IBob

I used a small cheap greenhouse pump sprayer with neoprene tube attached, but most of them leak at the screwon top, so test if buying.

However, I like the idea of the pump oilcan above much better: the pumped up sprayer delivers the fluid at an uncertain rate, and needs to be shut off real quick at the end of the fill.
 

3 hours ago, red750 said:

Then there's this:
 

Considering that we are required to have ADS-B in controlled airspace, where it will be used to verify position etc and ensure separation, it would surely need to be quite accurate
BurnieM do you have any insight as to how accurate it is near ground level? Is it less accurate there?

Assuming you have the flight recorder enabled in Ozrunways, it generates a data file for each flight.
By dumping that out you can access the altitude data, which is what I did following a near miss at the start of a flight a while ago.
I then corrected the data for QNH on the day, and found the corrected GPS data to be very accurate: I know this because, following the near miss I flew a return trip at very precise altitudes (as displayed by my altimeter).

There are various comments about GPS altitude not being very accurate. There are also comments about it being less accurate near ground level.
It would be nice to get a fix on the actual degrees of inaccuracy:
Are we talking about tens, or hundreds of feet?
And how close to ground level should we expect additional inaccuracy?
Anyone???????

 

Maybe check the size of your mudwasps, Skippy? And take note of where they nest in your area. Remember they have to be able to get in and also turn round in order to lay eggs etc. So if the hole is round it has to be a reasonable diameter to allow that.
Here they will get in a dowel sized hole  or a keyhole (which allows turning). I haven't seen them in anything round much smaller than that.
They also nest between flat surfaces and in curtain or hung clothing folds, but that's not relevant here..........

FWIW Savannahs traditionally have a 3mm nylon breather line for each tank. These poke out under the wind and are cut off at 45deg into wind to give a degree of positive pressure. It's not the tidiest setup, but seems to work though it can be difficult to get equal pressure in all tanks as the pipes do not sit straight or perpendicular to the underwing due to the natural curve of the pipe itself.
At one stage I had very uneven L/R fuel feed, and was able to partly correct this by adjusting the angle of the pipe cutoffs. If I were  building again, I would run and anchor solid pipes down through the wings, rather than flexible line, allowing the cutoff angles to be precisely adjusted.

I did try converting to (much tidier) forward facing underwing vents, using tiny 90deg garden irrigation fitting, but changed back after just one short flight that saw massive crossfeeding. Part of the problem there was a poorly moulded integral fuel tank filler point, that allowed that tank to 'blow'. However, it does not do this with the standard setup, so clearly the forward facing vents were delivering a lot more pressure.
 

Mason bees/mud wasps are a whole class of critters: over here they are just a little smaller than a german wasp, but far too large to enter or nest in a 3mm pipe. They may be different where you are.

Part of my preflight is to visually check the ends of the breather lines. This is easy as the the nylon is semi transparent. To date I have never found anything in there.

Nic and I have been stopped for a while now. Might have to retitle finish 1 aircraft by Feb 2024 and 2nd by Feb 2025. We’d have flown through this by December 2022 if it was Titan and we had the engine. ........

They say to make God laugh, tell him your plans........)

Jury strut. To prevent the strut from buckling under negative Gs (including when landing).
The earlier Savs did not have them, the later ones all do. I guess they decided it's a good idea (despite the struts being quite rigid) and especially once they added the optional extra tanks, which carry twice as much fuel in the wings.

Very easily added if you wish: they are held in place by 3 rivets into a wing rib at the top, and a band that fastens round the strut at the bottom.

I think most window cleaners are mostly just meths and water, Facthunter.
But if in doubt, dishwashing liquid as suggested by Onetrack would work fine.
Ideally, I would want whatever in a  pump/spray container: you're trying to work reasonably quickly, and pump/spray is a great way to apply the liquid (if you're applying it to the sealant, as I did). And that was the recommendation from the glaziers where I bought the sealant.

Hi Marty, you may want to consider Bostik SIMSON ISR 70-03 for the bottom edge of your screen.

It's what the glaziers use at glass joints, also widely used by light engineering shops and the like.

Wonderful stuff and highly recommended.

Comes in a mastic tube, clear or black, you apply masking tape where you don't want it, gun it onto where you do want it, then spray with that window cleaning stuff, which allows you to work and smooth it with your finger/s without it sticking to you or dragging. In the event of sticking or dragging, spray some more. Feather it where it meets the tape, which you then strip off as soon as you have finished smoothing.
I used it (with some trepidation) between my windscreen rubber and the fuselage and was very pleased with the result: the black literally looks like part of the rubber fitted perfectly to the fuselage.

8 hours ago, onetrack said:

Well, after a bit of research, it appears this stunt was common amongst the skydiving/parachuting fraternity, and they call it a "Hang Load". Apparently there are several movies of sizeable hang loads, each trying to outdo the others record.

