skippydiesel

9 hours ago, Marty_d said:

Well, I still don't have a home airfield for this plane.  I may have to end up trailering it, and if that happens, I need some way to take the wings off - hence I think having the ability to disconnect the wing tanks would be a good idea.

 

While I do support the metric system, I don't mind referring to 3/8" hose when that's what's written on it.

Fair comment - didn't realise you had removable wings/tanks.

No offence intended - As an enthusiastic adopter of the metric system, I see all references/uses of the obsolete imperial measurements, to be backsliding "Luddites"

Hmmm! - I can see having a "quick" connect for a ferry tank/range extender, type situation but why would you have them for a permanently plumbed fuel tank???

One further Q - Your location, is that Tas, United States of America?  the only country to still favour the imperial measurement system.

27 minutes ago, Old Koreelah said:

A cheap kitchen timer stuck to panel has served me well.

Problemo - most kitchen timers seem to only run for 60 minutes - not great if you have a 6 hr duration (not that I fly for more than 2-3 hrs at a stretch)

Well - I was trained (GA) to fly on time based, on max possible fuel consumption. This was "wet hire" where most of the Cessna's I was flying did 32 L/hr.

Life was simpler, calculations were consistent. Fuel gauges was so erratic no one ever used them.

Now I own an aircraft, fitted with a magnificent Rotax 912ULS,  I can fly at different power settings for a cruise fuel flow 13-18L/hr. I only mention this because, now I am more likely to use the "econamy" option & I need to be more aware of duration ie it can only get worse /shorter.

This is particularly important when running into an unexpected/strong head wind.

Single pilot versus plus passenger/load, also has an impact (not previously highlighted in GA training, 32L/Hr covering almost every eventuality) in these small aircraft. As I generally fly alone,I flight plan on a fuel consumption that will accommodation a pax/load and this gives me a nice conservative planning figure (14L/h) for the occasional slightly higher cruise than normal or an unexpected head wind (to some degree).

I have been fortunate - my automotive style fuel gauge, has remained in calibration for many years and this combined with my fuel flow "computer" allows for very good real time fuel remaining indication.

In 11 years of flying behind my Rotax, I have only diverted once for additional fuel due to unexpected/forecast strong head winds - my fuel gauges/clock/ deteriorating ground speed, all gave me advanced warning, enabling me to plan a diversion, fuel up and continue to my destination without stress.

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

With return lines to keep everything cool how is a normal F/F meter going to allow for the extra? A Flow measurement is a good thing but it must be reliable and pretty  accurate. Nev

Is this Q to me Nev??

If yes- I have found that by calibrating your fuel meter to total fuel consumed, you end up with a very very accurate  read out of fuel consumed/remaining. The fuel that returns to the tank has not been consumed so does not effect the total reading also the fuel return is only a small % of the total so any in flight inaccuracy is minimal (saves on investing dollars & complexity in a second sensor.)

Your actual fuel flow at any given time in the flight may be slightly out but for me what matters is not that you are doing 8L/hr loitering or 21L/hr in climb out but what is remaining in the tank.

The inflight read out will remain constant for any given power setting, and this gives a pretty good idea of power setting.

I have always kept a fuel log - so am able to verify the fuel flow meter setting/accuracy every time I fuel up.

This has been discussed before:

One , admittedly unlikely, scenario is that your(13)  Header tank vent will allow fuel to move from a full (1) RH Tank or from the (12) Return line into the (4) header tank bypassing the (3) Individual tank shut of valves.

Brakes on our light aircraft are a vexed issue;

On the one hand you need sufficient "performance" to do your engine run ups.

On the other

Your dont want so much that you are in danger of locking the wheels, particularly on a sealed runway as this may overdress the undercarriage, cause a skid/hydroplane and lose of control

So its a bit of a balancing act. I found that a change to a smaller diameter (longer stroke)  hand operated master cylinder, allowed for a 4000 rpm (Rotax) stationary, ignition/condition check and to prevent wheel rotation/rumble in the air, first stage, on the park lock (just enough to stop the wheel) meant that if I had forgotten to disengage  the brake (happened a couple of times) on landing this did not cause an issue.

3 minutes ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

The 2 pack stuff does look better though I have to admit.

