Commander-Archive.digest.vol-aa
April 29, 2001 - May 25, 2001
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | garyloff <n27kb(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Oil? Well ... |
The best thing I have ever done for any airplane engine is install a pre-oiler.
No more bare metal rubbing on same at start up.
You will be amazed at the pristine condition of your powerplants at TBO and regret
that you tore them down.
Pre heated oil still sits in the bottom of the pan. A pre-oiled engine will start
far eaisier, run better and burn less oil. It's a beautiful thing as they say.
Take a look and judge for yourselves. WWW.OILAMATIC.COM. If Lycoming and Continental
made these standard equipment they would sell alot less engines
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Odum
To: CloudCraft(at)aol.com
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2001 1:11 PM
Subject: Re: Oil? Well ...
Keith,
Actually it is due to the additives that the particular oil manufacturer uses
in the oil(s). And, with the advance of time the additives get better and better.
Take a read on John's book. It's gets a little over my head occasionally - actually
most of the time - and I have an aeronautical engineering degree and a
minor in chemistry !
Paul
CloudCraft(at)aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 04/28/01 23:52:11 Pacific Daylight Time, calnet01(at)gte.net
writes:
Lycoming recommends that we all run Phillips X/C II 20W-50 oil in our
engines. PERIOD - end of conversation. Why do you want to do something
different than the factory recommends ?
Thanks for putting that out there.
Much of the conversation was about the aerodynamics of the breather tube in
the flat-nacelle models.
As far as choice of oil, I'm not surprized what Lycoming calls for, but I
wonder if they are reaching back to the 50 year old designs.
In the past, they've distanced themselves from those engines and at one TCFG
round table the tech rep was apparantly unaware of some of the operating tips
Lycoming published back in the good old days.
Just food for thought.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aviation Oil 101 Homework |
Paul Odum wrote:
> By the way - didn't mean to ruffle any feathers.
Doin' fine Paul. One of the reasons I set up this list is to facilitate
dialog, discussion, and questions. I don't mind "heated debate" at all
as long as folks continue to provide useful information and don't get
too personal. Everyone's entitled to opinions and hopefully will share
them - backed with constructive information.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 04/30/01 06:03:57 Pacific Daylight Time, Aircntr writes:
> Keith;
> They appear to be rubber grips, kind of like the old bicycle handle bar
> grips we used as a kid. They look home made.
>
The above is forwarded from Gary Gadberry to the Group re: the grips on
N666DF.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Oil? Well ... |
Now there's a great idea !
I always pre-oil my boat with a drill motor before we go out. It's a
hassle but worth the effort !
Paul
garyloff wrote:
>
> The best thing I have ever done for any airplane engine is install a
> pre-oiler. No more bare metal rubbing on same at start up.You will be
> amazed at the pristine condition of your powerplants at TBO and regret
> that you tore them down. Pre heated oil still sits in the bottom of
> the pan. A pre-oiled engine will start far eaisier, run better and
> burn less oil. It's a beautiful thing as they say. Take a look and
> judge for yourselves. WWW.OILAMATIC.COM. If Lycoming and Continental
> made these standard equipment they would sell alot less engines
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul Odum
> To: CloudCraft(at)aol.com
> Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2001 1:11 PM
> Subject: Re: Oil? Well ...
>
> Transfer balances to an APR as low as 2.99% Intro or 9.99%
> Ongoing.
> 24-hour online account management and Rewards Points for
> every
>
>
> Keith,
>
> Actually it is due to the additives that the particular oil
> manufacturer uses in the oil(s). And, with the advance of
> time the additives get better and better.
>
> Take a read on John's book. It's gets a little over my head
> occasionally - actually most of the time - and I have an
> aeronautical engineering degree and a minor in chemistry !
>
> Paul
>
> CloudCraft(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> >
> > Transfer balances to an APR as low as 2.99% Intro or 9.99%
> > Ongoing.
> > 24-hour online account management and Rewards Points for
> > every
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 04/28/01 23:52:11 Pacific Daylight
> > Time, calnet01(at)gte.net
> > writes:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Lycoming recommends that we all run Phillips X/C II
> > > 20W-50 oil in our
> > > engines. PERIOD - end of conversation. Why do you want to
> > > do something
> > > different than the factory recommends ?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks for putting that out there.
> >
> > Much of the conversation was about the aerodynamics of the
> > breather tube in
> > the flat-nacelle models.
> >
> > As far as choice of oil, I'm not surprized what Lycoming
> > calls for, but I
> > wonder if they are reaching back to the 50 year old
> > designs.
> >
> > In the past, they've distanced themselves from those
> > engines and at one TCFG
> > round table the tech rep was apparantly unaware of some of
> > the operating tips
> > Lycoming published back in the good old days.
> >
> > Just food for thought.
> >
> > Wing Commander Gordon
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
Folks,
In case your are interested. I just signed up to volunteer the 680E for
AirLifeLine missions. It's tax deductible and, I think, a good cause. So
write off some of those sightseeing flights !
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randy Dettmer <rcdettmer(at)charter.net> |
I have been interested in volunteering my 680F for Angel Flight, or similar
flights. Is AirLifeLine the same?? If so, can you pass along info..??
Thanks,
Randy Dettmer
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net>
To: ;
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 8:25 AM
Subject: AirLifeLine
>
>
> Folks,
>
> In case your are interested. I just signed up to volunteer the 680E for
> AirLifeLine missions. It's tax deductible and, I think, a good cause. So
> write off some of those sightseeing flights !
>
> Paul
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Furlong5(at)aol.com <Furlong5(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 4/30/2001 8:23:52 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
calnet01(at)gte.net writes:
I just got my application
Jim Furlong
> Folks,
>
> In case your are interested. I just signed up to volunteer the 680E for
> AirLifeLine missions. It's tax deductible and, I think, a good cause. So
> write off some of those sightseeing flights !
>
> Paul
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
If you are interested in Air Lifeline or any of the other organizations look at
the AOPA web site. They should have the listings. I threw away the article -
sorry folks !
Paul
Randy Dettmer wrote:
> I have been interested in volunteering my 680F for Angel Flight, or similar
> flights. Is AirLifeLine the same?? If so, can you pass along info..??
>
> Thanks,
> Randy Dettmer
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net>
> To: ;
> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 8:25 AM
> Subject: AirLifeLine
>
> >
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > In case your are interested. I just signed up to volunteer the 680E for
> > AirLifeLine missions. It's tax deductible and, I think, a good cause. So
> > write off some of those sightseeing flights !
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Allen Reed <allen_reed2(at)hotmail.com> |
Hey Gang, just a little note to let you know that now I am accountable for
my own actions,yes,I passed my check{forgot to carry cash}ride!I as a lowly
highschool gradeate,have tried to include my actual experience as a non
pilot non holier than thou first time airplane owner of a very special
airplane,Lucille,into this chat group.Today I experienced a feeling that you
fellows seem to have forgoten.I have enjoyed picking at you guyes because
you knew and I did'nt,now all of a sudden everybody has to have an
enginering degree to have a thought about something that used to be common
sense.HEY,lighten up DAMN IT and get back to being what I liked about ALL OF
YOU! BIG AL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RnJThompson(at)aol.com <RnJThompson(at)aol.com> |
Hi JIM,
Recieved the news letter today.Unfortunately the mailman left part of the
envelope sticking out of the letter box. It rained and hence one very wet
news letter full of wonderful colours. The power chart survived.Please could
you forward me another copy if possible.
Regards,
Richard.
P.S. Ithink I will change my name to Dick seeing as there seem to be a number
of Richards.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 04/30/01 22:39:13 Pacific Daylight Time,
allen_reed2(at)hotmail.com writes:
> now I am accountable for
> my own actions,yes,I passed my check{forgot to carry cash}ride!I as a lowly
> highschool gradeate
Ahhhh, the burden of command.
Well, congratulations, Big Al!
Thanks for the reminder ... these are the good old days of aviation.
Oh - and you're completely over-educated. Bill Lear was a high school drop
out.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rodd Browne <dc8f(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Hey Guys,
Is there an STC for a Shadin fuel flow indicating system on a 560E and does anyone
have a copy I could peruse?
rodd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
Allen Reed wrote:
> Hey Gang, just a little note to let you know that now I am accountable for
> my own actions,yes,I passed my check{forgot to carry cash}ride!
CONGRATS Allen! I DO remember!
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
> Rodd Browne wrote:
> Is there an STC for a Shadin fuel flow indicating system on a 560E and
> does anyone have a copy I could peruse?
Rodd, the last time I spoke to Shadin about this (granted, some years
ago) they told me that they'd never been able to get their system to
provide accurate numbers on a pressure carb installation and would
therefor not pursue an STC. There are several new totalizers on the
market which might be worth looking into.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JETPAUL(at)aol.com <JETPAUL(at)aol.com> |
Congrats Big Al!!!! (ANY CHECK PASSED IS WORTH MORE THAN CASH!!)
And Oh, by the way..........WELL SAID!!!!!!!
Paul Reason
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Andrew Foss <afoss(at)caw.com> |
I have a Shadin in my 690 and it's terribly innaccurate, although it is stc'd.
Their support has been poor and the unit is truly unservicable and unadjustable.
You need to pull it out and set some switches on the side to do anything and
no one has been able to get it calibrated properly.
I used a JPI in my 500 and it was a wonderful instrument, with great support and
with the manual you can set up readily. It's programming and setup is straighforward,
available and logical. You'll have your fuel flow reading adjusted perfectly
within a few flights.
one guys opinion, JPI is a terrific instrument and in the new 700 twin model they
also do a reverse indication for lean of peak setting. I highly recommend the
whole enchilada, w/ egt/cht, fuel flow, electrical and oil. Over the life of
your engine and flying availability, it will more than pay for itself. It allowed
me to immediately identify when I had a clogged injector, a little oil leak
collecting on a cylinder that made it run hot, mag ground-wire problems, alternator/battery
problems etc. Each event was minor and caught before it actually
grounded me. As well as complete information to run your engine for maximum
reliability and tbo.
It also has 2 full fuel levels, I set the second one 10 gals less than the full,
so in the event, I didn't personally confirm that that last 10 gallons was squeezed
in it was easy to have a reliable verification to your main fuel gauge.
I know it sounds like I'm a JPI sales man, which I'm not, I wouldn't operate a
piston engine w/o it!
andrew
Rodd Browne wrote:
Hey Guys, Is there an STC for a Shadin fuel flow indicating system on a 560E
and does anyone have a copy I could peruse? rodd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randy Sharp <sharp.r(at)apple.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aviation Oil 101 Homework |
>definition of ZnDTP and what it's used for.
Here yea go Paul,
It's used as an anti-wear additive.
In medium-high loading conditions (anti wear), or very high (EP), the
additive
reacts with metal surfaces forming layers with a low friction
coefficient.
Types:
Zinc diackyl dithio phosphates, Sulfur-Phosphorous Compounds, Clorurated
Paraffins,
Organic sulphur compounds Zinc Dialkyl Dithio Phosphates (ZnDTP)
They also have very good antioxidant performances.
Question on ZnDTP has been raised after the introduction of catalytic
converters.
In fact phosphorous contained in ZnDTP seems to be a poison towards the
catalytic systems. Contamination to the converter is possible as a
consequence of the oil
consumption which burns and goes in the exhausted gases.
If it's used in Aviation, I'm sure glad we don't have catalytic
converters.
No existing efficient alternatives to ZDDPs, a limit in phosphorous
content in
engine oil has been introduced in new specifications.
Randy Sharp
calnet01(at)gte.net said:
>Ok guys,
>
>Seemed I caused quite a ruckus over the oil thing. Looking through notes
>from my days as a chemist for a rather major Oil Company's Aviation
>division I found some interesting stuff.
>
>Here's a little homework for you.
>
>There is a particular oil additive that you "should" be running in your
>piston engined Lycomings (I am). This particular additive is found in
>Phillips X/C II and Shell 15W/50. Although Lycoming does not recommend
>against using the Shell brand it has been found to leave greater varnish
>deposits, lead deposit accumulation, etc., etc., etc. This is one
>problem associated with synthetic oils.
>
>I will give you one hint. The additive helps to prevent friction induced
>hot spots.
>
>Anybody care to take a crack at what additive we should be looking for
>in the oil we pour into the tank ? Try to give everyone the name of the
>additive and the additive designation.
>
>I'll provide the answer next Saturday night unless I'm motoring around
>in N680E.
>
>Oh, by the way - according to my notes some additives are required per
>Lycoming AD/Service Bulletin. Someone in the group should do some
>research and discover whether or not we are all impacted by one of these
>Lycoming SB's in our GO, GSO, IGSO Lyc's.
>
>Have to teach for Cisco Systems all week. Also - may have N680E sold -
>partner maybe ? Anyway, maybe we'll get a new member and I'll get a
>t-shirt.
>
>By the way - didn't mean to ruffle any feathers. After having worked for
>years as a chemist for this rather large Aviation Oil Company I get a
>little self righteous. My Oncologist thinks being a chemist caused me to
>get cancer - twice. All those thousands of hours of combat flying and I
>get cancer because I worked in the aviation oil/fuels business. What's
>up with that ? Be careful around this stuff.
>
>There's another freak of the aviation oil business. Aircraft oil doesn't
>use ZnDTP. Go figure ! That would be great.
>
>I think Schwaner talks about some of this stuff in his book. I'll take a
>look this week if I get time. By then I'm sure all you dedicated engine
>guys will have the answer. Bonus points will be awarded for the
>definition of ZnDTP and what it's used for.
>
>Catch ya later dudes.
>
>Paul
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Barry.Collman(at)airclaims.co.uk <Barry.Collman(at)airclaims.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Aviation Oil 101 Homework |
Blow it!
Randy just beat me to it - just what I was going to say!! (Tongue firmly in
cheek here).
Oh well, I'll just have to try and be a bit quicker with the next
brain-teaser.
How Y'All doin'?
Best Regards,
Barry Collman
Randy Sharp
e.com> cc:
Subject: Re: Aviation Oil 101 Homework
01/05/2001
16:29
>definition of ZnDTP and what it's used for.
Here yea go Paul,
It's used as an anti-wear additive.
In medium-high loading conditions (anti wear), or very high (EP), the
additive
reacts with metal surfaces forming layers with a low friction
coefficient.
Types:
Zinc diackyl dithio phosphates, Sulfur-Phosphorous Compounds, Clorurated
Paraffins,
Organic sulphur compounds Zinc Dialkyl Dithio Phosphates (ZnDTP)
They also have very good antioxidant performances.
Question on ZnDTP has been raised after the introduction of catalytic
converters.
In fact phosphorous contained in ZnDTP seems to be a poison towards the
catalytic systems. Contamination to the converter is possible as a
consequence of the oil
consumption which burns and goes in the exhausted gases.
If it's used in Aviation, I'm sure glad we don't have catalytic
converters.
No existing efficient alternatives to ZDDPs, a limit in phosphorous
content in
engine oil has been introduced in new specifications.
Randy Sharp
calnet01(at)gte.net said:
>Ok guys,
>
>Seemed I caused quite a ruckus over the oil thing. Looking through notes
>from my days as a chemist for a rather major Oil Company's Aviation
>division I found some interesting stuff.
>
>Here's a little homework for you.
>
>There is a particular oil additive that you "should" be running in your
>piston engined Lycomings (I am). This particular additive is found in
>Phillips X/C II and Shell 15W/50. Although Lycoming does not recommend
>against using the Shell brand it has been found to leave greater varnish
>deposits, lead deposit accumulation, etc., etc., etc. This is one
>problem associated with synthetic oils.
>
>I will give you one hint. The additive helps to prevent friction induced
>hot spots.
>
>Anybody care to take a crack at what additive we should be looking for
>in the oil we pour into the tank ? Try to give everyone the name of the
>additive and the additive designation.
>
>I'll provide the answer next Saturday night unless I'm motoring around
>in N680E.
>
>Oh, by the way - according to my notes some additives are required per
>Lycoming AD/Service Bulletin. Someone in the group should do some
>research and discover whether or not we are all impacted by one of these
>Lycoming SB's in our GO, GSO, IGSO Lyc's.
>
>Have to teach for Cisco Systems all week. Also - may have N680E sold -
>partner maybe ? Anyway, maybe we'll get a new member and I'll get a
>t-shirt.
>
>By the way - didn't mean to ruffle any feathers. After having worked for
>years as a chemist for this rather large Aviation Oil Company I get a
>little self righteous. My Oncologist thinks being a chemist caused me to
>get cancer - twice. All those thousands of hours of combat flying and I
>get cancer because I worked in the aviation oil/fuels business. What's
>up with that ? Be careful around this stuff.
>
>There's another freak of the aviation oil business. Aircraft oil doesn't
>use ZnDTP. Go figure ! That would be great.
>
>I think Schwaner talks about some of this stuff in his book. I'll take a
>look this week if I get time. By then I'm sure all you dedicated engine
>guys will have the answer. Bonus points will be awarded for the
>definition of ZnDTP and what it's used for.
>
>Catch ya later dudes.
>
>Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randy Sharp <sharp.r(at)apple.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine Analyzers |
afoss(at)caw.com said:
>I have a Shadin in my 690 and it's terribly innaccurate, although it is
>stc'd. Their support has been poor and the unit is truly unservicable and
>unadjustable. You need to pull it out and set some switches on the side
>to do anything and no one has been able to get it
>calibrated properly.
I too have the Shadin unit and it appears to be inaccurate some of the
time.
It reads on the high side for fuel flows for the RE. (LE appears ok)
But it has been reliable, never had a problem with it for the past 9 years
other than the indications on the right.
>I used a JPI in my 500 and it was a wonderful instrument, with great
>support and with the manual you can set up readily. It's programming and
>setup is straighforward, available and logical. You'll
>have your fuel flow reading adjusted perfectly within a few flights.
>one guys opinion, JPI is a terrific instrument and in the new 700 twin
>model they also do a reverse indication for lean of peak setting. I highly
>recommend the whole enchilada, w/ egt/cht, fuel flow,
>electrical and oil. Over the life of your engine and flying availability,
>it will more than pay for itself. It allowed me to immediately identify
>when I had a clogged injector, a little oil leak collecting on a
>cylinder that made it run hot, mag ground-wire problems,
>alternator/battery problems etc. Each event was minor and caught before it
>actually grounded me. As well as complete information to run
>your engine for maximum reliability and tbo.
I installed the Insight engine monitor, great support and very small
package.
I really liked the IR support for downloading the EGT/CHT values into a
handheld
from the front panel for charting and printing of saved data records.
(This feature is included and is not an extra option)
The unit can be used as a warranty indicator for newly overhauled engines.
I saved all of my data points as an excel spreadsheet and charted them
in case the manufacturer had questions on the operation of the
remanufactured engines.
This unit also has an auto lean setting, press two buttons
simultaneously,
start the lean process by reducing the mixtures and it accurately
determines
which cylinder is leaned FIRST.
