turboplanner

9 minutes ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

I have often wondered why 2 strokes are not better than 4 strokes. The flimsy valve business with 4 strokes should wipe them out in comparison. The failing of some 2 strokes has been the need to mix the oil in the fuel, but this is not a 2 stroke thing but a cheap thing. Yes, the fact that crankcase compression systems cause some of the incoming charge to go straight out the exhaust is a downside. But the extra mixing of fuel/air is an upside.

What about a diesel 2 stroke? It sure has been done and it should have taken over but it didn't. I have never understood why not.

   

2 stroke diesel is off the table these days. Can’t achieve emission standards.

2 stroke issue is probably not enough cooling time between power strokes.  
 

For something practical within a 3 year design budget you need to start with a current engine.

3 hours ago, kgwilson said:

I got into RA for a pretty basic reason. I'd been flying Hang Gliders for 20 years from 1974 & got my GA licence while still Hang Gliding & that was more than 30 years ago. I retired the first time in 2005 & planned to build an aircraft but I was never interested in basic rag & tube. I flew a few in the 80s to 90s belonging to other people & it was just not my cup of tea. The first was a weight shift Quicksilver. By 2009 I'd made my mind up that sooner or later I would not pass the class 2 medical & there were plenty of RA kits available so I started conversion in a Skyfox Gazelle at Caloundra which was a breeze to fly but too slow for me to go anywhere. Bought the Sierra Kit in 2011 & installed a Jab 3300 & by 2015 I was away. I finished the conversion to RA at Coffs in a Jab 170.

 

Compared to NZ where I had flown most of my life the regulations were a bit more draconian but the RA side was pretty basic & anyway I had a PPL so could fly in CTA & although I never renewed my class 2 I still transit CTA with permission. There are probably plenty like me & I have no desire to return to GA. I only ever flew with more than 1 passenger on club trips or when family came to stay.

 

760kg doesn't interest me  but some of the stupid regulations annoy me, like No access to CTA, Class D changing to class G with the click of a minute hand, ASIC cards & ramp checks. Only in Australia.

You've mentioned your CTA before, but your guys are using discretion based on work load.

At one time I got a call at Mangalore where at the time I was the only one inbound in the circuit to say they were on the 123 radial 2 miles dme inbout fr RWY x , in a Fokker Friendship F27 probably student pilot under the hood.  I'd done my CTA training, but that's what I had to unscramble to know whether I was directly in front of him or not.

On another day had a visit from a friend from the opal fields and his mate. He owned a C150 so I offered to show the Moorabbin with a quick circuit. By the time we got there it was about 5 pm. The taxy and take off and circuit were fine until late downwind where we had to get  flap on and squat the aircraft back to slow down enough to hold out place and avoid a go round. This was about the time they marvelled that I could understand anything the tower was saying, they had never had to slow down, then we turned final, and we were No 5 with full flap and hanging on the prop sinking our way down ready to go round if an aircraft didn't vacate the runway fast enough. Only three of us managed to get a landing.

It's a different world and requires training. If your training is in a CTA, effectively there's no extra time to pay for; if you didn't add enough hours to get it right for all the airports you will be visiting, ie not just Coffs if one day you want to go into Bankstown.

14 minutes ago, jackc said:

I am tipping there will be a rash of engine development with the demise of the Rotax 2 strokes……Rotax have made a big mistake in my opinion.

The person who can design a simple four stroke engine meeting current emission standards (none exist for aviation, but automotive indicates responsibilty) which will put up with the rigors of flying and self-maintenance, has a chance of making big money, even if they just pick a bike engine, convert it for aviation, and open up the clearances to make it bullet-proof (motor bike engines are not constant power engines but can be converted to that mode.)

13 minutes ago, APenNameAndThatA said:

I keep mentioning this, and nobody agrees or disagrees: isn’t weight-shift the new rag and tube? That is, don’t people who want cheap flying now do weight shift?  

Not at all, take a lot at the engines going into trikes and the sophistication and the price.

1 hour ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

If the RAAUs was developed to foster affordable flying, I reckon the stupidity of the population has beaten them.

First, a digression:  Gliding was once the cheapest way to get into the air, and it still can be if you will accept winch launches in a wooden glider. Very few do this.

The result is,  if you look at glider sales nowadays, you will see a tiny number of 1/2 million dollar things being imported by the rich.

The scene I grew up with, where working guys could buy a syndicate glass 15m glider, has also gone by.

 

When I bought my Jabiru kit, it was cheaper than the sales tax on a self-launch 17m glider.... so now RAAus had the cheapest flying for me.

But the new aircraft mainly seem to be factory built 1/4 million things for the rich.

What is happening?  Why do the younger generation seem to only want things they can't afford?

Overselling by the preceding generation.

