pylon500

Had something fly around two nights ago here at Taree, NO lights at all. Lots of wooshing and turbine engine noise, but hard to tell if a Blackhawk (or two), or a C130J? Clear cloudless night with lots of stars, but couldn't pick it up as a silhouette or anything. Sounded like picking up the NDB from the West, broke off left to the North, then large R/H orbit back over the township and depart back to the West.. Waited outside for a second one (military often do things in groups), but nothing else. I'm used to the sound of the old C130E's and H's, but I don't see/hear the J's much up here.

Just thought I'd add these to the list.....

Yeah, unfortunately a bit more than I think is worth. Upon buying my very own (third hand) Lightwing, complete with it's singular approval to run a Bolly prop, and maybe a few other non approved mods, it was suggested to me that for a small fee, I could have the pilot notes, and thus certification and weights, updated to the LSA class for better utilisation. When the aircraft got damaged by a student, and I started the rebuild, it became apparent that their were some vagaries to be dealt with....... I would still like to point out that I feel the Lightwing is still one of the best trainers we've ever had, having only one(questionable) fatality in around thirty years of operation. Many people have had their little inputs to improving the Lightwing along the way, not least of which was usually replacing Howard's 'Piece of Wood', with a decent propellor (Sweetapple, GSC, Brolga, Warp, Bolly?), or other little mods. Now it's hard to know just where the Lightwing sits, and as such we are in fear of losing a great plane for the sake of pretending to be GA certified. YES, but it' mine, and you can't have it. I'm talking about my Murphy Renegade project..... https://plus.google.com/photos/113292981019876413104/albums/5517491041560340721?banner=pwa There is a Murphy Rebel flying around with an R2800 up front, AND, I know where there are 2 Rebels in various states of disrepair, that could be 'moved on' to make room for other projects........ Arthur.

And that's just the ultralights, then add the sailplanes and hang-gliders, (about another 25). Actually, seeing that most of what I fly are ultralights, the 'numbers' are usually in a fairly small range, and most of the time you can 'feel' what the plane wants to do. Some of the slick machines can feel a bit vague until you get to know them. Slowest thing I've flown was probably the Lazair, which actually flies very well and coordinated, and flies at typical hang-glider speeds. The fastest thing I've flown would be an RV-4. Lots of high looking numbers, but very stable with nice positive pushrod controls. Landing is a cases of get it near the ground at idle (about one foot off with one stage flap), and just keep slowing down 'til it lands itself. Helps to use a long runway until you know how to 'nibble' with the drag curve on approach. I usually explore full flaps (where available) once I've got a bit of a feel for a plane. I will usually have a look at the pilot notes as well, if available.

My concerns with the Lightwing (and more so the rebuilding of it), stem from the fact that they grew up in a time when it would appear many of the rules were only being used as a suggestion, rather than a mandate. Don't get me wrong, I think the Lightwings are great machines, despite the variations one can find in them. Many of these variations were indeed improvements, but I'm not sure how many of them made it into the certification packages? We were all quite happy to upgrade the engines, update the airframes (LW-1 to GR582 to GR912) and try various props to suit our assorted roles, but now with the CASA witch hunt going through the RAAus, and Lightwings no longer being built (to my knowledge), it would appear that all Lightwings could be questioned regarding their 'authenticity'? I am about to start finishing my Lightwing. All the structure is done and I finally have room to start covering, but I still need to buy an engine and prop, and would ideally like to put it back online. I just need to be able to interpret the various contradictions in the certification packages to see if I can end up with the plane I want. ps, How 'written off' is that one?

Lightening holes definitely give that 'aeronautical' look.... To be continued?

Yeah, best to get that looked at. A trim tab bent over 90º, is basically stalled and not doing much. Many things to look for; Nose wheel springs? Drooping aileron? Mis-aligned aileron hinge (the ailerons hang off the top skin on a Technam?) Nosewheel spat loose? Rudder cable fraying somewhere? Rudder pedal springs?

Some FTF's are non for profit clubs, with training ability.... Join the club, learn with the club, fly with the club and hopefully donate time and effort to uphold the club, that can supply you a mega-buck aircraft at just an hourly rate...

