Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/23/2017 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    A couple of things: 1) My engine mount isolators appeared cracked for *years*. I deferred the maintenance because I wanted to do the Rotax rubber/hose replacement at the same time I replaced the isolators. When I actually did pull them out, only the very outer visible edges were cracked, the part of the isolator that is important, where it holds the bolt, was perfectly fine. I think the outer edges where the isolators get bulged and stretched are prone to cracking, especially since they are subjected to direct engine heat. I don't think that necessarily means they are going bad. In fact, my new isolators (less than six months on them) already have tiny cracks in places, in spite of me treating them with silicone grease as recommended by Roger. I'm not concerned. If you can rub them and pieces flake off, they are probably in trouble. Otherwise I'm guessing they are still serviceable. 2) Getting to the isolators means pulling the engine. It's not that hard to do, but it does take some time. An engine hoist makes it much easier. You only have to pull it out about 6-12 inches from the firewall. But honestly, if you have a rubber replacement coming up in the next couple of years, I'd defer it until then if you mechanic will agree to it and your mounts are not getting flaky as mentioned above.
  2. 3 points
    Five years after laying down lots of money it looks as if our two planes for AUS have finally been shipped. GRYPHON (CTLS jubilee) and I (CTLS turbo) have some bill of loading info. to suggest that our planes will be in Melbourne AUS in the third week of October. Just after I get back from Page. This has been a long saga with countless stories lies and promises from Germany. Our agent has paid many thousands of euros extra for each, we have paid the freight and insurance twice, I sold my beloved CTSW a couple of years ago on the promise of delivery, the stress feels like it never ends. And now on the water are our two new bundles of joy, is this a dream ? no it is real !!! finally. Will post again when we know more. PS others may of may not be all that interested but it makes me feel pretty good to be actually able to post this.
  3. 2 points
    On Skyvector, if you locate over the Grand Canyon it will show a button in the upper right for the Grand Canyon VFR chart which shows the same stuff as the figure above here in Foreflight. Cheers.
  4. 2 points
    I fly a CTLSi and a C-172 all the time. I compare them as a sports car vs grandma's station wagon. Both handle turbulence well but the Cessna may not feel as "rough" as the CT. The CT is clearly more fun to fly, goes faster, uses far less fuel, has better visibility, has longer legs, easier to hangar, way better panel, and the cute factor is way up there. The CT does not carry 4 people.
  5. 2 points
    This is a photo of Mammoth Lakes California taken this morning from about 11,000' The SW flow is 40kts from left to right. Notice the smooth contours of the clouds on the left but after colliding with Mammoth Mountain in the center the flow on the right is now disturbed and no longer smooth. The air here is smooth in places and turbulent in others as this visual shows.
  6. 2 points
    Agreed, do everything on the back of the engine that you can get to, while you have it off.
  7. 2 points
    If I were replacing the engine mount rubbers I would also change out 6 hose at the same time. I would replace the fuel feed hose from the firewall to the gascolator. I would replace the large coolant hose at the water pump. Finally I would replace the 4 lower coolant hoses. All pretty easy to do with the right clamps and tools, except the large coolant hose can be a bear.
  8. 2 points
    YEAH !! I am still waiting for him (Roger) to take a trip to the Philippines and work on my aircraft
  9. 2 points
    I might regret posting this but when I read people say that a CT lands flat I think that is because the speed is too high. Slow it down a bit increase the angle of attack the nose wheel is now higher. I can see why some are scared of full flap landings because it is a little more demanding but that is a matter of practice. The stall is so docile and also low speed that it is not to be feared. Get out there and enjoy such a wonderful capable bird.
  10. 2 points
    When operating at low throttle the mixture is lean anyway then add very cold air and the mixture is very lean. Carbs will altitude compensate but not density compensate like injection will. The answer is to just increase throttle till it smooths out or if you don't feel like that just go higher for thinner air which will also fix it. The altitude compensation of Bing carbs is not that good anyway so climb to find the best spot.