 

None of the movies, and very few of the photos are in the public domain apparently, because they're still in copyright.

 

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Heller-Hang-Load-Taft.jpg

 

https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/55987-"no-frills"-twin-beech-movie-clip/

 

Here is the original Carl Boenish Footage. The stacking starts at 3.25. Note the last guy off bounces off the tail...not so good. I'd say this stuff comes under the heading of 'Only In America', bless 'em..............)

I'm not convinced by the guy hanging off the prop.........seems a bit over the top. This is the image I was actually looking for:

At least we got to sit inside, Cooperplace..............)

41 minutes ago, facthunter said:

The pilot is the biggest dill. Handling a plane close to stall and with massive drag on one side requiring a lot of rudder.  You can't have seat belts when there are NO seats. The only seat in the Plane is the pilot's. Jumpers get high on the risk and drive home at  a great speed just like people who have been to a car race do.  Nev

There I have to disagree with you, Nev.
It's a common if dated misconception that skydivers do what they do for the 'thrill'. They don't. They do it for the pure pleasure of flying.
The jumpers I knew came from all walks of life, and most were not risk takers: the odds were quite calculated.

I'm not sure what the physiological effects are, but I can certainly say one effect is to put many of life's minor problems and setbacks into perspective.
And after a good day, I would drive home at a very leisurely rate... many other jumpers I knew, In Australia and NZ, did the same.

PS the same happens for me now with flying: I find myself driving home at not much above my STOL over the fence speed.......)

Cooperplace, I have not been involved in the sport for many years, so cannot claim to be well informed.

So far as I know, jumpers are (still) not restrained during takeoff. The principal reason for this would be that the seats are usually stripped out of the aircraft with the jumpers sitting on the floor. And I would think seat belts would cause more problems than they would prevent, the risk being damage, disturbance or snagging of the jump gear.

Having said all that, Cooperplace, skydiving has never been particularly hazardous, principally because the jumper is intensely focused on what they are doing. It used to be said that you were more likely to get wiped out driving to the DZ than at the DZ, that was true.  And it is far safer now than it was back then, due to greatly  improved equipment design, reliability and ease of operation.

It does, however, suffer the same problem as aviation: when something does go wrong, it is all over the media.
And we will continue to see accidents. Though I am reliably informed that most of those nowadays are not freefall: they are jumpers under open and fully functioning high performance canopies who misjudge their landings.
 

1 hour ago, cooperplace said:

Maybe that's what caused this crash? We don't know it to be an engine failure do we? The TPE331 is said to be very reliable.

 

Is this what caused the 2010 Fox Glacier crash? The more I hear about skydiving the more it scares me. There seems to be a different mindset in skydiving, too much left to chance.

We don't know.

NZ TAIC stuffed up their investigation, then had the wreckage buried just 3 days after the accident. Their conclusions were strongly challenged as time went by, and they eventually revised their position, saying that they were unable to establish the cause. Unfortunately, because the wreckage was bulldozed and buried, it was not possible to examine the controls etc when it was finally later exhumed.
A bad situation and one that left a very bad taste too.

27 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Meat Bombing IS scary. There's no seats and they used to hang out on the strut of a C-182. It's all part of the scene.  Nev

Furthermore, the load forms a scrum at the back of the pilot's seat to get the weight forward for takeoff....then shifts back and sits on the floor once the pilot gives the nod.
Or that's how it used to be......it's been a long while now..........)

PAC 750-XL?

Initial reports say it ran off the runway.

47 minutes ago, facthunter said:

The design more than any other has managed to keep the Engines near the centre of drag. It has an ample rudder and a dorsal fin. Once you got used to the seat height , control should be better than most others of the period.  Nev

But can you imagine the noise ??????????

My flying is simple fair weather VFR.

I have a Galaxy Tab A10, SM-T515 with a uAvionics Ping for ADS-B in.
Works fine once I sorted out how to keep it locked on to the Ping.

Here are the RWY device requirements, though I don't think this has been revised for a while:
https://docs.ozrunways.com/rwy/device_requirements.html#hardware-requirements

I would suggest contacting them.

Closing pattern very similar to that tragic helicopter midair at the Gold Coast.......(

Isn't the aircraft rego set......and adjustable.......in the ADS-B device?

Giving this thread another bump.
It's about making overseas purchases, especially larger ones, without getting screwed by the financiers with a combination of transaction fees and loaded conversion rates. Simply put, Transferwise (and several similar providers) transfer funds internationally at the true conversion rate and for a very modest transaction fee.

What was Transferwise now calls itself just Wise, and has steadily increased the number of countries it operates to and from, while also reducing transaction times.

I'm still with them, though my overseas expenditures have mercifully tapered off.
But I still get that happy warm feeling that I'm poking the bankers in the eye with every transaction.

I reccomend anyone interested to visit their website. It has a simple calculator showing the conversion rate and cost of a proposed transaction.

We'll be getting the slipsticks out shortly......)