>I know it sounds like I'm a JPI sales man, which I'm not, I wouldn't
>operate a piston engine w/o it!
>andrew
Same here, in fact ANY engine analyzer is recommended.
I quickly determined I had a failed plug (ONLY leaked above 10K PA),
the EGT/CHT for #3 cylinder was almost shut-down (<300 deg EGT, <50 CHT).
On the ground the mag check and temps revealed no problems because the
ambient atmosphere was higher. The problem didn't reveal itself until I
climbed to altitude.
This would have been impossible to troubleshoot without the engine
analyzer.
The engine wasn't running rough so I would have never known a problem
existed.
(In cruise, 5.5 out of 6 cylinders appears to be enough, I did notice
sluggish performance
for climbs above 6K) and I'm sure in the long run the cylinder would have
been damaged.
I replaced the plug on that cylinder and it fixed the problem.
I had some mechanics telling me that I had a bad valve in the cylinder or
leaking rings etc.
(It was just a bad plug)
The Documentation does a very good job in troubleshooting using example
photos of EGT/CHT
readings for various flight conditions.
Randy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randy Sharp <sharp.r(at)apple.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aviation Oil 101 Homework |
Barry.Collman(at)airclaims.co.uk said:
>Blow it!
>Randy just beat me to it - just what I was going to say!! (Tongue firmly in
>cheek here). Oh well, I'll just have to try and be a bit quicker with the next
>brain-teaser.
That's OK Barry,
Next time I'll let you give the answer.
>How Y'All doin'?
Great and you?
How is the wx over there in the fatherland?
Enjoy the week,
Randy
>Best Regards,
>Barry Collman
>>definition of ZnDTP and what it's used for.
>
>Here yea go Paul,
>
>It's used as an anti-wear additive.
>
>In medium-high loading conditions (anti wear), or very high (EP), the
>additive
>reacts with metal surfaces forming layers with a low friction
>coefficient.
>
>Types:
>Zinc diackyl dithio phosphates, Sulfur-Phosphorous Compounds, Clorurated
>Paraffins,
>Organic sulphur compounds Zinc Dialkyl Dithio Phosphates (ZnDTP)
>
>They also have very good antioxidant performances.
>
>Question on ZnDTP has been raised after the introduction of catalytic
>converters.
>In fact phosphorous contained in ZnDTP seems to be a poison towards the
>catalytic systems. Contamination to the converter is possible as a
>consequence of the oil
>consumption which burns and goes in the exhausted gases.
>
>If it's used in Aviation, I'm sure glad we don't have catalytic
>converters.
>
>No existing efficient alternatives to ZDDPs, a limit in phosphorous
>content in
>engine oil has been introduced in new specifications.
>
>Randy Sharp
>
>
>calnet01(at)gte.net said:
>>Ok guys,
>>
>>Seemed I caused quite a ruckus over the oil thing. Looking through notes
>>from my days as a chemist for a rather major Oil Company's Aviation
>>division I found some interesting stuff.
>>
>>Here's a little homework for you.
>>
>>There is a particular oil additive that you "should" be running in your
>>piston engined Lycomings (I am). This particular additive is found in
>>Phillips X/C II and Shell 15W/50. Although Lycoming does not recommend
>>against using the Shell brand it has been found to leave greater varnish
>>deposits, lead deposit accumulation, etc., etc., etc. This is one
>>problem associated with synthetic oils.
>>
>>I will give you one hint. The additive helps to prevent friction induced
>>hot spots.
>>
>>Anybody care to take a crack at what additive we should be looking for
>>in the oil we pour into the tank ? Try to give everyone the name of the
>>additive and the additive designation.
>>
>>I'll provide the answer next Saturday night unless I'm motoring around
>>in N680E.
>>
>>Oh, by the way - according to my notes some additives are required per
>>Lycoming AD/Service Bulletin. Someone in the group should do some
>>research and discover whether or not we are all impacted by one of these
>>Lycoming SB's in our GO, GSO, IGSO Lyc's.
>>
>>Have to teach for Cisco Systems all week. Also - may have N680E sold -
>>partner maybe ? Anyway, maybe we'll get a new member and I'll get a
>>t-shirt.
>>
>>By the way - didn't mean to ruffle any feathers. After having worked for
>>years as a chemist for this rather large Aviation Oil Company I get a
>>little self righteous. My Oncologist thinks being a chemist caused me to
>>get cancer - twice. All those thousands of hours of combat flying and I
>>get cancer because I worked in the aviation oil/fuels business. What's
>>up with that ? Be careful around this stuff.
>>
>>There's another freak of the aviation oil business. Aircraft oil doesn't
>>use ZnDTP. Go figure ! That would be great.
>>
>>I think Schwaner talks about some of this stuff in his book. I'll take a
>>look this week if I get time. By then I'm sure all you dedicated engine
>>guys will have the answer. Bonus points will be awarded for the
>>definition of ZnDTP and what it's used for.
>>
>>Catch ya later dudes.
>>
>>Paul
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Allen Reed <allen_reed2(at)hotmail.com> |
Hey Chris, NOOOOO!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JETPAUL(at)aol.com <JETPAUL(at)aol.com> |
Hello JB!!! I got a first hand look at one of your new towbars when I first
laid eyes on N444WA. What a great job!!! It is well worth the money, and a
first class piece of work. No baggage compartment is complete without one!!!
(along with the 2 step folding ladder and a set of jumper cables!!)
Paul Reason
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Allen Reed <allen_reed2(at)hotmail.com> |
Hey Team,Many of you thought that Lucille was an appropriate name,so what
would Chris call his blown 500,hows about SLICK WILLIE TWO!!!! BIG AL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JETPAUL(at)aol.com <JETPAUL(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 5/1/01 10:23:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time, JETPAUL(at)aol.com
writes:
<< Hello JB!!! I got a first hand look at one of your new towbars when I
first
laid eyes on N444WA. What a great job!!! It is well worth the money, and
a
first class piece of work. No baggage compartment is complete without
one!!!
(along with the 2 step folding ladder and a set of jumper cables!!) >>
Oh Yeah I almost left out the most important stuff in the baggage
compartment......
A FEW QUARTS OF YOUR FAVORITE OIL.......JUST DONT TELL ANYONE WHAT KIND IT
IS, BECUASE I THINK WE PUT THAT BABY TO BED ALREADY!!!!!!
PAUL REASON
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 05/01/01 18:28:58 Pacific Daylight Time, w.bow(at)att.net
writes:
> Sorry but I have been having a bit of a time. Have I returned to the group?
Affirmative. You are at your present position at this time.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Allen Reed <allen_reed2(at)hotmail.com> |
Finally the fun is back on this site! Please gang lets not get out of sorts
again,Okaaaa! By the way,someone asked what I took my check ride
in,wellll,it was a YES,,,Cessna 172 and it was for my private but have
faith,my pilot,friend,and my tutor{same man}is in town and I will be
starting my For Real training tommorow.Tighten your corsett Lucille cause
Daddy's a coming to get you.Best to all. BIG AL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 5/1/01 7:23:30 PM Pacific Daylight Time, JETPAUL(at)aol.com
writes:
> Hello JB!!! I got a first hand look at one of your new towbars when I first
> laid eyes on N444WA. What a great job!!! It is well worth the money, and
> a
> first class piece of work. No baggage compartment is complete without
> one!!!
> (along with the 2 step folding ladder and a set of jumper cables!!)
>
>
THANKS PAUL.......
Wait tell you see my next offering. I am having a baggage door
organizer made. It will replace the baggage door upholstery and contain a
pouch for a quart of Hyd. fluid, a quart of oil for each engine as well as
window cleaner, preflight tool etc, etc. It will end all of that fun we used
to have hunting in the dark cave for a quart of oil.
They will be available soon (at a discount to TCFG members, of
cource). I should have the prototype done right away. Thanks for the kind
words!! jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 5/1/01 8:01:31 PM Pacific Daylight Time, john(at)vormbaum.com
writes:
> Oh, lots of rags/shop towels seem to make their way into my baggage
> compartment (what, me leak oil? No way!).
>
>
There will be room for plenty of rages John!! jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
HI RANDY........
You should contact Dick Maccoon at Mr. RPM 360-387-2272. He is
in Washington State and will have a new twin turbo kit for your airplane
soon. I have visited his shop recently an it is a well thought out system
Good luck!! jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: FLYIN, TOWBARS AND STUFF |
In a message dated 5/1/01 3:35:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Furlong5(at)aol.com
writes:
> I'm wondering how many - if any --- Commander owners would be interested in
> beginning a formation flying group in the Northwest. The greater Portland
> and Seattle areas.
HI JIM.....
Count me in. I really enjoyed flying with you last week. I know
there will be some other Commanders coming on line this summer, a 520 in
Troutdale and there is a 500 in Bremerton. We see who else makes contact. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
Randy Sharp wrote:
> So what do you think about the cost, installation, maintenance etc. with
> the Rayjays?
Honestly, I did not go looking for a turbo'd bird - just happened across
a truely outstanding Viking which happened to have them.
From my experience and other research, I've found the Rayjay's to be
a darn good choice. If they're really taken care of, they might come
close to making a 2000hr TBO, but I think a 1000hr life is a more
reasonable expectation. The failure mode generally isn't anything
exciting - they just begin to loose boost and may begin to use a
little oil. My setup has the auto wastegate controller which basicly
makes operation invisible. Just fly it like any other injected engine
except that MAP doesn't drop off as you climb.
At overhaul, I installed two brand new turbos even though the old ones
didn't seem to be showing any trauma. (I think they were about $2600)
They had both been overhauled at around 1200hrs so I figured it was a
good
time. The wastegates I have are very simple devices (no castings)
and I had them overhauled for a couple hundred dollars
(the valve was getting a bit warped - it's
just a piece of flat metal welded to a shaft).
The installation certainly adds some cost at overhaul, but I've not
found
that it added any significant operational cost. Havn't had a bit of
trouble in the 3 1/2 years that I've owned this airplane. I do make
sure to keep fresh oil in her and am carefull to cool the turbos for
the recomended 4 minutes before shutdown. The folks I've know that
have had problems with turbo'd birds have all been "abusive" from what
I've seen. I know one fellow who had to replace his turbos almost
every year, but he was the type who is still at cruise power entering
downwind, chops the power, brakes hard to make the first turnoff,
then shuts down as soon as he's on the ramp.... with stuff still
glowing red hot. He seems to go through a LOT of cylinders also :-)
Anyway, hope this was of some interest. I'd be happy to discuss
further if you like....
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randy Sharp <sharp.r(at)apple.com> |
| Subject: | Re:Turbo Rayjay's |
Thanks Chris!
As usual your wealth of knowledge and very informative format is greatly
appreciated!
The installation of the Rayjay's looks more like an advantage
than a disadvantage at this point.
Yes I would like to discuss this further!
(not sure if you want to take it off-line or not?)
Your experience with the turbos will be very helpful in the decision
process!
Thanks,
Randy
chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com said:
>Randy Sharp wrote:
>> So what do you think about the cost, installation, maintenance etc. with
>> the Rayjays?
>
>Honestly, I did not go looking for a turbo'd bird - just happened across
>a truely outstanding Viking which happened to have them.
>From my experience and other research, I've found the Rayjay's to be
>a darn good choice. If they're really taken care of, they might come
>close to making a 2000hr TBO, but I think a 1000hr life is a more
>reasonable expectation. The failure mode generally isn't anything
>exciting - they just begin to loose boost and may begin to use a
>little oil. My setup has the auto wastegate controller which basicly
>makes operation invisible. Just fly it like any other injected engine
>except that MAP doesn't drop off as you climb.
>At overhaul, I installed two brand new turbos even though the old ones
>didn't seem to be showing any trauma. (I think they were about $2600)
>They had both been overhauled at around 1200hrs so I figured it was a
>good
>time. The wastegates I have are very simple devices (no castings)
>and I had them overhauled for a couple hundred dollars
>(the valve was getting a bit warped - it's
>just a piece of flat metal welded to a shaft).
>The installation certainly adds some cost at overhaul, but I've not
>found
>that it added any significant operational cost. Havn't had a bit of
>trouble in the 3 1/2 years that I've owned this airplane. I do make
>sure to keep fresh oil in her and am carefull to cool the turbos for
>the recomended 4 minutes before shutdown. The folks I've know that
>have had problems with turbo'd birds have all been "abusive" from what
>I've seen. I know one fellow who had to replace his turbos almost
>every year, but he was the type who is still at cruise power entering
>downwind, chops the power, brakes hard to make the first turnoff,
>then shuts down as soon as he's on the ramp.... with stuff still
>glowing red hot. He seems to go through a LOT of cylinders also :-)
>
>Anyway, hope this was of some interest. I'd be happy to discuss
>further if you like....
>
>Chris
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aviation Oil 101 Homework |
I rather think that everyone on who wants to be a millionaire should be
asked the questions on Win Ben Stein's Money. No one would get past $1000
!!!
Randy Sharp wrote:
>
>
> JETPAUL(at)aol.com said:
> >Boy this Randy guy seems to be a pretty "SHARP" Cookie.
> >Wow, I can't believe that you guys let me beat you to that one!!!!
> >Paul Reason
>
> >- and I have an aeronautical engineering
> >degree and a minor in chemistry !
> >Paul Odum
>
> Like Paul I too have an Aeronautical Engineering Degree but instead of a
> chemistry minor, I have a computer science degree.
>
> The Internet has a wealth of information at your finger tips!
>
> (Too bad I can't bring the computer with me on the show
> "Who wants to be a Millionaire?")
>
> ha ha
> Randy
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tylor Hall <tylorh(at)sound.net> |
Randy,
I got the stuff from Dick McCoon on his new turbo kit. The new system will
include an intercooler and oil cooler. His system also removes the cowl
flaps, which are replaced by SS exhaust ports. The first system is about to
go on a customer's aircraft in the Seattle area.
In the west, having 25-29" MP available is very good for going over
mountains.
Regards,
Tylor Hall
tylorh(at)sound.net
913-422-8869
-----Original Message-----
From: Randy Sharp [mailto:sharp.r(at)apple.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 11:03 AM
To: TCFG(at)listbot.com
Subject: Re: FUEL BURN
YOURTCFG(at)aol.com said:
>HI RANDY........
> You should contact Dick Maccoon at Mr. RPM 360-387-2272. He
is
>in Washington State and will have a new twin turbo kit for your airplane
>soon. I have visited his shop recently an it is a well thought out system
>Good luck!! jb
THANK YOU VERY MUCH! JB
I will give him a call.
Randy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randy Sharp <sharp.r(at)apple.com> |
| Subject: | Re: To turbo or not to turbo |
Thanks Keith!
Your input is greatly appreciated as well!
And yes D.P. is a great guy.
It's always good to hear the other side and subsequent related issues
in order to make a sound decision.
Randy
CloudCraft(at)aol.com said:
>> When I first bought the 500B I didn't want the extra headaches associated
>> with turbos but now most of my flights take me to Tahoe and the extra HP
>> would
>> help.
>
>Randy,
>Recently had this discussion with a 500B owner who is also an A&P (not to
>mention one of my favorite people in the world).
>Once you install a pair of "hair dryers" you'll have a totally crammed
>engine compartment, making many other maintenence actions difficult.
>Maintaining the turbos is another epic all together.
>
>However. Now that you're flying to Tahoe, Truckee, (Santa Fe, Telluride?)
>etc. fairly regularly, I'd be happy to spend your money and suggest you tubo
>normalize.
>
>If I was the King of Siam, I'd have a 500-B with manual waste gates. That
>way, I could use the turbos when needed and spare them and the rest of the
>engine components the extra heat on most flights.
>
>It's always been my opinion that if you operate from some of the Western
>U.S.
> airports, you really need the boost. It's not just the MEAs. It's the
>O.E.I. climb gradients.
>
>Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Vormbaum <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
You guys picked a bad time to talk about this!
I have a blown 500-B. Since I bought it in Oct. of '99, the turbos have
never worked. Last fall Morris fixed the right engine turbos, and that
engine is incredible. I can overboost the engine at 15k feet if I'm not
careful with the wastegate controllers! Of course, that was only the
beginning of the saga. When we tried to get new turbos for the left engine,
we discovered that Rayjay recalled 500 housings & bearings because of
incorrect manufacture. Suddenly there were none available......3 mos. later,
when I finally found a pair of brand new ones, they were $2,600/ea. Youch.
Oh well, bought 'em anyway, and Morris again redid all the ductwork on the
left engine (we estimated that both sides had about 1500 hrs. on the turbo
hardware). I now have new wastegates, new turbos, and all new ductwork on
both engines. However, my left engine isn't making an ounce of boost. I'm
assuming the air door isn't closing when the system begins to develop
positive pressure. We'll find out tomorrow when Morris tries to diagnose &
fix the problem.
The engine compartment does indeed become cramped, and I have the scars to
prove it. When everything works as advertised, I'll be a happy camper. I'm a
speed freak, so a non-geared commander that can do 200ktas up high is very
attractive to me.
As far as the extra expense, I figure that just comes with the territory
when you buy (complex) airplanes. It's still worth it to me out west here,
as Keith said, because of the OEI safety cushion it will give me.
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Sharp" <sharp.r(at)apple.com>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 8:22 AM
Subject: Re: FUEL BURN
>
>
> chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com said:
> >Randy Sharp wrote:
> >> Flying a 1964 500B.
> >> 10K PA, Std Temp; 2350 RPM, 20" MAP, (13.5x2) or 27 GPH
> >> (172-177 KTAS)
> >> 10K PA, Std Temp; 2200 RPM, 19-20" MAP, (11.5 x2) or 23 GPH
> >> (160-165 KTAS)
> >
> >Thanks for that data Randy! I'm with you on the power settings.
> >I've found that by decreasing from 75% to about 60% on my Viking
> >that I don't loose much time on my shorter trips but cut the
> >fuel burn a LOT. I've got the side advantage that I can drop my
> >RPM way down and crank the MAP up with my "hairdryers" and it
> >sure makes a big difference in cabin noise.
> >At 10K I like to run 2200 and 25" which gives me about 155kt and
> >12.5 GPH. (this actually equates to an equiv 23" effective due
> >to turbo heating). Gotta admit that I do like my Rayjays for those
> >long trips. At 24k running 2400 X 27" I can squeeze almost 200kts
> >out of the wood-winged-wonder.
> >
>
> >Chris (I wanna "blown" 500B!) Schuermann
>
> I have been considering that.
> I want to install de-ice but if I can't climb above it I don't want
> to be in it.
>
> So what do you think about the cost, installation, maintenance etc. with
> the Rayjays?
>
> When I first bought the 500B I didn't want the extra headaches associated
> with
> turbos but now most of my flights take me to Tahoe and the extra HP would
> help.
>
> Randy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Furlong5(at)aol.com <Furlong5(at)aol.com> |
I'm flying a 500B - w/rayjay turbos - as a loaner from Gary Gadberry while he
is refurbishing my new 500A.
the wastes gates don't want to close. I've put Mouse Milk on the connections
but they still don't seem to want to work.