  11. 2 points
    Amelia Earhart Peak 11,974'
  12. 2 points
    I don’t think anybody takes exception to landing technique discussion. But we don’t need a new thread on it twice a week. Just start a landing technique thread and keep all of the discussions there. At least that way if somebody wants to find info on landings, they can dig through one deep thread instead of twenty single page threads.
  13. 2 points
    This whack a mole of new threads all on the same topic is getting a little weird. It seems like the discussion gets to a certain point where people differ, then a new thread pops up and the cycle of abuse starts over...
  14. 2 points
    The CT is a numbers plane, its slick with the nose down, dirty with the nose high and power off, so the best approach is flying the numbers for the configuration. We start our students at 15deg and 0 flap until they are able to maintain a steady glideslope and approach speed and figure out where the ground is to time the round out and flare appropriately. Common errors in the CT landing is ballooning by an over pitch at the transition from the round out to flare, failure to recognize elevation above the runway, or failure in maintaining an appropriate altitude while reducing speed to touchdown speed near stall. Using 15 or 0 flaps allows some addition time in the flare while the speed is depleting for touchdown, and yes if you are patient and continue increasing pitch as speed decreases then you should touchdown near stall speed. If you are not patient enough in increasing pitch while reducing speed you will touch flat and may bounce and get a second landing practice. If you cross the runway threshold above target approach speed then you will have to work longer in the flare to reduce the speed to near stall touchdown and float further down the runway (long runway or long landing desired, no problem just takes longer). Cross the threshold to slow and the transition from round out, to flare, to touchdown will be very timely, firm if not timed correctly, or over pitched because of rapid sink, followed by a balloon then quickly run out of airspeed. The CT with 30 or more flap is certainly manageable with the appropriate airspeed and is not terribly difficult once you have mastered the sight picture for round out and flare. However, the CT is very easy to balloon during the initial round out with 30 or more flap when it hits ground effect. You have to make a smooth level off, almost pause for a couple seconds until a little sink is observed, then continue with pitch increasing into flare. With 15 or 0 flap this transition is a bit easier plus if a balloon occurs it is easier as an instructor to salvage it into a go around or landing. With 30 or more flap the instructor has to really be close to the throttle as it can quickly bleed speed during the balloon.
  15. 2 points
    The Best Ever Holidays to all.... and a great 2018, 19, & 20!!!
  16. 2 points
  17. 2 points
    Gorilla tape should provide a temporary repair.
  18. 2 points
    I never really liked the Willette opinion letter. It focuses on part 43. That portion of the regs. imposes NOTHING on owners or operators. The topic of mandatory engine overhaul, or any other mandatory maintenance, are requirements of WHEN to perform maintenance, and they are found in other rules like part 91, 39, 135, etc........................Part 43 speaks to WHO can perform, and HOW maintenance must be performed. So for SLSA, 91.327 is the operational rule that puts maintenance burdens on operators. It doesn't speak to any kind of "maintenance program". It does speak to an "inspection program" for the aircraft.......................................... a "Condition Inspection". A condition inspection is just that..........................an inspection. That is the extent of legally required maintenance on SLSA aircraft. The other key language in 91.327 is the requirement for operators to have any maintenance performed on their SLSA be performed (by appropriately qualified personnel) in accordance with PROCEDURES. In the case of SLSA, these PROCEDURES must be those specified by the aircraft manufacturer. An overhaul requirement, or a hose change requirement, or a training requirement, are not PROCEDURES, and are therefore not part of required maintenance on SLSA regardless of what the maintenance manual or POH say. I agree with previous posts, that an SLSA aircraft manufacturer can make other types of maintenance legally mandatory with regard to WHEN, and HOW by way of the Safety Directive system. The FAA can also do so using the Airworthiness Directive system. I too think that the inspector in IOWA is 100% wrong in taking the position that the engine must be overhauled for the aircraft to be