Thruster88

Skippy, not seeing altitude on any of the rotax charts you have put up. As you can see from this Lycoming chart there are numerous combinations of RPM (prop control), manifold pressure (throttle) and altitude to achieve a known fuel flow/performance.

To make use of your manifold pressure gauge you would need a power chart. Such charts for say a Lycoming O-360A1A will include altitude, rpm, manifold pressure and show fuel flow for each setting. 23-23 @3500 feet is not the same power as 23-23 @5500 feet. Rotax do not seem to publish such charts, good luck finding one.

There is a similar story involving a Lycoming and some dodgy oil hoses on an experimental Osprey In the hunter valley nsw. Collision with terrain involving amateur-built Osprey 2 amphibian aircraft, VH-WID, near Maitland Airport, New South Wales, on 17 May 2020 | ATSB WWW.ATSB.GOV.AU

The only requirement i can find for remote areas is to carry survival equipment, MOS 26.64. Remote area survival equipment (MOS 26.64) An aircraft that is flying over a remote area is required to carry appropriate survival equipment for sustaining life for the area that is being overflown.

Launch price for 3 blade to suit 180hp RV is only $7500 aud? without tax and spinner, they should sell very well.

The extra screening is reqired for aircraft with more than 36 seats because terrorists will not fly on those "little" aircraft. Makes perfect sense yes.

Twins most often go down because of a thing called Vmc roll over.

Sure, more weight in a 40,50:1 LD glider will make them go faster, they are powered by potential energy after all. More weight in a powered aircraft = less climb rate, less cruise speed for a given power setting so less effcient.

No definitive answer yet. The cruise performance chart for my muskeeter shows maximum range is achieved at the highest altitude in the chart, 10500 and the lowest power setting, 50%. 784nm in 8.6 hours. No wieght is stated so presume this is at MTOW. Higher power at lower levels reduces range by 130 nm.

Horizontal stabilizer has to push down more than usual so more lift on main wing required so more drag from wing and tail, more load on wing results in higher stall speed.

A little bored atm so i thought why not calculate the maximum force on the carb bowl of a Rotax 914, 6 years in development and now 29 years in production, unchanged, i would call that a succsess. So standard 912 80hp carb inlet pressure at sea level = 15psi. 115/80 x 15 = 21.5 psi approx required to make 115hp. This engine has a critical altitude of 16,000 feet. At 16,000 feet atmo pressure is 7.96psi. So 21.5 - 7.96 = 13.54 psi pressure differential. Carb bowl is approx 2.25 x 2.5 inches = 5.625 sq in x 13.54 psi = 76lb or 34.5kg. Feel free to point out anywhere i have gone wrong. I did this in imperial units for skippy's enjoyment. From above posts, the boost pressure is in both the carb throat and bowl area so flow thru the jets is not affected as one might think.

Interesting point in the vid, "why dont manufacturers just limit the elevator travel so it can not reach stalling stick position". I believe this was done with the Ercoupe.

Not sure what you are trying to say here. Having done differential leak down tests with calibrated equipment on jabiru, rotax, continental, lycoming and pratt&wittney radial engines, repeatability and fault finding is excellent.

Lycoming have 12 year calender tbo. On condition is alowed by CASA for for private or airwork (flying trainig).

In Australia factory built aircraft, cessna 172 or Brumby or Tecnam cannot become experimental VH or 19-xxxx raaaus aircraft. CASA is the regulator of aircraft in Australia. A 19-xxxx can become an experiment VH or the other way if mtow is ok.