Just a clarification on pricing when dealing with engine use/cost.. Lightwing example; GR582 replacement engine cost ~$6000, replacement rate -every 300 hours. GR912 replacement engine cost ~$20000, replacement rate -every 2000 hours. Result, by the time you replace the first life 912, you have replaced 6 582's!! That's $36000 worth of engines. This is why bean counters like GR912's, even though the aircraft is now heavier, not balanced as well and a bit different on the ground. Note Some customer values may differ to those stated above

WTH!? Not sure what I missed here, but I thought that all students, pilots, instructors and all other members of the RAAus were covered for any liability (third person and/or property) via our membership fees. Why are they trying to look at FTF's and SFTF's as entities? They are just where you go to find the RAAus members?... Insurance companies will only look at TF's as some form of profit making business, which would become fair game for huge premiums! If this is the case, what the heel do our membership fee cover?

Am I missing the point? I thought I was explaining WHY; The money flyers are pushing for super ships, the schools are listening to the 'market', so the students and new pilots don't know any better! Very few schools have the 'low end' any more, and sight seeing in a Jabiru is almost a contradiction of words... The Foxbat is a bit more acceptable. If you have a Drifter and tell people that you were flying along some deserted beach at 505 feet, they all throw their hands in the air saying your an accident waiting to happen. No one seems to remember back when we only had 300 feet (yes, even I agree a bit dangerous), some may remember when we had 1500 feet, but now, if you don't have a flight plan, all the maps, your human factors test passed and an epirb, some will say you shouldn't even be flying, let alone along that deserted beach, even at 1500 feet. WE'VE LOST THE PLOT, and we let it happen. To be honest though, there are still a few of us stalwarts out there, trying to uphold the original cause. I'm still teaching tail wheel, I'm using a two stroke Lightwing, although I've had to take the nice three blade 'Warp' off, and put the original crappy wooden prop back on. Still, I can manage 500 fpm, which is better than the Gazelle I used with the crap 'Allsize' it had to have. (Climb damn you!!!) Who knows, maybe flying low end ultralights may become trendy again, but it will need more marketing..

Web porn is the similar, but just not quite the real thing....

I may not be right here, but I feel that if you have full British accreditation, and have a G-xxxx registered Trike (as we call them), you should be able to bring it here and fly it (for a few months at least) on your own license. It would pay to contact RAAus first to be sure. I would say contact CASA, but they will just offload you to RAAus or HGFA anyway. Technically your UK License should outrank our Certificate.

The airfield and surrounding acreage is for sale (see elsewhere), but as I said earlier, I don't think you will find anyone that will actually give you permission to land there. The Realestate crooks might say they can get it for you if you say you're flying in to have a look at buying, but I wouldn't hold your breath....

Really, the answer is NO. Recreational aircraft as defined by the rules now being enforced, are really just light weight GA aircraft, and will soon cost just as much to operate as Cessnas and Pipers. The concept of the 'Ultralight' aircraft had gone by the wayside once the 'get rich quick' flying schools (I know, and they know, they never did!) started following 'market' pressure, and using modern super ships, and pushing to get the rules to allow more modern, more super, ships. Add to this the later generation GA pilots coming into ultralighting, but still wanting to have the equivalent of a Mooney to fly around in! Of course the definition of super ship can vary depending where you look from; Thruster and Drifter pilots thought, "That Lightwing's not an ultralight!, look its got doors, brakes, and it's doped and painted!" I grew up with Lightwings, and looked at the Jabiru and thought "Those fly about the same as Cessna's, it should be GA!" These days, most people that get the itch to look into cheap flying are not sure what to expect, so when shown Technams, Foxbats and Jabirus, take this as the norm, and should they see a Thruster or Drifter, would probably laugh their heads off, or shy away in fear. They have no idea that this is where we all started, that these aircraft all flew, and within their class flew well. I think Instructors with around twenty years of experience, would agree with me that the Lightwing is still probably the best ultralight trainer we ever had?! Should I point out that, (to my knowledge) there has only been ONE fatality in their flying history, and that pilot may have died in flight? Now they're trying to relegate them to non training private use, and/or force users to fly them in their original 1980's form, with inefficient (and not really certified, just approved) wooden props, and questioning things like oil injected two strokes, 912 conversions, long range tanks and the like. So really, it won't be too long that when we only have super ships, and we are pretending to be, (and paying the price of) GA, should someone discover a lightweight flying machine made of aluminium tubes, with Dacron covering, a two stroke motor and a TAIL WHEEL, they wont know what it is or how to fly it, or even where to get trained to fly it. Maybe about then, a group of people will get together and start a new flying group...... And they could call it the "Australian Ultralight Federation" Flame suit ON