legal. He is well within his authority to say that he is not going to certify the aircraft as in a condition for safe operation, but his basis for saying it is fundamentally incorrect in this case. Same could be said for hose change, or lock nut change. Absent a Safety Directive or AD, those types of maintenance requirements come down to the judgment of the inspector after diligent application of the required inspection PROCEDURES. Just because something is replaced, or overhauled does not by itself correct an unsafe condition. I can replace a properly functioning used lock nut with a brand new defective one, and I have actually induced a potentially unsafe condition. Wouldn't it just make more sense to use proper maintenance PROCEDURES when installing/inspecting any fastener, and then safety can be assured. Basically what that means is......................if the nut is found to be bad as installed, REPLACE it. Used is not necessarily bad, new is not necessarily good...................Judgment prevails and the regulations support this. How many hose changes have resulted in off airport landings due to debris? How many off airport landings have been found to be a direct result of NOT replacing all hoses at and arbitrary 5 yr. mark? Anticept, The Piper hose AD is an apples to oranges comparison as I see it. The unsafe condition there is cause primarily by a routing proximity to the aircraft exhaust and not a blanket life limit for a hose. It is very specific, and as we have discussed previously, the AD only applies to aircraft with a specific type of hose design installed in the first place. Nevertheless, the safety issue was addressed in the correct way. If hose changes or engine overhauls, or locknut replacements are so critical to safety in the SLSA world, a Safety Directive must be issued.
  19. 2 points
    The wind has no effect on the turn, whether upwind or downwind in direction.
  20. 2 points
    Repairing two wingtips shattered during landing short of runway.
  21. 2 points
    It takes about 12 man hours to do a proper condition inspection on a CTSW, that includes complying with all the safety directives. If you change sparkplugs, and change oil and filter you will have another $100 in parts. That is if there is nothing wrong.
  22. 2 points
    $900 isn't steep for an annual many main centers charge $2200 up to $5K. $900 is reasonable cheap.
  23. 2 points
    Congrats on keeping the CTSW, I think it’s a good choice. $900 seems steep for an annual, that is getting toward Lockwood price without the Lockwood experience level! What worked out for me when I was S-LSA, was to find a good local independent A&P, and I did all the work myself. I paid him $400 to supervise and look over all my work and sign off the logbook entry.
  24. 2 points
    Just remember anyone, including a trunk monkey, can do work on an experimental aircraft. But, unless you built it EAB (experimental, amateur built) you will need the 16 hour course and the appropriate FAA certificate to sign off inspections on an E-LSA but only if it's yours. If EAB you don't need the 16 hour course but you still need a FAA certificate to sign off inspections and that only works for the original builder. If you didn't build the EAB the "anyone can work on it" still applies but an A&P would be required to sign off inspections. For S-LSA you need the 3 week course then you can work on and sign off inspections on any S-LSA. Being an A&P works too. And, what Andy says about just because you can, doesn't mean you should, is right on. About 7 years ago a cylinder head cost about $2K, probably a lot more now. So, screw up a valve job and you could have a major expense.
  25. 2 points
    It smells exactly the same as burning money. When my exhaust broke just aft of the cylinder, I didn’t notice until I pulled the cowl, likely a couple of flight hours later. Others said later they thought my airplane sounded a bit different from the other CTs, but not crazy. I didn’t notice any change, maybe because of my noose canceling headset. I did hear a change in some of the GoPro video I reviewed after the repair.
  26. 2 points
    We have the same problem in Aus. with not enough Rotax trained people. The average aircraft mechanic seems to have the attitude "I've been working on Lycs. and Conts. for thirty years so why should I go to school to work on these little pieces of crap". I think the saying goes they don't know what they don't know.
  27. 2 points
    The latest is that our two are on the docks in Singapore. They were offloaded from the TAURUS on the 4th Oct. and scheduled to load on another ship end of month. That would have them arrive in Aus. fifteen days later. We wait patiently but at least they are out of Germany.
