MikeBravoYanky

The essence of all conflict and threat comes from the underlying fact we have all been engaged from birth in a huge spiritual war between GOOD and EVIL.. To understand this we first have to define GOOD & EVIL.. These are not disembodied forces, they can only result from the deliberate choice of a MIND.. So ultimately GOOD is of GOD and EVIL is of the DEVIL.. and we all get to choose. The problem here is non of us are totally GOOD or totally EVIL! Which means the enemy is not always "out there".. it is sometimes ME..! Atheists and theophobics are of course in complete denial about all this which is too bad because the ONLY way to understand the problem and get the best guidance is found in the pages of the BIBLE and an understanding of who is God and who is the Devil.

 

Back to the topic of lethal almost undetectable drones.. It is not the weapon that is the real problem.. it is the person who chooses EVIL which we may now give the correct definition EVIL = Playing GOD. The verification of all this is easy.. GOOD comes only from TRUTH and EVIL always comes fro LIES.. (again correctly described in the BIBLE).. We don't have TRUTH (because we never know everything, only GOD by definition does).. The best we have is VERIFIED KNOWLEDGE.. but that is sufficient to establish who GOD is.. I am talking observational science not religious beliefs..

 

So every functional state of matter (ie has a purpose) specified by information is a DESIGN and product of a MIND. We are all familiar with engines we know they are designed.. easy.. Well it may surprise you to know the most efficient engine known exists in billions inside every cell of every living animal.. its called ATP Synthase and 8 million will fit on cross section of a hair. They are a true electric motor fully controllable and fully specified by information in DNA.. Hence they are a DESIGN and can only be the product of a mind.. but this mind must therefore be responsible for all animal life.. Well only the GOD of the BIBLE fits that criteria so we know who he is and the real answer to the fear of death is the fear of God..

 

 

Strangely the video of the model at the top of this thread clearly uses pendulum stability for roll stability and a rear rudder for direction. So I’d disagree

I was only referring to the Russian towed thing.. model is different for a number of reasons..

Needs higher mast to give more pendulum stability.

NO.. "pendulum stability" will not help.. You would just end up with big lateral dynamic oscillations.. lateral divergence is a "dynamic stability" problem which can only be solved with damping or the equivalent of dihedral producing opposite roll with side-slip (like a big central fin above the rotor) or effective roll controls.. The gap in the middle is also a big lift killer..

Very good.. first time I have seen this one.. many pilots don't know why the wing was elliptic.. but it was not only the elliptic plan-form but also the 13% thinness which made it efficient for both high speed and manoeuverability..

 

It was Prandtl (German) who discovered that an elliptic plan-form, which gave an approximate elliptic spanwise lift distribution, made the downwash across the span constant producing the lowest induced drag and most efficient total lift..

 

Pitty they don't mention the other names in the game.. Like Kurt Tank designer of the Fockwolf and Sir Stanley Hooker at RR improved the merlin blower and designed the double blower by adding the Kestral blower as a second stage (same mass flow).. He was also responsible for NOT going with fuel injection.. A wise move because the fuel feed into the inlet before the compressors cooled the mixture by about 25 deg and reduced and I think initially removed the need for a big inter-cooler.

 

 

Just a thought.. High aspect ratio 'should' make wing drop esp in an 'unbalanced - skid' turn more likely because the speed differential across the wing tips will be greater.. I would be interested in practical experience confirming this.. I only know of one who managed it on climb out and ended up in hospital..

 

All respect, sad thoughts and prayer for those affected by the tragedy..

 

 

I flew GA for years only flying enough time doing circuits to keep minimum currency.. while developing an experimental gyroplane for a business which did not work out.. (it was all about cost) Now have a Supa Pup and can't hardly wait to fly more consistently and purposefully and get a lot more hours in the saddle.. and the accompanying higher skill and safety level that goes with that.. The rules of GA vs RAAus were always going to be difficult.. wherever there is a written rule there is of necessity a boundary and someone is always right on that boundary and wonders why a very small change changes all the rules.. its just a fact of life. The only thing that really helps is if we can find ways to 'simplify' those rules and I think the US model could help us greatly on this.. AOPA is an organization attempting to make some headway in this direction..