I've always had a fear of Rayjays because of all of the war stories I've
heard over the years. Unless I can get these to work I won't have the
advantage of seeing how they perform at altitude and since it is not my
airplane I am not going to put any money into fixing them.
Jim Furlong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Vormbaum <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
One thing I've discovered is that the wastegates are the first to go; they warp,
and no matter how smooth the mechanism, they won't close due to the misshape.
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: Furlong5(at)aol.com
To: john(at)vormbaum.com ; TCFG(at)listbot.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 10:36 AM
Subject: Re: Turbos
I'm flying a 500B - w/rayjay turbos - as a loaner from Gary Gadberry while he
is refurbishing my new 500A.
the wastes gates don't want to close. I've put Mouse Milk on the connections
but they still don't seem to want to work.
I've always had a fear of Rayjays because of all of the war stories I've
heard over the years. Unless I can get these to work I won't have the
advantage of seeing how they perform at altitude and since it is not my
airplane I am not going to put any money into fixing them.
Jim Furlong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tylor Hall <tylorh(at)sound.net> |
Randy,
www.mrrpm.com only talks about the Orinda engine program.
Does not have any thing on the web site about the 500B Turbo. That is
coming.
He is offering it two ways. All new and upgrade to the old Rajay system
reusing the existing turbos.
Give me a call and I can sent it to you.
Regards,
Tylor Hall
tylorh(at)sound.net
913-422-8869
-----Original Message-----
From: Randy Sharp [mailto:sharp.r(at)apple.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 12:28 PM
To: Tylor Hall
Subject: RE: Turbo
tylorh(at)sound.net said:
>Randy,
>I got the stuff from Dick McCoon on his new turbo kit. The new system will
>include an intercooler and oil cooler. His system also removes the cowl
>flaps, which are replaced by SS exhaust ports. The first system is about
to
>go on a customer's aircraft in the Seattle area.
>In the west, having 25-29" MP available is very good for going over
>mountains.
>Regards, Tylor Hall
Thanks Tylor for this information!
Did he mail the information to you or does he have a web site yet?
Do you remember what the cost and installation downtime was?
Randy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: To turbo or not to turbo |
Several good points everyone.
Yes, the additional plumbing definitly makes it more difficult to
work on. Here are a few pics of the installation in my Viking
Left side
http://www.c2-tech.com/~chris/Eng/r0100241.jpg
Right side
http://www.c2-tech.com/~chris/Eng/r0100236.jpg
Here is a picture of one of my wastegates
http://www.c2-tech.com/~chris/7ML/mvc-053x.jpg
(the pics in the first directory are pre-overhaul - the second dir
is during the "firewall forward" if anyone wants to see more)
One of the reasons I have so many pictures of the engine installation
is that I've had to help _four_ shops re-install engines on turbo-
Vikings as they couldn't figure out how to hook everything back up!
I never had any problems with my wastegates, but I don't lean at
all agressivly and try to keep the temps way down.
There are basicly two different Rayjay installations - manyual and
auto. In the manual config, you get another knob to play with to
control the wastegates by hand. Simple and effective, but it's up
to the operator to remember to decrease boost as you decend and to
manage boost during climb.
The automatic version just maintains selected MAP. Mine also has a
little toggle switch on the panel to turn the turbos off (ie: fully
open the wastegates). I just always leave 'em turned on. Figure
if I'm paying to have the hairdryers that I'll use them...
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: To turbo or not to turbo |
HI KIDS.........
Good points all. I have no empirical experience with turbo
normalized Commanders but I flew a Duke for many years. It to had automatic
controllers and they worked great (one would 0ccationaly hang up on TO, so
you had to monitor that) It was a joy to fly as you simply set the MP and
forgot about it until approach.
The engines and turbo system had 1800 hr since overhaul (1600 TBO)
when I sold the airplane. I flew it about 400hr. I had ZERO trouble with
the turbo system. It used one large turbo one each engine.
I chose my current Commander, a 680E, because I need to climb to at
least 10K and be able to stay there on one engine. No normally aspirated
twin will do that, so one needs turbo or supercharging. I can tell you that
it is worth the hassle for me. My airplane climbs well even above 10K and
the cruse speeds at altitude are much higher. As a rule of thumb, I figure
that climbing from sea level to 12K turns MPH into KPH at the same power
setting and fuel burn. It climbs smartly so I climb higher that I otherwise
would, giving better performance and a cooler, smother ride in the summer
months.
I had a normally aspirated 560A before the Duke and made a terrifying
trip from SEA to BOI one night. With the family sleeping after a fun
weekend, I was looking at a solid undercast only 500 feed below the belly at
11.5K. It was absolutely clear, above and a spectacular ride. My
destination was also clear but below me I listened to the shrill voices of
the commuter airline guys whining abut "moderate to sever ice" and they were
"missing" all the approaches in snow and fog. There I sat knowing that even
the failure of one mag would be a "dial 911" emergency! It was one of the
longest flights in my log book.
The old gal never missed a beat but I promised myself never to expose
my family to that again and I never did, hence the Duke and now the 680E.
Sorry to be so long winded but living out west has some disadvantages
(it is worth it)! I would opt for the hair dryers if I could. Just my
opinion. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 05/02/01 12:52:09 Pacific Daylight Time, YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
writes:
> No normally aspirated twin will do that, so one needs turbo or
> supercharging.
Everyone here has chosen an airframe / powerplant combination to fit their
needs and I am NOT suggesting one is better than another. Let me perfectly
clear about that.
Just an observation that I was discussing with Michael Macoscko (a list
member) who I had the pleasure of meeting in real life on Sunday:
The superchargers on the G-series Lycomings are bullet proof. I've only
flown one pair that needed to be overhauled and I think it was because the
engines had had an overhaul or two, but never the blowers.
I know there are several potential owners watching our conversations and they
may not know the difference between superchargers and turbochargers.
The superchargers on the Geared-Lycoming engines found on Commanders are spun
by the engine crankshaft (via reduction gears) and thus are not subject to
the 1600 degree exhaust temperatures that turbochargers are.
There are no waste gates on the superchargers and they also spin at a much
lower RPM than a turbocharger. Many of the turbocharger operating techniques
are not required for superchargers, such as the 3-4 minute idle for
spin-down, etc. (You may still want to do this for general thermal evening
of the entire engine, however, but the roll-out and taxi if not super short
will take care of that.)
Continental kind of blows the language by calling their big engines
"Turbo-Supercharged" bla bla bla when, in fact, they're turbocharged. (As in
GTSIO-520-K)
Lycoming has upheld the King's English and calls one method "Supercharged"
(GSO-480, IGSO-540) and the other "Turbocharged." (TIO-540)
OK, class. That's today's lesson in airplane semantics. Your homework
assignment is to write a sentence using Supercharger and Turbocharger, and
say which one you have or wish you have or wish you didn't have.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
What an amazing last 24 hours worth of information on this list!
I'd like to take a moment to thank everyone who's contributed to
the incredible discussions going on. I'm just proud of the content
quality here. The "signal-to-noise" ration is higher than any other
aviation chatlist I've ever been subscribed to!
I hope none of the "lurkers" are becoming overwhelmed with email :-)
Howdy to all the new folks - I see quite a few have joined the
list in the last few weeks. I (your humble list and web site manager)
hope you are finding the list content and discussions informative.
The fearless Capt Jimbob (chief of the Twin Commander Flight Group) is
a regular contributer the list. There are also some of our friends at
Twin
Commander Aircraft Corp hanging around who will hopefully hop in and
address various topics from time to time as well as let us in on the
latest news from the factory. (like when the Shrike will be put back
into production :-)
If you're an owner or wannabe owner, please consider joining the TCFG.
Jim is doing an outstanding job of providing support, information,
answers,
discounts, etc as well as producing a truely useful newsletter.
(besides, he's actually a pretty nice guy, but don't tell him I said
so).
Chris Schuermann
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
Guys,
I want to put together a Calendar for the rest of this year and for next
year.
How about you guys go out and take some pictures of your Commanders on the
ground and in flight. Maybe we could get up a formation flight for the
calendar next year when we meet in August.
I'd like to get the story on your airplanes - maybe Barry can help fill in
the blanks.
Run out and get a roll of 24 exposure 35 MM film - take some pics - and
send the roll of film to me.
I will send it up to Photoworks in Seattle. They will put all the pictures
online and we can sort through the photos we want on the 2001 remaining
calendar. Later in the year we can haggle over the 2002 calendar.
We can design the calendar on line on the photoworks site. Also - they
will put off high res pictures on CD for 5.00.
What do you think ?
Paul
Chris Schuermann wrote:
>
>
> What an amazing last 24 hours worth of information on this list!
> I'd like to take a moment to thank everyone who's contributed to
> the incredible discussions going on. I'm just proud of the content
> quality here. The "signal-to-noise" ration is higher than any other
> aviation chatlist I've ever been subscribed to!
> I hope none of the "lurkers" are becoming overwhelmed with email :-)
>
> Howdy to all the new folks - I see quite a few have joined the
> list in the last few weeks. I (your humble list and web site manager)
> hope you are finding the list content and discussions informative.
>
> The fearless Capt Jimbob (chief of the Twin Commander Flight Group) is
> a regular contributer the list. There are also some of our friends at
> Twin
> Commander Aircraft Corp hanging around who will hopefully hop in and
> address various topics from time to time as well as let us in on the
> latest news from the factory. (like when the Shrike will be put back
> into production :-)
>
> If you're an owner or wannabe owner, please consider joining the TCFG.
> Jim is doing an outstanding job of providing support, information,
> answers,
> discounts, etc as well as producing a truely useful newsletter.
> (besides, he's actually a pretty nice guy, but don't tell him I said
> so).
>
> Chris Schuermann
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
Hey guys,
Did you all read that article on the space station today ?
Apparently it is so loud in the thing that NASA, and everyone else
participating in the program, is afraid that the astronuts will go deaf
in a short period of time ! And I thought my Aero Commander was loud !
The astronuts have to wear earplugs all the time.
Paul
YOURTCFG(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 5/1/01 6:28:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com writes:
>
>
>> There's no vibration coupled through and no
>> metalic noise or oil-canning.
>
> CHRIS, That is because there is no metal in there my friend!! love
> jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
Hey Commanderheads,
Please mail the photos to me at:
Paul C. Odum
3168 Jacinto Drive
Simi Valley, CA 93063
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Vormbaum <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
How about some digital pix emailed directly to you, Paul? I hear there's
going to be a great opportunity to get some formation shots of some Northern
California Commanders late in August (heh)...
BTW, I finally had a chance to meet another list member today; I had the
opportunity to see Randy Sharp land his 500-B in some of the most
challenging crosswind conditions I've experienced in my (brief) piloting
career, on his way to Morris' hangar today. I know, because I landed my
500-B 10 minutes prior to his arrival. The ATIS called for 20kt. winds,
gusting to 35kts., from 360 deg....and we got all of that. And we were
landing on Rwy 28....almost a perfect 90 deg. crosswind. All I can say is
that Randy's an artist. I'm sure his landing looked a whole lot better than
mine!
Actually, today was a good day in Commanderland. Randy S. gave Andrew Foss a
ride over to pick up his dash 10 690-B. Randy D.'s 680-F was also present,
as was Mean Mary....so we had 5 fine examples of Commanders, pretty much
covering all phases of Commander development present. I'm getting psyched up
for the fly-in!
Every time I fly I seem to learn a lesson about Commanders & their
versatility. Today's lesson? I have discovered that I own a twin that is
perfectly comfortable being slipped! On short final I thought I'd (risk it?)
give it a try....and she slipped in as docile as a lamb! Morris confirmed
that it's OK....he told me to go ahead and throw full pedal & opposite
aileron from 5,500 ft. with the gear out & full flaps, and watch 'er come
down at 4,000fpm, not a bit more. I don't know that I'm brave enough to try
that yet....
/John
PS: How come it always seems to be a headwind on BOTH legs of a round trip?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Odum" <calnet01(at)gte.net>
To:
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 10:04 PM
Subject: Re: WOW!
>
>
> Guys,
>
> I want to put together a Calendar for the rest of this year and for next
> year.
>
> How about you guys go out and take some pictures of your Commanders on the
> ground and in flight. Maybe we could get up a formation flight for the
> calendar next year when we meet in August.
>
> I'd like to get the story on your airplanes - maybe Barry can help fill in
> the blanks.
>
> Run out and get a roll of 24 exposure 35 MM film - take some pics - and
> send the roll of film to me.
>
> I will send it up to Photoworks in Seattle. They will put all the pictures
> online and we can sort through the photos we want on the 2001 remaining
> calendar. Later in the year we can haggle over the 2002 calendar.
>
> We can design the calendar on line on the photoworks site. Also - they
> will put off high res pictures on CD for 5.00.
>
> What do you think ?
>
> Paul
>
> Chris Schuermann wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > What an amazing last 24 hours worth of information on this list!
> > I'd like to take a moment to thank everyone who's contributed to
> > the incredible discussions going on. I'm just proud of the content
> > quality here. The "signal-to-noise" ration is higher than any other
> > aviation chatlist I've ever been subscribed to!
> > I hope none of the "lurkers" are becoming overwhelmed with email :-)
> >
> > Howdy to all the new folks - I see quite a few have joined the
> > list in the last few weeks. I (your humble list and web site manager)
> > hope you are finding the list content and discussions informative.
> >
> > The fearless Capt Jimbob (chief of the Twin Commander Flight Group) is
> > a regular contributer the list. There are also some of our friends at
> > Twin
> > Commander Aircraft Corp hanging around who will hopefully hop in and
> > address various topics from time to time as well as let us in on the
> > latest news from the factory. (like when the Shrike will be put back
> > into production :-)
> >
> > If you're an owner or wannabe owner, please consider joining the TCFG.
> > Jim is doing an outstanding job of providing support, information,
> > answers,
> > discounts, etc as well as producing a truely useful newsletter.
> > (besides, he's actually a pretty nice guy, but don't tell him I said
> > so).
> >
> > Chris Schuermann
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Barry.Collman(at)airclaims.co.uk <Barry.Collman(at)airclaims.co.uk> |
"John
Vormbaum" To:
Subject: Re: WOW!
03/05/2001
08:24
How about some digital pix emailed directly to you, Paul? I hear there's
going to be a great opportunity to get some formation shots of some
Northern
California Commanders late in August (heh)...
Hey - YEH!! What about a formation of fifty Commanders, flying in the shape
of '50' at Hillsboro - now that would be a blast! Decibel readings off the
scale, or what! I seem to recall the South African Air Force doing a
similar formation of T-6s when they were retired from duty some years back.
The noise must have been something else.
PS: How come it always seems to be a headwind on BOTH legs of a round trip?
Yeh! One of life's mysterious anomolies. Could it be the effect of the
Gulfstream? Another anomoly is why is it, that when you dial a wrong
number, it's never engaged??
Have a Nice Day!
Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Andrew Foss <afoss(at)caw.com> |
What a day, flying w/ Randy Sharp.
We first left RHV in a Hiller helo, 15 minutes after departure, we hadn't even
left RHV's airspace getting spanked and buffeted by a 60+ kt headwind. Bumper to
bumber stop and go gridlock traffic on Hwy 680 was about 2x our forward speed.
In the spirit of Monty Python's flying circus, we "Ran away...", and took the
500 up to HWD.
Arriving in HWD, Randy chirped it in on the right wheel, the left followed
eventually, and he was fully cross controlled all the way in. On the roll out w/
full input already in, he had to pat the right brake a bit to stay on the
centerline. 3 times that flight he asked "wanna fly?", I assured him I was
pretty happy as a pax, thanks anyway.
Going in to Steamboat last weekend ATC vectored me right through the approach
and into some really nasty looking Wx over the Rockies, since a Pilatus ahead of
me hadn't closed their plan. I had a VFR hole, so I cancelled and did John
Meredith's knife edge descent. Gear down, 200kts, on the right wing tip, my VSI
stops moving at 6000'/min, absolutely smooth, no G's, it's great. The commander
come's out of the sky in a hurry, when you need it.
As far as sideslipping, I thought the issue with twins had something to do w/
recovery in the event of an engine failure?
andrew
John Vormbaum wrote:
>
>
> How about some digital pix emailed directly to you, Paul? I hear there's
> going to be a great opportunity to get some formation shots of some Northern
> California Commanders late in August (heh)...
>
> BTW, I finally had a chance to meet another list member today; I had the
> opportunity to see Randy Sharp land his 500-B in some of the most
> challenging crosswind conditions I've experienced in my (brief) piloting
> career, on his way to Morris' hangar today. I know, because I landed my
> 500-B 10 minutes prior to his arrival. The ATIS called for 20kt. winds,
> gusting to 35kts., from 360 deg....and we got all of that. And we were
> landing on Rwy 28....almost a perfect 90 deg. crosswind. All I can say is
> that Randy's an artist. I'm sure his landing looked a whole lot better than
> mine!
>
> Actually, today was a good day in Commanderland. Randy S. gave Andrew Foss a
> ride over to pick up his dash 10 690-B. Randy D.'s 680-F was also present,
> as was Mean Mary....so we had 5 fine examples of Commanders, pretty much
> covering all phases of Commander development present. I'm getting psyched up
> for the fly-in!
>
> Every time I fly I seem to learn a lesson about Commanders & their
> versatility. Today's lesson? I have discovered that I own a twin that is
> perfectly comfortable being slipped! On short final I thought I'd (risk it?)
> give it a try....and she slipped in as docile as a lamb! Morris confirmed
> that it's OK....he told me to go ahead and throw full pedal & opposite
> aileron from 5,500 ft. with the gear out & full flaps, and watch 'er come
> down at 4,000fpm, not a bit more. I don't know that I'm brave enough to try
> that yet....
>
> /John
>
> PS: How come it always seems to be a headwind on BOTH legs of a round trip?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Odum" <calnet01(at)gte.net>
> To:
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 10:04 PM
> Subject: Re: WOW!
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Guys,
> >
> > I want to put together a Calendar for the rest of this year and for next
> > year.
> >
> > How about you guys go out and take some pictures of your Commanders on the
> > ground and in flight. Maybe we could get up a formation flight for the
> > calendar next year when we meet in August.
> >
> > I'd like to get the story on your airplanes - maybe Barry can help fill in
> > the blanks.
> >
> > Run out and get a roll of 24 exposure 35 MM film - take some pics - and
> > send the roll of film to me.
> >
> > I will send it up to Photoworks in Seattle. They will put all the pictures
> > online and we can sort through the photos we want on the 2001 remaining
> > calendar. Later in the year we can haggle over the 2002 calendar.
> >
> > We can design the calendar on line on the photoworks site. Also - they
> > will put off high res pictures on CD for 5.00.
> >
> > What do you think ?
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > Chris Schuermann wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > What an amazing last 24 hours worth of information on this list!
