skippydiesel

29 minutes ago, SplitS said:

You know you can run avplan and ozrunways on your phone.

That's my backup.

EFB's are game changers with ADSB in and out via skyEcho, and real time weather updates the safety factor improvement alone is worth changing over from maps.

 

 

Not on my phone - steam powered!. My backups to my iPad are : a GarminMap 96C, AvMap,  compass, maps, clock and eyeballs (in no particular order)

1 hour ago, Mewp said:

I use avplan and print out the track maps and ersa entries. I have lost an ipad to overheating for about 15min and reverted to maps and onboard garmin gps. Technology not designed for the purpose (ipad) will always present a risk.

Had the same problem Mewp, twice. Both times full sun on iPad, in winter (vents all closed). Solution for me has been to install a dedicated mini eye ball vent, behind the iPad mounting, havent had a problem since.

Check out Classifieds

38 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Training Module 1:           Tyre kickers

                                          Assess your potential customer

 

                                          Footnote: Don't get excited, it only saps your energy which is required when the customer says your

                                                            price is too high.

🤣😜

On 06/12/2020 at 8:51 AM, rhtrudder said:

Noticed my plane slowly developing a vibration over the last 6months , ended up replacing my prop, wheels up landing , and the vibs still there so I removed the plate and noticed it had a rattling sound which I didn’t think was there when I fitted it , now vibration has gone , if you have fitted one might pay to get a prop balance to check it out 

How disappointing - I fitted a BM,  after  getting my prop professio0nally dynamic balanced, so saw no change in vibration. My idea was, that it might just take care of any nasty stone chips in the future, allowing me to get home with minimal vibration - good idea (??) now in doubt.

3 hours ago, turboplanner said:

I would certainly think of buying one.

Turbs dont do this to me the, geriatric salesman heart has started to beat very fast - CPR going to be needed any moment.🤩

13 hours ago, turboplanner said:

He doesn't have to supply commercil in confidence information. He's one of the few suppliers that puts up with some of the crap dished out here.

Thanks Turb's. You are a gentleman.

🤣You have certainly earned that whopping discount on your Faeta purchase😁

55 minutes ago, Jabiru7252 said:

I find this a bit like using calculators. Why 'do' the math if you can use a calculator? I know a few folks who cannot subtract 35 from 50 without using a calculator or pencil and paper. It's sad that technology can actually makes us dumber. 

I find that mental skills not used, lead to mental atrophy however the basic grounding in maths/aviation/fuel calculations, etc stays with us (or at least me) so although my mental arithmetic has plummeted to almost idiot level, I still know the concepts & formulas, so use the electronic wizardry accordingly - its just another world. I am sure our grandparent & parents lamented the loss of "standards" in our generation, just as we do now.

2 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

 

All fair comments NT

 

Will come back to you on this "dinner is served"

 

Back again:

Bubble Canopies V High wing (without top window) - I can only speak from personal experience.

I trained in Cessna’s & converted to RAA in Jabs - to be honest I was so pleased to be flying, I never thought to consider the evident benefit in being in an expensive sun shade and having windows that can be opened while taxying and in flight. They can still get very hot though, not sure why, may be engine heat.

I now fly a low wing with bubble canopy. I do have some automotive static cling reflective sunshade stuff (AutoBarn) on the upper inside, covering about 1/3 at a guess, does a fair job at a very low cost. One of those concertina blinds would probably be better but cost about 800% more.

Yes, in summer I wear a broad brimmed "bonnet" - one of those nifties but defiantly not flattering, jobs with that are headset compatible and I use sun screen (when I remember).