 

Thanks to all and safe flying in the new year..

 

 

Just doing some comparison and ball park costing and trying to get information on costs for lycoming engines, plenty of infor on US prices but not much around on pricing in aus.Obviously there are a lot of variables here eg TTR but looking at averages and ball parks rather then specifics.

 

For used 0320 or 0360 what is the most common TTR sold out there and what is a general price you should budget for.

 

What is the price for a new engine certified/ non certified after shipping etc to australia

 

I am looking for an engine for an CH300 experimental GA aircraft with engine range of 125 - 180 HP. Designers recommendation in 1970 was for a Lycoming 320.

 

Thanks

 

Nick

Hi Nick..

 

I have an AO-360 with only 302 hrs from new.. I bought it in a J2 gyroplane which sat in a shed for over 25 years.. I had it overhauled in about 2001-2, corrosion damage required cam shaft grind, con rods, cyls bored to max and full certification check.. I had it in the J2 for 10 years with ground runs only.. It had a prop strike in a taxi incident in 2010.. It has not run since but stored inhibited and occasionally turned over.. Its set up for const speed prop and would need crank case split to re-configure for fixed pitch prop.. I have not had crack detect done or run-out but I am sure it will check out ok. I wanted it for another project but now thinking of selling..

 

 

I am a semi/retired aero engineer with my own business and project (originally with a modified (Exprimental) civil registered gyroplane) involved in a taxi test accident in 2010. 18 months after the accident I was charged with reckless operation of an aircraft "endangering myself"..! I beat that charge in the magistrates court but it was only at the third court cases that a judge finally agreed the pilot of an experimental aircraft cannot be charged with reckless operation endangering himself.? The case is still not over with final hearing in Federal Court 18 May fighting the notice of cancellation of my PPL. As far as I can see once these things get into the hands of lawyers.. truth, justice, logic and even language all take a distant back seat.

 

 

My one word sermon to everyone for the biggest problem by far.. over any other I have encountered (and you will) in aviation.. (also true for other professions).. EGO !

 

 

Thank you Ian and all for support and quality information..

 

 

Your guess is as good as mine, Craig. Seek counsel from experienced trike pilots. Some of the best have been here. Nev

My gyroplane instructor Paul Bruty was badly burned converting a student from long term trike pilot to conventional controls.. The 59-60 year old student died (pushed when he meant to pull).. I would just caution any pilot at retirement age with many hours on conventional/opposite controls converting to the reverse.. Not opposed to trikes as such just sounding a note of caution.

 

 

VH Exp might be the most suitable category for specialist work. Getting mods approved for "normal" VH is time consuming/practically impossible. Nev

VH Reg Experimental aircraft can be used for commercial aerial work with the appropriate CPL and AOC.. Answer to a question put to Mick English of CASA head office.. (in court)..

 

 

And what do you think happens when as an RAAus pilot you are faced with ANY 19 regn aircraft?Technically they are homebuilt and each aircraft cannot be assumed to be the same as any other similar aircraft ... your dash fit-out is particular to your build and you might have put switches in different places or even built a completely modified flap tangent to have different setting to what the kit manufacturer or plane designed intended ...

And there is no actual POH for them as each is individual.

 

Or take a one off self design

 

How does the OPs Manager or RAAus RAAP deal with that?

 

OR If yours is the ONLY single seater of a particular type in the country how do you get familiarization? Particularly if there is NO instructor in the country with that aircraft group?

 

I'm not being flights of fancy here or playing word games for fun - I know that there is only 1 instructor (not current) who has Group C (me) and there are two pilots who fly the single seater on the RAAus Reg that is Group C ... and the Ops Manager accepted at the AGM that the Ops Manual as it is currently enacted actually fails to cover Group C at all in many areas - so technically I can comply with the CAO and fly the aircraft without being a member of RAAus or doing biennials or meeting medical standards simply because I have in the past been issued an AUF/RAAus certificate with that group on it.

 

Apart from the odd Group C issues that are the Ops Managers own making (the old ops manual covered me) there are real problems with applying the concept of type training to experimental aircraft - and with RAAus that is EVERYTHING that is registered 10- or 19-

 

Unless 'types' are design features then the whole construct of the RAAP falls apart in application to anything experimental.