> > > I'd like to take a moment to thank everyone who's contributed to
> > > the incredible discussions going on. I'm just proud of the content
> > > quality here. The "signal-to-noise" ration is higher than any other
> > > aviation chatlist I've ever been subscribed to!
> > > I hope none of the "lurkers" are becoming overwhelmed with email :-)
> > >
> > > Howdy to all the new folks - I see quite a few have joined the
> > > list in the last few weeks. I (your humble list and web site manager)
> > > hope you are finding the list content and discussions informative.
> > >
> > > The fearless Capt Jimbob (chief of the Twin Commander Flight Group) is
> > > a regular contributer the list. There are also some of our friends at
> > > Twin
> > > Commander Aircraft Corp hanging around who will hopefully hop in and
> > > address various topics from time to time as well as let us in on the
> > > latest news from the factory. (like when the Shrike will be put back
> > > into production :-)
> > >
> > > If you're an owner or wannabe owner, please consider joining the TCFG.
> > > Jim is doing an outstanding job of providing support, information,
> > > answers,
> > > discounts, etc as well as producing a truely useful newsletter.
> > > (besides, he's actually a pretty nice guy, but don't tell him I said
> > > so).
> > >
> > > Chris Schuermann
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Andrew Foss <afoss(at)caw.com> |
I at least had one of life's major anomoly mathematically explained and put to
rest the other day.
socks + heat = socks -1
which explains why socks get lost in the dryer.
andrew
Barry.Collman(at)airclaims.co.uk wrote:
>
>
> "John
> Vormbaum" To:
> m.com> Subject: Re: WOW!
>
> 03/05/2001
> 08:24
>
>
> How about some digital pix emailed directly to you, Paul? I hear there's
> going to be a great opportunity to get some formation shots of some
> Northern
> California Commanders late in August (heh)...
>
> Hey - YEH!! What about a formation of fifty Commanders, flying in the shape
> of '50' at Hillsboro - now that would be a blast! Decibel readings off the
> scale, or what! I seem to recall the South African Air Force doing a
> similar formation of T-6s when they were retired from duty some years back.
> The noise must have been something else.
>
> PS: How come it always seems to be a headwind on BOTH legs of a round trip?
>
> Yeh! One of life's mysterious anomolies. Could it be the effect of the
> Gulfstream? Another anomoly is why is it, that when you dial a wrong
> number, it's never engaged??
>
> Have a Nice Day!
>
> Barry
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Barry.Collman(at)airclaims.co.uk <Barry.Collman(at)airclaims.co.uk> |
Hi Capt!
Thanks for this. It's just that certain 'official' documents show one
presentation of this data, whilst others show another. '9333C' it is then,
which is good, because that's what I input on the database and with over
250 model 680s, that would have mean a lot of alterations!!
Thanks too for letting me know what the various digits mean, that's going
to be useful information when looking at other models.
Thanks!
Kindest Regards,
Barry
HI BARRY........
Reading from the HARTZELL APPLICATION HANDBOOK, there is NO dash. It
should read 9333C. Some of the shorter blades have a dash AFTER the C
i.e., 9333C-3. The 3 is some factory modification and not always defined,
could be a little more (or less) twist in the blade?
Hope this helps.Sorry about the sun, I'll pray for rain!!
capt jimbob
HI BARRY......
Not that it probably really matters, but I gave you a bit of
misinformation. I used to know all this by heart after getting the STC for
the "T Bone" props. Here is the correct breakdown. 9333C blades are: 93
= original, uncut diameter. 33 = original templet design. "C" is the twist
modification.
If it has a -3, that indicates that 3 inches have been removed from the
original diameter (now 90 inches).
I know, I know, you asked what time it was and I told you how to make a
watch, sorry.
jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2001 Calendar |
HI KIDS.......
I have arranged to have a noted air-to-air photographer at or
flyin. His work has been on the cover of many magazines. He took the
Feathered engine photo of triple two some of you have seen. He will take a
photo of you flying your airplane over the beautiful Oregon scenery for $250,
36 exposures, you keep the negatives. We will have a Maule photo plane
150MPH so everybody should be able to stay close without wearing any flaps.
It will be a great opportunity to have a great pix of your bird.
He loves doing this so I am sure I can talk him int some "freebie"
formation shots if we can get some guys to fly CLOSE formation. The
Commander is so big that a lose formation wont work.
If you want to have a photo done let me know so we can plan a
schedule, it will be a busy few days.
Sounds fun, cant wait!! jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Furlong5(at)aol.com <Furlong5(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2001 Calendar |
In a message dated 5/3/2001 9:03:31 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
YOURTCFG(at)aol.com writes:
> If you want to have a photo done let me know so we can plan a
> schedule, it will be a busy few days.
>
Count me in.
Jim Furlong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WilliamPeper(at)cs.com <WilliamPeper(at)cs.com> |
| Subject: | Flying formation sounds great |
Hi, y'all
It's really great to contemplate a "tight" formation flight up to Washington.
. . . I'm even trying to envision getting there myself. However, the talk
about formation flight in the last couple of days has caused me to stand up
and say a couple of things that I believe are of utmost importance:
I have flown quite a bit of "tight" formation in a North American T-28 Trojan
with 1400 HP, and the successful execution of it takes knowledge of formation
flight, exquisitely precise verbal and hand signal communication,
better-than-meticulous technique, and LOTS of practice, practice. Anything
less than a thoroughly familiar formation team will, by the power of
statisitcs, most likely end up with a tragically disastrous outcome.
Straight-ahead formation flight, especially when close-in, is demanding
enough when there are several aircraft involved. The complexity immediately
increases when you mix airframes of different horsepower and speed
capabilities. Start adding turns to the left and right, and you downright
INVITE disaster if every person in the flight is not "in sync".
I care too much for the people in the TCFG, their heirs, and the image of the
venerable aircraft itself to stand by and idly follow the very
well-intentioned and inspired threads about flying in a huge formation to the
Fly-in.
For those who have experience in formation flight, civil or military, careful
planning, briefing, and execution could turn out a really nice formation.
Again, it takes practice, practice with multiple aircraft, even with "loose"
formations.
I would suggest getting a copy of the T-34 Association's training films on
formation flight. Alternatively, Sporty's carries a good (albeit dry) tape
series on T-28 formation flight (at least I think it's still available).
Takes a strong cup of coffee to get through those tapes, but there's wisdom
in them there cassettes.
May everything we do "build up" the image of the Twin Commander . . . if you
fly one, you're an ambassador for the design whether you know it or not!
Best to all of you
Bill Peper
Crawford, Texas . . . home of Geo. W. Bush
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Advice Please! |
There is one more consideration. The 685 is built under the same TC
as the 690 airplanes and as such is subject to the same, very expensive wing
spar AD. This requires that several fuel bladders be removed and the wing be
subjected to an ultrasound inspection every 36 months. The 680 airframe does
not have thei AD. My .002 jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying formation sounds great |
Well said Bill.
Formation flying is extremely hard under the best of circumstances. You
know - no bumps and clear skies.
I personally liked to tuck within 2 or 3 feet of the aircraft I flew
forms with in the Navy.
If you can't do it close you can't do it far away. It's one thing to
talk the talk. A completely different proposition to walk the walk - or
fly the Aero Commander as it were.
We can probably do a very "loose" form workup. I don't think we have
enough time to practice for a good group shot. Maybe some two or three
ship loose form photos.
Paul
Callsign - P51PAUL (used to fly my uncle's P-51D down to PCola - hence
the callsign)
WilliamPeper(at)cs.com wrote:
>
>
> Hi, y'all
> It's really great to contemplate a "tight" formation flight up to
> Washington.
> . . . I'm even trying to envision getting there myself. However, the
> talk
> about formation flight in the last couple of days has caused me to
> stand up
> and say a couple of things that I believe are of utmost importance:
> I have flown quite a bit of "tight" formation in a North American T-28
> Trojan
> with 1400 HP, and the successful execution of it takes knowledge of
> formation
> flight, exquisitely precise verbal and hand signal communication,
> better-than-meticulous technique, and LOTS of practice, practice.
> Anything
> less than a thoroughly familiar formation team will, by the power of
> statisitcs, most likely end up with a tragically disastrous outcome.
> Straight-ahead formation flight, especially when close-in, is
> demanding
> enough when there are several aircraft involved. The complexity
> immediately
> increases when you mix airframes of different horsepower and speed
> capabilities. Start adding turns to the left and right, and you
> downright
> INVITE disaster if every person in the flight is not "in sync".
> I care too much for the people in the TCFG, their heirs, and the image
> of the
> venerable aircraft itself to stand by and idly follow the very
> well-intentioned and inspired threads about flying in a huge formation
> to the
> Fly-in.
> For those who have experience in formation flight, civil or military,
> careful
> planning, briefing, and execution could turn out a really nice
> formation.
> Again, it takes practice, practice with multiple aircraft, even with
> "loose"
> formations.
> I would suggest getting a copy of the T-34 Association's training
> films on
> formation flight. Alternatively, Sporty's carries a good (albeit dry)
> tape
> series on T-28 formation flight (at least I think it's still
> available).
> Takes a strong cup of coffee to get through those tapes, but there's
> wisdom
> in them there cassettes.
> May everything we do "build up" the image of the Twin Commander . . .
> if you
> fly one, you're an ambassador for the design whether you know it or
> not!
> Best to all of you
> Bill Peper
> Crawford, Texas . . . home of Geo. W. Bush
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Advice Please! |
In a message dated 05/03/01 19:30:56 Pacific Daylight Time,
MRPOULIN27(at)aol.com writes:
> I am in the process of purchasing a "Twin Commander". Yes I'm excited, but
> a little confused. I'm looking at pressurized versions. Other the the
> body length, what are the differences between the "685" and the "Shrike
> Conversion 680F(P)"? Even though its 10 years older, why is the "680F(P)"
> up to $80,000 more. Capt jimbob sent me some great info, but I would like
> your opinions. Oh yeah, the "680F(P)" has 400HP R.P.M. engines. Look
> forward to hearing from y'all.
>
Mark,
Here's a quick rundown on the differences -- and with little clues to go on,
I'll make a few assumptions (eeegads, not that!) about pricing.
The AC-685 is the Turbo Commander (AC-690) airframe with Continental
GTSIO-540-K engines, rated at 435 hp. for take off.
It's a "long body" model with many of the Turbo Commander systems and
refinements that came in the early 1970s.
The AC-680F(P) is actually an earlier design, but from what you've hinted at,
is a "Mr. RPM" conversion, using turbocharged (dual RayJay) Lycoming I0-720
engines rated at 400 hp. This is a "short body" model.
The Mr. RPM conversion removed the geared Lycoming engines, skydrol hydraulic
system (most conversions did, but not all) and cabin supercharger and went
with bleed air pressurization from the RayJay turbos.
Being a "Shrike Coversion" 680F(P) marks it as one of Gary Gadberry's
products and most likely sports many refinements which may include a Shrike
nose, rudder cap, wingletts, and many other nifty things; perhaps a new panel
is part of the package.
Also, price difference could be due to difference in engine times, mod status
and market on one model vs. another.
The 680F(P) will have the lesser runway requirement of the two but if you
need seating capacity, the 685 is the obvious choice.
Ask some more specific quesitions and we'll do our best to answer.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | w.bow <w.bow(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying formation sounds great |
AMEN!!!!
Bill Bow
----- Original Message -----
From: WilliamPeper(at)cs.com
To: TCFG(at)listbot.com
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 12:28 AM
Subject: Flying formation sounds great
Hi, y'all
It's really great to contemplate a "tight" formation flight up to Washington.
. . . I'm even trying to envision getting there myself. However, the talk
about formation flight in the last couple of days has caused me to stand up
and say a couple of things that I believe are of utmost importance:
I have flown quite a bit of "tight" formation in a North American T-28 Trojan
with 1400 HP, and the successful execution of it takes knowledge of formation
flight, exquisitely precise verbal and hand signal communication,
better-than-meticulous technique, and LOTS of practice, practice. Anything
less than a thoroughly familiar formation team will, by the power of
statisitcs, most likely end up with a tragically disastrous outcome.
Straight-ahead formation flight, especially when close-in, is demanding
enough when there are several aircraft involved. The complexity immediately
increases when you mix airframes of different horsepower and speed
capabilities. Start adding turns to the left and right, and you downright
INVITE disaster if every person in the flight is not "in sync".
I care too much for the people in the TCFG, their heirs, and the image of the
venerable aircraft itself to stand by and idly follow the very
well-intentioned and inspired threads about flying in a huge formation to the
Fly-in.
For those who have experience in formation flight, civil or military, careful
planning, briefing, and execution could turn out a really nice formation.
Again, it takes practice, practice with multiple aircraft, even with "loose"
formations.
I would suggest getting a copy of the T-34 Association's training films on
formation flight. Alternatively, Sporty's carries a good (albeit dry) tape
series on T-28 formation flight (at least I think it's still available).
Takes a strong cup of coffee to get through those tapes, but there's wisdom
in them there cassettes.
May everything we do "build up" the image of the Twin Commander . . . if you
fly one, you're an ambassador for the design whether you know it or not!
Best to all of you
Bill Peper
Crawford, Texas . . . home of Geo. W. Bush
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Woodley Earthlink <woodlema(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying formation sounds great |
I am going to make an assumption that everyone who flies has access to some spare
change.
If you want to fly formation I would suggest purchasing Elit Flight control systems,
and Microsoft Combat Flight sim, and Micsrosoft Flight sim 2001. You can
choose a realistc Cessna 182, and perform flights to and from over 3000 airports
around the country. Combine the 2, access the Online Microsoft site, and
form a squadron. Schedule a Dibs line, and set up a conferance call so everyone
in the flight group can talk with each other.
Then play Formation flight on the simulator on your home comuter systems. Since
he have, what appears to be quite a few military pilots they can teach using
the simlator the principals of flight fomationat a cheaper cost than the fuel
it would take to perform the training. Once the principals are learned, and
there is some semblace of proficiency, you might wanna try it in a Real Life formation.
Just a suggestion. You could also buy a nice flight control system from COMP-USA
for a few hundred dollars, less than the cost of a tank of fuel.
----- Original Message -----
From: w.bow
To: WilliamPeper(at)cs.com ; TCFG(at)listbot.com
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: Flying formation sounds great
AMEN!!!!
Bill Bow
----- Original Message -----
From: WilliamPeper(at)cs.com
To: TCFG(at)listbot.com
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 12:28 AM
Subject: Flying formation sounds great
Hi, y'all
It's really great to contemplate a "tight" formation flight up to Washington.
. . . I'm even trying to envision getting there myself. However, the talk
about formation flight in the last couple of days has caused me to stand up
and say a couple of things that I believe are of utmost importance:
I have flown quite a bit of "tight" formation in a North American T-28 Trojan
with 1400 HP, and the successful execution of it takes knowledge of formation
flight, exquisitely precise verbal and hand signal communication,
better-than-meticulous technique, and LOTS of practice, practice. Anything
less than a thoroughly familiar formation team will, by the power of
statisitcs, most likely end up with a tragically disastrous outcome.
Straight-ahead formation flight, especially when close-in, is demanding
enough when there are several aircraft involved. The complexity immediately
increases when you mix airframes of different horsepower and speed
capabilities. Start adding turns to the left and right, and you downright
INVITE disaster if every person in the flight is not "in sync".
I care too much for the people in the TCFG, their heirs, and the image of the
venerable aircraft itself to stand by and idly follow the very
well-intentioned and inspired threads about flying in a huge formation to the
Fly-in.
For those who have experience in formation flight, civil or military, careful
planning, briefing, and execution could turn out a really nice formation.
Again, it takes practice, practice with multiple aircraft, even with "loose"
formations.
I would suggest getting a copy of the T-34 Association's training films on
formation flight. Alternatively, Sporty's carries a good (albeit dry) tape
series on T-28 formation flight (at least I think it's still available).
Takes a strong cup of coffee to get through those tapes, but there's wisdom
in them there cassettes.
May everything we do "build up" the image of the Twin Commander . . . if you
fly one, you're an ambassador for the design whether you know it or not!
Best to all of you
Bill Peper
Crawford, Texas . . . home of Geo. W. Bush
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying formation sounds great |
Guys,
Us military people spent hours and hours and dollars and dollars of your
tax money learning how to do this. Flight sims, while a good (read safe)
method are no substitution for burning up a lot of fuel practicing.
Paul
Mark Woodley Earthlink wrote:
>
> I am going to make an assumption that everyone who flies has access
> to some spare change. If you want to fly formation I would suggest
> purchasing Elit Flight control systems, and Microsoft Combat Flight
> sim, and Micsrosoft Flight sim 2001. You can choose a realistc Cessna
> 182, and perform flights to and from over 3000 airports around the
> country. Combine the 2, access the Online Microsoft site, and form a
> squadron. Schedule a Dibs line, and set up a conferance call so
> everyone in the flight group can talk with each other. Then play
> Formation flight on the simulator on your home comuter systems. Since
> he have, what appears to be quite a few military pilots they can teach
> using the simlator the principals of flight fomationat a cheaper cost
> than the fuel it would take to perform the training. Once the
> principals are learned, and there is some semblace of proficiency, you
> might wanna try it in a Real Life formation. Just a suggestion. You
> could also buy a nice flight control system from COMP-USA for a few
> hundred dollars, less than the cost of a tank of fuel.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: w.bow
> To: WilliamPeper(at)cs.com ; TCFG(at)listbot.com
> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 10:10 AM
> Subject: Re: Flying formation sounds great
>
> Transfer balances to an APR as low as 2.99% Intro or 9.99%
> Ongoing.
> 24-hour online account management and Rewards Points for
> every
>
> AMEN!!!! Bill Bow
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: WilliamPeper(at)cs.com
> To: TCFG(at)listbot.com
> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 12:28 AM
> Subject: Flying formation sounds great
> Twin Commander Flight Group -
> http://www.aerocommander.com
>
>
> Hi, y'all
> It's really great to contemplate a "tight"
> formation flight up to Washington.
> . . . I'm even trying to envision getting there
> myself. However, the talk
> about formation flight in the last couple of days
> has caused me to stand up
> and say a couple of things that I believe are of
> utmost importance:
> I have flown quite a bit of "tight" formation in a
> North American T-28 Trojan
> with 1400 HP, and the successful execution of it
> takes knowledge of formation
> flight, exquisitely precise verbal and hand signal
> communication,
> better-than-meticulous technique, and LOTS of
> practice, practice. Anything
> less than a thoroughly familiar formation team
> will, by the power of
> statisitcs, most likely end up with a tragically
> disastrous outcome.
> Straight-ahead formation flight, especially when
> close-in, is demanding
> enough when there are several aircraft involved.
> The complexity immediately
> increases when you mix airframes of different
> horsepower and speed
> capabilities. Start adding turns to the left and
> right, and you downright
> INVITE disaster if every person in the flight is
> not "in sync".
> I care too much for the people in the TCFG, their
> heirs, and the image of the
> venerable aircraft itself to stand by and idly
> follow the very
> well-intentioned and inspired threads about flying
> in a huge formation to the
> Fly-in.
