Geoff13

Well there you go. I didn't even think of just treating it like a photo. Thank you.

OK if this works this is how to make a manometer. Manometer how to build EAA Sport Aviation in August 2006 (3).doc Manometer how to build EAA Sport Aviation in August 2006 (3).doc Manometer how to build EAA Sport Aviation in August 2006 (3).doc

Camel Email sent

Camel PM me with your email address and I can email you the instructions on how to build one. I have it in a .doc file and am not sure how to post it here.

As I say I have no idea about the flying scene up that way so I have no idea if it could be commercial or personal, but what I am seeing on here seems off to me. That is what I am saying.

What do I suggest? Simple put a formal complaint through the correct channels. "bt50flyer" stated that he is led to believe that it has been reported to RAAus and the CFI has been approach which sounds to me as if he is not sure. So be sure report it, follow it through and if you get no satisfaction go to the next level in the chain. (If the evidence is there then there should be and almost immediate response). Hinting and innuendo will do nothing to fix the problem. My comment is as valid as either of the complainants here my feeling is that if there were a legitimate complaint submitted correctly then it could not possibly be ignored if the evidence as shown here holds up. I am not trying to defend anyone other than a fair go.The fact that I have not been further North than Bundaberg since starting my flying means I have no axe in this particular fire other than my own sense of right and wrong and at the moment my BS alarm is going of in a big way.

Then it should go through the correct channels. RAA and if no satisfaction, then CASA. A public forum is not the right place and this is not the right way to do it. I have seen businesses and people destroyed by people slandering them on social media.

What intrigues me about this whole thread is the OP has made 2 posts. Then 2 different people who joined only after the OP come on and bag the school involved. Smells like a witch hunt to me.

I actually agree with that comment but your photos do no prove it is in use. My point was that the photos alone do not justify the comments on this thread. If that aircraft is registered and flying then I would agree with many of the posts but a few photos with no explanation proves nothing., hence my comment about the packer press, they are very good at using sensationalised reporting using photos with little evidence.

I would like to see your LAME friends evidence, and a few photo's of a poorly maintained plane does not do that without much more information. Rubbish. If you were capable of building a plane safely and to a suitable standard you would be capable of maintaining it. More rubbish. Pics like this without context show nothing. And again rubbish. Why would the owner be an L2 just because it is a 24 Rego. You do not need to be an L2 to buy, fly or maintain a 24 rego aircraft. It only needs to be maintained by an L2 if it is going to be used for hire. This thread and many of the posts appear to me to be an excuse to bag RAA without proof or reason. I have no problem bagging someone or an organisation if there is evidence to show but I don't see any here. There is not even any evidence to show that the photos in the OP are even the same aircraft as shown in Post #6. But then lets not let facts get in the way of a good story. Seems that some posters on this thread could be touting for a job with Packer Press

And to add to that Aerprakt have redesigned the nosewheel and they now come with a heavier duty nosewheel same as the Foxbat. As is the replacement one on the one that I am aware of that damaged the nosewheel/leg/firewall. The new nosewheel/Leg assembly does to the best of my knowledge not fit the wheel spat and costs a reasonable amount of top end speed. Bet they don't put that in the glossy brouchure. :)

Much easier to get forgiven than to get approval.

I have just completed my first BFR. What I did gain from that was the need for continual learning and assessment. It is very easy to pick up some bad habits. I intend to do a lot more Dual time in future to not only continue learning but hopefully pick up and bad habits that creep into my flying. The bonus is there are still several endorsements out there for me to get so I advance my skills as well as improving on my current ones.

It appears as though RAA may have realised that they pissed some people of by taking away our classifieds from the website. It has been reinstated. Maybe they will give us back our free magazine as well. LOL

You should buy one of these. In fact this one even LOL. http://recreationalflying.com/classifieds/x-air-hanuman-for-sale.271/

So my questions would be along the lines if he put a new UL Engine into his new plane, was it a home built? If so how old was the engine time wise? As we all know these builds often take longer than we think. Was the engine installed in accordance with manufacturers instructions? If it was up to 100 hours then for the average RAA pilot that is 2 years with a minimum of 2 annual inspections. so how long does the manufacturer need to provide warranty? So my point is we need far more info before determining if the manufacturer should respond?

You raise far more questions than answers.

Thank you all for your replies. In summary it sounds like it could be quite an interesting airplane. Now if I could just convince her indoors that maybe I should have something slippery and fast, as well as a Drifter, then I might be in business. LOL

That should be compulsory listening for all Student pilots. That is about as good an emergency response from all concerned as I have heard. It takes me back to my emergency and the professionalism shown by those on the ground in my case. Nothing will make a student or low hour pilot feel better than listening to calm professional responses by everyone else on the network. That goes for everyone on that clip. Well done to all concerned. As I said That should be compulsory for all student pilots whether they fly into controlled airspace or not. I just sat through it twice and to be honest it makes me feel good to know that there is such professionalism out there.

That is why I was asking here. That one was VH rego but has just been put on RAA rego (provisional).

Hi all. As the thread title says, has anyone flown a Dragonfly mkll or have any experience with them please.

Why? Because with different instructor you will get different ideas. Yes you need to sort the wheat from the chaff but that is where you need to develop a good relationship with the CFI even if you do not fly with him/her do not be afraid to ask questions. At the end of the day the CFI is the person in charge of your training. As for which standard to follow, that is easy. The highest standard. Even as a fairly low hour student you should quickly be able to determine which instructors set the higher standard and aim for that higher standard no matter who you fly with. If you do that, you will not have to change standard depending upon who you are flying with. If you aim for the highest standard then even instructor who will accept a lower standard will be happy with your efforts as will those who look for that little bit extra.

I believe that could be a good thing.

Actually guys and girls, don't get me wrong. The Foxbat is a brilliant little machine. But it is just that, a machine which means it was put together by humans and as such can have faults. The problem here is not that the machine is not perfect it is simply a matter of the factory and/or their distributors not admiting that there could be a problem and not even investigating properly to see if there is or how it could be fixed. How anyone could make the conclusions posted in this thread or the thread that started this discussion without sighting either of the aircraft in question or any of the faulty components actually beggars belief and makes a mockery of the pretence of learning from others problems. In both instances IMHO there is evidence that refutes the conclusions drawn.