Just look at the slobering over the 760 kg, and consider what the retaliation will be from the GA light end.

Almost certainly we will  see LAME maintenance, then a decision might be made on where the crossover will be because the aorcraft specs are the same, then people will want to do what the two seat GA does, so training will have to increase, so certificate cost goes up by a few thousand.

Then you might hear people wishing they could go back to the days of buying a $100,000 plastic fantastic.

It's a common theme; last time I looked you could buy a 320 hp Jetski.

Take the Formula 500 Class in Speedway. They started out as TQs, Three Quarter scale speedcars, where you scrounged around the wreckers  for light car rear axles fitted Mini wheels and 10" tyres, found a 500cc motor in a wreckers for a couple of hundred dollars, worked it over and you were racing for a couple of hundred dollars. Then wide tyres became popular on Sprintcars and the 10" tyres became as wide as they were high, cost about the same as the car, and you would burn a set off on a single chanpionship night, so the costs became about the same as building ten new cars for the season. The specatacular performance attracted cashed up plumbers etc, so they bought rolling chassis from the USA for ten times what is cost to build. The locals were still winning but had to have the lastest.........and so on for decades until today you buy one ready to go for $30,000 - $40,000. Not surprisingly the entry guys shifted to old Sprintcars with Chev 350s.

It's really in the perception and the concept being sold by the President and Committee (in RAA Directors) who quite often have a totally different outlook to the younger members of the group.

The irony is that in all these groups there is nothing pushing them away from affordability except themselves.

14 minutes ago, walrus said:

Turbo, I'm in complete agreement with you but I'm married.

AH! Now it makes perfect sense; squeezed between a rose and a thorn.

1 hour ago, walrus said:

It wouldn’t be Australia if such a change didn’t require another layer of paperwork and more complex rules. However, congratulations to RAA for perseverance. The access to controlled airspace would also be very welcome because it then makes touring a lot easier to potentially plan.

 

My touring plans founder on controlled airspace road blocks at Alice Springs, Tindal, Darwin, Broome, Karratha, Perth and Adelaide.

Sunny the whole point of flying is you don’t have to follow roads and major cities and the whole point of recreational flying is you stay away.

.......ALF compliance. 

Not many people know that Turbo was, and still is a goto Aeronautical Engineer for companies like Boeing and Airbus Industrie. It was Turbo who solved the safety issue with the Boeing Dreamliner breaking up on forced landings by designing the equivalent of a tournique around the fuselage, which cause it to snap neatly in two rather than break up into little pieces.

Turbo adapted the Honda reverse trust system to blow air over the wings during the landing, so while the pitot tube in the nose recorded an airspeed of 44.9 kts, the SSHLS (Slow Speed Honda Landing System) was blowing air over the wings at 120 kts. Better still, in a secret deal brokered by Turbine Design's Purchasing Vice President, John Kerry, it was built by a Chinese manufacturer for US$10.56, and ...............

20 minutes ago, onetrack said:

You're missing the point, Turbo. Waraton is talking about a corrupted decision-making process in Govt. I personally think, if John Cleary has evidence of corruption in the planning and decision-making process, then he needs to present that evidence to the local legal enforcement team.

Alleged corrupted decision-making process, and I'm not suggesting it wasn't corrupt, but a corruption allegation in Planning, while it may refer to an alleged crime, mostly centres around wounded residents or in this case pilots worried about the effect on their amenity.

In this case, if the loss of amenity had been raised in the first stage, the Responsible Authority would have an obligation to consider it.

If it wasn't raised, it's game over; people not directly affected can't just enter the process down the track unless procedure hasn't been followed

If people did object, and their perception was that they were right and the Responsible Authority was wrong, which happens in many Planning cases , there is the low cost recourse of taking it to NCAT for a Review. Even then many people think the process is corrupt because they didn't win. If you don't apply to NCAT, that's the end of the matter.

There is still one more step and that's the Supreme Court, but only on grounds that a mistake was made by NCAT. The Supreme Court doesn't hear the merits of the case and make a decision on that.

Where the EPA is involved in issuing a licence there is also a process for a Works Authority, but that hasn't been mentioned here.

So in general if you think the proess was corrupt you might take it to the Supreme Court, or if the Government process was corrupted by criminal activity you might take it to ICAC, but in terms of publicly re-running the Planning process again using petitions and your version of what should have happened there's no local legal enforcement team in that structure and it's all too late now.

2 hours ago, waraton said:

John Cleary is a highly respected, dedicated and intelligent individual who has driven the effort to have some transparency throughout the planning and approval process of this project. I take John's word as truth that the approval process was corrupted and he provides some significant insight into this in the video. He doesn't think it is final and that is why he has been doing what he can to get as much support via the petition to do so. I have signed the petition and passed the link on, it can't hurt if others do the same. 

