Bruce

I would have to check the part numbers although I am pretty sure that these Avdel rivers are in our extensive Tecnam parts stock and have supplied to LAME’s in the past. We air freight these in so they may be a little more expensive than bulk rivets by sea container. Regards Bruce

Merry Christmas, Ian and family

Hi Alf I found the Supercheap sun visors very effective. There is a longer car side window version that is perfect for the Sierra. Throw away the original black suckers and buy the same size clear suckers from Clark Rubber. They rarely fall off then. And for any low wing bubble canopy, have a look at the ‘Snap vents’ sold by Aircraft Spruce. Price is low and vents very effective on ground. If LSA get approval from the manufacturer before installation! Regards Bruce

I can see that there is some confusion on this subject Back in 2000 factory built Ultralights required a Type Certificate (TC). The original Australian manufacturers were required to go through an expensive certification process. There was no system in place to allow the importation of foreign factory built Ultralights. The only possibility was for CASA to formally visit the factory of the manufacturer and approve the aircraft for Australia. CASA issued a NPRM calling for submissions allowing foreign factory built ultralights. This new rule came to pass in 2002 with the proviso that a foreign TC must exist for the foreign factory built Ultralight. At that time Australian ultralights could only operate to a MTOW of 544kg. Most of the Ultralights with a TC in Europe had a MTOW to fit in with the different European weight restrictions, usually around 450 kg. The AUF at the time issued Type Acceptance based on the documentation and TC submitted. The CASA audit identified aircraft that were not adhering to the original TC’s. It is correct that some Ultralights were built to a higher MTOW and in a number of countries including Australia and NZ, this was 544 kg. All importers were required to submit documentation from the manufacturer supporting a higher MTOW. A number of importers were unable to produce this documentation and the MTOW of these aircraft was restricted to that off the original TC. Ultralight certification should not be confused with LSA. The FAA introduced a simpler form of aircraft certification in September 2004, in which: 'The manufacturer is responsible to certify the aircraft and the continuing airworthiness. This means that the manufacturer certifies that each aircraft complies with the LSA standards by signing a statement of compliance. The statement of compliance must indicate that the aircraft was manufactured by a qualified manufacturer, complies with the design and performance, quality assurance, production testing (not required for a kit aircraft) and continued operational safety monitoring standards’. LSA allowed a manufacturer to nominate a MTOW of up to 600 kg with the manufacturer assuming full responsibility for the ongoing airworthiness of the LSA.(Whereas CASA has a responsibility for factory built Ultralight aircraft because of the Type Certification of those Ultralights. In 2006 CASA enacted an Australian version of LSA with a 600 kg MTOW. Not long after that RA Aus allowed a maximum MTOW for Ultralights of 600 kg. There was some confusion in the technical guidance from RA Aus at that time and some owners and importers of identical Ultralight airframes began operating at a MTOW of 600 kg. This was identified in the CASA audit of RA Aus and TC’s or documentation from another countries National Airworthiness Authority approving operation at a higher MTOW was required of the importer or owner. Most LSA are now designed with greater strength to allow for the higher MTOW. Ultralights approved to operate at 600 kg MTOW were required to alter the ASI, lowering the indicated VNE and VNO speeds. On the subject of manufacturer empty weights, to meet a MTOW of say 450 kg or less, most manufacturers had a minimal aircraft is available which is essentially a stripped out shell. no heater, no upholstery, no trim, limited fuel capacity, smaller wheels, two stroke engines, minimal electrics, the most basic seats, simple hand brake, etc. that is how the mythical figure of 270 kg could be achieved whereas the same airframe destined for Australia included every possible option including a personal bidet! With regard to future RA Aus increases of MTOW, these will not apply to LSA aircraft unless CASA changes the regulations governing LSA. The weight increase will allow homebuilts and GA certified aircraft,with TC’s that fall within the new MTOW, to be registered as Ultralights with RA Aus.

Thanks Alf It’s all slowly coming together with a step up in advertising shortly and a push on LSA and GA for 2018. regards Bruce

For TECNAM owners who may have missed the TECNAM factory press release I have attached a link below: TECNAM STRENGTHENS ITS PRESENCE IN AUSTRALIA NEW ZEALAND WITH CORPORATE SUBSIDIARY The new company, TECNAM PTY LTD, based in SE Queensland, will take over the role as Master dealer for Australia and New Zealand. A large spares stock for LSA and GA TECNAM models will be established in SE Queensland under my control with overnight Express mail to Australian main centres and DHL overnight to our authorised service centre in Tauranga, New Zealand. A comprehensive CRM system will allow LAME’s and L2’s to establish a ticket on-line with the airworthiness and engineering department at the factory for resolving maintenance or repair issues. The website, tecnam.com.au will be updated to reflect the changes. This move by a major light aircraft manufacturer indicates the confidence TECNAM has in the future of GA and Light Sport Aviation in Australia and New Zealand. Regards Bruce [email protected]

And after you have done all that you have to get past AQIS on arrival. If the aircraft is new from a known manufacturer with a track record, the aircraft in container will smoothly pass through the clearing process. If, however the aircraft is second hand, the container will have to be completely unstuffed in a quarantine approved facility, inspected for, mud, grass, seeds and insects. The container is then stuffed again, not necessarily to your high standards and loaded on a truck for delivery. I always try to be there and supervise the unload, reload and fasten down for the final delivery. Take note also of what is happening with Classic car imports where brakes and engines are being pulled apart on arrival to remove brake linings and gaskets containing asbestos!

