Yenn

And that would be blighty good. I had never heard of rucks, but blighty is old, does anyone know where it comes from? I reckon OME would soon find out.

1 No 2 Very little 3 Not really 4 No 5 Yes and No Really we have turned RAAus into a not for profit, profit making machine. The executive now have to ensure that they can keep the money flowing in as well as keep CASA off their backs. I am happy flying now but as I see it we are on borrowed time. Airservices have just stolen a load of our airspace and np doubt CASA will see us as getting less safe, because their are more of us per cubic airspace than before, so they will want to legislate that there can be only so many planes in any area or some other stupid thing to reduce the risk.

Talk to your member of parliament.

I found that when I built the RV4 that the sender which is the same as KGWilsons could not be accurate at empty. before it reached that stage the float was on the bottom and there was still about an inch of fuel there and also because of the dihedral, there was even more inboard of the float. I calibrated the gauge for in flight level and on ground level, then hardly ever used it. Not having a good fuel gauge forces you to keep tabs on fuel use with the dipstick and you get a quick indication if anything changes.

A friend of mine made his own prop using the grinder and a guide wheel of the same diameter. He used a special Plywood which was mainly longitudinal plys with only a small amount of cross ply. He used to carve one blade of a prop and then copy it to both sides of his blank. His props worked OK I know they were used in a couple of Boorabees.

Not much has changed but an awful lot has happened. There has been a large amount of time and money expended on keeping the situation the same as before. At least one competitor to RAAus has poured a lot of time into becoming compliant ages ago, only to be brushed off by CASA.

I flew the very first Kookaburra at Cobar in the seventies. It taught me a lot about flying. The most impressive way to see the further effects of Rudder and aileron. It was damaged before I could so;o in it and I spent quite a bit of time helping repair it. I have heard it is now in a museum.

Nev. Definitely not directed at you. I value your contributions as intelligent and interesting.

Are you people really trying to make a mockery of this site, or are you so self important that you don't care what is going on?

When all is said and done and we are stuck with class E at 1500' above GL. I will go flying in my non transponder equipped plane with a very small radar reflection. Who will know what height I am and who will even know I am there unless they are looking out for me, Those RPTs coming into the nearby city will be sitting there dumb and happy, never expecting too se a small plane anywhere near their flight path. What if I am a bit high, I am still below 1500' above the ground a kilometer away to the West. The on;y way I could be convicted of being in the wrong place is if the RPT hit me and there was a record of its altitude at the moment of impact. I know they are not going to hit me because they want to keep up in the higher air to reduce he turbulence which upsets passengers. There is absolutely no possibility that any IFR flight wants to fly down at 2000' above GL. It is all a stunt put up by Airservices to see what they can get away with. If they achieved their goal, they would not be able to control the area anyway, without increasing staff and radio frequencies.

Without a demonstrated need for this equipment I do not feel like paying out a fairly big sum of money for the small amount of flying I do. I agree it would be safer if airlines could see us, but it would be much safer if we were not there. Every time we go along with these safety items that cost us money we are giving the powers that be encouragement to screw us more.

Most may be happy but some would not. Why is there any need for change? Don't forget it is only a couple of years or so since CASA brought in the big change of ADSB for all IFR. If change was so necessary it should have been done then.

Aircraft Spruce used to sell it according to my old cattledog, but the size they had was small for most decent sized planes. Look it up on the net.

I see you are starting to give in already, which is as I predicted earlier. The aim of the process was to upset us so much that we breath a huge sigh of relief when they bring Class E down to 3000' There is no chance that there will be subsidised ADSB. That was used originally to get ADSB up and running, then dropped. The savings on radar coverage were supposed to make subsidising ADSB viable, but the powers that be decided they liked the saving more than giving any help to pilots.

All you have to do is fly the aeroplane in the air, until it stops flying and lands. Until you are on the ground, you are in the air, which is most likely moving.

Nor has tailwind. We never seem to realise that we fly in the wind, not in relation to the ground.

The angled strips is an old design, use yellow and black diagonals to stand out well.

I have been told that adding 0.2% of mineral 2 stroke oil to the fuel is a good move for any engine. This has been worked out by people trying all sorts of additives. Supposedly used by Mc Laren in racing engines. It must be mineral oil. The bore wears very little at top and bottom dead centre, due to lower piston speed. From my experience the greates bore wear is about quarter way down the stroke, speeds are higher and loads are higher there.

330 hours on avgas mainly.

I have seen the reslts of detonation and am sure that a good borescope would pick it up. I was looking just because a borescope was available to me and I have never used one before. My friend has a vast knowledge of aero engines and what he saw was inconclusive, it looked like a little blob on top pf the piston. It turned out to be a bit of carbon reflecting. Just to make sure there was not a problem I removed the head and now I will remove the other three so as to be as the Irish say "To be sure to be sure" It is not a very big job with a Jab.

A friend of mine who is an ex LAME came to our strip today to work on an RAAus plane,so I assked him to bring his borescope and let me look at my Jab engine. It was a very basic machine with a head which only just went through the 12mm spark plug hole. One piston looked as if it had molten aluminium on it and both of us couldn't decide if it was a detonation problem or not. Twenty minutes later the head was off and it appeared that what we saw was just reflection from the piston crown. no sign of detonation, the bore looked perfect, valves also but I haven't had a good look at them yet. I have decided to do a top overhaul to all the cylinders, will probably be able to post some photos.

Absolutely no experience with that brand and I assume they are working OK nowadays. Propeller failure scares me more than engine failure. Lose an engine and you know you are flying a glider, but losing part of a prop could really stuff up your day. I am not suggesting that is likely with this brand of prop. Just commenting.

Kiwi at the start of this debate you mentioned maintenance, no mention of engine maintenance. I think you will find that airframe maintenance does not allow extending the hours or date past that authorised by the annual.

I think you will find that there is no tolerance. In GA operations you can exceed the hours, but you have to get approval from someone acceptable to CASA and that will cost you several hundred dollars.

Tony Hayes the self proclaimed expert said that you couldn't three point a Thruster safely, plus a lot of other things. He flew my Thruster and declared the engine had been overspeeded and was unsafe. He was fooled by an optical illusion looking into the cylinders and other things as well.