  28. 2 points
    Thank you John Olaf and Tim for organizing such a great fly-in. Thanks also to tour guide extraordinaire Dwayne for a wonderful tour of Bryce Canyon and all the helpful tips regarding places to fly and things to see during our short stay in Page. There are not enough superlatives to describe the flying and the scenery in the area, we only wish it was just a little closer. We landed back at KYIP shortly after 2:30 local time Monday afternoon. Long day Sunday to Kansas City, MO but we did have good weather all the way home, just not the tailwinds we had hoped for. Including the three days of amazing flying in Page, we put 38 hours flight time on our CT, averaging just under 5.2 gallons/hour. Again, thanks to everyone for a fantastic time. Incredible flying and wonderful people - it just doesn't get any better!
  29. 2 points
    Escalante, UT today with 9 airplanes. As you may notice we are having more variety in airplane types. Several other Light Sport planes have joined us and are most welcome. The pictures are "the group" eating breakfast in Escalante, then planes on the ramp, then John and Linda in their plane, then Darryl Swensen with his CTLS (which is for sale), followed by a couple pictures of Lake Powell.
  30. 2 points
    Far from a CT, but has been my "spare time" project over the last year. This Skymaster had not flown for about 20 years but Sunday it did again!
  31. 2 points
    ct9000, good point. I've used a straight board across the fuselage so it contacts each wing and put a level on this. I found that my floor is level so I just measure distance from floor to wingtips now. Tom, yes, no need to drain the tanks. Roger. I'm not thinking about making things perfect, just about the big picture. If Buckaroo is ending up with 3 gallons in one tank and 17 gallons in the other, he's got a "gross" problem and a situation that makes for very uncomfortable flying. For this, if it were me, I would want to understand how things could be this far off. Speaking for myself, I must understand inaccuracies and variables in order that I'll be able to get to know my plane. You have to remember that you have been at this for a long time and for most of the problems we discuss here, you already been to the rodeo and it's old hat for you. For those of us that are new at this, we need to work thru these issues and understand them to be comfortable when we fly. I do agree with you regarding pilot orientation, etc. For a while, I was finding that my fuel tanks had 3 or 4 gallons difference after some fairly long flights even though I was flying coordinated according to my ball . I guess it's my nature to want to understand why. First I checked fuel flow thru both tanks. When I found this OK, I next looked into my ball calibration. It was apparent that the ball was quite a bit off. But, as you point out, this system is only good until the next time someone pushes or pulls on the mushroom. Now, I have my ADS-B with a sensitive AHRS system. My electronic ball is calibrated to my CT and is unaffected by mushroom movement. My fuel usage is now pretty even between tanks. You'll note I didn't say it is perfect but I'm still working on it!
  32. 2 points
    Update: USAIG decided that the cost to repair it was reasonable. I have been working on it in my shop for the past month. Determining the correct parts to order has been a bit of a challenge to say the least. While the prop was shattered, the prop flange run-out was 0 degrees. I pulled the gear box and sent it off to Lockwood for a rebuild. The run-out on the crankshaft was also 0 degrees. Then I used the Rotax tool for testing crankshaft twist. Again, 0 degrees. Yeah! Didn't have to have the engine rebuilt. Saved $14K. I think the insurance company would have totaled it if it needed an engine rebuild. While the landing gear was wiped off, there was no damage to the main gear sockets so we just need to replace the main gear. The nose gear folded under the aircraft, but there was no firewall damage. So, I removed the small motor mount from the main motor mount and was able to swing the engine out and to the passenger side enough to remove the main motor mount and replace it without removing ALL of the plumbing. During the process, I found a badly chafed SCAT tube from the air filter to the intake plenum. So I'm replacing it with SCEET (double walled). The steering rods were bent. To replace them, I used a scope camera to line up the rod end joints while a helper inserted the steering rods and screwed them in. It is VERY hard to get your hand all of the way in there and I have the scrapes on my arm to prove it. The Vividea Ablescope is amazing. It's a tiny thing, transmits via wi-fi, and has a 180 degree bend feature that I have used extensively. You can insert it into a spark plug socket and check out the valves. I had 2 iPad mini's; one for me and one for my helper. After