skippydiesel

57 minutes ago, Blueadventures said:

Nice; what is the cost excluding travel?

Let you know when she responds to my email

FYI - Aircraft Weighing Australia 

Contact: 0448448316, Ceri (Kerri) Bartlett

aircraftweighingaustralia.com.au

35 minutes ago, Yenn said:

What use is repeatability if the repeat is incorrect each time.

For scales to be usable they need to be correct. If they are incorrect by for example 15% they should I think still give a correct C of G, but the weight will be incorrect.

If they are incorrect by different percentages at the ends of the scale, they will be incorrect on C of G as well as weight. In both cases not acceptable for safe flying.

Repeatability means that when you set the scale, using a known weight, you then have an accurate start point.

If the scale has an adjustable readout (& all that I have ever seen do) then you can set the scale accordingly - it will be correct at the test weight.

Ideally your test weight will be in the same range, as the weight you want to measure (outside the lab this is rarely practical). I

The scales should  be tested before & after measuring the unknown (aircraft wheel) weight to check that it is still giving the same reading (repeatability). 

Technology is such that many digital measuring devises remain "accurate" over extended periods however it would be a false assumption that they are always correct. EG Your local fuel station is subject to routine testing of their fuel metering devises,to ensure that you the customer is not being "shorted". The same goes for any public weigh bridge. ETC ETC ie the equipment is being tested for repeatability.

FYI

Most of the filters I found, that may meet my specifications, are not readily available in Australia

The following are available  in line fuel filters, with clear plastic body, gauze filter medium and 8mm in/out spigots ;

• Baldwin BF 7863 
• Baldwin BF 7850 - this one has about X4 the surface area of the above
• Claimed filtration 75 micron (both)

• Hengst H102 (straight) & 103 (elbow) WK
• Claimed filtration 150 micron

5 hours ago, Bosi72 said:

..............................................................

Also, a number of 4wd's, utes and cars these days have a trailer sway control.

 

 

This is in-itself part of the problem. I refer to the unstoppable march of technology. Don't get me wrong, technology enables me to fly etc etc not against it, just recognise that so often (always?) there is a down side, rarely considered , to every "improvement/enhancement".

In this case the dumbing down of driver skills.

There was a time we all drove manuals, had to be alert to trailer sway and know how to counter it, leave decent stopping distances (particularly when towing)& not rely on the ABS to get you out of trouble - not any more, or so the weekend worriers (don't) think.

Steve L, above, ".... common to see them overheated due to riding on t’s common to see them overheated due to riding on long downhills" Why?  because the driver either doesn't understand engine braking OR is to lazy to use it. I don't drive an auto transmission, but understand that they can be changed down, to access engine braking but those that have been "trained" on autos (or become habituated) don't seem to understand this, preferring to rely on the brakes alone.

Rant over

Any measuring devise that has repeatability, within an accepted range, must by definition be appropriate. (repeatability in this context simply means that the devise will give the same result every time it is used). 

This is not the issue - we live in an era where society (& authority) seem to require third part endorsement (certification) of almost everything we experience, including the use of scales to weigh  whatever.

The desire/move to change a departments name would seem to be very common and in most instances, without any objective reasoning or goal. 

It usually occurs about the time that there is a change in administration & the imposition of a range changes, designed to demonstrate the superior capacity of the new order.

I have always suspected it is as a result of an external (read very expensive) consultant purporting to be a "marketing" expert wishing to justify their fee.

The net result is always very expensive (the tax payer will cough up) of dubious benefit, characterised by customer/client confusion, frustration & even anger and demoralisation of the staff - in short inefficiency.

Well I have used both override and electric and I will never go back to overridden.

I have towed large double floats (600 kg x 2 horses, plus all gear & feed for weekend coemption probably 2.5-3 tonne all up) . Numerous configurations of dual axle flat/box trailers - never had a brake problem. Why? because I do my own (re) wiring, to a standard far beyond the usual commercial rubbish.  I minimise connections and where they are unavoidable make sure they are tight & well sealed against moisture/dirt. I run a separate earth/ground wire front to back, that connects in with the tug plug system (which also has a dedicated earth system to the trailer hitch).  Brake wiring is on a separate parallel circuit (not in series like some trailer places ) to each wheel, using HD wire. All wires are, wherever possible, contained in conduit (usually recycled polly pipe & properly supported along length). If I have to cross the trailer chassis, I try to put the wiring behind a chassis frame or in a chassis tube, to avoid "gravel rash"  None of its rocket science and the brakes can be set by the driver (in his/her seat on the go) to reflect any change in load/conditions. Lights always work as do the brakes - easy!

