skippydiesel

Not very often does a "change" become, for the better!spacesailor

SkippydieselYes weather and fuel supply are obviously the most important planing points.

Hi SD, Don't for a minute think that things will be made simpler with these changes because they won't. Don't you think we'd be better to accept and keep what we have now because all we need do is get the training at our cost and away we go. can't get any simpler than that The costs are far more that what you have stated. I would support maintaining the "status quo" if it was not so clearly broken/inconsistent/illogical.

 

Not wanting to change a flawed system, is a bit like saying, I am frightened to go out into the dark corridor and furthermore refuse to turn on a light, as I am happy & safe in my room.

 

Its a position I grant you but not one that I think is laudable.

 

I have no recollection of stating a cost high/low to enter CTA - what I have said is there is bound to be associated costs with additional training for a qualification/endorsement to enter CTA. Training for a CTA endorsement would be up to the individual pilot (ie not mandatory) to apply for. Ultimately, I guess, the costs would be a combination of those set by the regulatory body and the training organisation(s).

Hi SD, you have what everybody else can have if they want. So why don't they go and get it rather than try to change things at great cost and to achieve the very same thing they can have now. Plus the additional rules and regs that will be added will affect all raa.

Just because I have a PPL does not mean I should complacently site back and accept the ridiculous mish mash of rules/exemptions that seem to apply to aviators who just happen to have longer/shorter wings, radio/no radio, transponder/or not, or no wings at all.

(If you are rich does this mean you should have no empathy for the poor?)

I view change for changes sake, as one of the social ills that bedevils our society, but when there are such glaring and illogical inconsistencies/impositions on our sport, it behoves all of us to support change for the good.

I doubt that additional rules/regs would apply to those flying outside CTA and who are not endorsed to fly inside CTA.

To fly inside CTA would , I imagine, require some additional training/endorsement and yes of course you would have to pay for the training and abide by the rules.

My reasons for supporting RAA (endorsed pilots) access to CTA is simple - other recreational pilots are allowed to do so, why not RAA?? (PLEASE EXPLAIN!!)

I am an advocate, for the most part, of the KISS principal - WHY MUST WE BE LUMBERED WITH RULES THAT ARE THEN COMPLICATED BY GLARING INEXPLICABLE EXCEPTIONS??

Good old Uncle Sam coming to the rescue - hope they/you have finally got to the crux of the matter.

SkippydieselI'm thinking of leaving in late April early May but will do some earlier flights to Clare Valley, Port Pirrie and possibly Port Lincoln first.

 

Bernie

Is the April/May period particularly auspicious (weather) ??

All the best Bernie,

I am planning the same trip but in a slightly slower aircraft (ATEC Zephyr Rotax 912ULS).

I don't need AVGAS & my research to date suggests ULP 95 & 98 RON is available close to most of my potential stop overs.

I am in no hurry & expect/hope for several side trips along the way - so 3 days to 3 weeks, each way, will be just fine with me.

Have you any advise/observations/preferences on the most auspicious time of year to journey forth?

Would be very interested to be kept informed of your experiences and progress along the "track" - hope you will be able to spare the time to keep in contact.

They answer to a minister who ultimately answers to public opinion. Ultimately they will make the facts match what they want, just look at the whole jabiru engines debacle

These maintainers manage to obtain high levels of reliability (still well below 912's in my opinion) but at high cost in $$ & time (non operational).

Yous buys cheap Yous pays the price - somewhere!

It seems to me that without such dedicated and high levels of maintenance, the old Jab is indeed unreliable engine.

The dedicated and high levels of maintenance I see at my local airfield is unlikely to be found in every Jabs local - ergo Jabs by dint of their maintenance requirements are less reliable than comparable aircraft engines

So in my humble & totally biased opinion there is some reason/rational behind the CAA restrictions on Jab powered aircraft

Please explain to me the possible gain by changing. I'm prepared to be convinced.

Hi TerryC - For me it is the irrational inconsistency, as much as the convenience of being able to go through CTA.

I am fortunate I hold both a PPL & an RAA Cert - I can, if a choose, avail myself of the privilege to enter CTA. Any change in the rules will have little impact on me.

How is it that gliders, parachutist and trainee RAA pilots can operate in CTA ??? and a fully qualified RAA Pilot can not! This is just the BS exercise of power without any rational argument, much like the imposition of ASIC requirements on recreational pilots using RPT airfields (some of which are no longer so served).

Doesn't need evidence. There just needs to be a perception and casa will act on that and deem it to be in the best interest of the public that they take action.

. Purge oil lines when you're finished. (whatever that means)...Cheers

Hi Geoff - hope your not a 912 owner/operator because the above advise is very very important to the start up lubrication of your engine after a complete oil change.

I say couplet because most 912 oil changes consist of draining/refilling the remote oil reservoir/tank and not the crankcase.

If you drain the crankcase, there is a sequence of events and the use of positive air pressure, to ensure that the oil is circulating correctly in the engine before you actually start it.

Failure to do the purge correctly, puts your engine at risk, due to oil starvation.

