turboplanner

......rump and heavy weight had pushed the floor panel off, and the rump scraped the grass surface of the runway. Bull didn't realised she had suqashed the floor out and thought the swearing and yelling was due to ....................

8 minutes ago, RFguy said:

Turbs, was this application of WOT from low power setting 'applied  instantaneously', and the time  till the seizure ?

Usually towards the end of a straight (in racing) with WOT and the car accelerating. Sometimes you could instantly back off and the seizure wouldn't occur, most times there wasn't enough reaction time to stop the seizure.

In my experience, pistons under full accelerating load went from normal running to start of seizure in about 2 or three seconds.

9 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

Just picking up on the Discourse on Victoria's proposed mileage tax for electric vehicles.....

As proposed, it is a clear disincentive to EV users.

 

If they want to implement this tax in its present proposed form, they will cop a beating.

 

If they want to revise vehicle registration costs wholesale, and I suggest it is a good idea to do so, all they have to do to gain acceptance, is to charge ALL vehicles a tax per kilometer (relative also to GVM).

 

It should fit in with the right wing concept of 'user pays'.

 

Why should my mother-in-law pay the same car registration as me, when she only does a few thousand k per year but I do 30,000k per year? Clearly she shouldn't have to shoulder as much expense toward road maintenance as me?

I don’t have the exact facts but that’s basically what happens now.

36 minutes ago, kasper said:

But if you are looking at charging for use based on the damage they do rot the roadway then gvm is important.  It already exists in practice as excise is more per km the larger the vehicle gvm as they have larger engines and more l/100km.  
 

once there is a fair basis of charge for use you then can overlay policy adjustment to address additional outcomes desired - increase the charge for ICE engines to cover their additional environmental ‘Costs’ to the country or alternate apply a discount to non-ICE engines to reflect a lower impact on the environment.

That might start a few questions about whether temperature is lagging CO2 or CO2 is lagging temperature, and what an increase in temperature of the magical 1.5 degrees which was first touted in the early part of the first decade of this century would mean, given that Sydney is roughly 1.5 degrees hoter than Melbourne and Brisbane is about 1.5 degrees hotter than Sydney, and so on, and the measurements for what has happened since say 2000.

.......ease back on the throttle and handle the stick [avref] with a bit more success if they were to have a successful landing.

The approach went well, but when Bull tried to do the round out, Mavis ..............................

55 minutes ago, jackc said:

Anything that has been done......can be UNDONE.  It depends on how much time and effort needed to be invested......

Yes, quite correct.

18 hours ago, jackc said:

No we don’t, but in making a submission......you do the core submission and then you have variables you may need to use in negotiating a workable outcome.

Now, you never send a submission in.......it gets circulated, laughed at and gives the receiver a chance to apply negative decisions with little consultation.

So, you make an appointment with the key person simply saying you want to discuss some aspects of Aviation etc.  You could have a report to submit.

to that key person.  It’s not hard to make a plan and IF you get a knock back then it’s up to using the skills of negotiation get a foot in the right door.

Start with RAAus and see where it leads, may have to knock on CASA’s door?

May need involve a politician?   

I wonder if we have any RAAus or CASA lurkers here, snickering to themselves 🙂

 

The RAA Inc Members gave up their one on one rights in order to hand all that over to a Limited Company. Today RAA Members are shareholders and the Company does all that.

9 minutes ago, octave said:

To be clear I have no problem with every user paying for road infrastructure.  I think $375 a year would be a significant contribution.

What do you think you are paying now?

2 hours ago, kgwilson said:

Taxing EVs is a backwards thinking kneejerk panic reaction to a current tiny proportion of the governments revenue stream. They should be doing the opposite like most European countries and subsidising the cost of EVs, providing free or heavily subsidised quick charge stations. Look what happened with rooftop solar. The only problem with that was the failure to recognise the massive uptake would cause overloads in the distribution network. This can be easily overcome with distributed local storage but as always our political dickheads are always way behind the 8 ball.

There's plenty of disussion on the Victorian tax, but it's not significant and is a payment for distance travelled nominally to support road infrastructure and maintenance. It's not going to play a part in the bigger picture where The upfront cost of EVs is 2.32 to 2.6 times the prices that people can afford. Governments could give financial support to assist in the building of a charging network.