> For those who have experience in formation flight,
> civil or military, careful
> planning, briefing, and execution could turn out a
> really nice formation.
> Again, it takes practice, practice with multiple
> aircraft, even with "loose"
> formations.
> I would suggest getting a copy of the T-34
> Association's training films on
> formation flight. Alternatively, Sporty's carries
> a good (albeit dry) tape
> series on T-28 formation flight (at least I think
> it's still available).
> Takes a strong cup of coffee to get through those
> tapes, but there's wisdom
> in them there cassettes.
> May everything we do "build up" the image of the
> Twin Commander . . . if you
> fly one, you're an ambassador for the design
> whether you know it or not!
> Best to all of you
> Bill Peper
> Crawford, Texas . . . home of Geo. W. Bush
> To unsubscribe, write to
> TCFG-unsubscribe(at)listbot.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Furlong5(at)aol.com <Furlong5(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying formation sounds great |
In a message dated 5/4/2001 7:52:48 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
calnet01(at)gte.net writes:
> I am going to make an assumption that everyone who flies has access to some
> spare change
On the contrary --- if I didn't fly I might have some "spare change".
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randy Sharp <sharp.r(at)apple.com> |
| Subject: | Flying formation sounds great but safety is paramount |
I agree with the concerned members about formation safety.
There is no substitution for actual flight experience and thorough
training using approved
instructors.
Think about putting a cocky 23 year old kid in a T38 and group them
all together in one large flight...
The only way they survived was from a dedicated, regimented, disciplined,
flight program. Yes the USAF and other military organizations do have
simulators
but from my experience the feedback from the visuals and performance
characteristics
are not the same. (And these are MULTI-MILLION dollar full motion full
visual Sims)
Not a $2K PC.
If the program is done correctly it can be safe, but when done
incorrectly it can
be disastrous, and this of course strongly depends on the experience of
the pilots
in the formation and flight LEAD.
I really don't think anyone was suggesting taking zero time formation
pilots and flying
them at 5-10 ft echelon intervals. Hopefully that was not inferred from
the conversations.
As someone mentioned, we probably don't have the time to coordinate for a
large formation
nor tight spacing in the given time frame even WITH the experienced
formation pilots we have.
Maybe a brief introduction to the basics at a very loose interval while
enroute to OR would
be more appropriate. No more than two to a wing formation etc.
(practice is key but coordination is critical!)
If anyone is interested, I have enclosed a Formation inflight briefing
guide for example.
You will see there are LOTS of details that need to be discussed before
every formation flight.
(word document)
Randy
calnet01(at)gte.net said:
>Guys,
>Us military people spent hours and hours and dollars and dollars of your
>tax money learning how to do this. Flight sims, while a good (read safe)
>method are no substitution for burning up a lot of fuel practicing.
>Paul
>
>Mark Woodley Earthlink wrote:
>> I am going to make an assumption that everyone who flies has access
>> to some spare change. If you want to fly formation I would suggest
>> purchasing Elit Flight control systems, and Microsoft Combat Flight
>> sim, and Micsrosoft Flight sim 2001. You can choose a realistc Cessna
>> 182, and perform flights to and from over 3000 airports around the
>> country. Combine the 2, access the Online Microsoft site, and form a
>> squadron. Schedule a Dibs line, and set up a conferance call so
>> everyone in the flight group can talk with each other. Then play
>> Formation flight on the simulator on your home comuter systems. Since
>> he have, what appears to be quite a few military pilots they can teach
>> using the simlator the principals of flight fomationat a cheaper cost
>> than the fuel it would take to perform the training. Once the
>> principals are learned, and there is some semblace of proficiency, you
>> might wanna try it in a Real Life formation. Just a suggestion. You
>> could also buy a nice flight control system from COMP-USA for a few
>> hundred dollars, less than the cost of a tank of fuel.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: w.bow
>> To: WilliamPeper(at)cs.com ; TCFG(at)listbot.com
>> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 10:10 AM
>> Subject: Re: Flying formation sounds great
>>
>> AMEN!!!! Bill Bow
>>
>> Hi, y'all
>> It's really great to contemplate a "tight"
>> formation flight up to Washington.
>> . . . I'm even trying to envision getting there
>> myself. However, the talk
>> about formation flight in the last couple of days
>> has caused me to stand up
>> and say a couple of things that I believe are of
>> utmost importance:
>> I have flown quite a bit of "tight" formation in a
>> North American T-28 Trojan
>> with 1400 HP, and the successful execution of it
>> takes knowledge of formation
>> flight, exquisitely precise verbal and hand signal
>> communication,
>> better-than-meticulous technique, and LOTS of
>> practice, practice. Anything
>> less than a thoroughly familiar formation team
>> will, by the power of
>> statisitcs, most likely end up with a tragically
>> disastrous outcome.
>> Straight-ahead formation flight, especially when
>> close-in, is demanding
>> enough when there are several aircraft involved.
>> The complexity immediately
>> increases when you mix airframes of different
>> horsepower and speed
>> capabilities. Start adding turns to the left and
>> right, and you downright
>> INVITE disaster if every person in the flight is
>> not "in sync".
>> I care too much for the people in the TCFG, their
>> heirs, and the image of the
>> venerable aircraft itself to stand by and idly
>> follow the very
>> well-intentioned and inspired threads about flying
>> in a huge formation to the
>> Fly-in.
>> For those who have experience in formation flight,
>> civil or military, careful
>> planning, briefing, and execution could turn out a
>> really nice formation.
>> Again, it takes practice, practice with multiple
>> aircraft, even with "loose"
>> formations.
>> I would suggest getting a copy of the T-34
>> Association's training films on
>> formation flight. Alternatively, Sporty's carries
>> a good (albeit dry) tape
>> series on T-28 formation flight (at least I think
>> it's still available).
>> Takes a strong cup of coffee to get through those
>> tapes, but there's wisdom
>> in them there cassettes.
>> May everything we do "build up" the image of the
>> Twin Commander . . . if you
>> fly one, you're an ambassador for the design
>> whether you know it or not!
>> Best to all of you
>> Bill Peper
>> Crawford, Texas . . . home of Geo. W. Bush
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Woodley Earthlink <woodlema(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying formation sounds great but safety is paramount |
I never suggested PC sim training as a substitute. Only as a basis for
getting the basic principals involved in it. As with anything there are
principals (theories that need understood) involved. We all study things
before we actually practice them, or at least I hope we would.
I simply suggested a method by which you could easily learn the principals
prior to kicking the starter. I apologize for my pitiful suggestion.
**Mark goes into corner and shuts his mouth now**
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Sharp" <sharp.r(at)apple.com>
To:
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 12:40 PM
Subject: Flying formation sounds great but safety is paramount
>
>
> I agree with the concerned members about formation safety.
> There is no substitution for actual flight experience and thorough
> training using approved
> instructors.
>
> Think about putting a cocky 23 year old kid in a T38 and group them
> all together in one large flight...
> The only way they survived was from a dedicated, regimented, disciplined,
> flight program. Yes the USAF and other military organizations do have
> simulators
> but from my experience the feedback from the visuals and performance
> characteristics
> are not the same. (And these are MULTI-MILLION dollar full motion full
> visual Sims)
> Not a $2K PC.
>
> If the program is done correctly it can be safe, but when done
> incorrectly it can
> be disastrous, and this of course strongly depends on the experience of
> the pilots
> in the formation and flight LEAD.
>
> I really don't think anyone was suggesting taking zero time formation
> pilots and flying
> them at 5-10 ft echelon intervals. Hopefully that was not inferred from
> the conversations.
>
> As someone mentioned, we probably don't have the time to coordinate for a
> large formation
> nor tight spacing in the given time frame even WITH the experienced
> formation pilots we have.
>
> Maybe a brief introduction to the basics at a very loose interval while
> enroute to OR would
> be more appropriate. No more than two to a wing formation etc.
>
> (practice is key but coordination is critical!)
>
> If anyone is interested, I have enclosed a Formation inflight briefing
> guide for example.
> You will see there are LOTS of details that need to be discussed before
> every formation flight.
> (word document)
>
> Randy
>
> calnet01(at)gte.net said:
> >Guys,
> >Us military people spent hours and hours and dollars and dollars of your
> >tax money learning how to do this. Flight sims, while a good (read safe)
> >method are no substitution for burning up a lot of fuel practicing.
> >Paul
> >
> >Mark Woodley Earthlink wrote:
> >> I am going to make an assumption that everyone who flies has access
> >> to some spare change. If you want to fly formation I would suggest
> >> purchasing Elit Flight control systems, and Microsoft Combat Flight
> >> sim, and Micsrosoft Flight sim 2001. You can choose a realistc Cessna
> >> 182, and perform flights to and from over 3000 airports around the
> >> country. Combine the 2, access the Online Microsoft site, and form a
> >> squadron. Schedule a Dibs line, and set up a conferance call so
> >> everyone in the flight group can talk with each other. Then play
> >> Formation flight on the simulator on your home comuter systems. Since
> >> he have, what appears to be quite a few military pilots they can teach
> >> using the simlator the principals of flight fomationat a cheaper cost
> >> than the fuel it would take to perform the training. Once the
> >> principals are learned, and there is some semblace of proficiency, you
> >> might wanna try it in a Real Life formation. Just a suggestion. You
> >> could also buy a nice flight control system from COMP-USA for a few
> >> hundred dollars, less than the cost of a tank of fuel.
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: w.bow
> >> To: WilliamPeper(at)cs.com ; TCFG(at)listbot.com
> >> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 10:10 AM
> >> Subject: Re: Flying formation sounds great
> >>
> >> AMEN!!!! Bill Bow
> >>
> >> Hi, y'all
> >> It's really great to contemplate a "tight"
> >> formation flight up to Washington.
> >> . . . I'm even trying to envision getting there
> >> myself. However, the talk
> >> about formation flight in the last couple of days
> >> has caused me to stand up
> >> and say a couple of things that I believe are of
> >> utmost importance:
> >> I have flown quite a bit of "tight" formation in a
> >> North American T-28 Trojan
> >> with 1400 HP, and the successful execution of it
> >> takes knowledge of formation
> >> flight, exquisitely precise verbal and hand signal
> >> communication,
> >> better-than-meticulous technique, and LOTS of
> >> practice, practice. Anything
> >> less than a thoroughly familiar formation team
> >> will, by the power of
> >> statisitcs, most likely end up with a tragically
> >> disastrous outcome.
> >> Straight-ahead formation flight, especially when
> >> close-in, is demanding
> >> enough when there are several aircraft involved.
> >> The complexity immediately
> >> increases when you mix airframes of different
> >> horsepower and speed
> >> capabilities. Start adding turns to the left and
> >> right, and you downright
> >> INVITE disaster if every person in the flight is
> >> not "in sync".
> >> I care too much for the people in the TCFG, their
> >> heirs, and the image of the
> >> venerable aircraft itself to stand by and idly
> >> follow the very
> >> well-intentioned and inspired threads about flying
> >> in a huge formation to the
> >> Fly-in.
> >> For those who have experience in formation flight,
> >> civil or military, careful
> >> planning, briefing, and execution could turn out a
> >> really nice formation.
> >> Again, it takes practice, practice with multiple
> >> aircraft, even with "loose"
> >> formations.
> >> I would suggest getting a copy of the T-34
> >> Association's training films on
> >> formation flight. Alternatively, Sporty's carries
> >> a good (albeit dry) tape
> >> series on T-28 formation flight (at least I think
> >> it's still available).
> >> Takes a strong cup of coffee to get through those
> >> tapes, but there's wisdom
> >> in them there cassettes.
> >> May everything we do "build up" the image of the
> >> Twin Commander . . . if you
> >> fly one, you're an ambassador for the design
> >> whether you know it or not!
> >> Best to all of you
> >> Bill Peper
> >> Crawford, Texas . . . home of Geo. W. Bush
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randy Sharp <sharp.r(at)apple.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying formation sounds great but safety is paramount |
woodlema(at)earthlink.net said:
>I never suggested PC sim training as a substitute. Only as a basis for
>getting the basic principals involved in it. As with anything there are
>principals (theories that need understood) involved. We all study things
>before we actually practice them, or at least I hope we would.
That's why I mentioned the simulator WAS used in the military.
Believe me they DO use them a lot.
I just wanted to say that it confused me more in some cases than helped.
(some guys got really sick from the desync situation, must be from the
lowest bidder on the software program)
But it's always a good staring point.
(Saves JP4 too in the long run)
>I simply suggested a method by which you could easily learn the principals
>prior to kicking the starter. I apologize for my pitiful suggestion.
It's Not a bad suggestion, a sim is still a good idea to be used as a
supplement teaching aid. Especially If you have enough monitor screens!
I actually taught my son how to fly an F18 from a dual CPU 3 monitor sim
setup.
Albeit it wasn't like the real thing but it sure was fun.
(Except he kept shooting me down while in formation)
I consistently told him NOT to fire on his wingmen. (Kids)
>**Mark goes into corner and shuts his mouth now**
>Mark
Nah Keep those ideas and suggestions coming!
A suggestion not given is an Idea not learned?
(where did I hear that?)
RS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
First, my appologies for not keeping the web site updated very
well. I've been working almost around the clock for what seems
like forever and also trying to work in building a new house in
my spare moments.
Anyway, I've added several backed up pages on the Rennaisance 690
from Byerly. I've also decided to provide individually clickable
pics since for several weeks the pictures were very large.
In the latest update, she's back on her feet and ready for a test
flight and then on to the paint shop. (sure wish _I_ was the
customer!)
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flying formation sounds great but safety is paramount |
Guys,
I think that we could get away with several loose finger 4 formations. The
Bonanza guys do it for Oshkosh. it will take extreme concentration, gasoline
and " No RT Chatter !!!!"
We can set up the aircraft in finger 4 formations on the ground and then pick
out that rivet you will keep sighted on the entire flight !
Follow the leader.
Paul
Randy Sharp wrote:
>
>
> I agree with the concerned members about formation safety.
> There is no substitution for actual flight experience and thorough
> training using approved
> instructors.
>
> Think about putting a cocky 23 year old kid in a T38 and group them
> all together in one large flight...
> The only way they survived was from a dedicated, regimented, disciplined,
> flight program. Yes the USAF and other military organizations do have
> simulators
> but from my experience the feedback from the visuals and performance
> characteristics
> are not the same. (And these are MULTI-MILLION dollar full motion full
> visual Sims)
> Not a $2K PC.
>
> If the program is done correctly it can be safe, but when done
> incorrectly it can
> be disastrous, and this of course strongly depends on the experience of
> the pilots
> in the formation and flight LEAD.
>
> I really don't think anyone was suggesting taking zero time formation
> pilots and flying
> them at 5-10 ft echelon intervals. Hopefully that was not inferred from
> the conversations.
>
> As someone mentioned, we probably don't have the time to coordinate for a
> large formation
> nor tight spacing in the given time frame even WITH the experienced
> formation pilots we have.
>
> Maybe a brief introduction to the basics at a very loose interval while
> enroute to OR would
> be more appropriate. No more than two to a wing formation etc.
>
> (practice is key but coordination is critical!)
>
> If anyone is interested, I have enclosed a Formation inflight briefing
> guide for example.
> You will see there are LOTS of details that need to be discussed before
> every formation flight.
> (word document)
>
> Randy
>
> calnet01(at)gte.net said:
> >Guys,
> >Us military people spent hours and hours and dollars and dollars of your
> >tax money learning how to do this. Flight sims, while a good (read safe)
> >method are no substitution for burning up a lot of fuel practicing.
> >Paul
> >
> >Mark Woodley Earthlink wrote:
> >> I am going to make an assumption that everyone who flies has access
> >> to some spare change. If you want to fly formation I would suggest
> >> purchasing Elit Flight control systems, and Microsoft Combat Flight
> >> sim, and Micsrosoft Flight sim 2001. You can choose a realistc Cessna
> >> 182, and perform flights to and from over 3000 airports around the
> >> country. Combine the 2, access the Online Microsoft site, and form a
> >> squadron. Schedule a Dibs line, and set up a conferance call so
> >> everyone in the flight group can talk with each other. Then play
> >> Formation flight on the simulator on your home comuter systems. Since
> >> he have, what appears to be quite a few military pilots they can teach
> >> using the simlator the principals of flight fomationat a cheaper cost
> >> than the fuel it would take to perform the training. Once the
> >> principals are learned, and there is some semblace of proficiency, you
> >> might wanna try it in a Real Life formation. Just a suggestion. You
> >> could also buy a nice flight control system from COMP-USA for a few
> >> hundred dollars, less than the cost of a tank of fuel.
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: w.bow
> >> To: WilliamPeper(at)cs.com ; TCFG(at)listbot.com
> >> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 10:10 AM
> >> Subject: Re: Flying formation sounds great
> >>
> >> AMEN!!!! Bill Bow
> >>
> >> Hi, y'all
> >> It's really great to contemplate a "tight"
> >> formation flight up to Washington.
> >> . . . I'm even trying to envision getting there
> >> myself. However, the talk
> >> about formation flight in the last couple of days
> >> has caused me to stand up
> >> and say a couple of things that I believe are of
> >> utmost importance:
> >> I have flown quite a bit of "tight" formation in a
> >> North American T-28 Trojan
> >> with 1400 HP, and the successful execution of it
> >> takes knowledge of formation
> >> flight, exquisitely precise verbal and hand signal
> >> communication,
> >> better-than-meticulous technique, and LOTS of
> >> practice, practice. Anything
> >> less than a thoroughly familiar formation team
> >> will, by the power of
> >> statisitcs, most likely end up with a tragically
> >> disastrous outcome.
> >> Straight-ahead formation flight, especially when
> >> close-in, is demanding
> >> enough when there are several aircraft involved.
> >> The complexity immediately
> >> increases when you mix airframes of different
> >> horsepower and speed
> >> capabilities. Start adding turns to the left and
> >> right, and you downright
> >> INVITE disaster if every person in the flight is
> >> not "in sync".
> >> I care too much for the people in the TCFG, their
> >> heirs, and the image of the
> >> venerable aircraft itself to stand by and idly
> >> follow the very
> >> well-intentioned and inspired threads about flying
> >> in a huge formation to the
> >> Fly-in.
> >> For those who have experience in formation flight,
> >> civil or military, careful
> >> planning, briefing, and execution could turn out a
> >> really nice formation.
> >> Again, it takes practice, practice with multiple
> >> aircraft, even with "loose"
> >> formations.
> >> I would suggest getting a copy of the T-34
> >> Association's training films on
> >> formation flight. Alternatively, Sporty's carries
> >> a good (albeit dry) tape
> >> series on T-28 formation flight (at least I think
> >> it's still available).
> >> Takes a strong cup of coffee to get through those
> >> tapes, but there's wisdom
> >> in them there cassettes.
> >> May everything we do "build up" the image of the
> >> Twin Commander . . . if you
> >> fly one, you're an ambassador for the design
> >> whether you know it or not!
