Paul Turner

Hi Kaz, The following is a repeat of a copy of a comparison of the numbers for the Carbon Cub and Savage Cruiser that I posted some time ago. Please note, I'm not throwing rocks at the Carbon Cub... I'm actually scared about flying in one in case it's too much fun and I end up wanting to own one of them as well... I should say first-up that the Carbon Cub looks like a fantastic aircraft; the takeoff and climb performance is astounding. However, even with the 600 kg Max All Up Weight, the extra 'empty weight' and 90l fuel tank would bring the useable payload down to about 114kg. Enough for me and ummmm... not a lot more. Here's the comparison of the Carbon Cub (from the figures in the Sport Pilot magazine) and the Savage Cruiser (actual aircraft figures). Carbon Cub: Maximum All Up Weight - 599kg Aircraft Empty Weight - 423kg Maximum Fuel Load - 63kg Usable payload (Pax and Luggage) - 114kg Savage Cruiser: Maximum All Up Weight - 560kg Aircraft Empty Weight - 307kg Maximum Fuel Load - 45kg Usable payload (Pax and Luggage) - 208kg So, in fairness, it's not quite comparing apples to apples. I'd love to have the option of carrying extra fuel and higher cruise speed because, at times I have found 64l and 80kts to be range-limiting. However, the fact is that (for me at 100kg) the Carbon Cub would be a single-seat aircraft. Even with no fuel, (as a low-performance glider) I'd struggle to be able to fly with anyone in the back seat. Note (happy to be corrected if the following is not accurate): 1. LSA aircraft can be registered up to 600kg MAUW... IF certified to that weight by the Airworthiness Authority (aircraft manufacturer). This likely explains the difference in MAUW between the two aircraft. My version of the Savage Cruiser will never be certified for anything above 560kg (but this may not be true for later models). 2. The Cruiser is prettier... (but I'm allowed to be biased).

Hi Mat, Yep it's hangared at Dixon Creek (Yarra Valley Conference Centre). My LAME (Martin Smith) has his business there and looks after her. It's a nice spot but the strip is one way in and out, up a valley! A bit of local knowledge, judgement and practice is required but I've never had any problems (touch wood). I always think that if it looks too hard or there's too much tailwind (which is not very much) then Lilydale is two minutes away.

Sorry Dazza, she has a Victorian passport now but you are welcome to visit. It has a one of the best load-carrying capacities of any aircraft in the LSA category. Even with a Max All Up Weight limitation of 560kg (not 600kg), the aircraft can legally carry over 200kg of passengers and baggage with full fuel. The baggage compartment has an additional 20kg limit. Yep,it was new about three years ago; the current models have a slightly different shape.

Arrrh... I can't resist any longer... yes I own a Savage Cruiser (variant of the Savage Cub), and yes I think it's the best looking, best performing aircraft on the RAAus register... but I am biased. I've had the aircraft for a couple of years and LOVE her. It's absolutley true that the she is not a go-fast, get-there kind of aircraft but with her beautiful red and cream lines and her short-field capability, there is no aircraft that 'arrives' as well as she does. I've flown her from Brisbane to Melbourne but any long trip requires time. About two hours in the saddle is a good amount of time between stops which makes it a journey or 'shortish' hops of 150 to 200 nm. On the upside, the view is fantastic and she is a lot of fun to fly. As it happens, I have written an article on the aircraft which will appear in the next edition of Sport Pilot (November) along with a bunch of great aerial shots. If you want to know more, please don't hestitate to send me a message via this site with your contact details and I'd be happy to chat to you in more depth. By the way; yes the wings do 'fold' but on my aircraft this is not a minor task and would require significant effort. Unless the design has changed on new aircraft, it's not something I would recommend doing any more often than absolutley necessary. Cheers, Paul