trying to screw it in by myself for a couple of hours, with the camera and a helper I was done in 10 minutes. Highly recommended. Both wingtips were heavily damaged (shattered), but there was only minor aileron damage. No wing root damage which was amazing. Looks like the wings "slapped" the ground alternately. A composite instructor is coming over from Germany to replace one wingtip and repair the other as well as fix some of the dings and dents. He'll be here for a couple of weeks. Really nice guy over Skype and email. When he's done, I'll be certified to do composite work in CTs. I built a Cozy IV from plans in the past, but am looking forward to learning from him techniques specific to Flight Design. Overall, I have been VERY impressed with this aircraft. So impressed that I decided to buy one and use it for flight training. So we now have a 2009 immaculate CTLS in our hangar for training and a 2008 CTLS under repair. So far, we already have 5 Private Pilot students and one Sport Pilot. Tomorrow I'm cutting a radio ad. We live in the Verde Valley of Arizona (Cottonwood, Sedona, Camp Verde), and there hasn't been a flight training facility here in about 15 years. Turns out that there's LOTS of interest in flight training. Some people want to come out and do intensive training for a couple of weeks while their spouse hangs out at one of the many Sedona spas. Nice! We do the 5-hour CT transition training as well. Also, Rainbow Aviation is holding an LSRI 2-day class at our facility in October. Contact Rainbow Aviation if you want to sign up. Sid Lloyd Kestrel Aviation Services LSRM - Aircraft/Weight shift iRMT - Service/Maintenance www.kestrelaviationservices.com
  33. 2 points
    I am in the same position as GRYPHON and I thought about flying my new aircraft home to Aus. from Germany. The promises that keep coming all the time like "it will be packed in the container next week" and so on keep us hoping that it will happen soon. The logistics of getting the necessary permits and clearances are significant and time consuming. The other main problem for me is that my family believe that I would be shot down over Pakistan or some other hostile unstable country or if I made it to Indonesia get locked up or held for ransom. Still trying to hold a sense of humour.
  34. 2 points
    My next bird will have the 3rd wheel in the back. Can't beat them off airport. I've taken mind into some fairly rough ridge tops, fields, etc. and thankfully it's held up with the custom fork and gear extensions / big tire setup I built. Mostly it's due to Randy designing a tough plane with a solid nose wheel design. But either way it's harder on it than a tailwheel. We also get horrendous wind here in CO near the rockies, so one has to make peace with the possibility there will be a few days a guy will want/have to sit out. I mean you can land in 50-100ft if you have some wind so setting it down across my runway isn't out of the question, but you still have to taxi in that crap! I see it as they are capable of 'more' (more-rougher surfaces, so more LZ's, more speed, more torn up gear and wings etc.! ) But it really depends on the plane too. Something you can touch down slow in allows more option for landing into the wind. Then again my buddies helio courier is a real handful in fairly mild cross winds (~15mph direct). It touches down slow, but the mains are in front of the firewall! You can slide the wheels on pavement without it nosing over, but there is a lot of weight behind the wheels and ground looping comes easy. Plus you can't see anything out of it on 26's Does sound more like a technique issue and not so much of a lack of rudder authority issue in the x-wind though. Bummer
  35. 2 points
    They should have used beaded fittings. I think Flight Design is the first aircraft that I've seen use barbed fittings... everything else is either beaded for flexible, or flared rigid with a B-nut (AN818) and T sleeve (AN819).
  36. 2 points
    My pilot and I were in a Tomcat on a cross-country from Houston to Montgomery, AL. We had taken a southerly route to avoid heavy weather to the north; but as we hit Mobile, we flew into the goo at FL 350. Still didn't think much of it until Center issued a weather warning and we realized we were right in the middle of it. We plowed into heavy rain at 400 KTS, and it sounded like the forward windscreen had been hit with buckshot! Scared the hell out of me for an instant it was so loud. (The pilot didn't say anything and he was a lot closer to it.) No damage to the windscreen (which was very thick plexiglass) but the rain chewed off the nose of a small protruding dome (about 6 inches in diameter) under the radome (nosecone). Luckily, the Air National Guard at Danelly had some guys who could patch us up so we could continue on our way; but the sound of heavy rain hitting at high velocity is something I will never forget.
