rick-p

Hi all, Anyone looking for the ultimate between motor glider and light aircraft you at the right price contact Lambadaman and I think you will be pleased with what he can tell you. I bought his Lambada and there is one other that he has sold in Australia, it is a magic machine. the best of both worlds. Regards, rick-p

My aircraft is powered by a Jab 2200 with mechanical tappets. My engine reporting instrument is a Flydat:- oil pressure and temperature, etc. Problem:- oil presure reading on reduced power constantly reading low or the same after a long climb out. Temperature is fine, well within the correct range so not a viscosity problem. Using Aeroshell 100 plus. Pressure at reduced power fluctuates between .9 bar and 1.8 and whilst on full power increases to 2.2 bar to 2.8 bar. The other day it dropped to .4 on finals and .2 on touch down. I placed one s/s washer under the pressure relief valve spring which initially improved the situation then went back to previous readings or worse. No dirt was found under the seat on the relief valve. All other readings on Flydat seem to be ok. I was told by Jabiru that i should have an oil cooler fitted but I don't believe that this is the problem as temp's are perfect and the plane is factory built overseas and the Jab engine installed there. It has the deep sump and the airflow over the sump and engine is optimum. It's an extremley well designed and engineered installation and the designers were no slouches. Apart from instrument or pressure probe problems have any of you guys out there got any suggestions. Your knowledge or experiences will be greatly appreciated. My real concern is that if it is a genuine low pressure problem then the rear bearings will suffer. Does anyone know the correct operating pressure for the Jab 2200 as the book says one thing and the factory tells me something else. I will be this weekend fitting a VDO oil pressure guage to confirm whether or not it is the Flydat that is the problem, the oil pressure switch seems to be operating correctly. Please your suggestions guys.:;)5: Thanks, rick-p

Hi Danda, Thanks, it is a very interesting link with a wealth of information to be gleaned from it. Thanks again, rick-p

Hi Facthunter, Is it not also the case that certain synthetic oils are like magnets as far as moisture is concerned. This was a real problem with model aero engines when a few years ago castor oil was a bit hard to acquire in bulk quantities. I would also think that the climate where the aircraft is kept would play some part in it. Wet or dry climate and cold or hot climate, condensation from temperature variations, do you agree? Regards, rick-p

Brentc, It's not my allegation it is in fact the experts from whom I have obtained my facts. If I get a chance I will send a private message to you with the relevant info and if you feel so minded to do so you can call some people and find out for yourself. I still own and fly my CA21 Skyfox but I know it's limitations and I fly it within them. As a point of interest I understood that the cross wind rating on a Skyfox was only 14 knots not 20. Regards, rick-p

Ian I hate to be a killjoy but a word of advice, watch your top cruise speed in a Skyfox whether it has a tail wheel or training wheel it dosn't matter they are really only designed to cruise at a speed of less than 80 knots, more in the order of 73 knots. I have addressed this issue in these forums previously. I can assure you that my statements are based on fact not fiction. The fox is a wonderful light aircraft if flown within it's design envelope but go outside it and it will one day bite you and 80knots cruise is not good as it is borderline as to the Fox's design limits. As for the cost of the prop it would help if there was a little competition but unfortunately it would appear, probably because of the cost in doing so, that IVO or BOLLY props are not interested in obtaining certification. rick-p

Would anyone like to know the answer to my previous post in this thread? rick-p

"Facthunter" I sincerely apologise to you for my innocent error in the spelling of your name. It was, I can assure you, the typo Gremlin that made me do it. Those little beings that hide in or about the keys of the computer keyboard deliberately, just as you go to strike the correct key, subsituting another key in the correct key's place just so you will look like a Goose to all those who read your posts or worse still have them thinking that you are trying to be funny. I suppose they are the same as those little Gremlins that come into play when you are desperately trying to show to those watching from terra firma that your 3 point landings are the bee's knees and you end up with your backside pointing in the opposite direction from which ye came, or is it just the fat fingers syndrome? Who really knows? Truthfully it was just a mistake, I wasn't trying to be rude. Kind regards, rick-p

Fachunter, well put. It just about says it all about both attitudes relevant to putting a TD safely back on the ground. rick-p

Just to be different, in my view everyone should be taught to wheel a tail dragger on before they learn to three point it. I am of the firm view, as are a number of instructors I have spoken to, that learning to wheel on a TD certainly requires a certain amount of accurate judgement as to the aircraft position relative to the ground and a more accurate point of flare. It also makes for a much more controlled landing in a stiff cross wind as it requires a little more forward momentum to keep the tail up hence more airflow over the control surfaces and less effect from the cross wind. This is my view and i'm sticking to it as experiance has proven it to me, to be correct. rick-p

As a point of interest for all some Skyfox's are certified for three bladed props and in respect thereof can any of the prop engineers out there tell me why where and how. Just a little knowledge test. Regards, rick-p

Hi Secatur, my point exactly, thanks. Rick P.