It might be hard to believe but I don’t much notice the heat - two small sliding side windows in my Zephyr canopy work tolerably well and two big eyeball vents, located each side below the instrument panel (donated by a Mercedes W123), seem to take the edge of the summer heat, on the ground. Side vents are a bit noisy to have open when airborne and eyeball vents are very efficient in the air - so once airborne things become coooool very quickly

I guess for me, the unobstructed view, is what makes the bubble attractive, even with its evident but tolerable sunshade shortcomings

Probably not a good sales comment: Something not mentioned but you should consider. As you get older, upper body strength & general flexibility tends to diminish - getting into my cockpit is quite easy, once you know how - getting out is defiantly becoming more challenging. On occasion, I have had a passenger that really struggled and I almost "bust the poofer valve" helping extract them. This is a definite plus for most high wings, which can often be mounted in a very lady like fashion - derrière parked on cushion first, swing legs in after & reverse for exit.

Tail Dragger V Nose Wheel

I am not tail dragger rated so can only pass on what I have read/heard and observed.

The idea behind the tail wheel being more appropriate for unmade airstrips, is most likely because early nose wheels were (& still are on many aircraft) quite flimsy affairs. The small tail wheel does not carry a high load and is being dragged over the ruts & rocks, both of which would seem to result is less stress/load – so less likely to fail. The nose wheel, carries a greater load & is in effect being pushed, both of which increase stress. Not very scientific I grant you but paints a picture – tail dragger the winner.

If you are going to fit oversized wheels to your aircraft it makes more sense & is probably easier and slightly more aerodynamic to fit only two on the mains – taildragger has the clear advantage

It is clear to me that a nose wheel aircraft can perform STOL just as well as tail draggers so no winner there.

It is also clear to me, that it’s how you handle your aircraft on the ground which makes the difference – does your nose wheel land first, at the same time or a long time later (when speed has reduced considerably)? Do you taxi and corner at high speed?

A well-designed nose wheel fairing will negate most of the air speed loses/drag from having such a structure hanging out in the slip stream. A nose wheel will give you greater confidence in X wind landings and the ability to brake harder in a short field situation should you need to (less chance of a ground loop) and will allow more confident taxying in blustery quartering winds. And lastly a nose wheel allows for greater visibility/safety, on the ground, for almost all activities – nose wheel is well ahead in my view.

In the landing role, I was trained to keep the nose wheel of the ground as long as possible. Because I was taught in the bush, on dirt strips, I was also taught to reduce the load on my nose wheel when taxying or in the TO run, by carrying “back” elevator at all times. I like to watch other aviators TO/Landing & taxying – so many do not care for their nose wheel.

So, I guess I am biased, and although I recently came close to purchasing a tail wheel, I think the nose wheel on most modern RAA aircraft is a much more robust structure than in the past and its presence confers many more advantages than the tail wheel configuration (a tail wheel will always look better).

3 minutes ago, NT5224 said:

I have little doubt that Faeta are excellent aircraft. They look great and so they probably fly great too. We all know the Czechs build good small aircraft.

 

But the  specific question is whether one would make the best touring aircraft for a lap?  My personal feeling is that aircraft with bubble canopies are just not climate appropriate in northern Australia. Unless you want to wear a hat and sun cream all way round... Perhaps there is a tropical model with a opaque canopy?  Also  I would always favour high wing  and tail dragger for the bush and rough strips.  Thats not to say that low wing trikes are inferior. We are discussing a very specific mission here.

 

Alan

All fair comments NT

Will come back to you on this "dinner is served"

I take it you have been ordained by some higher authority that authorises you to lecture to others - I say it how I read/find it -  t like or not, that is your prerogative.

You on the other hand appear to prefer/advise the "silver tonged"  approach - may that philosophy serve you well - I have no intention of adopting it

Those in glass houses should not throw stones - you may like to review your recent  passive aggressive language  and non to subtle accusations, that you feel so free to launch at me - "cast out first the beam out of thine own eye;"

20 hours ago, M61A1 said:

I thought for a moment you might have been correct, but I checked and it was definitely a Faeta.

I won't go into details, because it's not my place to do so, no there wasn't a lot of damage, but there shouldn't have been any.

