440032

Pity the Jabiru 1100cc twin didn't happen beyond the prototype. I don't think it ever flew, certainly didn't in the aircraft it was specially made for.

How about some congratulations for JG3 for heading back home rather than press on when a significant part of the flight preparation and plan went down the gurgler. Good decision JG:score 010:. Presson-itis has not gone well for a lot of people. There's always tomorrow to try again.

Getting back to the original question of battery: Yes, readily available. That and many more. Australian Rechargeable Lithium Battery & Lead Acid Batteries

Curiosity got the better of me, I went back in to my A20 to see if I could find that thing. There it was, just inside the back cover, not at all buried deep in the guts of the radio like the button cell is. I have no idea how you even got it out, and you are right, the part number spec is not visible, I was sorta hoping I might be able to see what it was for you. Nope!

I did say the button cell was buried deep in the guts and tricky to get to! CR2032 size cell it was, maybe not that exact number, but that size - ten cent piece but thicker. It's there, and clearly not meant to be a user replace item (being buried so deep and spot welded in - not soldered). Replacing the battery fixed my squelchlessness, I have no idea why, but it did. The radio was useless so I had nothing to lose by taking it apart bit by bit and keep on going til I found that battery. Radio was probably 20 years old before that battery died.

Shouldn't have to put up with this crepe..................

I re-batteried my A20 years ago using ten individual nicad cells bought and wired up into the original battery case. Quite easy really. In the A20 there is also a button cell backup battery buried deep in the guts, spot welded in place, very tricky to get to, but possible. I fitted a new button cell wired in and moved to a more convenient location. When backup battery expired, my squelch stopped squelching. The new battery fixed that.

Benawen, ASIC has got nothing to do with CASA, it's not their baby. Expensive? Yes. useless? Yes. CASA's? No.

Jodel Robin DR400? Gotta be close.....

Fella is not an SAAA member.

SAAA course is not 1500. Have you attended it Jim?

I can't seem to find the interplanetary coverage for my roadside assist plan...

NGK 120 degree spark plug caps me thinks would google better. 45 degree caps would be pointing back at the cyl. Just sayin...

Agree. Time to get off the soap box and pull the plug. I throw in the towel.

Matt Bath?

CASA is aware these things will be appearing sooner or later. Theoretically eligible for an Experimental certificate, but license to fly? None exists, would have to be done individually by exemptions. You have to get the bathtub maintenance manual from Reece Plumbing.

He could rob that convenience store and make a clean getaway.

One would imagine that the flying club owned and operated the aircraft, for the members of the flying club to use, not the general public. All quite normal.

Assuming this is an RAAus case (we don't know yet) - has anyone read the Tech Manual? I found the answer in about 12 seconds, on page 2 of section 3.1. Example. Friend of mine built an RV12. Test period all flown off by a qualified pilot. Owner then did all his RAAus pilot certificate training in it, with a willing and able instructor. VH experimental will be the same process, build it, test it, learn to fly in it. If you can find a willing and able instructor AND the Part 141 flying school has mentioned "privately owned aircraft" in 4B12 of their ops manual. (or more generically, "all single engined aircraft"). Go for it Adrian. Case closed.

Perhaps a timely reminder? ASIC has nothing to do with CASA - it's not their baby. Never was, never will be. And my question is, who is entitled to ask to see your ASIC? Who, as in who on the airfield? The cleaner, the gardener, the refueller, who? Serious question. Who, according to the regulations. I just can't see any mention of it at all. So if bailed up by somebody claiming to be important, are they? How do you know? What gives them the power to bail you up and check your ASIC? And then, if you don't have one, what happens? What is their procedure? Will you get tasered or taken down by Chuck Norris?

Both those ways are no problem at all. From New Gisborne, you can pick up the rail line eastbound. From the north coming down over Kyneton - Romsey - Monegeeta army test track, Riddell is very visible from a decent way out. More open land that way also.Coming down the Calder Highway past Mt Macedon is rather bushy, but you're not over that for long, easy nav too - keep big mountain on left, scoot past the cross on the south face peak at 3500 feet then descend. I usually prefer the north & eastern side route, numerous private strips out that side, open country. Plenty of air between ground and 2500ft there, no problem. More options to do a U-turn (east!!!) and bug out if weather is a bit claggy. Either way, ease factor: 9.34.