One of the reasons for 912 owner/operators to do the "gurgle" check of the lubrication system as part of the pre-flight checks, is to ascertain if the oil is circulating.

Rotax go to some lengths to explain how to do "the purge".

Hi John - If I were in your shoes, I would be going pale at the thought of a costly BF strip & rebuild.

Sorry to harp on, but have you checked that the oil tank breather is completely open/free to atmosphere? and that there is no restriction in the oil, crankcase to tank, return line (including the fittings at both ends)?

Thanks Alf but we tried a new sender and then verified the problem by fitting a mechanical gauge which proved the readings we are getting from the sender, we have changed oil and filter 3 times so cant be the filter????John

The oil pressure sender/gauge system - highly likely but it would appear not to be the offender in this case (verified using the master gauge)

The oil filter scenario was, at best, a highly unlike cause.

I think you have to put aside the notion that this is a "good engine" just because its new or reconditioned - errors in construction/assembly

do happen.

At the risk of offending (I apologise in advance) for stating the obvious - it would seem to me that you must go back to basics.

I think I am correct in saying - Oil pressure in an internal combustion engine is generated by an oil pump and combustion blow bye (positive crank case pressure) past the piston rings.

The oil pump should give relatively constant pressure readings, especially when limited by a pressure relief system. SO it is unlikely the pump is responsible.

The pressure relief system could be acting up and instead of providing progressive relief is suddenly releasing, then on large pressure drop,slamming shut again - could cause a rapid pulse in the oil pressure reading that could get worse as the engine warms up - bit of a long shot but I think a

possibility

Crank case pressure is a more likely culprit - incorrectly fitted/wrong piston rings (or piston(s) and a very common problem, a partial or totally blocked crankcase pressure relief system - this would definitely produce rapid pressure fluctuations.

Unlike most modern engines, I don't think the 912 has a conventional pressure relief valve to get blocked/damaged/fail. Crank pressure is handled through the oil return pipe to the remote reservoir/can, that in tern is open to atmosphere.

SO

I would investigate excessive crank case pressure either due to an excessive leaking piston/cylinder or a restricted oil return system or a blocked reservoir breather.

Start with the simple -

Is the reservoir breather fully open to atmospheric pressure. If OK move on -

(as a long shot - are you running an oil vapour catch can on your breather ? if so remove it. It should not be required on a 912 & could be restricting the breather)

Is the oil return line unobstructed and hot oil able to flow freely. OK move on -

Is the crank case being over pressurised by blow by - not quit sure how to check for this but I imagine oil will be sputtering with lots of hot gas into the reservoir, rather than flowing.

Pretty sure the pilot (S) was the only person on board - much to young to die

Seconded - for a small (population) country Australians have an inexplicable love of bureaucracy, to our detriment in so many way but certainly in aviation there are far to many governing bodies, all after their slice of the cake or is it place at the trough.

I am sorry to intrude but I believe differently to your first point skippy. I certainly don't mean to be antagonising but I believe that you CAN fly an RAA aircraft with a rec flying certificate.At least I hope that is true as that is what I do.

No problem ; You are absolutely correct

Due to rather sloppy formatting , on my part, what I was actually trying to say got somewhat turned around. Not sure if its may failure to adequately check in the draft mode, or if something actually changed when I posted the comment.

You cannot excercise any ppl privileges in an RAAUs registered aircraft ( factory made or otherwise). You must have an RAAus pilot certificate as well.

• You can not currently fly an RAA registered aircraft with an RAA Pilot Certificate.
   
   
  
• RAA Certified pilots may not enter CTA.
   
   
  
• You can legally fly a RAA registered aircraft into CTA IF you have an RAA Pilot Certificate AND a current PPL or higher
   
   
  

Putting it another way - no matter what your pilot training or level of licencing, you can not legally fly an RAA registered air craft without an RAA Pilot Certificate. Duel authority pilot licencing/certification is perfectly permissible and does confer additional privileges (into CTA)

SkippyHi Kyle

 

I am pretty sure you will find its about 15 to 1 ratio. - seems a bit like a statistic snatched out of thin air. What about all those RAA aircraft located around greater Brisbane/Sydney/Melbourne/Perth/Adelaide that have to take a circuitous rout around their neighbouring CTA(s) To say nothing of the smaller Albury/Tamworth/Williamtown/Coffs/etc

 

Just that ratio alone is a reason of why most will not use CTA. - Sorry cant accept this as a logical argument. If it was offered, I believe a substantial number of RAA pilots (many with lapsed PPL) would avail themselves of this privilege.

 

I agree about the transitioning that would be handy but to do so you currently would need certified hardware according to the CASA rules as well as a factory built aircraft. - I stand to be corrected but I believe the ADS-B transponder and fully functional transcever in my aircraft is (with the addition of legality) fully acceptable for entry into CTA

 

I believe we should all have transponders so we can see where we all are and ATC can see where we all - Agreed but it should only be a requirement for entry to CTA

 

The current crop are just way to expensive as you need a certified transponder AND a certified GPS to go with it. - WHAT! you are flying an aircraft not pottering about in a vintage car. My transponder set me back about $4k did the install myself and a licensed shop did the coding & letter of certification. Not a small amount of dosh I grant you but what price to you put on your life. ATC have contacted me/or aircraft in close proximity to me, about 5 times in 8 years to warn of a potential conflict - seems like $$ well spent to me.