Oh FFS… get a grip guys…here’s a little experiment for you… go back to the office/ study/ shed/ lavatory… reach in to the pile of ‘Recreational Aviation’ magazines, dust one off that is at least six months old, take it out of the plastic wrapper because it’s likely not yet been read. Lay it down next the latest edition of ‘Sport Pilot’ and starting with the cover, flick through both page by page and compare the two. Notice a difference? Now I’ll accept that ‘beauty is in the eye of the beholder’ and you cannot create a magazine that satisfies all of the tens of thousands of readers every month. However, I believe, as many others do that the new Editors are finding a nice balance between ‘light’ and ‘technical’; ‘informative’ and ‘entertaining’. However, I think the BEST thing about the magazine is… the KIDS love it. By ‘kids’ I mean anyone under thirty. The magazine is now connecting with a younger generation of pilots in a way that it has never done before. This is hugely important to our little patch of the aviation world. Of course if I ever yearn for unsubstantiated rumour, misinformation, sexist, racist and misogynistic comments… I always have this forum to come back to *Please note: No offence is intended, if anyone is in fact taking offence, this is (probably) not the intention. Last comment… (ignoring the ‘infomercial’ jibe)… yes I wrote the ‘App of the month’ article. My journalistic qualifications are… nil; my flying experience is… limited. But I thought that my experience may be useful and relevant for a lot of people. Yes it took a lot of effort to ‘craft’ something together and Kreisha was able to provide a lot of (patient) support to help me turn out something that was (I hope) readable and informative. Truly, isn’t this the key to improving the quality of the mag? Don’t throw rocks at the people who are trying to fix the mag… jump in and help them. I did and I enjoyed the experience… and yes I hope to do it again. However, I’d be happy if I never get anything published again if it’s because there are too many better articles coming from lots of other people.

Really??? So if this was meant to be a joke, or even better satirical comment, then can I suggest you make it a little more obvous. Perhaps the ever-useful 'lol' immediately after the racial slur would help. If it wasn't meant to be a joke then I'm not sure how "I'm not racist" could possibly be expected to counter the earlier statement. I actually don't know what you could have possibly said that would be more racist or offensive. So, while I sit and wait to be flamed by the vocal minority, I'll try to decide which is worse: the original comment, the fact that this is meant to be a 'moderated site' that appears to condone this sort of statement, or that the no one else on the site bothered to complain about the comment (is this truely representative of the views of the majority of this forum?)

Brendon, Bruce Vickers at Lethbridge Airpark (Golden Plains Flying School) is an excellent instructor; he recently did my Biennial Flight Review. Give him a call on 0400 849 031 and get yourself airborne with a Trial Instructional Flight (TIF). Cheers, Paul

Ballpoint... djpacro... yes, she is pretty and she is a lady, which means I must treat her with the utmost respect and care. In return, she keeps me safe and only occasionlly slaps me to keep me in my place. Yes Ballpoint, she lives in Lilydale now; a fantastic airfield on the edge of Melbourne... just on the other side of the Glenburn Gap if you are heading this way.

Oh... Forgot to mention. It was a magnificently written article too. Well researched and put together. Another example of the great work the new Magazine production team are doing. Well done, keep up the good work

OK...I'll take the bait and defend the honour of the Savage Cruiser... I should say first-up that the Carbon Cub looks like a fantastic aircraft; the takeoff and climb performance is astounding. However, even with the 600 kg Max All Up Weight, the extra 'empty weight' and 90l fuel tank would bring the useable payload down to about 114kg. Enough for me and ummmm... not a lot more. Here's the comparison of the Carbon Cub (from the figures in the magazine) and the Savage Cruiser (actual aircraft figures). Carbon Cub: Maximum All Up Weight - 599kg Aircraft Empty Weight - 423kg Maximum Fuel Load - 63kg Usable payload (Pax and Luggage) - 114kg Savage Cruiser: Maximum All Up Weight - 560kg Aircraft Empty Weight - 307kg Maximum Fuel Load - 45kg Usable payload (Pax and Luggage) - 208kg So, in fairness, it's not quite comparing apples to apples. I'd love to have the option of carrying extra fuel and higher cruise speed because, at times I have found 64l and 80kts to be range-limiting. However, the fact is that (for me at 100kg) the Carbon Cub would be a single-seat aircraft. Even with no fuel, as a low-performance glider) I'd struggle to be able to fly with anyone in the back seat. Note (happy to be corrected if the following is not accurate): 1. LSA aircraft can be registered up to 600kg MAUW... IF certified to that weight by the Airworthiness Authority (aircraft manufacturer). This likely explains the difference in MAUW between the two aircraft. My version of the Savage Cruiser will never be certified for anything above 560kg (but this may not be true for later models). 2. The LSA Category limits that Coljones quotes above, I believe are US limitations for this category. For example, there is no speed limit for LSA aircraft in Australia. 3. The Cruiser is prettier... (but I'm allowed to be biased).

Remember the issue isn't just the engine, its the effect of ethanol on the rubber fittings in fuel tanks and fuel hoses in your aircraft. I wouldn't want fuel with added ethanol sitting in my aircraft (on the ground) for any length of time.