One word.....JATO

The 'ARM' he is talking about is the distance from a reference point, that a weight is taken for weight and balance calculations. Looking at his numbers (for an RV-4) I would say he is working from the nose somewhere, either front of spinner or maybe prop backplate. This will give him all positive numbers, which a simple app like that would prefer. However, it gives a CofG as a position with reference from that point on the nose... The paperwork I have for the Lightwing works from the leading edge of the wing, which means positive numbers behind the leading edge, and negative numbers in front of the wing. The upshot of this is that the calculations will come back as a position back from the leading edge, which is something you can visually relate to a lot easier. Check if the app runs in inches or centimetres? (Remember, centimetres are for Dress Makers !, Engineers use Millimetres) The metric coordinates for a GR582 are around; Mainwheels ~ 16mm behind Leading edge, (GR912 mains are around 150mm in front of Leading edge, so a negative number), Tailwheel ~ 3950mm behind Leading edge, Pilot seats ~ 307mm behind Leading edge, Fuel tanks ~ 180mm behind Leading edge. The published CofG range for the Lightwing varies depending on date and model, but they want the numbers to come out between 260mm (17%) and 288mm (19%) aft of the Leading edge. Numbers out side this range (like back to 300mm or 20%) are not going to be mentioned here...

I too have thought a lot about a multi engine 95:10.... Looking at the attachment below, think Lazair, and cheap four stroke lawn mower engines.. Was going to have the front open like the original; Just open up, turn around and sit in it, pull the nose shut:roflmao: ps, I have flown a four engined Lazair in the past, the sound was awesome !!

Any more news on this...?

So, how much capital do you need to invest to get that sort of return?

It appears that we will all have to buy newly made copies of the Allsize props from Howie, once they're signed off by a Reg35 engineer (or CASA's latest name change for the same person). So all of us that were using the worlds best props, will have to replace our Warps (sorry, but it's true) with lumps of wood again I wish I could figure out just what exactly proves a 'Safe History of Operation' (20,000 plus props made?) so that we can get Warps approved (if not certified), and put them back on. Below is an excerpt from a reply I got from WarpDrive; Arthur.

Many people have the idea of building their own aircraft, and then being taught to fly in it. Regardless of the various interpretations of the assorted rules, a totally different set of rules usually crop up that defeat the intended 'cost cutting' purpose, and that is that when you finish building your 19-xxxx, someone then has to fly a minimum of 25 hours in it before it can be flown dual! By the time you've insured and put 25 hours of fuel through it, plus all the 'tweaks' that go with a new aircraft, it's probably quicker to just learn at a school or club, get one of the instructors to test fly it and brief you on it, then finish the test time yourself, already as a pilot. Obviously this is not really ideal, but this is the interpretation that comes about once bureaucracy takes over and common sense disappears.

It was in the sense that it was another Bill Whitney design... Had a photo of it at a Narromine, but damned if i can find it

Interesting that no one mentioned the 'Amethyst Falcon'? A Bill Whitney design, specifically for aerobatics within the ultralight movement. The other missing aircraft is the Markey/Winton UltraBat. A fairly comprehensive history here; http://theultrabat.com/#/the-ultrabat-story/4578373011

I like a bit of 'Daring Do', and the testing of one's skills, but I could see that going horribly wrong very quickly. Any ideas of type of aircraft landing on grass field after the foxbat?