Don't yáll mean "howdy"? I've spent some time in Texas. (Spent time, not done time...!!!) El Paso side. Loved it.

LSA can only be changed by manufacturer approval. It's all in the regs and ACs. But back to the matter at hand. Angled instrument adapter/mounts, 3D printed by some clever guy? Assuming you have room behind the panel to angle the things. Might just be right up Peter Anson's alley..... http://www.ansoneng.com/ as greatest invention since the flux capacitor. Not that he invented that, but I'm sure he could have if he had wanted to.

Jaba-whoooooooooooo is right on the money there. Okay, so we're only talking VH experimental aircraft, not RAAus. Instrument number CASA 15/16: Authorisation of persons to carry out maintenance and issue maint release Para 2 definitions: Primary builder (a) is referring to one member of a group (of 2 or more) who has done more than half the aircraft themself. eg 1. Person 1 has done 60%. Person 2 has done 40% eg 2. Person 1 has done 51%, person 2 has done 10%, person 3 has done 10%. Percentages are all subjective. Keep it simple. In the group, who, if anyone, did at least 51%? That is the primary builder. If nobody did (individually) at least 51%, move to the next clause (b). Primary builder (b) is referring to one member of a group (of 2 or more) who has been nominated as the leader, in effect, because no one person within the group fitted into the previous clause by doing at least 51%, alone. eg 1. Person 1 and Person 2 do equal amounts, they always work together. Neither has done more than 51% individually. So one person must be nominated as the leader, to issue the maintenance release. Para 3 describes who 15-16 applies to, (a) a person (solo, or in a group) who has done more than 51% of the project, or (b) a person (generally, in a group) who contributed to the project. Para 4 describes who is authorised to carry out maintenance: (a) the person in 3(a) - a person who has done more than 51% of the project, and (b) a person in 3(b) - a person who contributed to the project (ie – the group situations). Schedule 1 condition 7 describes that a person in 3(b) – the group member(s) may only maintain those parts they built. Example 1 – Fred solely built the tailplane and elevators, fin and rudder. Barney did everything else. Fred can only maintain those parts he built. Can Barney maintain Fred’s work? No, he’s in the same boat. Fred though, has been nominated as the primary builder to issue the M/R. Could equally have been Barney. % plays no part. Example 2 – Fred and Barney built everything, together. Both Fred and Barney can maintain everything. But only one of them – the nominated primary builder - gets to issue the maintenance release! This time, Barney has been nominated as the primary builder, to issue the M/R. Could equally have been Fred. Best solution: Each group member contributes to each part of the project for maintenance purposes (but still only one is nominated to issue the M/R). What if the M/R person leaves the group? Can a new nomination be done before they leave? Don’t see why not, the reg doesn’t say when the nomination must occur. Maintenance may become a problem if one person leaves. Gee it gets complicated doesn't it? Well that's one topic well and truly hijacked from the starting topic, can you employ someone to build your JetBlaster 5000? Does it happen? Yes. Does CASA know it happens? Yes. Should it happen? No. Builders must always be able to provide proof (builders log, in-action photos, inspection visits) to their AP that they themselves built the aircraft. The AP can ask for a stat dec if still not satisfied, and BSing on one of those is serious business. And if still not satisfied, the AP can write it up as "LAME ONLY" maintenance (to protect third parties on the ground who are not involved). If it gets to that stage, you already know you are trying to cheat the system. If you are not trying to cheat the system, you can easily gather the proof of build as you go. It's not rocket surgery. I hope that this is of some use to folks. I also hope it's accurate! Should be, I been doing this quite a while. There are always unanswered questions remaining, and some of them are also unanswerable (other than "NFI") There are too many "what ifs" that will fit in one box.