January - February 2006 Recreational Aircraft Association Canada www.raa.ca The Voice of Canadian Amateur Aircraft Builders $6.95 Mike Wiebe's Falco Gary Wolf THE YEAR 2006 BEGAN WITH A builder oversight of the project, and viced by an AME, so we did not really CARAC MEETING that was asking to deal with the definition of mass see the problem. We also felt that the some unusual questions of the Indus- production. Shortly Transport sent real test should be whether a safe air- try, and RAA Canada attended to rep- out a policy letter MPL 13 that defined craft was being constructed. It seemed resent the interests of its members. mass production as the simultaneous strange that it would be perfectly There were several contentious issues, construction by the same builder of legal for a rank amateur to bodge his among them Builder Assist, and the more than one of the same type and way through a project like this, and possibility of changes to the ultralight model of amateur-built aeroplane, that there should be no concern over and advanced ultralight categories. glider, rotorcraft, manned free balloon that. The response from Transport The Builder Assist document was or airship. It is important to note that was that these aircraft were being signed into being on April 23 2002, in every case the person who owns the assembled under a mass production and it had few restrictions. The builder project is considered to be the builder, environment, and they intended to not the person stop it on that basis. It seemed that doing the actual they were confusing mass production We also felt that the real test physical work. with their real concern, that someone What was being might end up with a complex aircraft should be whether a safe aircraft judged as illegal about which he knew very little. The was the simul- result of this very frustrating two day was being constructed taneous owner- meeting was that they decided to let ship of two of the CARAC group decide how to the same type handle this. of an amateur-built was allowed to of amateur-built project. This would On January 10th we were invited contract for professional assistance, be taken as evidence that mass pro- to the CARAC meeting in Ottawa to provided the work was subject to the duction was being undertaken. The deal with several issues, builder assist builder’s overall control. The builder concern was that a kit manufacturer among them. There was a new defini- was solely responsible for evaluat- might sidestep the certification pro- tion of mass production that was to be ing and accepting the original aircraft cess and use Builder Assist as a back discussed and signed into use. Mass design, and for any changes incor- door to selling finished aircraft. production would henceforth be the porated during construction. At that In June 2005 David Moore and I simultaneous ownership of more time one Transport official was asked attended another Transport meeting than one amateur-built project by how much of the actual physical work to deal with mass production, and at one builder, and there was no longer the builder would be required to do this meeting Transport’s concern was any restriction that they had to be the himself, and the answer was, “He primarily that anyone contracting out same type and model. We objected writes the cheque.” There was one the assembly of a high tech airplane strenuously to this wording because caveat, that the aircraft could not be might end up with a complex machine, it would have immediately put many constructed under a mass production but he would not know enough to of us in breach of the regs. Transport system. maintain it. The example given was a apparently did not know that many of In February 2004 David Moore, Lancair turbine pressurized aircraft. us own several projects at one time. I Wayne O’Shea, and myself were We responded that anyone with half a explained that for many builders it is asked to attend a meeting to write million dollars in loose change would the process that is important, not the an interpretation this document to not likely be trying to save the $60/hr finished product. We piddle about further explain the responsibility for it would cost to have the plane ser- Continued on page 36 The Recreational Aircraft email: [email protected] tion of the magazine is to promote education Association Canada www.raa.ca and safety through its members to the gen- 13691 MCLAUGHLIN ROAD, R R 1, The Recreational Flyer is published bi-monthly eral public. Opinions expressed in articles CHELTENHAM, ON L0P 1C0 by the Recreational Aircraft Association Pub- and letters do not necessarily reflect those of Telephone: 905-838-1357 lishing Company, Brampton Airport, Chelten- the Recreational Aircraft Association Canada. Fax: 905-838-1359 ham, ON L0P 1C0. The Recreational Flyer is Accuracy of the material presented is solely Member's Toll Free line: 1-800-387-1028 devoted to the