FlyBoy1960

this was the development version of the aircraft that has gone on to become the first certified electric aircraft in the world, the Pipistrel ALPHA Electro. The 2nd photo you have above is a military variant which is not electric so I am not sure why the photo is there of that aircraft ?

They work great, i think i still have a new one laying around somewhere. Let me look.

I was just reading about the no-fly zone on the Internet and thought I would jump off to flight radar and have a look. Look at the flight tracking for this Etihad flight from Moscow to Abu Dhabi. It's transponder is going on and off by the look of the tracking and it is actually in around airspace. This was up-to-date as of 13:30 this afternoon. Strange ?

Cheaper to use a 24V battery.

a report on the plane crash will be prepared for the coroner and a Recreational Aircraft Australia investigation is also under way

🔄 Can carbon fibre composites be recycled? When carbon fibre is mixed with resin (typically epoxy), it forms a thermoset composite, which is very difficult to recycle using conventional methods. The challenge lies in the chemical structure of the resin: Thermoset resins, once cured, do not melt or soften with heat. This makes separating the carbon fibres from the resin extremely difficult without damaging the fibres. ♻️ Recycling methods (and limitations) There are a few recycling approaches under research or limited industrial use: Pyrolysis (heat-based) The composite is heated in an oxygen-free environment to burn off the resin. This leaves behind carbon fibre, but the process can damage or weaken the fibres. The result is often shorter, lower-quality fibres not suitable for structural aerospace use. Solvolysis (chemical-based) Solvents and supercritical fluids break down the resin. This can preserve longer, higher-quality fibres, but the process is complex, expensive, and not widely adopted yet. Mechanical grinding The composite is ground into filler material. This doesn’t recover usable fibres—just filler material for concrete or plastic products. 🛑 Key limitations Recycled fibres are typically not certified for structural aerospace applications. The cost of recycling often outweighs the value of the recovered material. Most end-of-life carbon fibre parts still end up in landfill or incineration, though this is slowly changing. 🌱 In development Researchers and manufacturers are working on: Recyclable resins (e.g. thermoplastics or reversible thermosets) Cleaner separation techniques Circular economy models for aviation and automotive industries But as of now, recycling carbon fibre composites remains difficult, energy-intensive, and limited in output quality.

Nice looking plane !

They said "it failed to take off"

Or, the school as a history of accidents and claims possibly brought about by different training standards and the insurers need to cover their risk. Quite often you are paying a very high percentage of the aircraft cost in excess. A $100,000 aircraft would normally have an excess of between $3000 - $5000, a $200,000 aircraft could double this

the RA-Aus insurance (try and get a copy out of the head office is impossible) only ensures third-party property and person damage. An example would be if you crashed and killed somebody. If it could be proven that that you were completely compliant with the regulations, your aircraft was up-to-date with all maintenance requirements and there was no other excuse for them not to provide coverage then, there will be an amount paid to your passengers family. Likewise, if you ran into a power line in the process of a completely legal flight (which is unlikely if you hit a power line) then they would cover the cost of getting the powerline repaired. From what I was told there have only ever been 3 successful claims because there is always a way to avoid fulfilling the insurace coverage.

I would be checking it is rated for 160 hp. Most of them are only rated for 115 hp as a maximum. It might pay to are some questions because not all propellers are built the same

the upper surface of the outer wing is vibrating aggressively. You can see it when he turns his head sideways around the 8 minute mark. Something is very wrong with this !

well please drop some hints please ?

Yehh.. That's grams, YOU NEED THIS IN OUNCES ! 🤩

LIMITED STOCK SALE!!!! Bert Flood Imports As we approach the End of Financial year, we have a limited amount of Rotax engines for sale at a discounted price. If you are in the market for a new engine, be sure to act quickly - these won't last long! To take advantage of this sale, use the link below. Sale is on standard configuration engines. For further details on configuration, please contact our team. PARTS PRICE & AVAILABILTY REQUEST Powering Performance, Delivering Excellence. Bert Flood Imports, Your Rotax Specialist. Customer Service Team Bert Flood Imports Pty Ltd 17-18 Chris Drive Lilydale VIC 3140 Phone: 03 9735 5655 [email protected] Bert Flood Imports have been involved in Rotax® engines for more than 35 years. We are the sole Rotax® Aircraft engine distributor for Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea and South-East Asia with a complete spares and back-up service for all models. Our Rotax® Factory Approved Workshop offers a full repair and overhaul service by Rotax® Factory trained staff. We hold the following approvals: CAA Reg30 Approved workshop and Cert. of Approval No.C514621. Bert Flood | Rotax Aircraft Engines

Yes but its ONLY a number you have been allocated, read the fine print, it will say its not a certificate or permission to FLY. You need to find the appropriate category and then get the CofA completed, then, and ONLY, then will you have a REGISTERED aircraft thats approved for FLIGHT.

My aircraft was registered under " AUF " without problems . 95-10-1103 . You can register a broomstick (ask the wife), There is a big difference between being allocated a NUMBER and completing a CofA. The number allocation has NOTHING to do with registration.

It must have been an engine failure ! 😁

Lots of good footage here. Perfect day ! https://www.onsceneact.com.au/index.php/767-light-plane-crashes-near-tharwa-in-canberras-south

It was "technically" taxiing because he was not airborne yet. Nothing to see here. 😉

He just makes them up. keyboard warrior with google and gpt to add to the diatribe.

From the last I heard the company producing the aircraft was sold because they were making 10 times more money out of making wind turbine blade. Whoever they sold it to is no longer trading, they lasted about 12 months apparently before the money ran out, they have grand designs of revamping everything and reintroducing/remarketing the products but it just didn't happen. The purchaser had no experience in aviation although he flew a Storch locally in Italy. All of this is secondhand from somebody I talked to at the airport but he is normally pretty good with what is happening

YAWN.. stop posturing. The RA-Aus are in the pooh-pooh because they lied in court, hid information and got caught out. The DPP will pursue them aggressively if they feel there is a case to answer otherwise there is no use in talking about this any further. The part that is worthwhile talking about is the fact that members money and obviously significant time resources for the staff, which come at a cost to the members, have been used/wasted in defending something which should not have happened. Let's say that RA-Aus spent $300,000 so far (this has been reported on this website) then they owe me and each of you who are members an explanation about what is going on and why they have had to spend this amount of money. I would be expecting an explanation even if it was $50,000! It seems that they have not learned anything from the coroner's inquest findings and they are doing exactly the same with the membership by lying with omission about what is going on.

She was nod a wife who knew nothing, she was training also!

Seems we are playing in an industry of decline in so may ways. 10 years ago there were report and photos everywhere. Now, radio silence.