Okay - some additional info:

• My apologies for doubting you - yes the Faeta did collapse the nose wheel, during a ground loop and sideways slide - very few (if any) nose wheels will put up with a 90 degree side loading like this.
• Faeta G figures - I am told that the figures you have found on the ATEC web site are for the Faeta with a fuselage tank at EU wights of 475 kg . Australian Faeta's come with 2 X 50 L wing tanks. Apparently this changes the  potential stress loadings so significantly , the original G figures have been left as is.

6 hours ago, M61A1 said:

I thought for a moment you might have been correct, but I checked and it was definitely a Faeta.

I won't go into details, because it's not my place to do so, no there wasn't a lot of damage, but there shouldn't have been any.

Then it was the NG - I will contact the owner for details.

On 02/12/2020 at 8:25 PM, Jase T said:

Am I the only one who still does flight planning like this??

 For trips away from familiar territory, I do both and cheat a bit using the iPad.

I like to have my maps, with track lines, with me and open. I print out ERSA airport info for destination alternate(s) & airfields along & either side of my track. I also print out weather details. All a bit anal but I enjoy it and it gives me a sense of added security on the flight.

1 hour ago, Blueadventures said:

The Zephyr with collapsed nose wheel was in Queensland. Should be seeing the owner tomorrow and I’ll ask about the repair.  I helped him with other matters and as he lives 2 hours away did not get to view the damage and repair.  I know he got parts from the au distributor.  That’s also why I asked some time ago about the circumstances of the damage to your Zephyr as we all learn from each other’s experiences. I still would like to hear your learnings if your happy to share. Regards Mike

To be blunt - I was a total F--- wit ! My first accident in 30 years and it was a doozy. This is not the conversation to unload in but suffice to say pilot error all the way -Failed to do comprehensive ground survey of private dirt strip. Failed to do comprehensive areal survey of same strip. Did not follow personal plan/minimums. There were some mitigating circumstances but not sufficient to absolve me of being totaly ashamed of myself. Touched down on an earth  bank, I had not seen from he air. Aircraft, collapsed nose wheel, broke off main wheels just above axle, smashed prop, damage to left wing leading edge & both flaps - economic right off. Walked away without even a bruise from harness (touch down estimated to be 30 knots indicated with 3 knot head wind). Aircraft is rebuildable, insurance should just about cover it - have been about to start for several months now . Hope to start any day.

Yenn - it seems to me you do yourself a disservice - nothing wrong with your mechanical skills/diagnosis. I have not long found out how use emoji's - so here is one for you 😇

31 minutes ago, M61A1 said:

There are two reasons for my "entrenched position", 1

1. It's about 3-4 times more expensive than I'm willing to spend on an aircraft.

2. It has a nosewheel. (too fragile...I've seen a broken Faeta))

If those things can be fixed, count me in as interested.

All I wanted know was what it's actual load factor is at the highest certified MTOW....I think it's useful to know if you are going to load it to the hilt and set of cross country.

 I have asked the same question of several Euro aircraft and no-one seems to be able to answer.

I - Fair enough - most of us work within a budget. I am intrigued - there are aircraft out there in the $40 k-70k bracket - what are you after? - there is a nice Europa Classic (Vic) for sale at the moment I think $38,000.

2 - You have seen a broken Faeta ? (are you sure it wasn't a Zephyr?)- there are only two in AU. I stand to be corrected but the older Faeta 321 (T tail) has never had an incident and the almost new Faeta NG had a bit of a runway error (pilot induced) and I believe damaged one main undercharge (not the nose wheel). From all reports the NG's incident was a very hard landing & ground loop and under the circumstances remarkably little damage was sustained - the aircraft is back flying and better than ever. 

