[aus-soaring] Re-Autotug

[Maurice Little]

Andrew Autotug is not dead and I am surprised your club Secretary has not keep your club advised of its status.  A letter was sent to all clubs sometime late last year from Dave Sharples (Mr. Autotug).  >From that Dave provided considerable details on its performance, work to date, cost saving and expenditure and what was the next step.   I haven't got the details to hand but his email is  [EMAIL PROTECTED] The figures were certainly substantial justification for its progress into retrofitting but there is some red tape in getting the necessary STC.   Dave is running out of puff on this and it is so close.  I recommend any interested party who has not kept themselves up to date on it contact him directly and get all the latest.  I agree the time may have arrived.   ML   Maurice Little Macbro United Tel:  613 9321 5215 Fax: 613 9374 2112 www.macbro.com.au

---

See attachment

Maurice.doc

---

---

----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Sharples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jerry Wells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 2:21 PM
Subject: Re: Contact with those without e-mail


> Jerry/Maurice
>                            John fairbairn's address is:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Dave
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jerry Wells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 9:12 AM
> Subject: Contact with those without e-mail
>
>
> > Maurice,
> > I had pondered this issue without any real insights.
> >
> > The status is that those without e-mail are:-
> >
> > Vice President QLD - John Fairbairn
> > Councillors QLD - John Clayton, Bob Ward
> > Councillors Vic/Tas - Vivienne Drew, Max Callingham
> >
> > Of these Dave Sharples is agent for John Clayton and Ian Patching for
Max
> > Callingham (because they have an e-mail address and attended Council as
> > agents).
> >
> > So every Region is covered by at least one person with e-mail (Qld - 1
> rep,
> > Vic - 2 reps, all others 3 reps)
> >
> > None of the non-email reps have a fax number listed (although I have not
> > checked if they actually have one).
> >
> > Faxing the messages is a possibility although I am not sure that e-mail
> > discussions will translate well into faxes (or real mail). There is
often
> a
> > lot of repetition in e-mails that is easy to ignore/jump over using an
> > e-mail program but will translate into real pages on a fax machine.
> >
> > Perhaps as a first step the regions that have a shortage of e-mail reps
> > could discuss the issue and advise their requirements. This could
include
> > one or more of the following options:-
> > * Advise e-mail address for reps
> > * Appoint more agents that have e-mail to act for those who do not
> > * Appoint a regional coordinator that has e-mail to keep those in that
> > region up-to-date with the discussions (e.g. by phone or fax)
> > * Advise a fax number to receive copies of all e-mail messages (being
> > prepared to take all the unfiltered messages)
> >
> > So over to Dave Sharples for Queensland and Maurice Little/Ian Patching
> for
> > Vic/Tas for feedback. I will ponder the best way to provide an automatic
> fax
> > service (any ideas welcome!)
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Maurice Little [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 November 2000 5:51
> > To: Jerry Wells
> > Subject: Re: Test - Redmond Quinn
> >
> >
> > What method of keeping councillors without email addresses in this loop
is
> > there?  If its to be fax can you provide the details of who those
> > councillors are with their respective fax details?
> >
> > ML
> >
> >
>

---

---

Maurice                  The Ron Baker bit was a joke, he is a Queenslander who is always writing shit in Oz Soaring, has difficulty in getting a club to accept his nomination for membership, has worn out his welcome at most clubs, I thought you were aware of his reputation, that's why I suggested he shift to Vic. as a joke.   Regards Dave

---

---

Maurice                Firstly, have you got a vacancy for one named Ron Baker in Vic.?   Will the Pawnee installation suit a Callair and if not can it be modified to suit and what changes do you anticipate?    I do not see much difference in a conversion to the Callair as distinct from the Pawnee.  Both original engines are the same so dimensions and weights should not alter.    Given extra weight and lessor performance of the Callair airframe would you recommend a V8 installation for a Callair and if so would this require a separate STC?      I don't know how many times I've changed my mind concerning whether to go V8 or V6.  The thing that really made up my mind was that the new all aluminium V8 chevs are electronically fuel injected which puts another $US3000 on it and with the shocking state of the dollar the price of a modified V8 would be around $A30,000 which is the price of a Lycoming rebuild.   It would not be so attractive at this stage, but in the very long term the V8 would be in front.  I wouldn't mind more discussion on that issue. This is an important decision as a change of engine would require some more testing to get an STC for that particular installation.     Note:  I am not against EFI systems, I do not think they are as great an advantage in aircraft as they are in cars therefore not worth the extra cost. This is a rather long subject and could be further debated, I would be prepared to write a report on my findings and thoughts on this issue (perhaps in AG) if there was enough interest in the subject.   Since the engine is auto by origin can routine maintenance be conducted by anyone rather than a LAME who of course will have no more skill other than perhaps airframe suitability and inspection. What maintenance schedule is anticipated for the engine.  100 hourly or 500 hourly or other? and what would it consist of in the first instance?     I am a qualified auto bod. I am doing all the 100 hourly's on the present autotug and a LAME does the airframe.  I have spoken with the Dept on this issue and the response was that an auto bloke would have greater experience on such engines and would be preferred if approved, but some reaction may be forthcoming from the LAME organisation/union if this were to be.  My long term policy was to eventually apply to do our own tug maintenance as we do have qualified airframe people who are authorised to do glider maintenance and with qualified auto blokes in our ranks ?????.  That of course is a long way off and would have to be handled carefully.   On the autotug the usual 100 hourlys are still required, we wrote our own schedule which was accepted and we adhere to that schedule.  Engine 100 hourlys cost less than $100 plus labour if any.  We intend inspecting the engine at 500 hours to try to establish wear trends with a full inspection and replacement of any parts not meeting manufacturers limits at 1000 hours. I cannot see this 1000 hour inspection costing any more than $3000 in the worst case scenario, but in my initial circular I allowed for a full engine replacement. To wear a modern engine out in 1000 hours is highly unlikely,  I personally got well over 3000 hours out of my petrol V8's in long distance heavy hauling forty years ago, they revved constantly at 4 to 5000 revs, the same as the tug does.   Maurice, I could go on for ever, don't hesitate to ask further questions.   Great to hear that Tony is improving. Regards Dave.

---