I had this problem with my J2 being the only Australian Civil registered gyroplane.. Even when /after having the thing designated 'experimental'..

 

 

IF you have an unflapped plane, it's rather necessary to be able to slip capably then you can keep your circuits tight and be a little high and slip it off. Get used to landing on one wheel in crosswinds too. Some students don't like this but get used to it.. It's all part of the same technique. You will find you PREFER one direction over the other. I prefer to have the left wing down moreso than the other way but practice both ways as the wind direction dictates what you must do, not what you like. Nev

I know a Tiger Moth pilot who said side slips were hazardous and had apparently seen one go into some sort of unrecoverable slip.. if so what's the problem..?

 

 

Nothing slips quite like a cub.

 

So my SupaPup should be ok with side slips..

 

 

Just an aside,The Mt Erebus crash in the antarctic, THEY (we know who there are) tried to blame the pilot for bad navigation, raided his home to take everything from there.

Even though the government Changed the flight map to remove a mistake that all pilots knew about, Without telling anyone.

 

spacesailor

Best movies.. based on true events.. I can well accept the NTSB attitude.. they're lawyers remember! CASA legal very much worse. I have a criminal conviction from them based on lies and fraud.. Just completed hearings at the AAT trying to save my PPL(A).. no decision yet. But RAAus will not let me join or register my SupaPup until the AAT decision is made. Seeing 'Sully' it was like re-living the nightmare.. only it was not a dream.

 

 

I am not so sure. They are stressed to aerobatic levels. They are very strong. They also pioneered an aircraft foam and aluminum construction.

You best not say too much.. CASA 'legal' have their spies.. and they don't like private R&D. They charged me with recklessly endangering 'myself'.. just taxiing an experimental gyroplane.. They alleged I was in breach of CAR 229 for taxiing an experimental gyroplane on my PPL(A).. they forged evidence in a charge of forgery then denied it and shifted the charge to 'used a false document'.. all with the compliance of ignorant magistrates and judges. My advice get a friend on the inside and trust no one.. Get every decision in writing.

In particular do you have a twin endorsement..?

 

 

what model was the one that crashed when being test flown from the factory?

Had to be N24 because as far as I can recall the N22 did not have the problem..

 

 

According to channel 7 news the pilot was Ian Cook from Mt Evelyn and he had recently bought the trike from Peter McLean. Nothing to say anyone had done anything wrong but did mention that there were dust devils near the strip.

Does anyone know if this Ian Cook is the same who held the GM position at Thales Bendigo (formerly ADI formerly Ordnance Factory).. I knew him and he told me about his early years flying gliders.. I would just like to know.. it makes a big difference to me.. very sad..

 

 

Gday Mike.

Ah.. Pilks.. Hello again.. by the way I am pretty sure I know the cause of the N24 stick force anomaly.. after I left GAF I was going over all the details.. with the crash I kept going back to the aerodynamic model.. and in the end a simple diagram of prop vorticity in a turn gave the answer..

(N24 stretched fuse) + (2 x same prop rotation) + (higher power) + (critical up elevator) = fuselage power induced vortex = differential tailplane incidence = half tailplane stall or some level of separation = sudden reduction in stick force.

 

What do think..

 

 

Sorry to hear that John. Hope they find the person who did it, and you get your stuff back. The penalty wouldn't be anything so don't expect justice there. Nev

Very disturbing news.. but on the 'justice' side that would be about right..

 

 

Yea remember it very well.. including the accident.. I worked on Nomad aerodynamic design at GAF in the 70's..

 

 

It is not for them to ignore any affected members concerns. When needed they take CASA on in a fullsome way. They would rather not be on a conflict footing but they don't have any need to be frightened of them. Spencer Ferrier has assisted the RAAus,( May still be doing it). Nev

Thanks.. yes I was in touch with Spencer.. a sort of watching brief.. might look him up again..

 

 

What do AOPA do in individual situations..

 

 

Tomorrow will be 5th month since my "show cause" conference at which the CASA lawyer agreed there was no grounds for any suspension or revocation of my PPL. The ops mgr suggested I talk to the new CEO of CASA.. Any thoughts.. from what I see of him in the Senate inquiry on the Jab engine I am not so sure..