skippydiesel

Worth considering that speed is not everything. When I was looking around Idid not want the 110 to 125 kt speed in a Jab as that brings with it the need of length to scrub off speed and therefore limits available private strips and country landing spots. I did email and had a call back from one of their aero designers Dan Moulder as I was asking if they had another wing option on the horizon that was draggy and offered the performance like the Foxbats and Savs etc. No was the answer and this was about 7 Years ago and they were busy with current matters at the time. I firmly believe there is a market place for such. Very good experienced Jab pilots can get into any PDF out of shortish strips. The Jab is a nice, forgiving and repairable fairly easily Fuse and wings etc. I finished up building a Nynja which I an absolutely happy with, and it did not need painting. I was also looking at the Sav S and that would have required painting which is a biggish task. In short perhaps look at anything that cruises at 85kts and easily lands in under 300 meters by low hour pilots, plus is true in responses.

Hi Blueadventures - I have some concerns about, what I consider, to be your Jab/parochial view.

Don't get me wrong I am an admirer of the Jab fleet BUT your view of what is possible at both ends of the flight envelope is just incorrect.

There are RAA aircraft that can demonstrate a stall of 28 knots and a cruise of 135 knots (75% power/18L/h), same day, same engine, same load conditions, no tricks/mirrors. Take off on grass in under 100 m and land in not much more. Whats more you dont have to be a high time pilot to achieve this sort of performance (granted it helps).

Gone are the days when you had to make a choice between STOL & High Cruise capability - low operating costs/low performance and high cost/high performance. You can actually have it all - This capability has now been available for about 20 years or so and encompasses several aircraft types and manufacturers.

All these generalisations - to what end?

There are aircraft that have BOTH low stall and high cruise. Fantastic control authority and very robust undercarriage.

(I am sure Nev will take me up on the following;)

As for the comments on V rating (Va speeds) - leaving low speed/ stall asides, In my humble opinion the important V ratings for RAA type aircraft are those that relate to the margin between NEVER EXCEED SPEED (Vne)/ and normal operating speeds. So;

(Vh) MAX STRUCTURAL CRUISE @ MAX CONTINUOUS POWER is an easy performance point to reach.

IF the Vh is close to the Vne, you have only a small margin of error where an over speed, resulting in structural damage, might occur. So look for an aircraft with a wide margin.

Other important V ratings are DESIGN MANOEUVRING (Va) MAX MANOEUVRING (Vo) DESIGN MANOEUVRING FOR MAX GUST (Vb) as these relate to turbulent air penetration speed limits.

The above figures, when analysed and not taken in isolation, for the aircraft under consideration are indicative of structural integrity at the higher speeds that you may expect to encounter.

True all aircraft are a performance compromise but some require far greater compromise than others

Price is affected by exchange rates, so why would it be different from a different source?

Please expand?

Why would you buy from overseas????

Simplez - if there is a significant cost advantage - however in this case it seem that the price has been rigged, so as to be much the same wherever you purchase - this is what my first question is about. Do you have an answear?

I have just been looking at the purchase price of a Rotax 912 ULS , from Europe, USA and Australia.

Having done all the sums (inc GST) they all come out within a few $100 - me thinks the price has been rigged. What think you?

While we are on the topic - any suggestions for a better deal?

It's been said before: Fuel is the cheapest thing you'll put in your aeroplane.

True o king - but this nugget of wisdom, doesnt stop any of us from looking for the cheapest price/litre of our chosen brew. Most of us have been guilty of driving past a servo that is only a cent or two more expensive than the one 10 k down the track.

Here is a relevant crashworthiness comparison of the various materials. Note that fire is not even considered in the article below.

Not only are the composite materials more flammable, the smoke from burning composite materials, is quite toxic.

 

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1687814018794080

This is hardly the full picture - the most important safety feature of RAA level aircraft is (in most cases) very low stall speed. Issues of frame deformation and flammability/toxicity fall well below the ability of a pilot/crew to walk away from a 30 knot (or lower) crash. The low weight/inertia of most RAA aircraft also mean that impact energy, from a controlled crash landing, will be rapidly dissipated, reducing the chances of ruptured fuel lines/tanks and therefore fire.

