Birdseye

Yes there are Savannahs over here. There are a half a dozen for sale at the moment, all with the Rotax 912.

I don't believe they are excluded, just that they are not required to do it (as yet).

To add to the comment from the VK5 above and some other comments on aerials and groundplanes. VSWR is a good indication that the circuit i.e. the feeder and aerial are tuned to the frequency in use. However it gives no indication of efficiency. Many shortened aerials give a very good VSWR, but so does a 50 ohm dummy load! In most cases an aluminium aircraft with a well bonded structure will provide an excellent groundplane, as will a fibreglass one if sufficient conducting tape or foil is applied as a ground plane. The short rubber counterpoise some use is more to achieve a match (VSWR) than to provide effective radiation. There is no need to run any wires back from foil groundplanes to anywhere, just ensure that the braid of the coax is well connected to it. From what I've seen there are few standards when it comes to radio connections, in fact non-standard seems to be the standard! Pleased to hear that somebody got a good response from Xcom.

Been using the mini for a while and with a kneeboard it's a very effective tool, both for ground planning and in the air. First tried it on some RPT flights to familiarise myself with the functions and found picking out map detail from FL380 with Ozmaps a doddle. Just beware that (and probably teaching many to suck eggs here) that 'airplane' mode disables the GPS and you have to select 'cell data off' instead if you want to at least follow the spirit of the law and use the GPS on RPT. I believe that its not just GPS, but uses GNSS as well. However, I haven't pinned that down absolutely. Sitting inside the aluminium tubes I never saw worse than 10M accuracy claimed.

Having done the L1 exam I am now totally confused. I get an email confirming that I have passed, but with an attachment that tells me I have not???? In addition, half of the questions I got wrong were not the questions I actually answered. If I interpret the intent of the exercise correctly, the aim is to educate people on where to look things up. It does do that quite well.

Sorry, I intended to say that I'd prefer dual sticks, but that's not a current option.

@Phil - I certainly couldn't fault Gordon or the operation, nothing but praise. @Nev - I like to say that I am comfortably built :-) Flying dual we are close to MTOW, so I believe that its a combination of light airframe and very powerful controls that made things hard to start with. I am progressing though! Discounting a few hours on Chippies years ago, the lightest powered aircraft I flew was the Cherokee and that has to be one of the nicest and viceless aircraft to train on ever. Centre stick is standard with yokes as a factory option. _Personally_ I would go for a centre stick, but that isn't an option.

Having at last had a hour when the wind wasn't gusting and the thermals weren't rising, it looks like 45 over the fence is optimum. Now if I can get this hold off and hold off thing going the aeroplane will be much happier.

Theory says that with a Vso of 32 a Vat of 41.6 is the go, but with a very light aeroplane in anything but flat calm, around 50 seems prudent. The last flight turned out a little interesting with developing gusty winds causing large variations of ASI and dictating a full stop.

Have to come to grips with the ergos and screen first. I'm more a 'six-pack' than a synthetic vision man. The centre stick and low left side throttle is also a bit of a challenge. Overall though a very nicely put together aeroplane, one that I'm hoping to put a few hours on over the next week.

Located just East of Perth. Currently getting to grips with a Foxbat.

Long time past ATC and PPL, with a dozen or years since a brief sojourn into gliding, now getting back into recreational aviating.