> >> Best to all of you
> >> Bill Peper
> >> Crawford, Texas . . . home of Geo. W. Bush
>
>
> Name: Formation Brief.doc
> Formation Brief.doc Type: Winword File (application/msword)
> Encoding: base64
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
I'm pretty bushed tonight so I thought I would give the answer early and
take the weekend off.
The answer to Homework question was Lycoming Additive LW-16702. This
additive is found in Aeroshell W100 Plus and 15W-50 oils. Also found in
Exxon Aviation Oil Elite 20W-50. I'm checking on the Phillips. I was
under the impression that it contained LW-16702 according to some old
documentation I had from Lycoming that recommended as the company's
choice for the GSO-480. If it does not I may switch to the Exxon Elite.
New's at 11:00.
Here' some information for your edification.
http://www.lycoming.textron.com/support/publications/index.html
http://www.tdatacorp.com/saib/ANE9922.htm
http://www.prime-mover.com/Engines/GArticles/Copper.html
http://www.carneyaviation.com/doc/breakin.htm
I happened to read the May AOPA pilot tonight and they stated that about
1/3 of the engines that come through Lycoming for rebuild will need new
camshafts if LW-16702 is not run (assuming from article).
LW-16702 is an antiscuffing additive. It helps to lubricate the camshaft
and hydraulic lifter bodies after engine startup.
You guys don't need any additional homework reading do you ?
NAH !
P51PAUL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MRPOULIN27(at)aol.com <MRPOULIN27(at)aol.com> |
Dear Commander Owners,
Thank you all for your previous input. Excuse the errors(if any). I've just finished
reading the last 50 pages of y'alls postings . . . "You guys are great!"
I'm going to make it to the Fly-In. Even if I have to bring my instructor along
w/me!
Some more background; Most of my flying will be 700-900 miles. Roughly 30 times
a year, w/ smaller trips of 200-300 miles, 10 times a year. Passengers will
be freinds, family, and biz associates(4-6max).
O.K Question 1: Performance of the 685?
2: Is the SPAR a problem(685)?
3: Why do I like the 680F(P) so much?
Gary Gadberry has a couple of the planes I'm looking at.(AIRCNTR.com) 89PK and
414C.
Let me know what you think. Again, Thanks for ALL the help!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Two more cents |
In a message dated 05/04/01 21:05:17 Pacific Daylight Time,
MRPOULIN27(at)aol.com writes:
> Gary Gadberry has a couple of the planes I'm looking at.(AIRCNTR.com) 89PK
> and 414C.
> Let me know what you think. Again, Thanks for ALL the help!
Mark,
I've given several check-outs in 680F(P)s and FLPs and set my clients up with
trend monitoring sheets, but don't know if they ever used them. Off the top
of my head, I can't recall accurate performance figures, only distorted
memories.
On the other hand, I used to fly N414C and if you'll give me a few days, I'll
go to my storage locker and look up my trend monitoring data from that
aircraft, circa 1997-98.
Q: Is the spar a problem on the 685?
A: No, not if its ultra sound inspection allows it to be a 36 month interval.
Even a 24 month interval is not that bad. It is an additional inspection
and although there is lots of experience doing it now, you still have to
budget that in, plus the inevitable fuel cell replacement here and there that
goes along with disturbing them for the inspection.
Q: Why do I like the 680F(P) so much?
A: Because you have good taste in airplanes. Of course, this shows with
both of your choices.
You haven't told us about your runways. If they're long enough and you are
really going to carry 6 pax for business, I'd consider the 685. As a biz
airplane, bigger is always better. It's also way quieter. You'll find the
pressurization on the 685 more reliable and easier to operate. (You have to
deal with vairiable RayJay output on the Mr. RPM 680F(P) and maintaining
cabin pressure during descent is an art.)
If your biz pax are really more of the "friends going along for a ride"
variety and if 6 of them is rare and they're genuine aviation enthusiasts,
the 680F(P) will be great.
As you can see, I'm starting to make a distinction between a personal
airplane and a biz airplane. The 685 was definitely a biz airplane from its
inception.
Few of my clients would stand up and admit that their Commander was for pure
fun. All but one or two claimed them as biz aircraft, so just between us
girls, let us know to what degree you're looking for a corporate airplane, or
are just going to write off your dream come true.
Uhhhh .... I don't think we have any IRS agents on this list, do we?
Keith S. Gordon
aka Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Oil 101 Answer and another Mystery Question |
In a message dated 05/04/01 20:59:55 Pacific Daylight Time, calnet01(at)gte.net
writes:
> You guys don't need any additional homework reading do you ?
Sure, P51Paul! Why quit now?
OK, class. What is it in automotive fuel (MoGas) that Lycoming really
doesn't like and is really why they won't allow it in the GO-435 or GO-480?
(In earlier days of the Twin Commander Flight Group I tried to push MoGas
through as an advocate to those owners and found out this factoid.)
Don't worry -- I won't keep you in suspense like Paul-O did. I'll only leave
you sleepless for a day or two.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Two more cents |
MRPOULIN27(at)aol.com wrote:
Again, Thanks for ALL the help!
>
> Mark
Mark,
I'm glad you're getting valuable info here!
Thought I'd a my two cents worth...
As one point of reference - the freight guys LOVE the 680FL(P)'s.
That says a lot for the overall abilities, reliability, and
functionality
of the model.
I know you're looking at a 720-powered bird. The Lycomng 720s are
outstanding engines. I've seen many run to TBO with no problems on
crop dusters (which certainly is "severe" duty).
You WILL need to study up on operation of the turbo systems if
they are of the manual type. Properly operated, they won't affect
the reliability or life of the engine at all. I ran my turbo'd
IO-540 2000 hrs and never had a jug off.
It is possible to destroy the engines due to boost mismanagment
though. There was an accident a few years ago in a 680FLP where
the new owner just shoved ALL the knobs in on his very first flight
and blew both engines catastrophicaly due to MASSIVE overboost.
Keith's previous info is, of course, dead on....
Let us know how your search work out!
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | N414C, AC-685 cruise data |
I'm ashamed to say I now have to apologize to all past girlfriends, wife, or
worse.
Three weeks ago I came across the flight logs for N414C and was going to
throw them way. Then I heard the collective voices off all those women
scolding me, "You may need that someday"; and so, kept it.
And here it is. A sample of flights I did in N414C, an AC-685. Low altitude
sprints and higher altitude cruise.
A few notes: The power setting I used is about 62-65% and fuel flows were
set to obtain a TIT (Turbine Inlet Temperature) that was 100 degrees rich of
peak. This TIT averaged 1550 / 1525 degrees.
The fuel flows are Left /Right engine, respectively.
Altitude 10,000' IOAT -10c KIAS: 163
DENALT: 8356 KTAS: 185
33" MAP 2600 RPM FUEL FLOW: 120/130 pph
Altitude: 11,000 IOAT -08c KIAS 153
DENALT: 10317 KTAS: 179
33" MAP 2600 RPM FUEL FLOW: 125/120 pph
Altitude: 17,000 IOAT: -14c KIAS 154
DENALT: 16049 KTAS: 197
33" MAP 2600 RPM FUEL FLOW: 125/120 pph
**75% power to break in newcylinder**
Altitude: 6000 IOAT: +01c KIAS 175
DENALT: 5147 KTAS: 189
35" MAP 2800 RPM FUEL FLOW: 165/160 pph set for cylinder head temp.
I never took this airplane into the flight levels because I never had trips
long enough to climb that high. This model is NOT a climber so I used the
mid to high teens for my trips. It does its best in the high teens, as you
can see.
Let me know if you have anymore questions about this particular AC-685, or
anything else.
Do we have any MR. RPM operators on the list for fuel flows and TAS? I'm
tempted to say the performance is close to the same as the AC-685, but really
wish I had hard data right now.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
Chlorine.
That's what's in automotive fuel (MoGas) that Lycoming is really squeamish
about.
The Lycoming tech reps never got around to discussing why there was chlorine
in MoGas, but it was verbally put to me that this is why Lycoming Just Says
No to MoGas, aside from the usual talk of vaporization, detonation, bla bla
bla, and why AC-520 and AC-560 operators couldn't get approval.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Another Day In Commanderland With Yoda |
Well Damn !
I finally got to get airborne in N680E around Noon today. took a couple
of friends along to meet Yoda.
Pointed her at Hayward and visited with Morris for 1.5 hours. He was
painting on some 500B nacelles out behind the hangar. Typical !
Tuned up the carbs. Fuel burns were 33.6 GPH up, at 12,500 feet, and
32.7 GPH at 13,500 homeward bound.
I started with empty tanks. Towed the airplane down to the fuel pits at
Camarillo and calibrated the tanks. That's great information to have. I
know what I've got now starting from zero (0). That's the way to go.
Loaded 222.1 gallons into the airplane.
Beautiful day !
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Two more cents |
Hey Keith and group,
I did some trend monitoring today in the 680E.
Here are the numbers. Do you they look OK to you guy ?. I'm worried
about fuel pressures.
Time 1330 Local
Location between Santa Maria and Paso Robles ( Outbound to Morris's)
Altitude 12,500 feet
OAT 32 F / 0 C
TAS - I think around 183 Knots
MP 30 / 30
RPM 2700 / 2700
CHT 190 / 185
Oil Temp 78 C / 75 C
Oil Pres 85 / 83
Fuel Pres 8.2 / 9.8
Carb Temp 10 C / 10 C
Return From Morris's
Time 1705 Local
Location King City
Alt 13,500
OAT 32 F / 0 C
TAS - 183 Knots
MP 31.5 / 31.5
RPM 2750 / 2750
CHT 199 / 189
Oil Temp 80 C / 79 C
Oil Pres 87.5 / 85
Fuel Pres 8.0 / 9.8
Carb Temp 12 C / 11 C
CloudCraft(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 05/04/01 21:05:17 Pacific Daylight Time,
> MRPOULIN27(at)aol.com writes:
>
>
>> Gary Gadberry has a couple of the planes I'm looking
>> at.(AIRCNTR.com) 89PK
>> and 414C.
>> Let me know what you think. Again, Thanks for ALL the help!
>
> Mark,
>
> I've given several check-outs in 680F(P)s and FLPs and set my clients
> up with
> trend monitoring sheets, but don't know if they ever used them. Off
> the top
> of my head, I can't recall accurate performance figures, only
> distorted
> memories.
>
> On the other hand, I used to fly N414C and if you'll give me a few
> days, I'll
> go to my storage locker and look up my trend monitoring data from that
>
> aircraft, circa 1997-98.
>
> Q: Is the spar a problem on the 685?
> A: No, not if its ultra sound inspection allows it to be a 36 month
> interval.
> Even a 24 month interval is not that bad. It is an additional
> inspection
> and although there is lots of experience doing it now, you still have
> to
> budget that in, plus the inevitable fuel cell replacement here and
> there that
> goes along with disturbing them for the inspection.
>
> Q: Why do I like the 680F(P) so much?
> A: Because you have good taste in airplanes. Of course, this shows
> with
> both of your choices.
>
> You haven't told us about your runways. If they're long enough and
> you are
> really going to carry 6 pax for business, I'd consider the 685. As a
> biz
> airplane, bigger is always better. It's also way quieter. You'll
> find the
> pressurization on the 685 more reliable and easier to operate. (You
> have to
> deal with vairiable RayJay output on the Mr. RPM 680F(P) and
> maintaining
> cabin pressure during descent is an art.)
>
> If your biz pax are really more of the "friends going along for a
> ride"
> variety and if 6 of them is rare and they're genuine aviation
> enthusiasts,
> the 680F(P) will be great.
>
> As you can see, I'm starting to make a distinction between a personal
> airplane and a biz airplane. The 685 was definitely a biz airplane
> from its
> inception.
>
> Few of my clients would stand up and admit that their Commander was
> for pure
> fun. All but one or two claimed them as biz aircraft, so just between
> us
> girls, let us know to what degree you're looking for a corporate
> airplane, or
> are just going to write off your dream come true.
>
> Uhhhh .... I don't think we have any IRS agents on this list, do we?
>
> Keith S. Gordon
> aka Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
Hey,
Have any of you guys done some flying in Baja.
I want to take a trip in the airplane and just lay around in a swimming
pool, get some sun and sip margarita's for a few days with some friends.
This will be a husband and wives trip.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Two more cents |
In a message dated 05/05/01 19:47:48 Pacific Daylight Time, calnet01(at)gte.net
writes:
> Here are the numbers. Do you they look OK to you guy ?. I'm worried about
> fuel pressures.
Those looked like good 680-E numbers to me!
As far as fuel pressures, I am suspect of all fuel pressure guages unless I
know they've been calibrated within one year. I only worry about fuel
pressure on the GSO-480 when I see the needles dancing around -- time for
boost pumps on during cruise. If it is chronic, time to check fuel filters.
Sounds like a perfect Commander day, complete with a trip to see Yoda. (Yes,
the Master painting something out behind the hangar is part of the charm!)
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Fuel Drain O'Rings |
Guys,
Does anyone know the size of the O'Ring for the fuel drains located in
the engine nacelles ?
You know - the ones by the landing gear.
If not I'll get a drawing from Geoffrey Pence on Monday.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JETPAUL(at)aol.com <JETPAUL(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: N414C, AC-685 cruise data |
Hey Commander Gordan!! How did you get TIT measurements on a non Turbine
airplane??
Isn't the GTSIO-520 on the 685?? I have not flown the commander, but the
C-421 with the same engine has only EGT gauges???
Don't get me wrong, I am with you all the way, and understood what you said:
<>
To paraphrase, (When you run a boosted engine you have to "COOL WITH FUEL!!")
Paul Reason
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Temperature Terminology |
In a message dated 05/06/01 07:04:37 Pacific Daylight Time, JET PAUL writes:
> Hey Commander Gordan!! How did you get TIT measurements on a non Turbine
> airplane??
Outstanding point, Paul!
When I first got in the AC-685 I was amused by the terminology "TIT" and I
wrote it off to Rockwell's marketing department who were the ones who
concieved that model as a stepping stone to the AC-690.
Then, some other airframer -- Piper or Mooney or someone, did the same thing.
Here's where the term comes from: You can measure the exhaust gas
temperature coming out of the cylinder, or, you can measure the temperature
where it enters the turbine housing of a turbocharger.
Semantics. It's where the probe goes.
(What's the difference between an oral and rectal thermometer? The taste.)
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Temperature Terminology |
Keith,
I confer you with an honorary Doctor of Medicine. Most medical students never grasp
the true difference between rectal and oral as you have.
----- Original Message -----
From: CloudCraft(at)aol.com
To: JETPAUL(at)aol.com
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 10:49 AM
Subject: Temperature Terminology
In a message dated 05/06/01 07:04:37 Pacific Daylight Time, JET PAUL writes:
Hey Commander Gordan!! How did you get TIT measurements on a non Turbine
airplane??
Outstanding point, Paul!
When I first got in the AC-685 I was amused by the terminology "TIT" and I
wrote it off to Rockwell's marketing department who were the ones who
concieved that model as a stepping stone to the AC-690.
Then, some other airframer -- Piper or Mooney or someone, did the same thing.
Here's where the term comes from: You can measure the exhaust gas
temperature coming out of the cylinder, or, you can measure the temperature
where it enters the turbine housing of a turbocharger.
Semantics. It's where the probe goes.
(What's the difference between an oral and rectal thermometer? The taste.)
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
Wow, an all time first - I'm going to take some exception
to a post from master Keith (okay, only a _little_ exception)
RE: EGTs and TITs. Although closely related, some aircraft
have instruments for both. The new digital, multi-channel
EGT/CHT gauges are also available with seperate TIT inputs.
The reason is that you may have max operating temperatures
for the hairdryers. During some operations, it may be
necessary to run a richer mixture (or leaner if you of the
LOP crowd) than you would normaly select just by EGT to keep
the TIT parameters acceptable.
On my turbo Viking, for example, the TITs actually run hotter
than the EGTs due to the continuation of burn in the exhaust
stacks. (I run ROP). The TIT probes are over 12 inches further
down the pipe than the EGT probes.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TITs and stuff |
In a message dated 05/06/01 13:17:25 Pacific Daylight Time,
chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com writes:
> Wow, an all time first - I'm going to take some exception to a post from
> master Keith (okay, only a _little_ exception)
I notice you won't debate the thermometer issue ....
You bring up a good point, Chirs and we don't disagree at all. I was only
attempting to answer why a Commander has a TIT guage and not an EGT, as the
Cessna 421 does.
By the way, JetPaul was wondering why TITs on were there when it's a "turbine
engine guage."
Actually, the turbine engines have ITT guages -- Interstage Turbine
Temperature. But then the Garrett dash 10 engine runs EGT as a limit
instead of ITT, so nothing is sacred.
Again, it's where the thermometer goes. Something in the engine area is
going to melt at a certain temperature and 'ya got to measure it somewhere.
Knowing that TIT runs higher than EGT was a revelation. I've never had both
points guaged. Thanks!
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TITs and stuff |
>I notice you won't debate the thermometer issue ....
I bow to your vastly greater experience :-)
>Again, it's where the thermometer goes. Something in the engine area is
>going to melt at a certain temperature and 'ya got to measure it somewhere.
That pretty much summs it up - yep. I'm guessing that it has a lot
to do with the exhaust plumbing and variations in engines. Probably
many setups can't overtemp the turbos without exceeding max EGT or CHTs
thus they don't need a TIT probe. Interesting topic anyway.
BTW, I've been studying lean-of-peak operation for some time now and
have come to my own conclusions based upon all available information.
If anyone really wants to know what I think on the topic, speak up...
otherwise I'll stay silent on the subject.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Andrew Foss <afoss(at)caw.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Baja California |
Baja is terrific! I'd recommend hotel Solidad, but there are plenty of great
places depending on your 'druthers, from Cabo if you want the resort city to
Mulege or San Fransicito if you want a sand beach strip and a quiet bungalo
on a deserted beach.
I'd highly recommend joing the Baja Bush Pilots association.
http://www.bajabush.com/
They have the most current information on airport conditions etc.
In fact, Jack McCormick the president flies a Shrike!
later,
andrew
Paul Odum wrote:
>
>
> Hey,
>
> Have any of you guys done some flying in Baja.
>
> I want to take a trip in the airplane and just lay around in a swimming
> pool, get some sun and sip margarita's for a few days with some friends.
> This will be a husband and wives trip.
>
> Paul
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TITs and stuff |
In a message dated 05/06/01 13:51:56 Pacific Daylight Time,
chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com writes:
> If anyone really wants to know what I think on the topic, speak up...
> otherwise I'll stay silent on the subject.
>
Speak!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tylor Hall <thall5(at)kc.rr.com> |
The best discussion I have seen is from GAMI.
www.gami.com <http://www.gami.com/>
I have been to ADA, OK and seen their engine test cell and it is amazing to
see what they can see going on inside of an engine while it is running.