You've put your finger right on it. 

A Planner spend 5 years at Unit before practicing because it is a complex and exacting procedure made more difficult by a set of time constraints.

It doesn't matter how wonderful you are if you missed the cutoff date for one of those time constraints.

It's going to be very interesting to see who starts importing 760 kg aircraft.

2 hours ago, waraton said:

Are you having a swipe at me or Ben Morgan??

I'm saying it's over. What's the point of posting issues that have been decided?

The times when something could have been done were:

(a) before the decision when aviators could have pointed out that the facility would affect a flight pattern and moving it may resolve the problem.

(b) the statutory period of days where the decision can be appealed at NCAT, and NCAT may or may not issue an order confirming the decision or cancelling it.

Talking about the decision, in the Plannning world is......talking about it.

1 hour ago, waraton said:

https://www.facebook.com/AOPAaustralia/videos/428879775416992/

 

Would have been good tp get an answer.

Ben Morgan "Has approval to move forward"

EOS

..........but the smooth flow of the NES story was interrupted by the shock announcement from Glasgow of the secret deal between China and the USA to drastically cut CO2 emissions.

In particular, and the part to shock NES readers is the announcement by XI Zhenhua (pronounced Walkington) that he had been secretly meeting with US envoy John Kerry for months when they announced at the COP21 conference a deal to shaft France and Australia in general to get to zero emissions.

"Orstralians always advertising fart larmbs and fart kittle, he explained so we both decide to ban Orstralia unless they shoot larmbs and kittle.

"Of course we not buy orstralian whit any more because we not eating whit anymore we eating Maccas.

"Most of all we ban urtrarights because they emit big CO2 from smocking engine and pirot farting."

Your correspondent has found that John Kerry didn't know about the Ultralights, and Xie had been holidaying in Queensland when someone buzzed him on a beach in a drifter.

Kerry had put in an urgent call, but XIE was firm, they had to go, expeciary the big ones. Cappy had sold his Jab in the Nick of time, bull would be walking, but Turbo with his Challenger was OK.

The ten thousand members of RAA (9800 of them refugees from GA who had been waiting for the 760 kg MTOW to bring their Cessnas and Pipers across due to blindness, artificial hearts, and sh!t like that were .........

............and that proved to be the solution; the CCP bought a stack of Y blocks from Cuba, knocked out the Stonefish, and embarked their CCP SAS troups safey on to a CCP sub waiting offshore.

This wasn't a French Sub which could operate successfully without mechanical failures and was fitted with all the 1964 state of the art gizmos; this sub was built in china, and the outer sections of the planes bent up when you were climbing and down when you were diving, the torpedo tubes were too big for the torpedos and shot them of at an angle, skinning thousands of stonefish and drawing threats from WWF, The controls had confusing labels like "When want the start press buoton three time maybe flash long red and brue it speak horsepower start" and there were three vital and unique bolts missing. The sub was going nowhere, and Cappy, OT, CT, and Turbo got the Corsairs out and loaded 500 lb bombs (bull only flew ultralights), and headed ...................

Is there an NCAT case coming up?

6 minutes ago, SGM said:

Turbo,

Did you mean continuing the Melb Coastal VFR route until the BOM tower then heading south from there?  I was trying to fly the entire bay shoreline if I could.

SGM

OK, the LAL cuts the shore on the western side, but starts quite a way inland.

.....head back home."

"I'm hungry" he added "Hey Ti Nee, strip off to bugy snugglers and see if you can catch that rooster - plenty of room for him in there!" The rooster won and poor Tiny was looking like pulled pork, so they walked along the beach, eventually coming to a small cove on sunset.

There was a sign which said "Stonefish Cove, site of the escape of a hundred Japanese SAS troops in WW2 who waded out when it got dark and swam, using frog stroke so there would be no fluorescence visible to Australian troops on the hill behind you. They all instincltively ducked and missed the tag line "Turbine Tourism"

The leader radioed for a sub at midnight, when they set out to wade out from the beach the sound of a hundred Chinese soldiers yelling XXXXX! at the same time is terrifying and this woke up the two Border Control officers and CASA FOI who discharged their 38 cal weapons. By now the Chinese were frog stroking as hard as they could go, free of the stone fish on the sand but the shots had terrified the stone fish and they had now taken off away from the Australians but straight for the Chinese with their legs wide apart, exposing the family jewels to the poisoned barbs of the stone fish ....................

No, but did you give any thought to using the Light Aircraft Lane instead?

......ussy about preserving the hallowed history of the Port of Darwin by our mortal and cruel enemy, the Javanese. (President XI had not done very well in history as school being overly occupied by little Ping Yu who sat in front of him.)