On the topic of fire - while toxicity is an issue heat and smoke from whatever source is potentially fatal. The toxicity of the smoke (all smoke is toxic) is probably the least of your concerns in this scenario.

You never empty ashes directly into an airstream. You cast out a container that is arranged to open, once clear of the airflow around the aircraft. That can't be too hard to engineer.

Agree - light weight paper bag that will open soon after ejection. Bag & ashes biodegradable. Best not to publicise your intentions - some people get very excited about over a few ashes being disposed of..

Mark, I would agree my example was flippant. I'll clearly need to read the FAA docs. yeah I understand the FAA etc sit down with the supplies and discuss it. they cant fudge it .

Take care that you do not "rock the boat" unnecessarily with the resultant (bullet through own foot"

Always best to know the answer, befor posing the question.

Who's the dealer?

I am, along with partner in crime, the Dexter

Plan on no 98. Need a servo. Rather than 98 I stick to 95 only. AvGas is ok for Rotax just aquatint yourself with Rotax instructions.

 

Every appraisal inspection could cost $500. But well worth it if it identifies a problem, you don’t need surprises after buying an aircraft.

Blueadventure - a lot of servos have moved to 98, deleted 95 and still serve 91. (Most if not all servos in my area have moved in this direction) If you are dead set on 95 - be warned it can be a little problematic to find.

The Rotax 912/914 range will happily burn both 98 or 95 without apparent differences in performance. If ULP not available, do not hesitate to use AvGas . Keep its use to an absolute minimum and no negative issues will arise.

Your budget will be a big factor in what's the best aircraft for you mission, if buying a kit aircraft it will generally take three time longer to build than you intend and by the time your finished will also cost more than initially budgeted for.

If you have your RPL there's plenty of good well priced small GA aircraft for sale that I wouldn't discount

Have to strongly disagree - Your advice may be good for a traditional plans built or "flat pack" delivered aircraft but is out of date for composite types.

ATEC aircraft come as very advanced kits. Assuming good organisational/planning skills (everything needed to hand) some basic understanding of 12 volt electrical systems and automotive style plumbing - I would guess delivery to flying condition 3-4 weeks at most.

Cost blow outs will be down to planning failures .

Skippy, just looked at the ATEC zephyr a few faeta ng. Good looking aircraft there and excellent performance figures.

Yep! and all easily demonstrated - no day dreaming sales talk.

My 2000 Zephyr (many improvements since then) can get off a grass strip with full fuel & me in under 100 m and land in not much more. Econo cruise at 100 knots 12.5 L/ H - 14 L/H at 110 knots. Stall about 32 knots. Fly around all day at 50-80 knots on 8 L/H The Faeta(s) are better again.

buying a 2nd hand aircraft from 1000km + seems to be a big job. still heading down a J170D/230D direction for the moment. Budget will stretch in a few years .

 

*** Are there regional people available who can do the chasing and do diligence for you, for a price ?

I know its hard at the moment but dont be in any sort of a hurry, do not fixate on any one aircraft and try and do or be part of, your own in depth inspection.

My recent experience:

I was so keen I would almost have purchased without an inspection.

Did hours of research into the aircraft type.

Found & checked out several other pilots experience of type.

Got comments on the sale aircraft from those who supposedly knew of it.

Came the day - I spent several hours checking as much as I could of the aircraft - all good!

THEN came the TIF with local acrobatics champ in command.

What with CO/exhaust poisoning, rough running engine/prop, feeling sick as a dog, heavy controls (at least to me) I decided to pass.

Very disappointing but the right decision.

Like some others I used 3 readily/cheaply available electronic bathroom scales. Found the scales turned off after a few seconds. Solution, raise aircraft onto three small platforms (being careful that they dont contact scales) get three people (wife & two sons) to take readings, as I pulled/ pushed aircraft on/off scales several times for multiple reading.

RF guy - have replied to your communique - have been having issues with getting through so hope you received my response

 

 

I am surprised how few 912ILS fuel injector motors there are used- seems a no brainer-15-20% fuel economy improvement, and you will get the money back after 300 hours of flying.