Overloads in the distribution network?

It's disgraceful that the networks are paying peanuts for power supplied by homeowners, but that's what can happen when you have private companies selling power. It's not in their financial interest to have their customers generating all their non-peak power, so providing zero income let alone wanting to sell it at retail price.

We are lucky enough to have the AEMO dashboard available to the pubic, so we can actually see what renewables are producing. This year, when the temperature dropped, renewables broke 50% market share for the first time, but generally in non- Peak Power times they can only pump out around 15% market share, and on a hot day with air conditoning going all over the country, they've only been able to produce 1% of Peak Power. Renewables just produce flat out all the time; they don't have the ability to do better than that 1%, and if you were to increase their output 99 times to get to 100% Peak Power, the Infrastructure cost would send us all broke, so we have another problem to solve where people trying to flog a concept haven't done their homework.

.......the primary controls [avref]. She grabbed one in each hand and the aircraft shuddered.....

"..........Bull share some of their DNA?" but Bull artlfully dodged the question, and it's clear from the recent conversations that where there's smoke there's usually fire, but Mavis persisted and when Bull said he was going out to the airfield to fly his Jacka, she got confused and said she was coming with him. It all went well until he asked her to get into the little aircraft................

36 minutes ago, octave said:

69000 Euros

Octave, the pricing came from this link: https://www.pipistrel-prices.com/configurator/configure/420/

As anyone can see, the base price is 125,000 Euros, a 3kW (10 hours) charger is 4,400 Euros, Dealer Delivery is 3,800 Euros, making the total price $133,200 Euros which at 5:29 pm  exchange rate is $207,506.95

..........sound of clapping. 

Samantha had come through; Bull was given a "TURBINE BULL" badge, a bale of hay and a tin of Turbine Lice Killer, and as he gingerly shook off the clamps and stepped down off the podium, he heard the Judge saying "and I hope we don't see you here again Mr Bull.

Unfortunately Mavis met him at the door, and............

42 minutes ago, octave said:

 

Priced this up based on US dealer pricing - $207,329.00 Australian Dollars

...........that no questions would be asked and no one would be on duty for ramp inspections, and mavis was just about to run for the taxi when the Judge banged his gavel scaring the crap out of everyone in the Court Room, and ruled that a trip by Mavis to see a fisherman would not be acceptable as proof beyond doubt that Bull was a bull. He called for a Vet, and a few minutes later Dr Samatha Shorts walked in (that wasn't her surname but Turbo has forgotten it). "Do you know what a bull is?" questioned the Judge. Thinking it was a trick question, and of course with no idea who Bull was and how much depended on the Decision, she looked across the room straight at Bull, who fainted, and she said ........................."

On 20/04/2021 at 12:47 PM, walrus said:

As with everything it is LOGISTICS that counts be it Covid19 or electric vehicles. In fact electric powered vehicles can easily be more versatile and higher performance than IC engine vehicles - and that includes (propeller)  aircraft.

 

 

The problem is the logistics of getting volts and amps to the motor - ie batteries, fuel cells or storage media. Power generation and distribution.

 

The example quoted to me was Britian - it uses something like 1 TwH annually for domestic use and 2 TwH for transport in the form of liquid fuels. So you see the scale of the problem - triple electric energy production and distribution to replace liquid hydrocarbons.

 

Visit any petrol station on the Hume or Pacific freeways. Look at the volume of traffic at the pumps. Now imagine if each has to take 30 minutes to charge. Can you see the problem? Then can you see the size of the mega voltage, ultra high amperage power lines joining each station to some super power station? We don't have the grid technology, battery technology, network topology let alone operating rules, legal, financial or safety infrastructure.......yet

 

 

 

Good examples.

Each form of vehicle down the ages has had to produce two things; performance which meets the requirement of the people who buy it, and a cost those people can afford.

Horse drawn vehicles met the requirement for thousands of years when were were a village society, and if necessary you could breed or eat the power unit.

Steam, heated by wood, coal or other combustable material succeeded in the 18th and 19th century, and in fact was responsible for the development of many regional cities and towns, but it had an incredible number of controls that constantly needed to be managed, was not suited to mass production, and while it could be scaled down to carry five people on pneumatic tyres, the operation, maintenance cost, and constant hunting for fuel and water on trips kept it out of road use.