It will make a believer of you. You will want to run out and install JPI
instruments and GAMI injectors to save 3 gallons per hour/ side in cruse.
Regards,
Tylor Hall
tylorh(at)sound.net
913-422-8869
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
>Speak!
WOOF!
Okay, you asked...
Some preliminaries...
LOP (lean of peak) engine operation came back into the light 3-ish
years ago when a company called GAMI (General Aviation Modifications
Inc)
began marketing special fuel injectors which supposedly "balanced" or
allowed all cylinders to run at exactly the same temps. Their claim to
fame is that you can successfully operate aircraft engines on the lean
side of peak EGT, thus substantially reducing fuel flow, running the
engine cooler, and making much cleaner exhaust.
I have been studying this topic since I first read articles and reports
on the GAMI system and I have now formed some opinions.
First, the folks at GAMI have worked hard to prove their theories
scientificly.
I'm impressed with their attitude and engineering and havn't heard a
single
negative comment about the company or the people. Their web site is
very convincing: http://www.gami.com/
Lycoming, on the other hand, strongly advises against LOP operation:
http://www.lycoming.textron.com/support/engine_operation_tips/SSP700A.pdf
Frankly, I find the years of history of reliable ROP operation MUCH more
convincing than Lycoming's technical refute. One can poke many holes in
their "official" documentation.
There are also some knowledgable folks who rave about GAMI and LOP
operation:
http://www.avweb.com/articles/pelperch/pelp0042.html
My point of view:
I do believe almost everything GAMI has to say on the subject. It is
clearly true that LOP will provide cooler temperatures, slower burn,
cleaner exhaust, and obviously lower fuel flow. Without re-hashing
many things which have already been written in many places, I'll jump
to the summary of why _I_ don't run LOP.
1) My last engine gave 2000 trouble-free hours running 75-100 ROP.
2) Although I agree that there is no chance of detonation below 75%
power and 50 LOP, GAMI suggests dialing up 75% power, then leaning
to LOP, then increasing MAP to make up for the lost power. I am not
convinced that my MAP and mixture controls are stable enough to maintain
exactly the correct setting over a long flight. If the mixture happens
to creep just a little rich, I could find myself at 85%+ and right
around peak EGT which _could_ definitly induct detonation (at least).
3) When running ROP, there is obviously NO oxygen remaining after
the combustion cycle. LOP, there is no fuel left, but there IS
excess oxygen. My fear is that this oxygen-rich, high-temp gas
could be damaging to the valves and exhaust system. (isn't that why
we weld with a "neutral" flame?). There is some scientific evidence
to back up this ascertation including metalurgical analysis of
damaged valves coming out of LOP-operated engines which suffered
surface fractures.
Anyway, that's my short summary and is MY opinion only. I think there
is a lot to be said for LOP operations - most new cars run that way
right? I'd say there is a good likelyhood that some engines can be
run LOP more successfully than others - depending on many variables in
the induction system as well as differing material issues (valve and
guide materials, exhaust components, etc). Let me see a fleet of
aircraft which all had uneventful TBO runs while operating LOP and I
might change my tune. Until then (and as long as I'm paying the bills),
I'll stick with what has worked for years-n-years.
Comments?
Chris Schuermann
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
HI KIDS........
All this talk about TITs, ROP, LOP and EGT sure is confusing!!
I am sure glad I just push the mixtures up to "Normal" and go-a-flyn!
Had a great weekend in Commanderland. Had some good old car buddies
from Idaho come up for the weekend and attended the big PDX swap meet. Found
a Hyd press gauge for the Commander for $5 (those car guys didn't have a clue
what it was) Also found three old ads for commanders to add to my collection.
Friday eve we grabed some fried rice and Col. Sanders and flew triple
2 out to the coast for dinner, sitting on the airport fence, what fun!
Then flew an air to air photo shoot late Sat eve. I don't know how
best to share these with you but the are spectacular. Jim Raeder, the guy
who will be at the flyin, shot them and, well, I will have to figure a way to
post some of them.
Today we flew up the coast to Tillomook to the air museum for lunch.
On the way home the Hobbs turned 100hr since the completion of the
restoration! Pretty cool.
All in all a great weekend in Commanderland!! Hope yours was great as
well. capt jimbob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ALPHIBET SOUP |
YOURTCFG(at)aol.com wrote:
> Had a great weekend in Commanderland.
Sounds like it! I ended up fighting a 30+kt X-wind and getting
bounced all over this weekend :( Some of my termites are pretty
bruised up!
> I don't know how best to share these with you but the are spectacular.
If you have a scanner, just email me the jpegs and I'll get 'em
online for ya. If not, I can scan and return. My new computer should
be arriving sometime this week (a 1.7Ghz P-4 with ALL the doo-dads).
Most likely it'll take me a full week to get everything working again
and all my stuff transfered over. (won't affect the web site thought .
that's running on another server).
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ALPHIBET SOUP |
Do you guys have the number for Sun West ?
Also - still need that o'ring number for the fuel drain in the nacelle. Do you
guys work on your airplanes or just drive them ?
Paul
YOURTCFG(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
bsp; Get all the corrosion taken
> care of.
>
> Barry Hancock wrote:
>
Paul,
> Got your address off of the ad you posted at aerocommander.com...
>
Sorry I missed you today. Morris was gracious and the trip was
>
> HI KIDS........
>
> All this talk about TITs, ROP, LOP and EGT sure is confusing!!
> I am sure glad I just push the mixtures up to "Normal" and go-a-flyn!
> Had a great weekend in Commanderland. Had some good old car buddies
> from Idaho come up for the weekend and attended the big PDX swap meet. Found
> a Hyd press gauge for the Commander for $5 (those car guys didn't have a clue
> what it was) Also found three old ads for commanders to add to my collection.
> Friday eve we grabed some fried rice and Col. Sanders and flew triple
> 2 out to the coast for dinner, sitting on the airport fence, what fun!
> Then flew an air to air photo shoot late Sat eve. I don't know how
> best to share these with you but the are spectacular. Jim Raeder, the guy
> who will be at the flyin, shot them and, well, I will have to figure a way to
> post some of them.
> Today we flew up the coast to Tillomook to the air museum for lunch.
> On the way home the Hobbs turned 100hr since the completion of the
> restoration! Pretty cool.
> All in all a great weekend in Commanderland!! Hope yours was great as
> well. capt jimbob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tylor Hall <tylorh(at)sound.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ALPHIBET SOUP |
http://www.sunwestaviation.com/
Phone: 520.889.8191 or 800.557.0149 Fax: 520.889.8192
Does this help??
Regards,
Tylor Hall
tylorh(at)sound.net
913-422-8869
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Odum [mailto:calnet01(at)gte.net]
Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 9:01 PM
To: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
Cc: TCFG(at)listbot.com
Subject: Re: ALPHIBET SOUP
Do you guys have the number for Sun West ?
Also - still need that o'ring number for the fuel drain in the nacelle. Do
you guys work on your airplanes or just drive them ?
Paul
YOURTCFG(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
bsp; Get all the corrosion taken
> care of.
>
> Barry Hancock wrote:
>
Paul,
> Got your address off of the ad you posted at aerocommander.com...
>
Sorry I missed you today. Morris was gracious and the trip was
>
> HI KIDS........
>
> All this talk about TITs, ROP, LOP and EGT sure is confusing!!
> I am sure glad I just push the mixtures up to "Normal" and go-a-flyn!
> Had a great weekend in Commanderland. Had some good old car buddies
> from Idaho come up for the weekend and attended the big PDX swap meet.
Found
> a Hyd press gauge for the Commander for $5 (those car guys didn't have a
clue
> what it was) Also found three old ads for commanders to add to my
collection.
> Friday eve we grabed some fried rice and Col. Sanders and flew
triple
> 2 out to the coast for dinner, sitting on the airport fence, what fun!
> Then flew an air to air photo shoot late Sat eve. I don't know how
> best to share these with you but the are spectacular. Jim Raeder, the guy
> who will be at the flyin, shot them and, well, I will have to figure a way
to
> post some of them.
> Today we flew up the coast to Tillomook to the air museum for lunch.
> On the way home the Hobbs turned 100hr since the completion of the
> restoration! Pretty cool.
> All in all a great weekend in Commanderland!! Hope yours was great
as
> well. capt jimbob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Air Cornditioning |
Do you guys know where I can line up a good used air conditioner for 80E
? My partner is interested in installing one but I can't afford to fork
over 1/2 of $14K for one.
Thanks.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ALPHIBET SOUP |
HI PAUL.....
Cant help with the "O" rings but suggest you just take them out
and match them up, or replace the whole drain, they are only about $20 from
Spruce.
Sun west can be reached at 800-557-0149 520-889-8191 fax 520-889-8192
jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 05/06/01 18:58:11 Pacific Daylight Time, calnet01(at)gte.net
writes:
> Do you guys have the number for Sun West ?
Here's what I have, hope it's still current
tel 800-557-0149
tel 320-889-8191
fax 320-889-8192
Sunwest Aviation
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James Crunkleton <crunk1(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Chris,
I too have read the articles about LOP. My trouble is that my engines won't run
LOP! Using a GEM1200, the engines get rough long before reaching LOP, so the
considerations are moot. I'm rather curious as to the performance of the GAMI
injectors, but not curious enough to spring for a set.
The 'Distinguished Gentleman' from Georgia
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James Crunkleton <crunk1(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Jim Bob,
I've got to agree with you. All those letters sure are confusing. That's why my
mixtures in the 520 are labeled "Loud" and "Quiet". ( Hint: Don't use "Quiet"
while airborne!)
Jim Crunkleton aka T.D.G.F.G.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | garyloff <n27kb(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Temperature Terminology |
----- Original Message -----
From: Milt Concannon
To: CloudCraft(at)aol.com ; JETPAUL(at)aol.com
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: Temperature Terminology
Keith,
I confer you with an honorary Doctor of Medicine. Most medical students never
grasp the true difference between rectal and oral as you have.
THAT'S SCARY, BUT BELIEVABLE!
----- Original Message -----
From: CloudCraft(at)aol.com
To: JETPAUL(at)aol.com
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 10:49 AM
Subject: Temperature Terminology
In a message dated 05/06/01 07:04:37 Pacific Daylight Time, JET PAUL writes:
Hey Commander Gordan!! How did you get TIT measurements on a non Turbine
airplane??
Outstanding point, Paul!
When I first got in the AC-685 I was amused by the terminology "TIT" and I
wrote it off to Rockwell's marketing department who were the ones who
concieved that model as a stepping stone to the AC-690.
Then, some other airframer -- Piper or Mooney or someone, did the same thing.
Here's where the term comes from: You can measure the exhaust gas
temperature coming out of the cylinder, or, you can measure the temperature
where it enters the turbine housing of a turbocharger.
Semantics. It's where the probe goes.
(What's the difference between an oral and rectal thermometer? The taste.)
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Andrew Foss <afoss(at)caw.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lean of Peak |
I did it, and put a few hundred hours on my 500B and the plugs and oil were beautiful
every change!
andrew
Tylor Hall wrote:
The best discussion I have seen is from GAMI.
www.gami.com
I have been to ADA, OK and seen their engine test cell and it is amazing to see
what they can see going on inside of an engine while it is running.
It will make a believer of you.You will want to run out and install JPI instruments
and GAMI injectors to save 3 gallons per hour/ side in cruse.
Regards,
Tylor Hall
tylorh(at)sound.net
913-422-8869
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Andrew Foss <afoss(at)caw.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LOP Operation |
One comment/correction, even ROP, there's still lot's of O2 left, maybe less,
but you we're not nearly efficient enough to burn it all, or even most of it.
andrew
Chris Schuermann wrote:
>
>
> >Speak!
>
> WOOF!
>
> Okay, you asked...
>
> Some preliminaries...
> LOP (lean of peak) engine operation came back into the light 3-ish
> years ago when a company called GAMI (General Aviation Modifications
> Inc)
> began marketing special fuel injectors which supposedly "balanced" or
> allowed all cylinders to run at exactly the same temps. Their claim to
> fame is that you can successfully operate aircraft engines on the lean
> side of peak EGT, thus substantially reducing fuel flow, running the
> engine cooler, and making much cleaner exhaust.
>
> I have been studying this topic since I first read articles and reports
> on the GAMI system and I have now formed some opinions.
> First, the folks at GAMI have worked hard to prove their theories
> scientificly.
> I'm impressed with their attitude and engineering and havn't heard a
> single
> negative comment about the company or the people. Their web site is
> very convincing: http://www.gami.com/
>
> Lycoming, on the other hand, strongly advises against LOP operation:
> http://www.lycoming.textron.com/support/engine_operation_tips/SSP700A.pdf
> Frankly, I find the years of history of reliable ROP operation MUCH more
> convincing than Lycoming's technical refute. One can poke many holes in
> their "official" documentation.
>
> There are also some knowledgable folks who rave about GAMI and LOP
> operation:
> http://www.avweb.com/articles/pelperch/pelp0042.html
>
> My point of view:
> I do believe almost everything GAMI has to say on the subject. It is
> clearly true that LOP will provide cooler temperatures, slower burn,
> cleaner exhaust, and obviously lower fuel flow. Without re-hashing
> many things which have already been written in many places, I'll jump
> to the summary of why _I_ don't run LOP.
>
> 1) My last engine gave 2000 trouble-free hours running 75-100 ROP.
>
> 2) Although I agree that there is no chance of detonation below 75%
> power and 50 LOP, GAMI suggests dialing up 75% power, then leaning
> to LOP, then increasing MAP to make up for the lost power. I am not
> convinced that my MAP and mixture controls are stable enough to maintain
> exactly the correct setting over a long flight. If the mixture happens
> to creep just a little rich, I could find myself at 85%+ and right
> around peak EGT which _could_ definitly induct detonation (at least).
>
> 3) When running ROP, there is obviously NO oxygen remaining after
> the combustion cycle. LOP, there is no fuel left, but there IS
> excess oxygen. My fear is that this oxygen-rich, high-temp gas
> could be damaging to the valves and exhaust system. (isn't that why
> we weld with a "neutral" flame?). There is some scientific evidence
> to back up this ascertation including metalurgical analysis of
> damaged valves coming out of LOP-operated engines which suffered
> surface fractures.
>
> Anyway, that's my short summary and is MY opinion only. I think there
> is a lot to be said for LOP operations - most new cars run that way
> right? I'd say there is a good likelyhood that some engines can be
> run LOP more successfully than others - depending on many variables in
> the induction system as well as differing material issues (valve and
> guide materials, exhaust components, etc). Let me see a fleet of
> aircraft which all had uneventful TBO runs while operating LOP and I
> might change my tune. Until then (and as long as I'm paying the bills),
> I'll stick with what has worked for years-n-years.
>
> Comments?
> Chris Schuermann
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randy Sharp <sharp.r(at)apple.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TITs and stuff |
CloudCraft(at)aol.com said:
>Actually, the turbine engines have ITT guages -- Interstage Turbine
Temperature.
>But then the Garrett dash 10 engine runs EGT as a limit
>instead of ITT, so nothing is sacred.
Good point Keith,
As mentioned, in some turbines you can't install a probe in areas where
you would like to monitor the temperature limits. (You'd fry the probe)
So they install them in a cooler area downstream and refer to them as a
derivative
of that location ie hence T3, T4, T4a etc.
Some USAF inventory engines are also labeled in generic terms such as
EGTs, TGTs, etc.
It appears every manufacturer has their own terminology and method for
thermal measurements.
TGT seems to be the most common, at least in the AF. (Turbine Gas
Temperature)
GE likes to use this term I believe.
RS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
Just added a couple of STUNNING pictures of Capt Jimbobs bird to
the web site. They're under the "Bathtub" section:
http://www.aerocommander.com/Pbathtub/3/index.html
They're a little large, but the quality was so good I didn't
want to shrink them any.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 05/08/01 00:05:47 Pacific Daylight Time,
chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com writes:
> Just added a couple of STUNNING pictures of Capt Jimbobs bird to
> the web site.
That's an appropriate description! Quality photos of a quality Commander.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Barry.Collman(at)airclaims.co.uk <Barry.Collman(at)airclaims.co.uk> |
Hi All!
That's my boy!
STUNNING pictures? An understatement old chap!! Really sharp images, great
stuff!!
Barry Collman
Chris Schuermann
cc:
Sent by: Subject: New pics
cschuerm(at)skymaster.c
2-tech.com
08/05/2001 01:23
Please respond to
chris
Just added a couple of STUNNING pictures of Capt Jimbobs bird to
the web site. They're under the "Bathtub" section:
http://www.aerocommander.com/Pbathtub/3/index.html
They're a little large, but the quality was so good I didn't
want to shrink them any.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
Thanks to Mr Bert Berry, we now have a bunch of new Commander ADs up
on the web site! Thanks Bert! I'd never seen some of these before.
Chris Schuermann
________________________________________________________________________________
WOW
Capt jimbobs plane is impressive.
Is that the captain himself at the helm?
Nice to know there is someone else in this world as portly as me
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Mixture controls and flaps |
Recently there were two items of discussion on tcfg that I have found service letters
on.
1 leaning pressure carbs
2 Flaps drifting down in flight
I have sent them to Chris for his download section on the website.
#1 says dont like chris and jimbob so emphatically stated and gives aerodesigns
reason why.
#2 is a bit surprising (at least to me) It says leave the flap lever in the full
up position all the time. I'sn't that a little tough on the actuators?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | w.bow <w.bow(at)att.net> |
WOW!!! That's pretty.
bilbo
----- Original Message -----
From: Milt Concannon
To: Twin Commander Flightgroup
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 1:12 PM
Subject: jimbo
WOW
Capt jimbobs plane is impressive.
Is that the captain himself at the helm?
Nice to know there is someone else in this world as portly as me
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 5/8/01 10:25:12 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
mdcmd@ms-online.com writes:
> Nice to know there is someone else in this world as portly as me
Be careful Milt, it's not nice to insult "The King" jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Burson <info(at)reaganfoundation.org> |
| Subject: | Reagan in His Own Hand |
Dear Nico:
I hope you have heard about a new book the Ronald Reagan
Presidential Foundation co-published with the Hoover
Institution called, Reagan, In His Own Hand: The Writings of
Ronald Reagan That Reveal His Revolutionary Vision for
America. I have attached for you an editorial I authored
about this book that ran in Sunday's Los Angeles Daily News.
Attached is the link to read the editorial.