8 minutes ago, Blueadventures said:

A way forward in near future would be to track down a SAAA w&b person near you; should be someone close by.

Done! 30 seconds ago. My thanks.

2 hours ago, Yenn said:

I made my ground plane from brass shim about 15 thou, just a square souldered up at the size that would fit inside the fuse. Very light weight and works well.

The antenna is 1/8" SS cut to suit the middle of the airband for length.

As I understand it any conductive material (mainly metals) will do.

For ease of acquisition (local supply/low cost), low weight and corrosion resistance, I went with aluminium.

The builders aluminium flashing is great stuff - can be molded to conform to almost any shape and trimmed with industrial scissors (could probably use any scissors but may not do the tool much good)  or tin snips . For stability & durable attachment, does need a sandwich of aluminium plate (s) where your antenna base comes through.

From RAA today - If I understood correctly;

RAA L2's have not had automatic W&B testing privileges since 2016.

RAA has a submission in with CASA, right now, to restart W&B testing (if you have done the course)

The submission is a step by step methodology for anyone whishing to do a W&B the CASA/RAA approved way - I don't quite understand if this allows an owner to actually do a pre first flight W&B (doubt it)

Proper scales are required (not your bathroom jobs).

I suspect that W&B for a first flight will still have to be signed of by an authorised (?) person

10 hours ago, Steve L said:

Skippy, I had override brakes on hundreds of rental trailers around SA without any problems, although I converted to disks early in the piece. I started with the run of the mill Mullins drum brakes, approx 50 units, and your right. . . a nightmare. So I converted to Holden HQ disks/calipers and marine seals, left the override coupling standard. The brakes then were exceptional with no adjustment and minimal wheel bearing failures. 
 

Steve 

Sorry Steve - I cant agree that a brake system that works by compressing a big spring, curtesy of a decelerating tow vehicle,  is (any longer) an acceptable braking system. Only reason hire companies still use them is that "weekend worriers" with tow bar but no electric brakes, want to hire them.

My mate was towing a loaded hired car trailer (override brakes) down a long steep hill, when he managed to "jackknife" the trailer (very near the bottom) and ended up under a "dog" trailer going in the opposite direction. Yes there were (as always) other factors, gravel on the road, the tow vehicle was just over its maximum allowable towing limit (which to my mind was too high anyway) but I very much doubt if he would have lost control if electric brakes had been used.

9 hours ago, aro said:

I think it's a dipole so a ground plane is not required. That is what the black bit hanging down is.

Again from the uninitiated - I had a dipole set in my glass aircraft - it was okay but nothing compared with the conventional antenna with decent groundplane that I installed later (chalk & cheese).

True the dipole may have been poorly executed (I don't know) and I did splash out & purchase a new radio at the same time but the difference was genuinely astonishing.

10 minutes ago, Blueadventures said:

Your best to phone RAAus Tech in the morning;  keen to hear what they tell you.

Will do.

Working okay is a bit like saying "sh'ell be right". This is a long way from even good trans/reception let alone excellent.

Most of us have experienced poor quality radio communications and hoped our own efforts would be a significant level better.

I would ask does the pilot (A) of this aircraft clearly hear transmissions from the pilot (B )10+ Nm away and conversely does pilot B clearly hear the transmission from pilot A - if not then something needs to improve.

A decent groundplane  is usually so easy and cheap to make/install - you may be surprised at how your transceivers performance improves..

Gentlefolk - IS THE RUMOUR TRUE??

Or

Are we just getting or underwear uncomfortably contorted, for no good reason

Personally I would have nothing to do with "override brakes"  on any trailer - high maintenance to keep working effectively, overly dependent on the tow vehicle providing the initial stopping resistance and have been known to "bite" with fetal consequences.

This obsolete technology was great, before we had electric brake systems and now should simply be outlawed.

Just my opinion (had a mate killed by one)

Just heard a rumour - RAA L2's are no longer able to perform an authorised weight & balance.