aerospace sciences. The inten- the responsibility of the author or contributor. Features 4 NightHawk Tornado A Canadian mod of a popular ultralight / by Gary Wolf .............4 Pro and Con Ken Armstrong weighs in on the debate ......................................7 A ‘Fine’ Filter Conversion Better AND Cheaper. by Bill Tee ...............................................10 Fishin’ the Net: the Sequel 7 Dave King on how to use the internet to save Big Bucks ..........12 Over The Horizon, Part 1 Cross Country Tips from Curt Reimer ......................................17 Mike Wiebe's Falco The "Weebee" Airforce doubles in size / by Mike Wiebe ...........22 Flying With Ultralights by Calvin Thorne .......................................................................30 22 From the President's Desk by Gary Wolf ........................................................................2 Across Canada: Chapters in Action by Don Dutton ...................................................................19 Tech Stuff Alternate Air / by Wayne Hadath .....................................33 Terry Jantzi's Hole punch and inexpensive light holder ...34 30 Gary Wolf reviews Princess Auto's Infrared Thermometer Gun ..............................................................35 Classifi ed ...............................................................................38 New In Canadian Skies ........................................................41 33 George Gregory Charlie Cetinski's Nighthawk Tornado TITAN TORNADOES ARE KNOWN as very fast airframe with a 912 engine, and added hard points to the ultralight-type aircraft from the USA. However a lot of work wing for a Wescam and a searchlight. The rear storage area on Titans is being done in Canada, at Charlie Cetinski’s fi eld was fi lled with electronics, and the whole plane was painted near Hamilton Ontario. His crew has been developing the fl at black for minimum visibility during night surveillance. Tornado for law enforcement and military surveillance This plane was meant to be an inexpensive replacement for work, and in the process they have produced a completely a helicopter, and was used as proof of concept. changed machine. There are two models - the police Night- Realizing the limitations of the original airframe, the hawk P for surveillance, and the military Nighthawk M crew special-ordered a new Tornado S fuselage with stiffer with hard points for missiles. landing gear, hard points on the fuselage, and no centre The Tornado was originally a FAR103 Ultralight in the tube in front of the pilot’s nose. Flamboro RAA member Jim US, but it soon grew into a two place for the amateur-built Anderson is widely known as a master in composites, and he category. A 4130 tube fuselage cage is married to an alumi- designed new fi breglass to replace the original alumimum num tailboom, with all fl ying surfaces made from aluminum. bodywork. The fair curves of Jim’s glasswork resulted in Unusual in planes of this category is that the Titan’s wing is lower drag while offering much greater interior space. Ron fully cantilevered. The cockpit of the original Tornado is a Taborek is a former aero engineer and chapter member who fairly tight fi t for most pilots, the result consulted on aerodynamic design. The of having been developed from a 254 clamshell canopy of the original was pound single seat ultralight. Access to hinged on a centre tube that was always the rear seat is somewhat restricted, an obstruction to forward vision. The and the passenger has to put up with the aileron pushrods right in front of Top: The front-hinged canopy of his nose, another holdover from the Jim Anderson’s glass bodywork single seat version. Despite the incon- provides unobstructed access and veniently small size, the speed range vision. Bill Brubacher is booting and low stall speed of the Tornado up the Rocky Mountain panel here; made it the best initial choice for Char- Left, Rocky Mountain panel with lie’s crew. They outfi tted their fi rst collision avoidance eases pilot load. 4 Recreational Flyer January - February 2006 new canopy is a one piece tilt-forward unit that offers access from either side of the front seat. Elbow room is greatly improved, and the pilot now has enough space to wear police-issue body armour without feeling cramped. The panel has an all glass Blue Mountain system, with an autopilot that can be programmed for a search Nighthawk pattern, leaving the pilot free to observe or to operate electronic surveillance equipment. This system is equipped with a moving map with terrain avoidance, to lighten the workload of the pilot. Rear seat access is also now improved with a larger door, and Tornado the relocation of the aileron pushrod to the side of the cabin. The rear space is still a bit on the tight side, but it is much improved over the earlier models. Two full-sized policemen can fi t in this plane with all gear.