skippydiesel

My limited research suggests that the Councils (most numerous airfield owners) review their fee structures on an annual basis. Should this be Condorcet, there would not be a problem with a 6 month lead time for publication. "......they will say you have missed the deadline for the next update" Failure to meet a deadline for inclusion, can not be a policy, as your statement sugests, rather a failure of the individual submitter. As such is not something I, you or NAIPS can do anythig about. I will contact NAIPS regarding your 6 month lead time - still seems improbable to me for a document, that by intent, must be as up to date as possible.😈

Let us know how things "pan out"😈

Yet another supporter of not disclosing airfield fees in the official document ERSA - Please make your argument for this support of non compliance with consumer law.😈

If it takes 6 months it will reflect the owners annual update (if any). There are airfield owners who post their fee schedule in ERSA. I wonder how they manage this astonishing feet of compliance with consumer expectation/law? Got to say, for a document that has 4 publications/annum, specifically to remain current, the idea that it takes 6 months to make a change/enty sounds a little implausable. Am I correct in my impression, that you are a supporter of not disclosing airfield fee structures? If so please, make your argument for not posting your airfield fee structure in ERSA. 😈

Hi BurnieM, Not sure what your point is, other than to show another airport not posting their aircraft movement fees in ERSA. I could not find any fees on the web page you supplied. Even if I had, this does not change the thrust of my argument that fees should be in ERSA, not on some obscure web site or with a third party informant. Are you supporting or against my position on this? 😈

Hi Turbs - No offence intended -it must be nice to live in your fantasy world of a warm body in every seat of your Cherokee Sixe. Your questionable experince is 180 degrees of mine and I sugest most private pilots BUT good on yah! if you can get 5 Pax for most flights. "There's really not a lot of point in comparing two aircraft built for different application then one person slagging the guy who's perfectly happy in another application." This is wilful miss reading of the statements made, which only gave the opinion & experince of most private pilots, regarding seat filling. 😈

If the customer (pilot) must search for the fee/price/charge information, the intent of the law requiring readily available pre knowledge of the cost, has not been met. You can see the price of vehicle fuel as you approach the service station. The restaurant menu charges are on the door/window as you enter or on the menu itself. Your grocery items all have clearly labeled cost. An investigation service eg my car pulls to the right when breaking, may not have a firm cost however the service provide is obliged to give an estimate (could be an hourly charge with parts ??) when asked for - this should be in writing. The prudent/professional service provider will contact the customer, to advise of any increase in the estimate, with justifications, prior to completing the work. Every service or good you consume/use, that incurs a charge/fee, is obliged to advise you of the cost before you commit. The advice method should be such that the provider can legitimately & demonstrably claim the the customer did know, before accepting the service/good. NOTE: I am not ingesting that every good/service provider meets the standard. This is no excuses for not trying to improve the situaton (fees in ERSA). 😈

Why? - Do you have a hearing/vision impairment? Are you concerned that the starter system will remain engaged? 😈

While a faithful reproduction of an official document ERSA is as valid as the origional - additional information / modifications does not fall under this accepted understanding.😈

Nothing could be further from the truth. Is not the cost of landing an aircraft at an airfield an operational matter?? What central information source would you have the information published in, if not in ERSA??? I believe that there is a legal requirement for ALL providers of goods/services, within Australia, to make fess/payments for the same, to be readily available to the potential customer/consumer. By readily available, I mean the customer (pilot planning a trip) should not need to search for the information ie it should "stand out like dogs balls". The appropriate location for such information should be contained within the pilots panning documents in the one location ie ERSA. There are airports that publish their access (landing/parking/overnight etc) fees in ERSA, there are very many more who do not. While there are many (non aviation) businesses in contravention of the Law, this is not a valid excuse for not drawing attention to such transgressions and trying to get it put right. What is the malaise in Australian private pilots, that they accept with barely a whimper, unjust, illogical charges & treatment (ASIC & airport owners not making landing fees readily available)???😈

ERSA is the pilots Bible of airfield conditions. ERSA is updated at least 4 times/annum - the information is as current as can be in a publication All pilots using Australian airspace are obliged to consult ERSA (amongst other official publications) when planning a trip. What I want is very simple, logical and I believe the minimum required by Australia Consumer Law - ALL airfields charging landing fees, lists/posts those fees in ERSA - not in some third party listing that may or may not be correct. I stand to be corrected - "Ozrunways, or similar," are not official documents. Useful? Yes! but do not carry the legal authority of ERSA😈

Give yourself the potential to save a few $$ - Check your sensor is working before, sending the Tacho for an expensive assessment😈

I admit to minimal knowledge in this mature, however I have always had the understanding that, in an aircraft, the POWER ON, IGNITION(s) ON and START (crank engine) should all be on separate systems ie not incorporated on one car like ignition system.😈

Its not clear what you are trying to achieve. Aircraft, unlike ground based vehicles, do not usually us a single (key) ignition switch as in system live/engine start all on the one rotting system. The usual arrangement, for a duel ignition system, is Ignition 1 & 2 armed/ON (could be via rotating (key style) switch or other system). Push button, or other momentary switch, to energise the starter motor/crank engine 😈