Got to fined/use a CASA approved person (do hens have teeth?).

Please tell me this is not true.

"I've sent off a few enquiries and have called a few transport companies; quotes are coming in around $15k+ which is a bit steep for what it is."

So my Aircraft Carrier may be the way to go - spend $15K (or more) on a  mainland "toy" hauler/van of the correct dimensions - tow it over (almost any ute would do the job as all up weight low) and sell the van in Tassie and get your dough back

No offence, but to my untutored mind,the groundplane looks to be far too small

49 minutes ago, facthunter said:

GUT an old lightweight caravan. Strap the wings carefully together with Pillows etc separating them and have light springs on  it Feed it through one end. It will weigh Bugger all and could be pulled with almost anything.. Nev

That's what I did to relocate my Sonex from S Gippsland to mid NSW (about 10 hrs drive each way).

• 1975 Viscount Supreme re named The Aircraft Carrier. Had to be this big to get the internal capacity (about 8 m). The double axle gives good stability & flotation on the road.
• Great chassis, suspension (with electric brakes both axles) all aluminium van frame and skin. Be warned, a van of this age uses imperial aluminium channel that is no longer available - modifications may require some ingenuity.
• It sounds easy but as I belatedly found out, the guts of a caravan (the internal fit out) are structural, so the conversion needs to include "stiffening" ribs.
• I replaced the floor with marine ply (Bunnings ). The wheel arches are forme ply onto angle iron, with width extensions to accommodate aircraft main wheel track.
• Loading is accomplished using SCA folding aluminium ramps (200KG each). Two strong blokes can wheel the fuselage up/down (I did toy with the idea of a boat winch).
• Wings can be either lie flat (with suitable packing/sandwich) or in purpose built (shaped) wooden (ply) carriers. There is also space to put the wings over top fuselage but would require some additional struts.
• I cut the rear end off the van body (in line with the chassis) and replaced it with a large aluminium single hinge door (which is also structural when closed).
• Most window glass replaced with double wall polycarbonate (Suntuff?) . Roof vents replaced with aluminium sheet. All wiring removed. Brake & vehicle lights wiring replaced.
• Threaded eye bolts (going through chassis out riggers) down each internal side, provide a wide choice of tie down locations.
• I used expanded polystyrene sheets (can be recycled for house/shed insulation), bubble wrap and packing tape, to protect large  components from tie down damage.
• Use low tyre  pressure (30 -36 psi) to soften the ride. If you go this low, be sure to keep an eye on tyre temperatures - increase pressure if they get hot.

Its not a "thing of beauty" but it is registered, tows straight and keeps the weather off - currently doing service storing the wings/empennage.

Note: Do not modify the chassis itself ESPECIALLY ANY PART THAT CARRIES THE VIN (usually the tow frame). If you do this in NSW, you will then require an engineers inspection/certificate to register the van.

Unless you get the (dual axle) van for nothing, you will probably end up spending around $8-12K to put it back on the road as an aircraft/toy hauler. To purchase one new will be north of $20K (I imagine)

If you want one, its easy to make a groundplane for a non metal aircraft  - I used flat aluminium rod (from memory 1.6 x 25 mm) for the longitudinal axis (cant remember the length but probably as long as the aircraft would accommodate on the inside floor of the fuselage)  now and builders (annealed) soft aluminium flashing for the horizontal axis. The flashing can be molded to the contours of the fuselage & glued in place with silastic. Where they cross ( as near to centre as practical) you need an aluminium plate with a hole in it for the cable/connector and 3-4 smaller holes to mount the antenna - worked a treat.

Twin (possibly a Baron) wheels up landing,  comment by ABC,  to the effect ..  "undercarriage clutch failed" .....?? where does this rubbish come from ??

FYI Pilot did  a great job

Thanks Onetrack - very well articulated.

One point- I don't have to guess/speculate on the fuel "cleanliness" required. Rotax have a specification for this (see above comment from me) "filter with mesh size 0.1 mm (70–100µ) " so 120 micron is a bit too course. I will aim for about 50-74 micron in my final/last filter in the system

Thanks RFguy - have measured my oil level relative to crank case , as per Rotax installation instructions, and find everything to be well within listed parameters.