Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Jodel D140 Mousquetaire

From here.

Well @gallois, at present it seems a poor temporary substitute for a Maule, but I have less than 50 hours on the type (mostly at LFHM) so I’m feeling my way like a fresh PPL. It is a very docile aeroplane, so perhaps I will grow to like it.

It has also only flown 250 hours since new in 2009, so there’s every chance that the cam lifters are corroded. We shall see.

It has an A1AD engine, but fixed pitch prop. I’ll have to learn from a TB10 or TB20 owner about the Bendix magneto.

The best part is that it came with an Owners Flight Manual written by some (UK LAA?) comedian:

Maximum operating air temperature: ISA +15 C
Maximum operating altitude: 11,400 ft
Maximum aer.odrome altitude for take-off: 3,000 ft
Maximum permitted tailwind for landing: 5 kt

What should I do with such a manual?

Last Edited by Jacko at 13 Sep 16:25
Glenswinton, SW Scotland, United Kingdom

@Jacko that manual may have been issued because at some point your aircraft was on an AtoA AOC? In that context the manual makes more sense, as it probably ensures the aircraft is operated by the terms of the AOC. Presumably there is a POH which provides any limitations outside an AOC, for example private use.

Oxford (EGTK)

Congratulations !!!
Do you have an issue with the Maule ? Or moved to Megeve before Brexit ?

Is it certified or experimental ?

Last Edited by Jujupilote at 13 Sep 16:56
LFPT, LFEH

Owing to a momentary misunderapplication of control (as George W Bush might have put it) an earlier-than-expected opportunity has arisen to apply mod kit 7 (upgrade to MX-7-180B) and various other improvements to the (t)rusty Maule.

The Jodel is a home built aeroplane, with an LAA permit to fly.

The LAA seems to perceive itself as a regulator whose aeronautical engineering expertise far exceeds that of aircraft designers like Heinz and Delmontez, but the CAA alternative may be worse.

Last Edited by Jacko at 13 Sep 18:07
Glenswinton, SW Scotland, United Kingdom

Have you signed up to the Jodel Group? (Free).
[email protected]
There’s likely an official manual available online. That’s where I got the DR1050 manual.

Maoraigh
EGPE, United Kingdom

I have only flown in a D140 in the right front seat and then only twice. Both times were to land on Alpine glaciers. I was impressed with its load carrying abilities and with the way it just flew at mountain altitudes. When my friend said you have control, I enjoyed its handling even though it was an old factory built version.
I have only flown in a Maule once and hated the lack of visibility. But each to our own and I can’t get a D140 or the Ambassador with IFR capability, especially PBN. But am still envious.

France

Jacko wrote:

The LAA seems to perceive itself as a regulator whose aeronautical engineering expertise far exceeds that of aircraft designers like Heinz and Delmontez

While I do love the LAA dearly, their propensity to gold plate drives me nuts. (They’ve gold plated some stuff beyond what EASA requires, for example).

The good news though is if you’re not making modifications, there are many perfectly pragmatic inspectors around.

Andreas IOM

Jacko wrote:

The LAA seems to perceive itself as a regulator whose aeronautical engineering expertise far exceeds that of aircraft designers like Heinz and Delmontez, but the CAA alternative may be worse.

@Jacko, I wouldn’t say that Heintz is the best a/c designer ever, especially after that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Zodiac

The FAA completed an in-depth review of the CH601 XL and 650 and issued a report entitled Zodiac CH601 XL Airplane Special Review Team Report January 2010. The FAA concluded:

FAA review of the in-flight failures did not indicate a single root cause, but instead implicated the potential combination of several design and operation aspects. Our preliminary assessments focused on the strength and stability of the wing structure. Further analysis during the special review found the loads the manufacturer used to design the structure do not meet the design standards for a 1,320 lb (600kg) airplane. Static load test data verifies our conclusion. The special review also identified issues with the airplane’s flutter characteristics, stick force gradients, airspeed calibration, and operating limitations.
EGTR
8 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top