Jump to content
  • Welcome to Recreational Flying!
    A compelling community experience for all aviators
    Intuitive, Social, Engaging...Registration is FREE.
    Register Log in

L/D

Members
  • Content Count

    34
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About L/D

  • Rank
    Active member
  1. Haven't flown for a while, though everything from ASK13, IS28, IS28M2 with Ingo Renner, Blanik's, LS4, Hornet, Libelle, Cirrus, Discus, Discus2, Ventus2cm, SZD55, ASh25T, Nimbus3, LS7, Ls6, Ximango etc and the list goes on. In the end it doesn't matter what aircraft you are in, each soaring flight will be a memory that is etched in for a lifetime as each one is unique.
  2. If Wade Mahlo is still around in Orange, he had meters of the stuff for the Vision, though I am not sure if it was more leading edge material, or fuselage boom diameter.
  3. The interesting thing is, if you ask CASA for a list of "Approved Engines", they don't have one. It is just taken that Rotax is acceptable and auto conversions are not but there is no modern day testing to prove to CASA that auto engines can be deemed as acceptable to be included on the (non existent) 'Approved' list. It would be for someone with an interest to argue the point with them.
  4. Looks like Klaus Holighaus had it right since the early 80's with the swept back leading edge :-)
  5. Have fun guys and I hope the cyclone doesn't affect you :-)
  6. Will be interesting to hear his backflip on CASA's agreed path to allow RA-Aus pilots into controlled airspace.
  7. How does that work legally, if the content of the Tech/Ops Manual currently need to be approved by CASA? The issue I see is, is that or some of our more astute members who like to skate around the edges, the Tech and Ops manual are the only legally binding docs. RA-Aus can publish as many bulletins as they want, but how legal are they and what is the requirement to comply?
  8. I personally would like to see a 1 pager in the magazine outlining all the resolutions that have been passed and declined. eg: Motion to reduce membership fee to $10 - Passed/Failed Motion to .... - Passed/Failed and so on... There are not enough resolutions in the meetings to fill up more than 1/4 page in the mag using 8 size font.
  9. Hi Coaltrain, The Discus is used by many aero clubs in Europe as the first single seat glider for students converting to single seat aircraft due to its docile characteristics and pure ease of maintenance and rigging. It has been a dominating aircraft on the world gliding scene since it was released back in the mid 80's. The Discus2 is the current version of the Discus though has been refined with the use of ongoing development in profiles and planform layout optimization. It comes in both 15m and 18m wingspan configurations. An aircraft less than $20K - you would be looking at a Cirrus, Astir, PZL Junior, libelle, and most things wooden.
  10. 1) Discus 2) Discus2 3) Depends on the dollar value of 'cheap - LS4, Hornet, DG101
  11. So what you are saying is that whilst the modification is being proven, the aircraft has been moved into a category that does not exist within RA-Aus and is flying there happily, signed out by RA-Aus? Or did I miss a piece of legislation somewhere?
  12. Whilst I don't want to put anyone down or criticise overly, there are a few things in the latest magazine that caught my eye, where it left me wondering - doesn't anyone else proof read the articles? The issues I see lie currently with the tech department, and whilst I know Steve hasn't been there that long as yet, it has been about 8 months now so the ins and outs of the various registration categories should be starting to gel. I read with amusement and concern in the latest magazine (march09) that when an aircraft is put into Experimental category, that the aircraft is no longer "operated" to the same safety standards as normal commercial passenger flight, (pg32 warning placard). I disagree with that statement, and I really hope that it was a misprint and should have made some reference to "maintained" instead. The next bit for which RA-Aus should be congratulated as it could never be done before was to place a factory built aircraft (aka Gazelle) into the experimental category after it has been modified without manufacturer's approval OR a CAR35 approval, for an infinite period of time. (pg 9+32) Whilst this is good for us aviators with said aircraft, I hasten to think what the consequences to the organisation would be when there is a double fatality. Is this approved by CASA? Is it somewhere in the tech manual? At least the resale value of the Gazelle just increased by 20% at least. Good for you Ian ;) Page 9 is a concoction of all categories with bits of LSA and Amateur built requirements listed under the heading 'Factory Built Non LSA'.
  13. Hi Tony, I notice you possibly did not get to fly one of the most recognisable gliders in the world, though it might come in the next installment of 'down memory lane'. The aircraft is of course the baby brother of the Moazagotl - namely the Minimoa. This specimen is owned by the Schempp-Hirth factory to add to their own 'museum pieces' such as the V tailed Open Cirrus, and access to a G ővier and G ő3. For those that are unaware of the origins of the name - G ő - G ő1 (Wolf), G ő2, G ő3, G ő4 stems from the factory of Wolf Hirth which was located in a town in southern Germany called Gőppingen. When Wolf Hirth met up with Martin Schempp, they moved the factory to the current location in Kirchheim/Teck. During the war, they were forbidden to produce aircraft and they ended up making weaving looms and prosthetics in order to keep their workforce employed. Wolf Hirth ended up becoming the Mayor of Kirchheim/Teck and due to his living and working on aircraft in the US prior to the war, was able to strike up favourable terms (foods, trade etc) for Kirchheim/Teck with the yanks.
  14. There is definitely more training conducted in composite gliders these days than those wonderous days of the blanik. Whilst my training was also in a Blanik and it is a gracious old girl to fly, the maintenance headache makes composites much more favourable. Most European countries trained in the Grob G103 Twin Disaster (aka the resin blob), gave the Centrair Marianne a go (then quickly forgot that idea) and have moved on to the Duo Discus (along with some of it's imitators). The major drawback to this approach in Australia is cost. Therefore, the Blanik will continue to be a viable training aircraft. Others such as the Puchatek and Puchacz are good at the time, but in training use see an growing rate of maintenance required as the hours are piled on. For a small club, the Blanik is a great workhorse for the money, for the larger more financial clubs (like Kingaroy), the move to a composite fleet has proven very successful with more membership and more hours being flown on club aircraft.
×
×
  • Create New...