Yes John that's true but with the CA21, CA22 & CA25 there was a variance in airspeed between each aircraft due to the way they were rigged. Certain of the CA21's & 22's varried greatly such as my CA21 cruise is about 65 to 70kts whereas the CA22 I learnt to fly in (same motor in each case) cruise was between 80kts and 85kts really leaving no room for error ( as it was proved) in the design limitations. I will agree that there were some improvements with the Gazelle but it is still the same design based on European calculations and not taking into account the turbulence we can experiance here in Australia which such in the case of the SkyFox can cause it to exceed the design limits very quickly (VNE) at times which such in fact did occur in a particular incident. Great aeroplane a hoot of fun and if you can fly a CA21 or CA22 you can fly anything but always be ever aware of your speed and climatic conditions, just back off when in doubt. Kndest regards, RICK P

Yes Ross point taken. This is more probably the case for Jabiru engines as they are evolving at very fast pace. My idear was basically to establish a factual base as to the pro's and con's in respect of each engine. Maybe the do's and don'ts also that would assist those who are in the dark and at times have only the club house or pub conjecture to base their decision on. It's no good going to the factory to ask what a manufacturer thinks of his product. The good or the bad oil must come from the end user not the opposition. You need like a hole in the head a Rotax 912 user making observations in respect of a Jab 2200. Do I make sense or have I confused the issue further. I hear every other day Rotax proponents bagging Jabiru but nearly all have never owned or used a Jabiru engine and at times there is the reverse of this situation with Jabiru motor owners. Can someone who can see where I'm coming from help me out here please? RICK P.

Ok I've read with interest and listened with some concern to the engine bashing given by proponents of the main two engines we use in our magical passtime, cloud dancing. I have been a Rotax (447 and 912) person since Adam was a boy but because of my recent aircraft aquisition I have now also become a Jabiru engine owner and user. What I would like to see in this forum is a genuine and constructive discussion of the said two engines as i do believe that certain of the hype in respect of Jabiru is not now deserved and that the 2200 is nearing a very comparable position to that of the 912. If those of you out there with actual knowledge and experiance could give an unbiased comparison of the two engines I know that it will be greatly appreciated by many. I could imagine that there are many people who seriously ponder on such things but do not ask for fear of appearing a bit dull of mind. Please humour an old fart and give all of us who don't know but want to know the real goods on these engines, who knows evenI maybe able add something not known by others. Lets set asside the street talk and speak of only fact without fiction. If you had heard some of the stories I heard in respect of both engines you would never have either in your pride and joy. WE SHOULD ADDRESS TOPICS SUCH AS RELIABILITY, ECONOMY, VALUE/ PURCHASE PRICEAND MAINTENANCE AND EASE AND COST OF MAINTENANCE just to name a few areas for discusssion. Also these areas could be assessed on a point system of 1 to 10 with 1 being the worst and 10 being the best. It should be a warts and all forum but factual not hearsay, or briefing room gossip. What do you all think? RICK P.

To all yes very sad when life is lost in such circumstances, particularly when it's doing something that is loved to be done by so many. The old saying "s..t happens" when you least expect it is so very true and usually when you are doing something that is enjoyable, look at Peter B and Steve I. I have lost very close anddear friends in aircraft accidents and it certainly hits home how vunerable we all are.The truth and reality of it all is that when your numbers up it's up and there is absolutelynothing you can do about it. It's the one's we leave behind that are the real victims so it is up to us all to giveourselves, families and friends a fighting chance byalways practising good airmanship and never thinkI got away with it before and I will again.As for ejection seats there is another reason they are not used on civillian aircraft and that is the powers to be would rather see a pilot have a go at getting an aircraft down somewhere less populated such as a football field than the middle of built-up area ofa city or town. We all know that theRAAF pilots are extremely well trained to the point that if they believedthat their ejecting from a disabled aircraft would causeloss of civillian life they would fly it or try to fly it to point where that would not occur.These guys in the main are fearless but is the average pilot ?Maybe Mr averageJoe would eject overSydney City proper with his plane then crashing into Martin Place killing 50or 100 bystanders.Food for thought isn't it? They allow BalisticRecovery equipment to be fitted aircraft, don't they? They use explosives andairbags in cars use explosives so I don't really think that the explosive argument is a valid one. My sincere condolences to the families and friends of the two deceased. RICK P.

Mate it's like anything in life, what we have we take for granted and onlywhen it's gone do we appreciate whatwe had and pine for the good old days.Thanks for the best of the best. Regards RickP.

Clem, why wouldit be a different story if it was a 912? RICK P rick-p

Tony, on the subject of a SkyFox support group i did myself try to start one years ago when the Type Certificate was sold to overseas interests.CASA was even interested in helping. Something like the Vic. Air Tourer. Unfortunately the then legislation did not provide for CASA to be able to take the type cert. away from the new Arab owners. Many letters and phone calls and $'s later I was still nowhere. I was confronted by by stone walls every which way I turned. There is a real need for a better understanding of all the SkyFox family be it theCA21, CA22 or CA25. every owner needs to know the aircrafts exact limitations because if flown within the same it is a completely safe and fun aircraft to fly but if you stray outside the now better knowndesign limitations of the aircraft it will, not may, it will bite you big time.Tony, you are 100% correct when you say that the main reason for so many bingles in them was as a result of poor instruction on type. I have flown many hours in a CA21 without incident whereas my soul mate in aviation died as a result of a catastrophic airframe failure in his CA22, he had in excess of 1000hrs on type and was a giffted pilot and instructor.All, be aware and wise, in rough air throttle back to between 65ktsand 70kts, no more andthis will allow a sufficient safety margin in the event of you getting caught by the big hit.I hope that this informationis of use and is treated as fact not fiction, regards, RICK P.

I have read all the observations here on this issue but still there does not seem to be any closure in respect of the matter. Is it a genuine problemor is it just another Jabiru motor hypothesis? I would really like to know as my new ship is powered by a 2200 and the alleged guilty rev range is just what my ship thrives on, (economy cruise).If someone has the correct verdict would they mind to enlighten me,thanks. Rick p.