 

So I would be happy to be able to transition CTA if possible as well but I know the technical stumbling blocks currently in the way. - It seems to me the "stumbling blocks" are political not technical. If you can have gliders and parachutes passing through CTA without radios (or on some mysterious frequency) or transponders what possible technical problem could there be letting an aircraft so equipped transition the air space.

 

this is a separate matter to any weight limit increase.

Also we have no desire to land in CTA with all the associated ASCIC crap and landing fees and parking fees etc etc...the overwhelming majority of all RAA flying is done well outside CTA and it should stay that way

DISAGREE with

• "majority of RAA flying ...is outside CTA "
   
   
  

The only reason RAA opps are outside CTA is because we are not supposed to go there. The few that do are either exercising PPL & 24 Rego privileges or doing so illegally.

I have little interest in landing at our major airports but I would like to be able to TRANSITION through their air space from time to time. Save me a heap of time/fuel on a long nave and more importantly allows for safer tracks to be selected avoiding dangerous terrain.

RAA aircraft flying out of airfields close to our major cities are significantly (negatively) impacted by their proximity to CTA.

What logical reason is there for RAA aircraft , suitably equipped and flown by qualified (CTA) pilots, not to fly in CTA - I believe the gliding and parachuti fraternity do so and they don't usually carry transponders

I have a GA licence so I don't need anything, so it's simple get a RPL or a PPL , but I would like to max 700 kilos in my J230 every now and then.

Would rely like to BUT to many commitments. Had the best weekend there two year back. Great atmosphere, good food, good crack - what more could you want?

My physics is pretty rudimentary at best BUT if you are voting for an increase in MTOW are you not ,in effect, voting for higher stall?

Yeh! Yeh! I know you could be flying a Lysander or a Pilatus Porter or some such STOL aircraft on steroids, but in the real world of "itsyy bitsy teeny weenie" aeroplanes what are we talking about? albatross like motor gliders!

I agree that this is a an unfair pole and unlikley to result in a genuine unbiased documentation of members opinions. - only being able to vote for one topic out of three diverse options is just rubbish.

Take myself access to CTA would be my No.1 priority - I fly out of the Sydney Basin, which means, due to CTA North & East, I am pretty well forced, if I stay within RAA regulations, to fly over very extensive & dangerous Tiger Country, if I want to go anywhere other than South. The ability to access CTA would allow a significant increase in my flight safety margins to say nothing of more direct routes & lower costs . For someone based in a country area this the inability to access CTA is at worst an infrequent minor inconvenience barely worth discussing.

The higher stall speeds and increased TOW are, in my case, academic - I fly a European aircraft that is limited by the manufactures to 540 kg ,(although their latest offering is certified in Au to 600 kg). So the increase in RAA TOW is unlikely to benefit those who have aircraft that will remain at lower weights. A higher TOW may benefit RAA itself, as it makes more aircraft, from the GA world, eligible to be registered under RAA - so more members more $$$$.

Well said - Thank you Thomas

Sorry Skippy, if a preflight doesn't include inspection at the cap, you need to 'change your installation'. If not, one day you WILL be looking for somewhere to land with a cooked goose! Experience talkin'.

I have not disagreed with the principal of your argument just its practicality in real life operations where cowling considerations preclude easy access.

I would also make the point that a correctly fitted safe cap stays that way until someone does not complete the locking turn or forgets to lock it down altogether. Cooling system problems are better diagnosed by observing leaking coolant, empty or contaminated overflow reservoir than repeatedly opening & closing the cap which lets air into what is supposed to be an air bubble free system.

In the scheme of priorities you might do better to checking that the radiator fins are free of chaff/insects etc that may cause your cooling system to overheat.

As I said my installation is not ideal from a cooling system cap inspection point of view but after 700+ hrs of trouble free operation and many more hours of trouble free operation of similar systems in land based vehicles, I feel confident that my maintenance regime, preflight checks and instrument scan give me almost all the information I can hope for.

Do you inspect the radiator cap on your land based vehicle before each journey? No! nor do I. I do glance at the translucent overflow tank about once per week - coolant level normal, system good to go.

Cooling system rarely give problems, if correctly maintained. Usually give plenty of notice of things like seal or cap leakage. Using proper/appropriate cooling system hoses/pipes, coolant mix and observing the Rotax service interval/time limits on hose and coolant life, is far more important than obsessively checking an already correctly installed cap.

Any change in cooling system "normal" performance should be responded to as you would an imminent engine failure - if in the air LAND - if on the ground do NOT TAKE OFF.

My aircraft along, with all its Rotax 912 powered siblings, has an exemplary safety record.To my knowledge, in about 20 years of operation across hundreds of aircraft, there has yet to be a catastrophic cooling system malfunction reported.

There are no grantees an apparently normal engine may fail on take off or in cruise. Usually there are warning signs that were ignored or just not observed/understood.