Gosh Yenn, there might be hope for me yet... did he get younger and smarter? That's what I want... but it would need an accurate shot huh.

Did that bullet enter through the top cowl? How could that happen?

My condolences to John’s family and friends. I will miss John’s seasoned advice on this forum. Bruce

Toe brakes have been standard standard in all TECNAM LSA for some years now (except the P92 Classic).

"The fact that they have cracked like that in the first place indicates that you have a vibration resonance on the part and so you need to damp it" Agree with Head in the Clouds, there is a vibration issue and this must be solved first. Balance the prop and the carbs! When was the prop last balanced with strobe or vibration analysis equipment?

Australia Aerobatic Club ‘CASA Guidelines' 3.13 MANOEUVRING SPEED 3.13.1 Manoeuvring speed (VA) is the speed above which full deflection of the elevator control will exceed aircraft structural limitations. Below VA the aircraft will stall before structural limits can be exceeded. VA will be specified in the aircraft's flight manual and placarded on the instrument panel. Full control deflection of any flight control should be avoided above this speed. 3.13.2 It is important to note that VA is established at the aircraft's maximum all-up weight or maximum aerobatic weight, and that at lighter weights it is possible to exceed G limitations at speeds less than the specified VA. 3.13.3 It could be argued that exceeding G limitations at a lighter weight may not necessarily overstress the wing structure because the lift forces imposed at the lighter weight for the same G are proportionately less, and therefore the wing structure should be strong enough to withstand the load. However, other airframe components such as engine mountings, attachments and other equipment still experience the full G loading and these structural components could fail even though the wing does not. 3.13.4 Thus, to stay within a safe operating envelope, the pilot should manoeuvre near VA with caution, monitor the accelerometer rather than rely solely on airspeed limitations, respect rolling G and flick roll limits, and be cautious in the use of abrupt control inputs. Never exceed the G or VNE limits of the aircraft Do not pull significant G above VA in turbulent conditions (a gust could overstress the aircraft)

Regarding the negative comments from seb7701 and bilby54 following bluesky's attempt to seek advice from forum members, the following are the facts Trouble shooting was carried out on the engine by a Rotax qualified L2. Bert Flood supplied two new fuel pumps. At this point the owner felt that the power issue had not been resolved and contacted TECNAM Australia. Copies of the printouts recovered with the dongle were forwarded to the TECNAM factory. Response back from the Rotax factory was that they were aware of the problem through Bert Flood and that they were working with Bert Flood to resolve it. It is important to note that TECNAM warranty covers the airframe constructed by TECNAM along with standard instruments. It does not cover the engine (Rotax or Lycoming) and third party avionics which are all subject to their own specific manufacturer warranties. This does not mean that we do not provide support and owners throughout the outback have first hand experience of our support. Arrangements were made for the owner to bring the aircraft to Southport (YSPT) for inspection by a well qualified LAME organisation. Their engineers went over the engine from front to back and spent hours on the phone with Bert Flood. A number of test flights were conducted by myself and the engineers using different prop settings and also fitting an original Tonini prop. With a Tonini prop we were able to demonstrate cruise at 106 knots and a fuel burn of 16 litres per hour. For each flight we split the Dynon Skyview screen showing half with flight instruments and half with engine instruments. A GoPro camera mounted immediately in front of the RHS screen recorded the flights. A dongle was used to download data from the Rotax ECU. With the Sensenich prop back on at #3 setting and flying 'on the step' we achieved 106 kts indicated and 16 litres per hour at 5200 rpm (all duly recorded by the GoPro). We concluded that the engine was now performing as per specification. bluesky is right to be concerned as to why the power loss happened and this forum is an excellent source of feedback from 912iS owners such as orfboy and others well qualified to comment. As Nev comments, the engine is incredibly complex. Bruce TECNAM Australia

The prop is made by Bolly. Having used Bolly props on a number of TECNAM aircraft I cannot speak more highly of their smoothness, performance and durability. Small stone damage is non existant and erosion of the leading edge in rain experienced with wooden props is history. I strongly recommend a professional prop balance when changing any prop. This new prop will be a win,win for JABIRU owners.

