KRviator

You'd be far, far, better off trying to put a 916 into a run-out O-320 airframe. A pair of 916's in something like a Twin Comanche would turn it into a rocketship. And an affordable (to operate, not install...) one at that.

I still need a GNSS navigator of some description for IFR, and think the cheapest way for a C146 navigator (not just position source for ADS-B), ADS-B out and ADS-B in (with spoken advisories) is a single GNX375. A GTX45R can have it's own GPS position source, but adding a GPS175 gives the required functionality, but for ~$4K more than the -375.

Just on those ADS-B transponders, yes, there are ADS-B out transponders, and yes, there are ADS-B receivers, however different manufacturers have different feature sets and it is worthwhile comparing them in depth before you spend your coin. I fly behind Dynon in the RV and have ADS-B out using their transponder for 10 years with good results, however their ADS-B in system doesn't announce azimuth or range to an identified threat, it simply announces "TRAFFIC!" in your headset and leaves it to you to find the intruder and determine their 3D position in space and where they're going. To that end, I am leaning towards Garmin's G3X, or at the very least, a Garmin GNX375/GTX345R transponder as part of the upgrade for the new chariot. The reason for that is it provides better alerting by way of announcing “Traffic, 10 o’clock, same altitude, 2 miles" - straight away, that tells you where to look without having to go eyes-in to determine where the intruder is. Even without traffic displayed on-screen, you're alerted to where it is, the screen will tell you what they're doing (climbing, crossing L->R, etc). This sort of functionality is not cheap, a Dynon transponder goes for around $4,500AUD, a GTX345R for $10,500 and a GNX375 for nearly $15,000, but if you need to upgrade to a C146 GNSS anyway (I do!), then that offsets some of the cost, a GPS175 is $10K, so between that and a Dynon transponder, vs a GNX for $15K, the difference is about 1AMU. I'll gladly pay that to have spoken traffic alerts.

@skippydiesel - just to make it easier when talking about airspace and transponders, typically transponders are referred to by mode, not class, though there is, 'technically' Class 1/2 transponders, for all practical purposes we ignore that as it is US-specific and refer to transponders as Mode A (able to squawk a 4-digit code and that's it), Mode C (squawk a code + Altitude reporting), or Mode S (for all intents and purposes ADS-B if you include a position source). Airspace is referred to with "classes". You are 100% correct that Mode A/C transponders do not show up on ADS-B "in" devices though

Has that been confirmed, or is it just a CAsA wish-list item aired at the info session? @facthunter mentions ICAO compliance - if introduced there's a variation right there. ICAO does not require a flightplan to operate in Class D, merely the establishment of two-way radio communications which may be as simple as Tower repeating your callsign.

It does not have to be ICAO compliant at all. There's dozens of variations in how CAsA and ASA operate when compared to ICAO.

Here's a draft VTC (Oct 2025 revision) - and what a dogs breakfast it is! Clearance required to transit the SY Basin on account of the entire area now being Class D LL 1000 with overlying Class C.

A very quick Google suggests a takeoff fuel flow of around 15,000lbs an hour. That's consumption not what the pumps can actually put out through a system that now has no restrictions in it and is open to atmosphere.. And given this is on rotation, there's no memory items for closing the spar valve or pulling the fire handle that early in the takeoff sequence, so the boost pumps will continue to run, the spar valve will remain open, yadda yadda.

Well, the 912 Installation Manual says 60L/min....

I was about to say you couldn't ask for a better paint job for the helicopter to find you! Shame about the nosegear, might have been able to top up and fly it out if it hadn't found that rabbit hole or whatever it was.

And an A320 was very nearly lost after the Captains sidestick was miswired during recent avionics work - but does that mean we should do away with FBW? 'Course not. We fly single-engine aircraft, sometimes over unforgiving terrain. Everything in aviation (and life) has risk associated with it, but just because there is a risk of something happening, does not mean it is probable, or even likely and so we should not undertake that activity (or install that auto-trim module). You seem to be assuming that there is no way to stop the trim during an inadvertent auto-trim movement, I don't know if that's because you're unfamiliar with the Garmin or Dynon systems, or autotrim in general, but pressing the AP Disconnect button will disengage autotrim, as will, IIRC, trimming opposite the direction the trim is running. As for what's wrong with manual trim? There's nothing inherently wrong with it, but electric trim is much nicer to have under your thumb rather than twisting a knob while I'd prefer to have my hand holding the throttle full forward (in the case of the RV), it is often lighter and able to be interfaced with the autopilot. For smaller aircraft like my old KR2, the little manual lever on the longeron that connected to a bit of wire-in-tube to the trim tab was more than adequate. But as things get bigger, technology takes precedence. Case in point...I'm installing EFI instead of the old RSA-5 system, but a risk assessment shows that I need to ensure continuity of electrons, so that requires a backup alternator. Should I stay with the old 1960's era injection system just because it doesn't require power? Heck no. EFI is well (flight) proven now, enables instant car-like starts - hot or cold, it allows LOP, I can run 98 Mogas, and I'll have the ability to trim fuel to each cylinder individually to balance the EGT's and the system has an option that provides a backup computer and fuel pump should the primary fail. The benefits outweigh the negatives and any risk can be mitigated. Same for autopilot, autotrim, or any other modern gadget in our aircraft.

No one needs auto-trim, unless you're an Airbus driver, but it's nice to have. No one needs an autopilot, or megadollar EFIS, but again, they're very nice to have. I'll have a 3-screen EFIS in the new project instead of a 6-pack and round gauges. I don't need it, but I certainly want it because it'll lower my workload considerably.

Why not have it? Even a grossly out-of-trim RV is easily controllable.

Sounds like the Dynon equivalent of Auto-Trim. After several hundred hours behind and with the Dynon autopilot in the RV, no, I don't need auto-trim, the SkyView system will audibly announce Trim Down or Trim Up if the servo load is too much for too long, but if I had the autotrim module, it'd do it itself. The new toy will be getting the autotrim module though, but only in pitch.

That actually looks half decent, well done! I'm still wary about the sensor drifting over time in a sustained balanced turn, and short of putting it in a centrifuge or similar I don't see any way you can reliably test that at home without taking it up and burning a lot of avgas but I'm watching the development with more than a little interest!