Downunder

Nostalgic for the Whiz Wheel? No! No I'm not.....

I will "second" the usefulness of a flow meter. Not an absolute solution in itself, but combined with gauges and known initial amount, you can compare readings in flight....

Perhaps more suitable for another thread, but I've always thought electric turbo chargers for take off and climb could work on aircraft....

I like this as a concept, but they should have made a new gearbox as a further develpoment incorporating the motor as a "built-in" component. This would save weight and bring the c of g back in a bit.

As the owner of a multi carb engine, if I was going the route of supplying and metering fuel to individual cylinders, I think it would have to be electronic fuel injection to reap many benefits without alot of the problems of multi carbs. http://www.sdsefi.com/jabiru.htm

Horsham Aviation. I have had outstanding service at very good prices. I know someone who put 50K in Garmin into a 172 elsewhere. I thought it was a bit expensive.

When I joined, it was actively promoting the fact in magazine articles that it did NOT and would not supply third parties with members personal information. Then one day it just threw that out the window ....... https://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/privacy-complaint-approved-by-oaic.68314/ https://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/avdata-again.67579/

The Raa always promised to never reveal personal details, however it did on the sly to avdata via the AAA (Australian Airports Association). Eventually revealed by the RAA when pushed. So avdata (a private company) now have everyones name, rego and address....... without their express permission.

Well, if you wanted to spend the money...... https://radiantinstruments.com/fuel-probe-system/

I'm not able to measure mine at the moment. I'm guessing you want about 5mm spring stretch seated and will probably pull twice that to get them on.

An interesting read for those interested in W&B in accidents. https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2017/aair/ao-2017-081/

My opinion. Use a real prop for load. A ground adjustable can be adjusted for different loads on the engine. Nothing to fabricate or calculate. It will also provide some airflow over engine.

The mum was 92....... and the son is suing for HIS stress and anxiety.....ffs....

Hang on, hang on. The training needs to be relevant to the flying being done, doesn't it? Those wanting a PPL for someone flying a drifter out of a farm strip need to think about why recreational flying exists and why it is a supposedly "affordable" hobby. I think the current training curriculum is perfectly fine with the minimum standard basically the ability to fly in a CTAF safely. Further training exists for expanding skills into Navigation/cross country, etc for those wanting that. It seems sensible to me. It's easy for the (perhaps non-flying) aviation "elitists" to tell other people and pilots how they should spend their money while destroying the financial viability of the average "Joe" wanting to give flying a crack!

And with a cable attached, you might be able to go the other way and lean it as well....

Well...... no one puts a gun to anyones head to make them sign up. There are far better deals. Even travelling to a regional airport and staying in accomodation can be cost effective. It wouldnt surprise me if the airport fees in a private/cta owned airport were extremely high. Noting, not only the operation of a business out of one, but the hangar lease as well......

From a report on the 915...... The initial climb rate was almost 2,000fpm at 70kt which (bearing in mind the density altitude) was pretty respectable, while at 7,000ft MSL the increase in performance really was very noticeable. The turbocharger worked as advertised, with no discernible reduction in manifold pressure, and having trimmed forward and set ‘max cruise’ of 5,500rpm and 37 inches of manifold pressure the IAS soon settled on 135kt for a TAS of 150 while burning 34-35 lit/hr. Pretty impressive numbers, and although if you’re a long-term Rotax pilot you might be thinking that 35 lit/hr is quite thirsty, I’d counter that 150kt TAS is quite fast! Pull the power back a long way to say 4,800rpm and seventeen inches, and the engine is now just barely sipping litres per hour at 80kt TAS, while a good compromise (Bristell call it the ECO setting) of 5,000rpm and 36ins of manifold pressure still give a TAS of around 145kt at 7,000ft AMSL.

https://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/rotax-914-jabiru-j230.72438/ The 915 fuel burn concerns me. I'm unsure why such a high technology engine (turbo and fuel injected) uses so much fuel. 40 lph plus at WOT. Even the cruise figures are not flash. Perhaps at 16 000 feet it becomes reasonable. For range and economy, the 912iS or even the 914 runs rings around it if you don't need that ultimate power.

I would not put sealant on the choke gasket.... And the sealant used on the float bowl is just there to retain it when you drop the bowl on the aircraft to check for contaminents or remove main jet. It's not there to actually seal. I would remove the needle and inspect it for wear while you're at it. A broad screwdriver down the hole to take out the retaining "plug". The rotax ones are loctited in but I've not had a problem getting it out. You will also be able to see what groove the circlip (e-clip) is on. Rotax had a problem with vibration and needle movement around the clip, so they fitted an o-ring to the botton of the retaining plug.

RAA aircraft can fly in class E if adsb equipped, if that's any help....

A bit under half that for a carby....... Hose barbs and worm screw clamps (or similar) are common in rec aircraft, including factory built. There doesn't seem to be a mass of fires resulting from their use....... lets not panic.

I have a manifold pressure gauge. There are so many variables to the figure, I think it would be impossible to diagnose anything before other more obvious symptoms become apparent.

Perhaps I'm too much of a sceptic, but l think most candidates have their own private reasons for getting into the RAA hierarchy. Either CFI's looking to expand regulation into more training or others using the RAA as a stepping stone into CASA and other aviation corporate oriented positions. I don't see many with purely the effective management and running of the RAA as their one and only goal.

What vacuum gauge are you describing? Manifold vacuum/pressure or diaphragm chanber vacuum?

A pricey one in Mongolia..... And another older add..... https://jabiru.net.au/more/for-sale/