Well I dunno who SAJabiruflyer is but he sure spoke for me. ...Bruce

I don't think that the CDI's failed in flight. Especially not both at the same time. I am aware of a couple of CDI issues but they related to aircraft not starting, NOT to engines stopping in flight. Problem of not starting may relate to voltage feed from the aircraft system to the CDIs pre-start being less than optimum. Not an issue in flight due to full electrical output at power settings. Have heard that the new soft start ignition may be better due to a better supply from the battery as part of the Rotax loom. Regardless, the CDIs that would not start an older engine started and ran well on a late model 912ULS with the soft start loom. There has been speculation re high temps within the engine bay affecting the CDI's but there are TECNAMS in western QLD that spent all of January flying in daily temps over 40 Degrees C with absolutely no problems with CDIs. Ross Millard may have some thoughts on this?

Agree with David, I think you are confusing it with the Murphy Rebel. The Maverick was built much lighter

Ave8r, while the pilot/licensing/instruction side may work well under the two orgs in New Zealand, the aircraft registration side is far worse off with four weeks plus waits for NZCAA delegates to come and inspect new aircraft. This particularly applies to ultralights (microlights), I believe because they are not economically significant. When LSA was first introduced there were similar waits for CASA surveyors to sign off on the aircraft. Our track record with RA Aus has been far superior to this with aircraft usually achieving registration within one working week of final assembly. We have a good system in place at RA Aus with comprehensive Technical and Operations bibles in place to guide the day to day functions as they affect pilots and aircraft owners. I personally fully endorse the comments made by Riley above. Members, through non-voting apathy have gotten Board members by default. RA Aus is a multi million dollar turnover organisation and is now beyond the business ability of a one man flying school operator. We have a rich and diverse membership, many in early retirement who have successfully built their own businesses or who have had salaried careers in management and finance. These are the members who we should be encouraging to take an interest in the oversight of RA, Aus, our organisation.

The L2 course at Clifton was run by Steve Bell and Trevor Bange, plus an experienced LAME from Toowoomba. The course was spread over five days, with practical work mainly on Trevor's fleet of Jabiru and Drifter. No one was promised a L2 and in fact most course participants received a Restricted L2 approval with future progression to based on RA Aus Technical assessment of work recorded in their L2 logbook.

Thanks for your comments Mick. Most aviators are going to see the pricing on the USA news sites where the prices shown are before taxes as this varies from state to state. FT also forgets that we don't keep the GST, our friend Mr Swan grabs that very quickly, both on clearing customs(which we claim back every three months) and again when we sell the aircraft. So the price before GST was to compare Apples with Apples. Shipping rates do vary and it depends on what you are prepared to pay. We have done the low cost route before only to have November containers, for example, spend over six weeks in Port Kelang while priority was given to the Christmas stock of major department stores in Australia. Chinese shipping companies offer good rates but with transhipments via mainland China ports. So we pay the extra dollars and get Italy - Australia direct. The most competitive and cheapest container route is between Europe and North America, which is why retail pricing is often lower in the USA for European aircraft compared to Australia. There are also hidden costs here. If AQIS decide a container is dirty on the outside, $150 to transport to the wash site, up to $200 for washing and $150 for transport back to the bond area. Since the wharfies locked an AQIS inspector in a container as a joke, AQIS can now ask for containers to be unloaded for inspection and repacked afterwards. Extra costs plus the need for an aviation person to supervise to prevent damage. (This unpacking of containers is guaranteed for anyone bringing in a second hand aircraft) The Tecnam Classic Lite is a very basic entry level aircraft that goes back to Tecnam's original 1992 designs. The base aircraft starts at 270kg with one 45 litre tank in one wing (like the origional J3 Cub) and the customer can option up from there. Options, however add weight and the aim is entry level flying/training and not safaris over thousands of miles carrying the kitchen sink. It really is a return to grass roots pleasure flying. The original 80 hp Echo's probably have the finest flying characteristics of all the Tecnam models. (95 kts and 1000 fpm climb solo is quite respectable). Add to that low octane ULP for fuel instead of Premium ULP, every 10 cents per litre helps! An Utralight MTOW of 500 kg will apply here in Australia for the Tecnam Classic Lite. The Max rough airspeed is 108 knots which exceeds the cruise speed and would only be encountered on descent, so not an issue in cruise. I think most of us slow down for comfort reasons in turbulence, even if the VNO allows higher speeds.

Should be around $75,000 plus GST, possibly less but will vary from state to state. USA fly away price is $71,000 plus taxes so considering extra shipping distance pricing is good. fly-tornado can take advantage of the factory door pricing and ferry back to Australia. No problem!!

I am trying to get better photos from Aero 2012 at Friedrichshaffen but this gives a good idea of what the first production aircraft will look like. Cargo pod has a 40 kg capacity and there is a smaller 5kg capacity baggage area with external door behind the standard internal baggage area. First TD (Rotax powered) for Australia leaves Italy at the end of April so Port of BNE mid June

Hi John, Just tried it again. When you get to the registration page in Italian, go to the top right and click on 'Eng' again. Registration page reverts to (Italian) English. Babelfish is always good for rough translations Rgds Bruce