 

 

300 hrs (if your sums are correct) is a lot of hours for the average RAA private user. Makes a lot more sense for a flying school/hire aircraft, but you still have to have the up front squilliondollar purchase price and that may result in a cash flow issue. .

Bit like saying your Lotus Esprit uses a lot less fuel than my Toyota Land cruiser. Bushcat is fairly fast for a rag and tube bush plane, maybe 90 knts or so but it's stall is a bit high for some reason.

 

Shajen, have you flown a Bushcat yet? It is very roomy and flies nicely. The flap handle is in a weird position. I am building a kit, right now I couldn't recommend building one though, it has not been fun! But if you don't want to build one, you're golden.

Well yeah! sort-of! I am talking the same same engine.

The Bushcat and similar aircraft excel at short field type opps. particularly where large low pressure tyres (rough surface) are a plus. The down side is the cruise.

The ATEC range do pretty well at STOL but you need to be careful about the surface conditions, with wheels about the size/rolling radius of those found on a wheel barrow.

If you then want to go someplace distant the poor Bushcat is struggling to make 100 knots at max cruise power (18//h) - so range/time is going to be problematic.

I think I would see the ATEC more like the Landcruiser and the Bushcat like a tractor.

The Bushcat must be super draggy. My ATEC Zephyr, powered by the Rotax 912ULS, has a 30 knot stall (not much higher than the BC) would be doing about 125 knots at 18L/hr. My usual cruise (1 pilot) 100-110 knots uses 12.5 - 14 L/hr. At 80 knots or lower I am using 8l/h.

Go for an ATEC aircraft (choice of very advanced kit or factory build) Very low stall/ great low speed a handling combined with amazing high speed cruise/X country. Probably widest performance envelope in RAA. 1-2 seats. 8-18 L/hr. 300 kg payload (inc fuel)

As an internationalist born in Nigeria, educated in Ulster, trained in England, of Irish/Australian parents, having lived in a number of, so called, English speaking countries - English, as spoken in various places , can border on a foreign language to each (& require the intervention of an interpreter from time to time) - it is no wonder that I have trouble with spelling.

Its all relative - Those who want to off shore fish or sail the coast, purchase a boat and may be a big 4 x 4 to tow it $$$$$$ down the bilge. Same with a lot of other recreational activities - check out any of the equestrian sports, the cheap bit is purchasing the horse its all up $ hill from then on $8- 10k for an RAA Cert may start to seem like small change.

Why do you add fuel from the completely empty situation and mark that position? In an earlier post I advocated leaving the unuseable there and adding from that. Then you are always indicating fuel available to use which I think would be more useful. You are correct about not relying on ONE instrument or method.. Gauges are generally not recognised as an only source.. IF a gauge is not accurate or reliable it's not of great value. Many aircraft fuel gauges are poor at doing the job. Nev

Fair comment/advice Nev - I guess I thought it important to know total capacity and usable/unusable fuel. Your way would have arrived at a similar knowledge base without the need to know unusable fuel. Either way - it is important information for any pilot to know o their aircraft.

As a bit of a maths klutz, I just lock my brake on, tie down wing tips, tail and nose and make sure my control surfaces are secured against movement. I use those weight rated "luggage" straps with the friction clamp thingy for fast tightening/loosening and always tie off the loose end for added security & neatness.

Skippy,

 

Whilst I am happy to endorse the general sentiment of you comments, any Victa Airtourer pilot will be happy to point out one of the exceptions.

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

Ts time wore on concern mounted. and some close formation ensued on similar model Jodels attempting to work out their fuel status. All landed safely.

Thank you for your kind words.

In my case I have "calibrated" my automotive style fuel gauge by:

My fuel gauge has remained accurate for 10 years now however I am careful to only use it as a back up to my fuel consumption/time calculations.

For many years my fuel consumption calculator gauge worked remarkably well. This is no longer the case. Despise all my efforts I seem to be unable to restore consistent/accurate function - This gauge will be replaced in the not to distant future. This gauges accuracy "drift" is a good example of why a pilot should never rely on a single device for something as critical as fuel/flight time remaining.