The CCP through the equivalent of our SAS hatched a plan to attack Darwin bypassing the Port, and launched their carrier-based MIG 300Ys headed for Darwin. The MIG 300 [Chinese avref] like its 250 predecessors hadn't been trouble-free with the A to X variants scrapped and recycled as letter boxes. Nevetheless, they flew valiantly on. They had the very latest Glass instruments with GPS supplied by Turbine Magenta. All they had to do was follow the magenta line. They had to trust the Turbine Instruments because they'd never had a case where one of their own had been remotely accurate, or lasted a complete flight. Cunningly, Turbo had slightly adjusted all the GPS chips, and the CCPSAS landed on York Peninsula.

They booked in for the night at the nearby resort called the Darwin Diggers Club, owned by Turbine Secret Destinations Inc and read all the brochures including the ones about how the Aborigines caught their own food. This incuded Blue-Headed Roosters and the text said "It easy, just like Chinee Rooster; grab neck, chop head off." Smiling at the carelessness of Australians giving away such handy hints by mistake, the first CCPSAS  platoon caught a "rooster" ............................

.......e-faced (courtesy Four and Twenty Pies, brought to you by Turbine CAT Oriental).

The CCP with its considerable resources, turned its attention to Australia and decided to bomb Darwin..............

47 minutes ago, Old Koreelah said:

Ideally, a pre-warmer and pump to get that oil circulating before we crank the engine. It could be plugged into any external oil line. 

 

During WWII winters, the Swedish Air Force kept oil hot and added it their fighter engines just before they were scrambled.

The issue is not with the oil, which lubricates hot or cold. 

As Facthunter explained, the tolerances are set for minimum wear at operating speed (cruise speed), which I think I explained in a thread a couple of days ago. Just pumping hot oil isn't going to do an awful lot because the engine itself with dozens of different interactions and dissimilar components warms the components up itself to its operating temperature for that component.

Sythetic oil lubricates under mor extreme pressure and heat - reduces were at the top stress/temperature end, like through turbos.

3 minutes ago, BirdDog said:

My Rotax 912 has a fuel pressure of about 5PSI and a flow rate of 22Lph at wide open and full pitch. 
 

I don’t know anyone that has had issues running Mogas in their 912s. The flight school where I learnt to fly ran mogas in all their machines for years - never had a problem.  
 

like anything we do in aviation, sure there is always a risk, but the stats show they are low, in my opinion. 

People are starting to drift off the issues.

I would not expect any school running 98 petrol to have any problems other than getting cancer from handling it.

3 minutes ago, jackc said:

Turbs, this would lead me to believe that addition of injector cleaner would be a help to keep carbides clear of any residue forming?

I didn't have any success down that path, probably because injector cleaner works while it runs through with the flow; the ethanol residue builds up while the engine's idling. Where you can open up both ends of the gallery and scrape it out or blow it out with compressed air it's just a small maintenance problem, it's the hidden gallereries that are the PITA, fixed with a new carbie or making up a manifold and putting a different carbie on.

1 hour ago, walrus said:

The fuel circuit in a 912 iS includes dual redundant pumps, an 8 micron filter after the 40 odd micron gascolator and its pressurised when running to about 45psi and a flow rate of about 70 l/h ( > 2X maximum flow). There is no air access to this system, the only air contact is on the free surface in. the fuel tanks. Murphy’s law therefore suggests some new failure mode will apply one day instead of “gum in carburettor passages”. 😞

I've set out the various phases to show where the main ethanol blockage problem occurs (other than eating the lines/tank etc)

Carburettors – Slide type 

The following is a description of how a generic slide type carburettor handles mixture for the various rpm phases.  Disclaimer: Refer to the Workshop Manual for your carburettor – they can vary in design.

Each RPM phase is handled by a different section of the carburettor.

This is generally the order you for setup or re-tune a slide carby.

Phase 1. Wide open throttle

Mixture controlled by the main jet when the slide is fully open.

Mixture is varied by altering the Main Jet size.

Phase 2. Idle, Slow running

Mixture controlled by Pilot adjusting screw, which on some carbies alters air, others fuel

(a)   It can be compromised by adjusting the throttle cable stop down too far, making that the pilot jet.

(b)   It can be compromised by a blocked slow running mixture hole on the engine side of the throttle. Where blocked by ethanol residue, slow running galleries can be cleaned out by removing the jet screw from one end and punching out the cap at the other end of the gallery. However, some slow running galleries are sealed off during the manufacturing process and the carburettor/body needs to be replaced.

Phase 3. About quarter to half throttle

Mixture controlled by the cutaway or bevel on the side of the slide barrel opposite from the engine.

Adjustment can be cut, or slides fitted – 1.5 mm increments.

Phase 4. Approx. three quarter throttle

Mixture controlled by the taper needle in the throat

Adjustable by grooves and circlip