I hope to do a good job Bruce - my main objectives are durability, good light weight coverage. As a novice spray painter (one good aircraft job to my name & all the gear ready to go) I do not pretend to have an in depth knowledge of paint types/applicability, so seek all the advice I can get before committing to purchase the wet sticky stuff.

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

It can add a lot of weight if you aren't careful  On older fabric covered Planes silver (fine aluminium) was added to the last application of dope Paint stripper can cause corrosion in Laps on sheet metal. Thick paint on doped fabric will  cause cracking of the paint and the fabric eventually. I'd be inclined to do neat touch ups  with acrylic enamel or acrylic Lacquer where a similar finish was originally used. The idea of a 2 pack doesn't appeal to me on small stuff. The thicker the paint the deeper the chips in it. .Nev

Thanks Nev; The paints I have provisionally nominated have a very high solids content. The theory being that I will only need a thin (light) coat to achieve good coverage. My intention is stick to a white (shade to be determined) all over - theory again no need to double up (weight)on paint thickness and simplicity (amateur). The Glasurit 68 is a commercial vehicle (not car) paint,  so should have excellent durability and chip resistance.

I would be pleased to entertain other paint suggestions (Upol?)

What! no paint guru's out there?

How can this be? most builders/owners/aircraft maintainers will have eider painted or commissioned a paint job - all I ask is you pass on your thought's/experience.

10 hours ago, Dalmo said:

Rather than adding electric actuators, etc., I've heard that one builder somehow attached small gears and sensors to the existing flap actuator tubes, and although the movement action is still manual, the flap position is displayed on his EFIS - now that sounds very interesting to me.🤓

Maaate! - if your intention is to make your system more sophisticated/complicated go for it - a manual flap gives the pilot immediate position "feedback". Way better/simpler and fail safe than any electronic position indicator could ever be.

I would like to have your comment & advice on:

Glasurit 68, with wet on wet 284-90, as a suitable aircraft paint over aluminium, that has been sealed/treated with  DeSoto 515X349 primer .

AND

Any other recommendations (with reasons) to do the job

I believe in flexibility - I use whichever method seems to give me the best result on the day (wind speed/direction). Usually crab on final, side slip over the fence, for a single wheel touch down - works for me. Way to high on final, slip for higher rate of decent, no airspeed increase. So my advice - practice both systems. 

Why not go for a "fabric" door along the lines of a "taught liner"

Adding to all the hazards listed by Nev: Single phase power lines are impossible to see from the air, do not always follow tracks, sometimes the poles are not equally spaced, occasionally  branch to shearing shed , etc  and can hidden by a tree/line lot. So look for the posts while well out. The post shadow, is sometimes easier to see than the post. Follow the line of posts and look for any "branching".

On 20/08/2021 at 7:08 AM, Bruce Tuncks said:

Thanks Onetrack. The snow system claim that their thing only uses 160 ml of water per minute, so a couple of litres of water would be enough for any climbout.

I am always suspicious, of the efficacy, where the recommended quantities, do not take into account the variables for your system eg fuel additives that are by the tank (how large/small is your tank???)

I'm with Nev on this - I had never experienced manual flaps, in GA, until I moved over to RAA - Now much preferer manual, for all the reasons that Nev gave.

3 minutes ago, jackc said:

Maybe Cancer is contagious???  You want my opinion? I think it’s possible!

Lets hear from the Facebook School Of Medicine, or some equally useless source of information!

Well in at least one case it is - Facial Tumours in Tasmanian Tigers - in nature, where there is one in, there may be others.

9 hours ago, BirdDog said:

Agreed Skip. 
 

The only thing I’m very cautious of is handing over too much power to government and relinquishing our freedoms. 
 

Remember, we we still a democratic country, and yes I want leadership, but with checks and balances.  
 

And just to restate. I’m not anti nor pro vax. I’m just a normal dude. 