The ICE vehicle exploded into use because it was cheap, you could switch it on, start the engine and go, it was faster than horses, and you could refuel and go in a few minutes, so effectively had unlimited range as long as there was infrastructure on the route.

Eelectric vehicles were tried early in the 1800s and faded out, then again early in the 1900s expanding rapidly into buses, trams and trucks where thousands of electric milk and bread vans delivered the milk every morning and charged up the rest of the day, then they faded out based on cost and range.

Then we saw minor variants.

LP gas was a few cents a litre so people started selling conversions and manufacturers started supplying LP models down line. The infrastructure never got close to petrol for refuelling, the government applied excise tax to cover road use at the same rate as for petrol, the price of gas went up, and it was killed off by the Australian Design Rule iteration for exhaust emissions.

At around that stage diesel was a lot cheaper than petrol, and the Japanese started selling small diesels for cars and 4WDs. One Isuzu car model could travel at 100 km/hr on 66 mpg, and the 4WDs fuel consumption was a fraction of car cost, sp the market expanded, and today is the biggest sector of the car market, but excise was applied to diesel, diesel price increased massively, and diesel quality dropped, and today we are in the middle of a shift across to petrol where there are total cost of life models already cheaper that diesel, and new compression ignition petrol engines in some models.

EVs in todays format are not new. I can remember motor magazines discussing regen braking in the 1960s, and I've been hanging on a promise from Isuzu that they had made a battery break-through in 1986, and after 30 or so years in Australia waiting for the break throughs, total EV market share is 0.5%

The last time we discussed Electric aircraft, we were basing them on an upscale of RC electric, which is reasonablly priced and reliable, but they don't have to deal with range which is based around a 10 minute session.

At that time I was thinking of a 20 or 30 minute training flight around the circuit.

You could still upscale that simpe technology.

If you want to think of cross-country flights, or 1 to 2 hour flights, then you have to move up to car type systems and technology.

I've been talking about Nissan Leaf, because it's about the smallest system on the market, with two different power models - 110 kW (147 hp) and 160kW (214 hp)

Nissan quote a road range of 315 to 385.

There's a big difference in range between cruising along at 80 km/hr (under the Air Resistance red zone) and passing cars at 100 km/hr) and the manufacturers have been quoting the lower, but for an aircraft we are going to require full power cruise where air resistance is a major factor.

That power is being distributed through four motors in a car, so the first issue is to find a motor which for a Rag and Tube would need to produce about 80 hp(60kW) from the one engine.

Instead of a four branch electrical circuit you would have one, but its cables would need to be heavier.

For a range calculation, you can drop rolling resistance, but you still have to factor in grade resistance, and you get a benefit on descent (but no regeneration factor which the car provides with its regen system.

If you're good at Performance and Operations calcs, you'll have a good idea of what power draw to factor in on takeoff and climb x time to cruise altitude, and what you can credit to the system for time on descent, and you can calculate various power draws for the cruise. With a head wind, no more power per minute is being used, you just have the time factor. If you've got the money you can buy as many batteries as you need for your chosen Max Range, but you are limited  by (ICE/equipment/fuel tank etc/fuel) taken out and the electrical system, which itself is heavy, and you're left with battery mass to take the AC to equivalent of Wet Mass. I may have skipped a few things there, but it's as easy as that. The Aircraft frame I was thinking of was the Skyfox with faric skins.

The standard system controls the mixture exiting the carb by the jet hole size, which of course is fixed. Does’ t cost anything to look at a plug after the proper test procedure.You just need patience to fit a slightly bigger main jet until you get the right colour. We are talking tiny increments because the mfr usually leans the engine for maximum power so you don’t want to solve one problem by creating another. If oxygen sensors could be fitted easily fitted To the standard engine that would be good. The ones I’ve seen normally inform the ECU which makes an adjustment. If you could get leads to a recording chip that’s all you would need and you could adjust main jest from the data. Some people have mentioned uneven manifold distribution and this would allow you to run varying jet sizes, again in tiny increments so you don’t transfer the work to other chambers. No one ha reported that they’ve got under the aircraft and measured the space to see if an intake could be fabricated for even feed. You have to solve the even feed problem before spendin money on fuel injection and if you do you won’t need it.