Not an electronics person; My gut feeling is that just connecting the tacho to power, on the bench, is not a diagnostic action. To find out if the tacho is working you will need to send a pulse/signal (as from the flywheel sensor). You will first have to assertion that the sensor (Hall Effect/Photo/Lazer) is working as expected - probably the easiest way is to temporarily wire in a "know to be working" tacho. If the loner tacho works, then suspect your tacho but first follow my advice (above) on making sure you have good connections😈

Just had occasion to investigate landing at Murwillumbah (NSW). This airfield/Council illistrate why we should not be paying a fee, when its not listed in ERSA. Note : I have no desire to discuss Murwillumbah as such - its failure to post the landing fee schedule, in ERSA, is typical of many airfields around Australia. We as private pilots need to make a stand - No Fee in ERSA, No Pay! From ERSA Murwillumbah (NSW) REMARKS 1. AD Charges: All aircraft 2. Pilot notes refer to Tweed Shire Council web site As instructed - Check out web site https://www.tweed.nsw.gov.au/community/events-venues/community-facilities/airfield "Landing fees The landing fees and annual fees are managed on behalf of Council by Avdata Australia. All information collected by Avdata is in accordance with Council’s Privacy Management Plan, NSW legislation and Avdata’s Privacy Policy. Please direct any queries to Avdata in the first instance at [email protected] or call 02 6262 8111." 😈

Not an electrician; A start solenoid is but a heavy duty electrical relay The engine starter solenoid should have 4 contact points; From battery posative(+) terminal (high amp/ thick wire To starter motor positive (+) terminal (high amp/ thick wire From start button/switch posative (+) wire that will energise the solenoid making a connection between battery & starter motor Earth (-) connection (this may be through the casing of the solenoid, through the mounting bolts . From the pic above, it looks like the red wire you have circled is the solenoid energiser (+) wire from your start button/switch Assuming your aircraft is all 12 Volts then this will be 12V "Yellow circle one that needs 12V to energize the solenoid, or a to be pulled to ground via the Start command " Not sure what mean - For electricity to flow (energise a system) it usually flows from + to -. There is no "..pulled to ground.." When you press the start button/turn the start key, you are making an electrical contact (command?). 12V electricity will flow down the wire to the solenoid and energises an electro magnet. The magnet moves a rod, which will close a contact in the high amp start circuit. The high amp circuit energises the starter motor which rotates your engine Engine starts You take finger off start button/switch and the system cuts of electrical energy No offense Steve ZK but this is very basic electrical understanding - might be an idea to consult with a friend, who knows how the system is supposed to work. I strongly recomend installing a dedicated earth (-) return circuit to your battery negative (-) terminal

First off - Check cables for continuity and the that all joins are clean & secure . Pay special attention to the earth (-) return. After the above, if it's still dead, you may need an electronics technician. Good luck! 😈

Great kids! I hope your family continue to enjoy flying with you. My wife pulled the plug after just a few flights & my children weren't really intersted. That is until one decided he would like Dad to pay for flying lessons. Had his PPL at 16 & his CPL at 18. Then decided being an electrical engineer delivered more reliable . Such is life!😈

Its not about the aircraft per say - The conversion (PPL- RAA) does not take into account the VH aircraft you may have been flying. Its abouts demonstrating, to an RAA Instructor, you have the flying skills (in a RAA aircraft) and the aeronautical knowledge. Most PPL's will have been flying Cessna's/Piper's etc not a VH equivalent of an RAA registered aircraft.😈

Its quite a few years since I converted from GA/PPL to RAA, so some things may have changed. I was required to do "human factors" as this had not been part of my PPL however you may already have done this as part of your training, so you may not be required to repeat this. As stated above, all your PPL ratings are recognised by RAA. Yes you will have to do minimum 5 flight hours and there will be some air knowledge questions to answer. If you want to add an endorsement (eg tail wheel) this is a good time & cost saving to do a combined conversion/endorsement. Note: Finding an RAA school offering tail wheel training may not be so easy. Word of caution - > 600 kg take off weight aircraft, take a little getting used to, especially in the landing phase . 😈

Its not that vibration is THE problem, its poor quality soldering - according to Rotax Owner Forum member, who give detailed instructions on how to open, investigate & repair the Ducati VR.😈

Like you I put my Ducati VR on the cabin side of the firewall - it lasted about 150hr. I even had a cold air blast tube to help keep the heat down. There have been some very interesting observations on the Rotax Owners Forum - Heat does not seem to be the whole story - Vibration is credited, by many, as the real "killer". Some pretty negative commentary on the quality of the soldered connections = failure due to vibration. I haven't tried this - Apparently you can dig out the putty like filler and do a simple continuity/resistance checks on the connections you uncover. Resolder the faulty ones and your Ducati VR can be put back into service. 😈

I have two problems with this; The horrific cost. The main benefit of FI is fuel consumption. Only high annual flight hrs (school?) are likly to see this pay off. Complexity. I like the reactive simplicity of the carby variant. 😈