Yenn

pour it in square or nearly square sections, with plain steel bars running from the poured slab into the next section. that stops any uneven subsidence. 6m square is quite large enough for a pour. One of the good things is that you use the already poured slab as formwork for the adjacent slabs. I am about twenty years out of date with estimating for this kind of job, but as someone said hotmix is a good alternative to concrete. It won't crack as concrete can if not treated correctly and also is reasonably easy to repair. Good road base can also provide a good floor, especially if you overlay it with old carpet as I have done in my hangar.

All concrete can bend and reinforced concrete is load carrying. It does not need to be pre stressed or post tensioned. those processes only increase the load carrying ability. As far as bending goes I have watched an 80' chimney in very high wind bend and twist. The way the reinforcing is placed controls the way concrete will bend.

Reinforcing is the key. I have seen a slab about 200mm thick, reinforced with 12mm steel at 200mm cts and it took loads from the crucible carriers at a metal smelting factory. About ten ton loads plus the vehicle weight. It cracked, but after several years of use. We replaced it with a slab with much more reo. Too long ago for me to remember exactly what was used. I reckon for what you are looking at, that a 150mm slab with 6mm mesh at 200cts, known as F63 would probably do. Laid on a waterproof plastic membrane over at least 100mm compacted sand. The mesh to be at least 25mm off the bottom. A civil engineer should be able to tell you exactly what you need very quickly, but I have been out of the job for too long.

I don't think CASA wold prosecute. It is reallynothing to do with them unless you engage in dangerous flying. Airservices control what goes on the charts regarding prior permission. The prosecution would come from the landowner and the fact that he has an airstrip shows that he has some interest in flying For him to prosecute would be costly and no doubt the landowner would end up out of pocket, so I reckon it would only happen if he was badly upset by your landing. My experience is that if you do drop in you will be helped if you need it and otherwise treated cordially.

Surprisingly I have mine. Australia Post has improved amazingly. I did a quick scan and read "In The Hangar". I am left wondering if the author knows what he is doing and also if it was proof read. I can only assume that the author doesn't realize the difference between EGT and CHT, but even in he was muddled the numbers quoted look wrong. Did he even have a CHT gauge? I reckon that if a magazine such as this is going to publish something it should at least demonstrate that the author knows more than just the barest basics. I don't know what RAAus teaches about EGT and CHT, but would expect that pilots should have at least a bare knowledge of what happens. Maybe it is just good that someone wrote something for inclusion and the editor grabbed it to fill up space.

This has been a requirement from day 1 with the ASIC card. Maybe it has been changed slightly, but it has always been stupid. Over the years our politicians have done nothing to bring any sense to the situation even when asked by electors. Stick safety into anything nowadays and those in control have open slather to attack the rest of the population to nobodys benefit. How stupid is it that an ASIC card holder has to tell the authorities when he has broken the law?

Surely this is not the place for this subject. It has nothing to do with our flying. How could the RAF or anyone else attack the Gestapo. They were the more or less brutal police and part of the German army. It is rather like expecting an attack on the catering corps.

We could always take a leaf out of the yanks book and use a combination of letters and numbers. How about VH-2FAT?

I didn't watch the video, my download speed is too slow. EGT is a measure of the heat in the exhaust pipe at the location of the sensor. That dimension can vary from cylinder to cylinder in any engine and even more so between engines. What it tells you is what is happening in combustion. In an engine with a big diameter cylinder, the plugs are usually several inches apart and if one of them is not working it will make the combustion process slower, which results in hotter gases going out the exhaust valve, hence higher RGT. That information can tell which cylinder is misfiring in a normal aero engine. Maybe not in a small rotax cylinder. If the mixture is too lean it burns slowly, again resulting in a higher EGT. If the mixture is too rich it will also result in a higher EGT, because combustion is still in process when the exhaust valve opens. Have a look at what EGTs can tell you and you will see that in a Rotax with a Bing carby it is a nice extra, but nowhere near a necessary instrument and definitely not an instrument to compare engines.

What report was that. I haven't seen one and was just responding to the question.

I suppose the answer is Yes, but you should be using your feet to control the rudder, not letting it and the nosewheel do whatever they like. Are you flying the plane or just going along for the ride?

I don't think spinning would result in stresses great enough to cause a breakup of an RV7. The most likely cause id spiral dive, which results in high speed and high loads when you use the wrong technique to recover. The likelihood of getting into a spin in IFR is way less than getting into a spiral dive.

Not the best way to have to give up a great pastime. Back to sailing should keep you occupied and that is what is most needed. I reckon when you stop "doing" you start dieing. Keep a positive outlook and don't forget alzheimers does not mean the end.

The Rotec injection system is not really an injection system. It is just letting the fuel out into the airflow, via a pipe with holes in it so that the lowered pressure around the pipe draws the fuel out. If you look back many years on this forum, one member did describe how he built a proper injection system, but he was a design engineer for one of the big motor companies. Mitsubishi, if my memory serves me right. The Sonex manufacturers also sell a similar TBI to Rotec and I know that works very well.

If you have a homebuilt aircraft, as I have, you need to have kept meticulous records for the full life of the aircraft. If not you will have trouble proving it is what you are representing it to be. So if you are offered an aircraft with poor records be very careful. It may be an egg, but is probably well on the way to being an omelette.

Just to add to above the fittings could be a weak point. 2 or 3 bolts in alignment at each end would seriously reduce the area taking the load.

Wing struts could also have a compression load in turbulence as well as static, so bear in mind column length, thickness ratio. Would you encase it in fibreglass?

I have not suffered air sickness, but I used to get seasick on a sailing boat. This only happened when I was on someone elses boat. I had years of skippering my own boat with no seasickness, but on other peoples the first couple of days would be nasty. Itb is in my opinion a mental attitude. Having to make decisions stops it from getting serious.

I have cutaway wheel pants on the Corby. Don't know what speed saving is as I put them on from day one.

Not sure where your destination is but there is the strip at Brown Bros at Millawa. also Beechworth, but that is short and rough. There is or was another strip just East of Millawa owned by a vintner whose name escapes me, he used to fly a Piper and a tiger Moth from it.

Yes Facthunter I did get it Rsabout.

How about putting the ends in the freezer for a little more clearance?

They didn't mention that it is always better to turn towards any crosswind component. That will tighten up the turn, but you will need to start aligning with the runway earlier.

I wonder if the Bonanza would have done better with a much steeper turn. What I saw looked very shallow. I used to reckon I needed more than 500' with my RV4, but I was using a much shorter runway and my climb speed was always higher than max climb speed.

I think the idea that having an IFR rating to get you out of trouble if the weather goes sour is not a good idea. To be able to handle a plane in cloud and turbulence when you took off expecting VFR is going to take some hard work and you need to be current, not just using it as a backup.