  37. 2 points
    Very glad she is uninjured - mistakes and mishaps can happen to any of us irregardless of flight hours in our log books.
  38. 2 points
    From the description and photo, this will be perfectly repairable, assuming the wings didn't hit too hard and damage the spars at the root. The belly crack will be a simple fix. The firewall is likely going to be damaged, that's a little bit more involved. Possibly the gear sockets, but those just get a few layers of reinforcement when that happens. The wing tips are what will take some skill to fix, however, but not terrible.
  39. 2 points
    A Merry Christmas and blessings in the new year.
  40. 1 point
    I'm not sure either. let me take another stab at it. trim is used to relieve control input pressure and is not generally used for short term conditions. My CT has light stick forces and turns steeply so I would never trim nose up for a turn, not worth it. take-offs in a CT are similar, if you can set trim ahead of take off roll you trim for the climb not the earlier portions there you use right rudder beyond the trim set for climb. how'd i do? my initial point was that I seldom know how far past the trim setting I will have to deflect the rudder because I don't know where I left the trim from the last flight
  41. 1 point
    Yes, Two ignition modules that run 4 spark plugs each.
  42. 1 point
    color me: 30 degrees closed throttle both from abeam, tight patterns notice the big pitch change when you hear the flap motor the 2nd time.
  43. 1 point
    We take them off once a year for that purpose. If you don't do a practice descent once in a while you won't be able to control your speed when the time comes. Also keep tools on board to remove a gear leg to use is ice ax / brake . We mask up the window and don't care about the paint.
  44. 1 point
    It was 40' deep at this spot in April Here's a shot from that time a year from 20 miles farther north. The highest peak is named 'Matterhorn' and the light up one to the right is called 'Dragtooth'
  45. 1 point
    I didn't read all the post, but Andy has a spring in his control system that moves the stick forward, so he needs nose up trim at slow speeds to overcome the spring tension. Ed's CT is older and doesn't have the spring, so it gets trimmed the other way. And yes flaps will effect the trim.
  46. 1 point
    Some of us are still waiting for Eric's report on the UAvionics "Echo UAT."
  47. 1 point
    If the wings are level and the ball is calibrated (reading correctly) and it is out of center to the left it will feed the left tank. The same yaw forces (centripetal?) that allow you to fly by the seat of your pants move the ball and now have the fuel transferring from the leading wing to the trailing wing (via uneven usage not actual transfer). The reason people fly with the ball off center is because they know their ball is wrong and they are trying to prevent unwanted transferring.
  48. 1 point
    " Why not? Is there a diagram? Because the fuel valve only separates the fuel tanks from the engine. The fuel valve is downstream of the hoses that pass fuel from wing to wing. Wing to wing is an open circuit. That's why when the fuel valve is off and you park on a wing down slope fuel flows to the low wing and will eventually overflow the down slope wing. The hose size from wing to wing is 5/16". Fuel flows slow between wings during a flight. You can transfer, but not fast, fuel by flying 1 ball out to the low fuel wing. To keep it fairly equal during a flight fly 1/2 ball out to the fastest draining wing. This isn't unique to FD. Other aircraft including GA have the same issue. It is because of the flat wing tank design and an instrument that may not be perfect.
  49. 1 point
    Picked this up at Oshkosh. It won't be available until the 1st quarter of next year but it is good idea and if it works it might be the way to go for in and out. scan0094.pdf
  50. 1 point
    I just finished up the LRSM-A class yesterday. Blue Ridge Community College provided an excellent program. Fred Dyen, instructor, and Keith Dennis, instructional assistant, went above and beyond!
×