As for the last - I will try for you but must put question to the Czechs

There is a 2003 DynAero MCR VLA Sportster Aircraft (Wa) for auction - amazing cruise & climb out but stalls a bit high for my taste . https://www.planesales.com.au/search

There is a pre loved, low hours, tail wheel Faeta overseas but the cost would not meet point 1.

2 hours ago, kgwilson said:

..........................................Removing the right to sue was one of the best bits of legislatioin they came up with. The system is self funding and has resulted in many costs being reduced.

Good -on -yah! KGW

4 hours ago, M61A1 said:

Thanks, but no thanks....I have seen them in the flesh and they do have some very desirable features, but I deem them too fragile for my purpose.

 

Despite your apparent willingness to debate, you seem to have had an entrenched position all along - I am disappointed. Particularly as your parting negative  comment is, once again, without good foundation (in my humble opinion).

7 hours ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

The issue is if I have taken offence or not. I haven’t. I’m actually trying to do you a favour. You seem to value being right above selling aeroplanes. Given the plethora of low winged composite aircraft on the market, someone reading this forum would be nuts to buy a plane from you. I can only imagine that if I had a problem with my aircraft you would swiftly “correct an error, refute an unfounded accusation and enter into vagarous debate”. As a customer, I couldn’t imagine a more unpleasant experience.

Point taken - I should sell planes and ignore the disinformation and errors being perpetuated by others, either through ignorance or malice. 

Fascinating ! It would seem that you would prefer the obfuscation & hype of some sale persons.  My manor may be a little direct even abrasive, for that I apologise but at least you will get the truth and  on going enthusiastic support. 

36 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

I .................................................................

 

I agree that the law is not affordable for most people, but people disagree and will not give in. 

 

 

And out of disagreement, the law was born - I agree the service is a necessary evil, however we have allowed it to turn into a hydra headed monster, that invades every facet of our lives, often to no discernible benefit. Is it not way past the time when we should be looking at rationalising/simplifying the legal codes that are necessary for every human grouping from the family unit to national society???

2 hours ago, turboplanner said:

Try the wikipedia versions - they give quite a good understanding.

 

Not sure that your referral to Wikipedia  was  all that helpful - How is it that the expansion of injury to encompass a much wider actionable claim furthers/improves our society? I fail to understand why every claim must be subject to an adversarial legal or quasi legal arbitration system.  It seems to me that  the intent of Donoghue v Stevenson may have been honorable/moral but has been well & truly corrupted  down the way.

British law has many good points but this is not one of them. Removing the awarding of compensation, for injury (however you or the court wish to define it) from the adversarial court would be a civilising and humanising act.

In the law, we have created a near perfect parasitic profession - self promoting/reproducing, non productive and like all good parasites, draining. Nature has its equivalent in the cycle of some fluke parasites- that are consumed on the contaminated food source of the host. The fluke then migrates to the brain of the first stage host, thereby controlling its behavior, so that the host will offer itself to be consumed by the 2nd stage host, eventually to be excreted, to infect the food source of the first stage. The fluke appears to provide no benefit to any of its hosts or the environment as a whole (this is an analogy for the place of the law industry, in our society, please do not take the story to literately).

It is right & proper that individual/entities, that are facing legal action, should have access to well trained advocates, so that justice is done (not just execution of he law). Unfortunately we have moved a long way from justice, with the law intruding on so many facets of our lives, in ways that do not serve us well.

M6 I am surprise - a fan club at my age! I did not make the connection - my interest in Robin Austin & his Sonerai 2  developments, is not in the aircraft as such but in Robin's ability to get extraordinarily performance from the marriage of a 100 hp Rotax and an otherwise unremarkable airframe.

As to your interest (academic I presume or can not interest you in a purchase?) in the Faeta G/weight ratings - I dont know the answear - but will try & find out.

1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

If you had taken my advice and read up on Donoghue v Stevenson then you wouldn't have written that.

True o well insured one - perhaps you might oblige with a brief explanation using small words that I can understand.

My thanks in anticipation.