Great photo Slarti; I remember that storm coming through. I think you took the shot from the perfect place... on the ground!

Nice work Dave

Here's an example of a Punkinhead cover. Great quality and service, about $500 but it will be less if they already have a template for your aircraft.

Ian, Thanks for putting this notice here but it would be great if RAAus published a more complete agenda for each of it's meetings, including the AGM. "Business arising..." doesn't give us a lot of idea about what will be discussed. For the interest of transparancy, can we get the Board to list that actual items to be discussed; this would give all members the maximum opportunity to contibute to the discussion prior to decisions being made. Also, has the board considered web-casting the AGM (via this site or their own website)? Regards, Paul

Shags, Agree with Matt 100% but just add two comments: - First up, chat to your Instructor and get him/her to show you the passage in the VFR Guide (or original regs) that spells our the 'Separation Minima fo Landing'. Really simple explanation of the rules and all very sensible stuff. - Secondly, as Matt indicates, set yourself some 'personal minima' for your operations. By that I mean have your own personal rules that you ALWAYS obey; such as 'not lined up on Final by 400ft AGL... GO AROUND'; or 'runway not clear by 400 ft AGL... GO AROUND'. Again talk to your instructor but I think it's good for low hour pilots (like me and 90% of recreational pilots... OK maybe 80%) to have personal minimum acceptable standards that are actually higher (safer) than the law requires. Personally I give myself a bit more space, a bit more fuel and a bit less cloud cover than I 'legallaly' can get away with to make sure I get to fly another day. It may mean that you miss a couple of landings but calling the pilot that cut you off an few 'choice' names in the clubhouse later in the day is a LOT better than dropping your aircraft onto the top of him (and his passengers). Great discussion for the forum by the way. Cheers, Paul

Sorry about the quality of this vision; the original is much clearer but I don't know how to improve the quality of the uploaded product... any suggestions welcome. Other than that; it's a great run along the coast. It can get a bit bumpy iin front of the tall buildings and a good lookout and listen is essential but well worth the trip.

July 09 English Watch Now!

Very cool!

John, Ignoring my earlier facetious comment... thanks for the link, it's a great piece that lays out in simple language some of the primary risk factors in our flying; and more importantly what we can do to reduce the probability of the event occurring. Others may argue around the relative percentages of the different risks but it's a great start to some constructive conversations... I've already passed it to my son and I'll do the same to every other person I know that flies. I might see if we can get permission to reprint it in the RAAus magazine. Cheers, Paul

Why do we have to report 'how many landings'? I'm pretty sure it will always be the same number as my takeoffs.

Gees... it used to be that if you stuffed up with an Instructor on board you had to run a lap of the airfield... now you get your mistakes (and your Mum's commentary) posted on the Internet... THAT'S motivation to get t right!

Great question Simon Flyer and bound to fire up some interesting debate. Unfortunately I believe there is no simple answer; or perhaps more accurately, there is no SINGLE answer to this question. I’ll attempt to extract myself from the paling fence I seem to be perched on and put it another way. There IS a correct amount and level of education that you need to be a safe and competent pilot and that requirement is primarily determined by: 1 the type of flying you intend to do 2 the type of aircraft you intend to fly and 3 your personal qualities (how easily you pick up new information and what type of learning works for you). The problem we have is that we all want simple solutions to complex questions and we strive for a ‘one size fits all’ approach. So, maybe the question is just incomplete. Does RA theory cut it… for what you want to do and who you are? The answer… maybe. If all I want to do is stay insight of the airfield in my Drifter, then RAAus theory requirements probably exceed my requirements. If I want to get in my go-fast machine and travel hundreds of miles in a day, then maybe I need more than what the standard RAAus syllabus offers. I’ve also seen some very good and very poor ‘ground school’ at GA and RAAus schools so again you need to think about what your needs are and match them to what is being offered at the school. So, I believe that if someone thinks they will be safer and more professional in the air with a more complete understanding of aviation theory, then look for it anywhere you can. Go to a GA school, look for on-line resources or book yourself into a Bob Tait course and sit the CASA PPL theory exam. I think RAAus has the right idea by breaking the education up to match a number of different endorsements. This tends to make us more focused on the question ‘what information do I need to do what I want to do in my aircraft?’

Hi There, "Just" landed here about twelve months ago and finally getting around to making my first post. I fly the Savage Cub Cruiser and Technam Golf at Boonah courtesy of AirSport... and loving it. See you there.