Again I agree with your opening statement however this must be mitigated with the ability of the Gov to actually manage/get things done. So we trade  a bit of self determination for a bit of Gove efficacy.  The "pendulum swings" and Gov assumes to much power & needs to be brought back into line ( a debate for another time: I think that time is well & truly overdue, with the Australian Government(s) transparency diminishing/increasing use of secrecy and all sorts of rorting going on)

5 hours ago, turboplanner said:

If you've been vaccinated (and assuming the current Vaccinated people can become infected and spread the virus, but can't suffer permanent injury or die position):

1. Your unvaccinated work colleages don't put you at risk

2. Your customers and the public don't put you at risk

3. You put your unvaccinated customers at risk

4. You put your unvaccinated fellow workers at risk

The forseeable risk is in the last two groups, so:

The Employer's duty of care is to ensure that groups 3 &4 are excluded from the business.

If it's an airline groups 3 & 4 can't be part of it or travel on it.

That changes if the government grants an exemption as they did to the medical professionals for Astrazeneca, but the chances of a claim where they might have to pay out are so remote as to be petty cash in the budget whereas the above would have a lot more casualties who could make claims of negligence. (I posted a recent example of a successful claim against just this arrangement in the thread Public Liability)

I have read your arguments on this m  - there is logic in what you promote but the facts you use are selective, so at the end your conclusion is, in my opinion, wanting.

4 hours ago, Russ said:

Chap central coast Qld, has been running a mercury engine for yrs now in his gyro, goes like the clappers, has an exhaust note that catches your attention, last I heard he has never had issues.

gyros have been running soob engines ( several models ) for decades now, EA81 was the beginning, up to EJ25’s, all reliable……ALL heavy

Many FW flyers are running the 6cyl soob, there is a dedicated FB group of these guys

Well there you go - not such an outrageous idea after all. Thanks Russ.

3 hours ago, BirdDog said:

Yep. There a few sources I trust, that’s for sure.  A bunch i don’t as it becomes very clear of the agenda.  
 

It’s amazing how polarising it is.  It’s the new religion and I’ve seen friendships end over it because one person has a different view.  
 

We just need to all respect the next persons right to believe in what is best for them.  We don’t tell people which mythical creatures that apparently lives in the sky, they should believe in. 
 

we respect their faith and smile and say, good on you. 
 

If we don’t hang on to that mutual respect we are doomed, and sadly the fear mongering from the main media is appalling. But it sells I guess.  

 

 

I agree in principal, with "live & let live" but with one overriding provision - your belief set/system/philosophy should not have an negative impact on me or the wider population. If it does then you deserve to have your activities restricted and possibly criminalised.

One of our greatest difficulties, as a democratic society, is "managing" the media so that it remains factual while at the same time being free to report the "truths" it perceives as important. It a difficult balancing act that often swings too far in each direction. 

2 hours ago, turboplanner said:

This one's a bit unusual in that Victoria's TAC was involved, but it includes the normal elements: a duty of care was owed, the duty of care was breached. It also inludes the exlanation that it wasn't intentional.

 

This would be of interest to someone who loans or hires and aircraft.

WX00161.pdf 1.06 MB · 8 downloads

Not sure if there is any great revelation here - duty of care, by employer/service (hire vehicle, aircraft) to provider to provide a safe vehicle/work environment is well established/understood by most.

2 minutes ago, onetrack said:

This statement is pure right-wing American BS scaremongering, and one of the most stupid statements I've seen here recently. No-one, anywhere, is suggesting they want all the unvaccinated demonised and attacked.

 

Some of the authorities are going overboard with a demand that anyone employed in a front-line position must be vaccinated - or lose their job. I don't don't believe this is the correct approach, and it's too heavy handed.

 

I notice some police are already protesting the demand that they be vaccinated or lose their job. I agree with their protest. I certainly wouldn't like to be told, I had to be vaccinated or lose my job, if I was still in the workforce. 

 

There are far better ways of approaching this problem. Just encourage employees to be vaccinated - and if they object, move them to an area where they have minimal contact with people. A remote rural posting.

 

There are way too many references to Facebook pages by the anti-vaxxers on previous pages, to give them much credence. Facebook is notorious for aiding misinformation.

 

Facebook exists to promote Facebook, and more billions for Mark Zuckerberg - not to promote accurate scientific information and health education.

There is much in your comments, that I agree with however there are work situations/environments where I strongly support mandatory vaccination - The very concept of a safe working environment (an employer legal obligation) demands this in many if not most instances. Basically all work environments where either your work colleagues or customers/public may be put at risk by you or where you are at risk from your interactions with colleagues/the public should require your vaccination.