Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If it’s the short wing t85 with 503 then yes. If it’s the t83 with the belt drive robin you might like to consider operating from a 8-900m long strip without trees in the first few miles ;-)

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the trouble with American Very Basic, Low powered aircraft. They all seem to have been developed on the Great Plains where once you clear the trees, there's not much need for more terrain clearance ability. Much the same in Great Britain. With the majority of Australia's population living between the Great Dividing Range and the coast, we need the power to get to 3 -5000' a bit quickly if we want to do anything more than short local flights.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a wonderfull concept and aircraft and full marks for his work, the only caviate I would need to adhear to would be a certified tig welding process and a clamp system inplace of through bolts on the landing gear sprung suspension tube

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
If it’s the short wing t85 with 503 then yes. If it’s the t83 with the belt drive robin you might like to consider operating from a 8-900m long strip without trees in the first few miles ;-)

Well considering i owned and did over 100 hrs in my belt driven T83 with robin ec44pm and operated out of my 200 meter strip its safe to say your not quite right there. !!!! In fact way off mate ;). T 83 with belt drive robin at mtow of 300 kgs climbs all day long at over 500 fpm. the most strip i used was 150 on a stinking hot day. ;). And that was in 2013IMG_4389.PNG.03e91c387b1a8bcebd6c3c9c8180986c.PNG

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well considering i owned and did over 100 hrs in my belt driven T83 with robin ec44pm and operated out of my 200 meter strip its safe to say your not quite right there. !!!! In fact way off mate ;). T 83 with belt drive robin at mtow of 300 kgs climbs all day long at over 500 fpm. the most strip i used was 150 on a stinking hot day. ;). And that was in 2013[ATTACH=full]61942[/ATTACH]

My experience operating an admittedly tired T83 was different- flying from 1000amsl in summer at takeoff weight of 260kg was poor. Climb around 3-350fpm.

And the comment on runway length was not just about getting off the ground but having enough to put it back down when the engine played up. Yes 200m is enough to get in the air but with the ultra prop it had you were working the engine hard .. and ANY carb issue or a speck of hot carbon would melt a hole Int eh crown of the piston in short order ... usually about 200m past the end of the runway from my experience.

 

Plus the t83 is a much smaller cockpit than the t85 - the a frames come together under the fuse boom not to the sides and the rear boom starts come off the back of the undercarriage criss beam UNLeSS it’s been modified to t85 status as yours had.

 

My post was half tongue in cheek. Not all thrusters are the same and the t85 r503 is a very high performance single seat aircraft. Near 1000fpm climb from the same 1000amsl airfield on the same day the t83 was climbing 200.

 

I was 95kg dressed and the two airframes are not comparable for comfort and performance.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...

At a sprightly 48 Kts she'd be quicker than walking (most of the time ;- )

Anyway, they only made 20 before closing up shop. Too bad.

 

 

Edited by Garfly
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks overly strong and the uncovered fuselage would have a lot of drag.  Drag is with you all the time as is surplus weight.. Nev

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

But lets not forget - the plane came in at 114kg with a generac big twin fourstroke engine ... that airframe while looking chunk is actually very light.

And for cover on the fusealge they are limited to 115kg empty in the USA so who is volunteering they can cover that for less than 1kg ...

Plus the USA is limited to speed - must stall below 24knt and full throttle must not exceed 55knt ... cruise at 48knt is pretty much what is requried.

 

The backyard flyer is a not designed to the Australian limits for ultralights so its pretty pointless comparing it to the Australian limits and pilot expectations because it will come up short.

 

Its like complaining that a 95.10 sapphire is not as good as a 95.25 sapphire or that the 95.25 sapphire is not as good as the 95.55 sapphire.

They all had different legal envelopes they had to fit within and the different airframes fit their envelopes in different ways.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
On 26/02/2021 at 11:55 AM, kasper said:

But lets not forget - the plane came in at 114kg with a generac big twin fourstroke engine ... that airframe while looking chunk is actually very light.

And for cover on the fusealge they are limited to 115kg empty in the USA so who is volunteering they can cover that for less than 1kg ...

Plus the USA is limited to speed - must stall below 24knt and full throttle must not exceed 55knt ... cruise at 48knt is pretty much what is requried.

 

The backyard flyer is a not designed to the Australian limits for ultralights so its pretty pointless comparing it to the Australian limits and pilot expectations because it will come up short.

 

Its like complaining that a 95.10 sapphire is not as good as a 95.25 sapphire or that the 95.25 sapphire is not as good as the 95.55 sapphire.

They all had different legal envelopes they had to fit within and the different airframes fit their envelopes in different ways.

We need to claim back history, and start a Foundation Aviation sector in Australia based on FAR Part 103 US standards.

Rec Aviation is heading into GA territory and we need a lower tier to get back to basics.  Yeah I know memories of dead pilots strewn around paddocks in amongst twisted and mangled Skycraft Scouts and other basic flying machines.

Whilst respecting the past, airframes have come along way since the AUF days.

We need to look further into the possibilities of creating this aviation segment.

Yes, it’s my opinion and I feel personally obligated to do something in furthering the concept.

New electric drive technology would be a whole new thing to try in the segment.

See here:

https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aviation-interests/~/media/5DF51DF31576409AB310FA7C5DBA34D7.ashx

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...