Jan_Olieslagers wrote:
@Silvaire: what’s wrong with the Trig radio T/S thinks of, that you suggest a Becker rather? If ever a radio gets installed, at all. That type of plane rather takes a handheld (Yaesu?) clipped in some lost corner. But if it must be panel mounted, the Trig is the one requiring least of the precious dashboard real estate.
I meant any comm radio that fits in a 2-1/4 inch hole, basically, because that works well in a tight single place cockpit.
In my non-electrical plane I use an old Icom handheld bought on Ebay for $100 about 10 years ago, running on AA batteries, plus an external antenna and a $100 battery powered Pilot PA-200 intercomm, running on a 9V battery. Plus two $900 headsets that are also used in other planes 
The mounts and (largely invisible) wiring was done carefully and it works fine for my purposes in US Class D and lower airspace. It looks OK too, but takes up more room than the smallest modern panel mount radios.
that works well in a tight single place cockpit.
As I said: the Trig is even more frugal. Or, it can be, though it can also use 2 1/4". Really well thought out, that kit!
Hm… Thank you for the suggestions.
The plane first flew in ’66. One of the plane spotters who photographed me recently last took a picture of it just before I was born!
The instruments are going to stay where they are. Perhaps the choice and positioning seems a little eccentric, but homebuilt VFR panels often seem to be and it’s part of its history. Any replacements will be with instruments of comparable vintage. The reason I don’t particularly like the Smiths is that it only uses a tiny part of the range. With the current prop it will rev as high as 2800rpm in a descent but as it’s for a motorbike (I can see why you like it Silvaire!), the range goes up to 8000. I’d rather something with a range of 4000 RPM or similar. Everything else seems to do the job.
The centre-panel will be black painted aluminium, same as now. Still not quite decided on the peripheral panel. The other place I could put a radio is where the placard is – would have to operatte left-handed though.
Silvaire wrote:
In my non-electrical plane I use an old Icom handheld bought on Ebay for $100 about 10 years ago…
It looks OK too, but takes up more room than the smallest modern panel mount radios.
@ kwlf, if you are going to renew the panel like for like, do you even need to renew the faux leather? It’s by no means the untidiest part of the panel, though a little fresh adhesive along that bottom edge might be nice.
I’m not sure that it is faux-leather. I think it’s some kind of thin plastic material, a little lighter than leatherette which is what has been used to cover much of the rest of the cockpit interior.
At present I’m using a Yaesu handheld which works OK within 10 miles or so of an airfield and would doubtless work better given a proper antenna. On one glorious day I forgot it and merrily buzzed around Wales radio-free. I do suspect though, that over the next decade or so we will find that mode-S or something similar becomes mandatory (airspace concerns, drones, collision detection/avoidance etc…).
An inline picture (couldn’t access this flickr feature from my mobile the other day):
kwlf wrote:
The plane first flew in ’66. One of the plane spotters who photographed me recently last took a picture of it just before I was born!
That’s really great, there aren’t a great many homebuilts of that era that fly now, so I can fully appreciate your interest in keeping it eccentric, original. The very thin black textured vinyl film is very ‘1960s British’, used on sports car instrument panels etc built by the myriad of small manufacturers in that era.
The records for my planes are very interesting to me. I recently got a bunch of stuff for the newer plane including group photos from Oshkosh in 1978, photos of my plane in the factory newsletter, importer records specific to my plane etc. If you add up the years for both planes, it’s 117 years of records and history. So I think keeping a homebuilt recognizable in roughly original form is a pretty good thing.
If you decide not to use the Smiths chronometric tach, you can sell it for use in an old racing car (it looks to me more like a racing car tach than a motorcycle version). Otherwise, I think readers may get more of the ‘flavour’ of the plane from this 2011 photo that is on line… I think it’s wonderful.
PS I think if you’re getting 2800 rpm max during descent your prop may be a bit coarse for the VW (?) My memory is of VW static rpm more like 3200 rpm.
You’re right re. the propeller – it’s significantly coarser than those that other people have fitted to their Turbulents and when it was ‘borrowed’ for a Taylor Monoplane, it was apparently very reluctant to leave the ground. Also, there is a range between idle and cruise speed where you have to baby the throttle to avoid stalling. I’ve just invested in a new propeller from Hercules.
I think I would order some sheet metal and fabricate a new panel to replicate this classic item.
Most of the panel is wooden and structural though – the central bit is painted aluminium and should be reasonably straightforward to replace.
I’ve ordered some ‘textured adhesive vinyl’ to replace the covering, like-for-like. I’ll see whether it looks the part when it arrives.