.

........fisherman, even if he had just cleaned out the boat. And there was such a man in the Port of.......

.....and nasty ............

........use the “pound of flesh” precedent, and he knew then that he would be safe.

He hadn’t counted on Mavis, who had been on a long quarantine (she had contact with everyone) and was........

4 hours ago, Cosmick said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2021-04-20/australians-want-to-buy-electric-cars-what-is-stopping-us/100071550

1.2 litre ICE young people's/retirees little car - $20,000, MG $46,000 - Extra cost $26,000    That's probably the simple explanation.

What should be ringing alarm bess and causing outrage is this:

"Meanwhile, 75 per cent of new car sales by 2030 need to be electric for Australia to achieve net zero emissions by 2035, according to the latest report by the Climate Council."

There are only 19.8 million cars in Australia (reg at 31/1/20) - and they only produce 5% of CO2 emissions.................................

So why do THEY have to carry the burden for the 95% non-automotive emissions?

6 hours ago, RFguy said:

My feeling is, at least in cruise, its probably rich enough already, judging by the deposits.

However, Is it rich enough when it matters- in WOT  max TO RPM,  or max RPM is another question.  Need to look at what the fuel flow and EGT does. The engine is 36 hp/litre at 3300 RPM..

The pre Gen4 pistons which were adapted from an engine that ran 54 hp/litre @5200(natural asp)  and 61 hp/litre @ 5200 (superchaged) in wet cooled bores.
The so $64 question  is, do the pistons run any hotter at roughly half the output than they would in the water jacket bores ?  

My guess is yes, as the water jackets are 80 deg C, the bore jackets >180C, that's more than the difference shown in temp versus RPM variations.  However, the bores is not the only way the pistons get their heat out (oil, cool gases).

 

I don't think it's liner calculation to compare hp per litre; everything's cooler in a water jacket, but I found it you get combustion wrong in aircrooled barrels, even high speed fans bloing them cool won't save the pistons, which in my case were the canaries that signalled disaster.

For example, big block V8 (c. 400 cu in) engines in sprintcars now produce 1,000 hp and you can flip  car over its rear wheels onto its back if you were so inclined, but they still run reliably at full power in races.

Top Fuel drag racing cars which are still based on V8 blocks, albeit with a lot of changes are producing 11,000 hp

Both those engines are powered by methanol, the top fuelers with the addition of nitromethane and take advantage of the fact that you can run an engine so rich on methanol that a fair amount pours out the exhaust cooling all the way through.

Plugs are read after a long burst of WOT acceleration with an instant engine cut, and with petrol, there are charts showing the colours from extreme rich to extreme lean, with the aim usually being a honey brown colour.

Coming back to petrol and 80 hp behind a prop, trying to read plug that way is a safety problem, but if you have a long strip with no other aircraft using it, you may get some good readings on a warm engine with WOT as in take off and mixture cut before it leaves the ground, then look at a plug.

In about 40 cases I looked at, 16 had burnt exhaust valves, which was telling me the chambers were very hot, and in those the pistons had stood up to it, so I was looking at mixture being too lean at WOT.  I didn't go any further and experiment with mixture.

I don't think combustion chamber temperature relates to EGT, so I don't think you'll pick up the interior changes on EGT gauges even though they quite accurately reflect changes outside the combustion chamber.

......best solution would be to get it under a microscope so........

[Expanation for the Guffa Wing And Dihedral.

This is a modified E section wing with reverse Bernoulli on the underside and winglets. They are made in Greece by Di who churns them out at a place called Hedra Lower, in the mountain country next to Delphi]

8 hours ago, Marty_d said:

Soooo... Australia is buying fuel and then putting it back in the ground?

 

Is that the ultimate "direct action" by the coalition?  Paying US oil companies to extract oil then put it back?

 

(tongue is firmly in cheek, I know irony doesn't always come through online...)

No it was a response to the scenario that there was a hiccup in the world oil supply, and some panic buying, and we only had x days supply that we owned. It was precautionary adjustment, just like all manufacturers do, and have perfected in these JIT stock days.