rodgerc

I inspected a new JMB VL3 Evolution with a Rotax 916iS engine at Redcliffe about 2-1/2 weeks ago….200kt TAS and on the RA-AUS register. Didn’t have the heart to tell the proud owner that it wasn’t an aeroplane. Hang onto your hats fellas….MOSAIC is coming, ready or not.

In an attempt in inject some light relief into this thread, and at risk of emulating Bernard Woolley (ref: Yes Prime Minister), it seems we may have a case of logical fallacy, since the conclusion is contained within the premise. Ie Since CASA has not evidenced anything in writing, neither in hard copy nor digital format, there cannot therefore be any “paper” to which value may be ascribed.

Conversely, in order to maintain your (owner built) CASA reg VH experimental, you must have completed the MPC provided by the SAAA….It’s cost is around $550. The W&B component of the MPC requires renewal biannually, but the procedures component has no expiry date. The catch is, according to the SAAA, to hold the MPC qualification, you must be a current financial member of the SAAA. Therefore, those who have resigned from, or have not renewed their SAAA membership after completion and Phase 1 testing are not entitled to maintain their VH registered experimental aircraft.

If you’ve already built a substantially similar aircraft and purchase another experimental built by someone else, there is an avenue to be the maintainer of the aircraft….

A six or seven years ago I asked my daughter (partner in law firm) whether or not I should agree to an engineering software licence agreement (Finite Element Analysis)….Her response after a cursory scan, “Do you want to use their software, or not?”

Buy one….Cut away most of the centre portion of the bellows so you have two ends to connect to your Bings with hose clamps….Make up two split ring flanges from some 0.040” 6061 T6 sheet that will secure the “cut ends” to your airbox with pulled rivets….Go flying.

Spot on Skippy…. I built and flew a 2300 cc AeroVee (upgraded from 2180cc Nikasil) powered Waiex that was a ton on fun and as strong as an ox, but the lack of a 912-ULS Rotax option (at the time) dictated that our relationship would not be long-term. The good news for existing owners is that they are so simple, that anything short of a destroyed spar cap is easily repaired or replaced. If (when) a new owner emerges, they would be well advised to relaunch with a decent Rotax mount….I’m not convinced the high wing variant was going to set the world on fire.

There’s more heat than light in forums….🤔…or is it fora? 🤷🏿‍♂️

https://services.casa.gov.au/airworth/airwd/ADfiles/airgen/gen/GEN-087.pdf

Over the years a number of fellow pilots have told me they wouldn’t be comfortable flying an aircraft that they personally built…My counter comment these days is, I’m not comfortable flying a plane I didn’t build. I’m exceedingly comfortable having my build quality and standard of finish measured against anything coming out of a “factory”.

He’s had considerable angst along the way with his chosen power plant, but doggedly preserved….I sincerely hope that he doesn’t come to regret his tenacity in that regard. 🙏

Just checking you familiar with the Rotax oil priming process utilising low pressure compressed air.

I wonder, is it the Subaru engine that typically fails or the PSRU bolted to it?

Dean, there’s a fairly active Aus/NZ FB group that might be a source of buyer interest in your S-7.