered.

Cheers

hey there ave8rr i train at coominya with john walmsley he did tell me the difference between the 2 abbreviation i cant remember at the moment,however call john and he will let you know he loves his lightwings as well just look up coominya flight training and give him a call.very approachable

 

 

nope u got it all wrong the soldiers shoot each other the pilot slips the pistol from the officers holster WHILE twisting his arm up behind his back then using him as a shield withdraws back into the aircraft .then after making a lightning excape from the aerodrome in his aircraft lands said aircraft safely at another location dropping off the officer safe and sound.After returning the officers pistol ,unloaded of course, to the officer so as he does not lose face our intrepid pilot once again takes to the skies with the sound of the james bond theme song blaring from speakers in the plane ?????????????????????

 

 

so has any body have any opinions on the foxcon terrier 100 or 200 .and can the owners of these aircraft post what they like/dislike about this aircraft

 

 

Yes, a bit heavier than a Rotax at 92Kg including starter, belt reduction, engine mounts, 50 amp alternator and 4 litres of oil in the sump. Payoff - about 25% of the initial cost of a 912S, cheap service costs, much simpler engine bay plumbing. Possible negative - one only electronic ignition system with platinum plugs, but when did you last have a failure of your car's electronic ignition system? It comes down to personal preferences and standards - I'm happy with mine after 8 years (and 608 hours as of yesterday) behind my EA81.

hey john ,i have been reading about the subaru motors as i actually have had a subaru car b4 and worked on others .my question is ,is it just a matter of buying a subaru motor and then doing the mods yourself where you can or is it more involved than that.as i have read there seems to be different vehicles for ignitions etc to source bits of pieces from which would reduce the overall costs i would imagine.i read with interest the motors were actually designed for a/c from the start .let me know as i havent decided on anything my friend david(magishme) and i am very keen on looking at the r80 and initialy we were considering the ul motor as another friend of ours is putting 1 in his bushcaddy r80.thanks for the info so far .jeff

 

 

As it just happens, I again intend flying my R80 to Natfly, arriving Thursday PM. Be aware, though, that mine is not standard issue as it is powered by a Subaru EA81. Otherwise you could visit me in Midnorth South Oz for a squiz.

hery there bloke are after as much info as we can find on the r80 myself and a mate of mine david ,magishme,on here wanting to look at that type of aircraft we r in south east queensland brisbane area and know a fellow flyer who is building 1.so if u have any picts you can put on here of facebook if you do fb would be good to see them ,ok hope to talk to you later

 

 

Jeff, we my have to venture down to Natfly.

i kno mate cant afford it though unless we pinch johns big plane lol.will hav to ask around and get over to jerrys

 

 

wondering if there r any bushcaddy r80 owners out there a mate and i r trying to check some out.

 

 

had to just tick the like symbol as there is no symbol for; want 1

 

 

hmmmm sounds

 

Let's just set the record straight on that point. I've owned two Austers, and learned more than I really want to know about them as a result of that plus operating them as glider tugs. I also own an STC for putting Lycoming 0-360 engines into J5G Autocars, and I've written lots of EOs for them as a CAR 35 engineer. Yes, one can keep them going almost indefinitely, by the "George Washington's axe" approach. They are not all that economical to operate in the long term. However their weaknesses are largely a known quantity:To be specific:

Airframe:

 

1. There is a weakness in the leading edge ribs, which are made from something like oversize umbrella frame material, on the upper surface, just ahead of the main spar. There have been several fatal accidents to glider tugs in the U.K. and one quite remarkable escape in Australia, due to this. The rib fails by upward buckling of its upper truss, under the very high suction load at that point, if the aircraft is exposed to a strong upward gust when flying at speeds above about 100 knots, and the failure propagates instantly to all the ribs in the wing. The cure is to replace all the wing leading edge ribs with pressed sheet metal ribs made from 0.050 inch material. This was done to the port wing of VH-WED, if my memory serves me correctly, after the owner managed to get it back on the ground with the entire leading edge of the wing buckled upwards. MORAL: Do NOT fly an Auster at more than about 95 knots, regardless of what its Vne may be - it is not designed for those speeds.

 

2. The ailerons have to be rigged about 3/4 inch down at their trailing edges, to prevent overbalance causing aileron "snatch" (abrupt hard-over) at the upper end of the speed range; this is caused by stretch in the aileron balance cable circuit, mainly due to extremely poor design of the aileron pulley brackets.

 

3. The flaps are barn doors, certainly - but if you are so foolish as to exceed the maximum flaps-extended speed, they will peel the rear spar out of the wing. The fix for this is to install steel-tube "A" frames, one at each flap bracket, running between the rear spar and the main spar, picking up on the flap bracket bolts, so the twisting load is not applied to the wooden spar.

 

4. Some aircraft have cast magnesium flap brackets, which are prone to rot away.

 

5. The control system pulleys are all too small in diameter for the cables, and they lack ball-bearings. They can be replaced with more modern pulleys, but the diameter problem remains. This shortens the life of the cables, and also causes considerable control circuit friction.

 

6. The main undercarriage pivot bolts bend in service and in doing so, crack the welded brackets on the longerons, because the design of the pivot lacked a spacer tube.

 

7. The main wheels are sized to use tyres made for Hurricane tail wheels, which are now unobtainable. The main wheel brakes are designed to fade completely after taxiing about 100 yards if there is any cross-wind, and the fairlead tubes from the heel pedals to the top of the undercarriage legs acquire a wear groove in them that completely locks up when the brake cables are replaced with new cables, so the brakes become completely useless. The cure is to modify the axles to accept Cleveland 600 x 6 wheels & tyres, and fit hydraulic toe brakes; there are several approved schemes for this.

 

8. The original tail wheel needs to be replaced with a properly-designed fully-castering one with a shimmy damper - a Scott 3200 is best. The tailwheel spring front bolt breaks regularly, in glider-towing it needs to be replaced at every 100 hourly inspection.

 

9. The early-type teilplane stubs had reinforcing tubes silver-soldered into them. The silver solder causes the stubs to crack, in the fullness of time, due to copper diffusion into tjhe grain boundaries of the steel. There is an AD on this; it really needs to be fixed by replacent the tailplane stubs completely.

 

10. The original fuel tanks are soft-soldered Terne plate, and they have an unfixable chronic leakage problem. The only cure is to replace them with made-to-fit welded aluminium tanks.

 

The pitot-static system has enormous errors, especially at low speed. It causes the ASI to under-read by 13 knots at the stall. This is the reason why many people find them difficult to land because they float. The do NOT actually land at 26 knots; when the ASI shows that, the real speed is 39 knots.

 

Engine:

 

1. The original magnetos are dreadful in too many ways to cover here; the worst is that the mechanical advance-retard linkage coupled to the throttle, wears the outside of the contact-breaker cam ring, and it only takes about 0.004 inches of wear here to prevent the points from opening at all. Lesser amounts of wear affect the ignition timing. The cure is to replace them with Slicks.

 

2. The engine anti-vibration rubber mounts - don't.

 

3. You need to wear ANR headsets, if you want to keep your hearing. They were invented too late, for me.

 

Apart from all that, they are quite fun to fly; but do respect their speed limits.

hmmm sounds like a nostalgic plane but mayb i should just settle for something mor modern

 

 

Ducked down to the airfield at lunchtime to go for a quick fly - a guy I have seen round came over to talk - turns out he flew Austers a bit in the early 60s. Took him along and he had a big grin the whole time. Thats what Austers are all about !

what do they sell for if u can find 1 ,hard to fly ? maintenance intensive i suppose