If you would like to buy this book, please visit our web
site at http://www.reaganfoundation.org and receive 10%
off as a supporter of the Reagan Foundation. I welcome your
thoughts about the editorial, please e-mail me at:
info(at)reaganfoundation.org
Best regards,
Mark Burson
Executive Director
Mark Burson Editorial
---------------------
http://www.dailynews.com/opinions/articles/0501/06/vew03.asp
Editorial
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Allen Reed <allen_reed2(at)hotmail.com> |
Hey Gang,Since getting my ticket,I have been my butt ready to take my multi
check ride,Today while my instructor and i were taxing Lucille to the run-up
area she gave me one Hell of a shock.If you guyes will think back,we all had
a little chat about the emergency pump handle in the floor.Me being a
non-forreal pilot of a commander{Howl a loogy} I added my 1.5 cents worth
and said live it were it was put!Well,today proved me right.AS soon as I
passed the last turnout I gave Lucille a little nudge to the left,but what
does sheeee do you ask,Sheeee turns abbruptly to the right.Holding both feet
to the floor,my breath,and my roid with a death grip on the seat cushion
helped nothing!Things happened so quickly that I grabbed the throttles,and
the real pilot{clark} grabbed the mixtures,closing both seamed to piss
Lucille Off and shegave a few gutterly growls and pulled a little harder.At
the same instance this was happening we were both assesing the loss of
hydrolic pressure and he reached for the pump lever{right were I left it}and
gathered enough pressure to hit the breaks and stop,with no dammage to
lucille.So please take my previous advice and leave the pump handles were
they were meant to be. Best To All, BIG AL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Barry.Collman(at)airclaims.co.uk <Barry.Collman(at)airclaims.co.uk> |
Hey Guys,
Keep an eye open for June 7th. President Blair (anagram of B-liar!) has
called a General Election.
We'll show you all how it's done - COUNT ON IT !!!
Best Regards,
Barr (I'll-get-lynched-at-Hillsboro) Collman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
HI KIDS..........
For many years I was a decon on a small nondenominational
Christian church in Idaho. We always seemed to be out of money. We always
managed to pay the bills, but never had anything left over for other
important things (like fixing a leaky roof) We had enough people attending
each Sunday and the adult bible classes were full, but no money, they weren't
members.
I remember telling our pastor that he should preach a sermon
explaining the importance of joining our little group and tithing regularly.
He said that he was afraid to, because it might drive people away from
church, and they needed to be there. I didn't understand until now.
So, I am reluctantly sending a reminder to those who have requested an
application to join the TCFG, but have not retuned it. There are about
(over) twenty applications that have been sent (some have been requested and
sent twice) that have not been returned. I know that it is eassy to get busy
and forget, I let my AOPA dues lap recently, but it is important to get them
in. As I plan the flyin, the upfront expences will be high and it will help.
It is also important to continue the growth that we have recently
enjoyed. Since I took the reins of the group, we have seen more that 20%
growth in the membership and I think this is fantactic. But I have lofty
plans for this group and understand that a growing membrship is what will
make it happen.
Sorry to have to remind eveyone, and for those who have paid their
dues or become new members THANKS!!!! This group is healthy and growing and
I am proud to represent you. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MRPOULIN27(at)aol.com <MRPOULIN27(at)aol.com> |
Hello Guys(Gals),
Thanks again for all your help! I read the AD's in Chris's message #1161.
Does anyone know why every 600 series model is listed except 680F(P)? The AD
is 00-00-30(http://av-info.faa.gov/ad/CE00/00-02-30.html).
See ya!
Mark Poulin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
HI KIDS......
I just got back from a little flying in triple 2. Spent some
time with Lori and Allen at Aero Air working out some details. Here is a
little new news. Morris Kernick will be handling the SB223, 90D and 208A.
He also plans to take us through the Brakes/steering system from the first
press on the pedal to the last movement of the brakes, or steering. He will
bring the components that make it happen so we can really see how this works.
I thought I knew a lot about it but still keep finding new little tricks.
Yesterday I moved the adjustment on the pedals from the center hole to the
lower one and it made an amazing difference (for the better).
Kevin Mculugh will be handling flight ops for both the piston and
turbine models. He is the Pres of Aero Air and the company check airman. I
plan to have Ken Mollson do the turbine engine seminar (Yoda calls him for
help!)
Sweed Ralston will join us for lunch on Saturday. Sweed started Aero
Air and has spent his life with Aero Commanders and many other airplanes. He
is an amazing guy and fun to talk to. In his mid eighties, he still gets
into the office every day.
We have the back hangar reserved and it will really work great. There
will be room for one or two Commanders inside and 7-8 just outside the door.
Allen said he will arrange a nice discount on fuel for all of us. So,
things are coming together but man is there a lot to do!!
Had a great flight. Plan to fly to Idaho tomorrow eve or Saturday,
AM, Moms day.
Talked to a really nice guy this week who is considering buying a 720
(they only made 13 of them). He found the airplane in the Midwest and it
flys! (Sweed Ralston told me he bought the FIRST 720, that would be the
FIRST pressurized private airplane)
Well i think that is all, hope all is well in Commanderland. jb
jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: flyin update |
Kids,
An Paul Odum will "hopefully" be bringing a video, courtesy of John
Schwaner at Sacramento Sky Ranch on the care and feeding of the GSO-480
!
YOURTCFG(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> HI KIDS......
>
> I just got back from a little flying in triple 2. Spent
> some
> time with Lori and Allen at Aero Air working out some details. Here
> is a
> little new news. Morris Kernick will be handling the SB223, 90D and
> 208A.
> He also plans to take us through the Brakes/steering system from the
> first
> press on the pedal to the last movement of the brakes, or steering.
> He will
> bring the components that make it happen so we can really see how this
> works.
> I thought I knew a lot about it but still keep finding new little
> tricks.
> Yesterday I moved the adjustment on the pedals from the center hole to
> the
> lower one and it made an amazing difference (for the better).
> Kevin Mculugh will be handling flight ops for both the piston
> and
> turbine models. He is the Pres of Aero Air and the company check
> airman. I
> plan to have Ken Mollson do the turbine engine seminar (Yoda calls him
> for
> help!)
> Sweed Ralston will join us for lunch on Saturday. Sweed started
> Aero
> Air and has spent his life with Aero Commanders and many other
> airplanes. He
> is an amazing guy and fun to talk to. In his mid eighties, he still
> gets
> into the office every day.
> We have the back hangar reserved and it will really work great.
> There
> will be room for one or two Commanders inside and 7-8 just outside the
> door.
> Allen said he will arrange a nice discount on fuel for all of
> us. So,
> things are coming together but man is there a lot to do!!
> Had a great flight. Plan to fly to Idaho tomorrow eve or
> Saturday,
> AM, Moms day.
> Talked to a really nice guy this week who is considering buying
> a 720
> (they only made 13 of them). He found the airplane in the Midwest and
> it
> flys! (Sweed Ralston told me he bought the FIRST 720, that would be
> the
> FIRST pressurized private airplane)
> Well i think that is all, hope all is well in Commanderland. jb
>
> jb
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
HI KIDS........
I just had a couple of interesting conversations today. First
was with Sweed Ralston. He talked a bit abut the old days. He asked what
model Commander I flew and said that Ted Smith chose a 680E as his last
airplane and owned one at his passing. I was wondering if Barry might be
able to confirm that. What a great airplane that would be to find!
I then returned a call to a soon to be new member who lives in the SEA
area. He just took delivery of a 685 (he has also owned a 680FP and a 500 A &
B) from Eagle creek, (New Engines!) and said he had the privilege of flying
Ted's widow to an Aerostar event a few years ago. He said that she was very
nice and complemented him on his fine airplane but said "you know, Ted really
liked the Aero Commanders much better that these airplanes" Pretty cool! jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | garyloff <n27kb(at)erols.com> |
Everytime govt irritates me and I think it should stay out of our business I'm
reminded of the first Lears and certain pharmaceuticals.
G
----- Original Message -----
From: CloudCraft(at)aol.com
To: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 9:18 AM
Subject: Re: TED SMITH
In a message dated 05/10/01 22:19:07 Pacific Daylight Time, YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
writes:
He said that she was very
nice and complemented him on his fine airplane but said "you know, Ted
really
liked the Aero Commanders much better that these airplanes"
I always wondered about that. I came to the Commanders via the Aero Star and
I still love the 'Star dearly.
Ted Smith was a most remarkable man. The Aviation world was blessed with 5
genius/innovators who were lucky enough to exist at a time when they could
build what they wanted and were given latitude to experiment.
That just doesn't happen any more; if you're not Raytheon, Cessna, etc., it's
just too difficult to bring a new idea into production.
Those 5? Bill Lear, Kelly Johnston, Ed Swearingen, Dee Howard and Ted Smith.
(Not that I like all their products. Lear's 20 series jets are lawn darts
and Ed Swearingen concocted fast but squirrely airplanes.)
As all of you have figured out by now, I'm very opinionated about aircraft
and I've always told people shopping propeller twins to stay with Ted Smith
designs if they want safe and delightful aircraft to fly.
I have to admit that it really pleases me to know that Ted Smith owned a 680E
to the end!
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi again!
Apologies Jim, should have indeed added its current location.
Last I knew, it was in Colombia, registered as HK-2440 with Occidental de Aviacion
Ltda., in Cali, Valle de Cauca. They were, I believe, formerly known as Aerovias
Bueno Ltda (AEROBUENO). The Commander was sold to them on March 4th 1980.
They've also had a 690A, serial 11100, HK-2415 which was destroyed in an accident
September 7th 1991 and a 695A, serial 96009, HK-3271 which was possibly seized
in Haiti. Sold back to the USA in 1988, it was believed sold back in Colombia
under 'Operation Starwatch', through Eagle Air in Memphis, TN.
So, I wonder if the 680E really is still around?
Anyone fancy a trip to Cali?
Barry.
----- Original Message -----
From: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
To: barry.collman(at)air-britain.co.uk ; TCFG(at)listbot.com
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 12:09 AM
Subject: Re: Ted Smith
THANKS BARRY!! Where is it now?? jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
Barry just sent me the picture of Ted's bird. Its in the
"Temporary" directory on the Commander web site. Large file, but
VERY high quality. Thanks Barry!
Chris Schuermann
http://www.aerocommander.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | H. James McConnell <skipper10(at)peoplepc.com> |
I am International President of Pilots for Christ, Int'l. We have members in 40
states and 10 countries. We refer to ourselves as "The Lord's Airforce" and
fly evangilistic support missions, Mercy Missions and Disaster Relief, amoung
some of our activities. Our flights cover the US proper and extend down into
the Islands off Florida, and Central and South American. Up to now, most of
our missions have been handled will with four place singles and light twins.
The missions are getting longer and involve more weight than something like a
Seneca can handle. We are looking for a 6+ place aircraft that can handle flights
of up to 1000 miles. Our headquarters is in Northern Virginia and we are
not in a position to travel long distances in our search unless the candidate
is really exceptional. Contact me on email at skipper10(at)peoplepc.com or by
phone at 540 439 0940. Jim McConnell
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tylor Hall <tylorh(at)sound.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Commander |
It seem to be a slow Saturday Night and no one has answered you.
TCFG is an owners group to support Twin Commanders.
If you are looking for a recommendation, you should consider a 680FL. It is
the only light twin that will carry full fuel and 6 people. They are
popular with the freight haulers. There are 8 680FLs for sale in Omaha
just north of me. I live in Kansas City.
You must have seen the web site. www.aerocommander.com
<http://www.aerocommander.com/>
Lots of photos and information there.
Are you looking to buy an aircraft or looking for a donation of one???
How can we help Gods work?
Regards,
Tylor Hall
tylorh(at)sound.net
913-422-8869
-----Original Message-----
From: H. James McConnell [mailto:skipper10(at)peoplepc.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 6:35 PM
To: TCFG(at)listbot.com
Subject: Twin Commander
_____
_____
I am International President of Pilots for Christ, Int'l. We have members
in 40 states and 10 countries. We refer to ourselves as "The Lord's
Airforce" and fly evangilistic support missions, Mercy Missions and Disaster
Relief, amoung some of our activities. Our flights cover the US proper and
extend down into the Islands off Florida, and Central and South American.
Up to now, most of our missions have been handled will with four place
singles and light twins. The missions are getting longer and involve more
weight than something like a Seneca can handle. We are looking for a 6+
place aircraft that can handle flights of up to 1000 miles. Our
headquarters is in Northern Virginia and we are not in a position to travel
long distances in our search unless the candidate is really exceptional.
Contact me on email at skipper10(at)peoplepc.com
or by phone at 540 439 0940. Jim McConnell
_____
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Commander |
In a message dated 05/12/01 16:33:05 Pacific Daylight Time,
skipper10(at)peoplepc.com writes:
> We are looking for a 6+ place aircraft that can handle flights of up to 1000
> miles.
Mr. McConnell,
Both at the same time, meaning 6 pax for 1000 miles?
You may be getting into turbine equipment, if so.
Keith S. Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Gravel <pgravel(at)svgair.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Commander |
Cessna 402C $300,000 190knots We have two great Airplane fopr the Money.
or get a 690 for 600,000. crusie at 260knots
f[Paul Gravel] or -----Original Message-----
From: CloudCraft(at)aol.com [mailto:CloudCraft(at)aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 6:27 AM
To: skipper10(at)peoplepc.com; TCFG(at)listbot.com
Subject: Re: Twin Commander
--
--
In a message dated 05/12/01 16:33:05 Pacific Daylight Time,
skipper10(at)peoplepc.com writes:
We are looking for a 6+ place aircraft that can handle flights of up to
1000
miles.
Mr. McConnell,
Both at the same time, meaning 6 pax for 1000 miles?
You may be getting into turbine equipment, if so.
Keith S. Gordon
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Commander |
In a message dated 05/13/01 04:46:01 Pacific Daylight Time,
skipper10(at)peoplepc.com writes:
> No. Not at the same time but we need something better than 4 passengers and
> 500 miles as in the Sececa. W do some overwater flights of 500 miles and
> the Seneca without full fuel is a no-go.
OK, guys, let's help this fellow out.
About 2 weeks ago lots of you weighed in with your cruise speeds and fuel
burns.
Can you give your actual usefull load for the model you're flying and list
any "extraordinary" equipment or appliances that may make your Commander
heavier than the average?
As a bonus, if you could post your cruise airspeeds in knots and fuel burns
in pounds per hour, it would be a terrific service for this gentleman and
others lurking on the list who are evaluatin Commanders.
Not to have tunnell Commander vision, Paul Gravel's comment about the Cessna
402 is quite right. A STOL kit and/or VGs may be required to get it to
behave like a Commander on shorter runways, but SVG Air are short field /
island hopping experts and wouldn't use equipment that didn't work.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 5/14/01 2:21:40 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
CloudCraft(at)aol.com writes:
> They have a repair for the magnesium fuel sumps.
>
>
HI KIDS.........
REAL breaking news! TCAC has just released SB 230 and it WILL
become an AD note (see Flight Group News, DEC issue). I have a copy and it
REQUIRES the REPLACEMENT of ALL magnesium sumps (repaired or not). Right
now, as a SB,only 135 operators are required to make the upgrade, (Paul
Gravell just ordered 9K worth for his three Commanders in St. Vincent) but
all effected Commanders will soon be included when the AD is issued.
I am planing to meet with TCAC and the FAA soon. SL 379 required that
the sumps be removed and inspected. If they were OK, (or could be repaired)
they could remain in service. SB 230 is a continuation of this letter up the
food chain, but with an important change,ie the requirement for a replacement
sump, regardless of the condition of your old one.
I will keep my personal feelings to myself for the time being, except
to say that I feel this requirement, and the elimination of any alternative
repair, is unfair to owners. I hope to persuade TCAC and the FAA to allow
for a reasonable approach to this problem. For sure, not all sumps will be a
candidate for repair and need to be replaced, and equally certain is the fact
that a new aluminum sump will be a more perminate fix, and therefore appeal
to many owners. On the other hand, the old sumps have served for about 40
years, so a "no corrosion" or repaired sump should not pose any safety
concern.
I will keep you posted. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | THIS WEEKS ADVENTURE! |
HI KIDS.....
I just got back in town from a trip to Idaho for MOMs day.
Great trip up, 205 MPH, "sever clear" all the way at 11.5. Took my son and
grand daughter for a nice scenic flight and ice-cream.
Sunday eve Sue and I flew a dear friend and his new honey to a late
dinner Mcall Id, 30 minutes ea. way. Home after dark, super black, gorgeous
night!! Got a "sqeeeeker" Everybody had a great time.
Flew home this afternoon. Got away late, deteriorating weather, etc,
etc. Had a lousy ride home. Ice above 10K and the "low show" was awful.
Did the "scud run" thing, (its been awhile).
Tried direct and wasted 30 minutes, had to backtrack. Finally slipped
over the Blue Mts. following the interstate. Into the Columbia Gorge it got
even worse, (usually home free when you get here) At the "Bridge of the Gods"
(a town) went from bad to worse, but we got through. 17 miles from the home
drome, almost had to turn back again! (it was forcast to be 4500 overcast, 7,
in light rain)
Then, got to the airport in pouring rain and barley min vis and I
missed the VFR approach!! I haven't "gone around" in about 15 years, but I
did today! Oh well, some days are diamonds and some days are stone!!
Finally, made a terrible landing (with all my airport buddies watching) and
even missed my usual precision parking spot.
Man, was I glad to turn off the master switch today! Or did I?? Oh
no! Love capt jimbob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 5/14/01 7:14:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time, YOURTCFG writes:
> REAL breaking news! TCAC has just released SB 230 and it WILL become an AD
> note (see Flight Group News, DEC issue). I have a copy and it REQUIRES the
> REPLACEMENT of ALL magnesium sumps (repaired or not).
A CORRECTION, By ALL sumps I meant to sat ALL EFFECTED sumps. All of the
bathtub airplanes are exempt. Read the SB closely to make certain your
airplane is included. Sorry for the error. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bow <w.bow(at)att.net> |
It is reasonable to me. If we can rap Twinkies in a product that will last 500
years in our landfills, we should be able to "rap" our magnesium fuel sumps in
something that will last another 40 years. Which by the way, would probably
outlast the aluminum sump.
bilbo
----- Original Message -----
From: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
To: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com ; CloudCraft(at)aol.com ; w.bow(at)att.net
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 11:40 PM
Subject: Re: sump
In a message dated 5/14/01 7:14:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time, YOURTCFG writes:
REAL breaking news! TCAC has just released SB 230 and it WILL become an AD
note (see Flight Group News, DEC issue). I have a copy and it REQUIRES the
REPLACEMENT of ALL magnesium sumps (repaired or not).
A CORRECTION, By ALL sumps I meant to sat ALL EFFECTED sumps. All of the
bathtub airplanes are exempt. Read the SB closely to make certain your
airplane is included. Sorry for the error. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Required replacement of the sump |
In a message dated 05/14/01 19:14:10 Pacific Daylight Time, YOURTCFG writes:
>
> I will keep my personal feelings to myself for the time being, except
> to say that I feel this requirement, and the elimination of any alternative
> repair, is unfair to owners.
You are more of a diplomat that I am, Capt. Jimbob.
TCAC pulled the same stunt with SB-223 and that got swatted down after the
TCFG went to the FAA directorate and reminded them of the provisions of SBs
and ADs.
Alternative methods can be used to comply. (Note the Saunders Spar kit, and
Central Airlines' SB-223 inspection / fix program as two examples)
TCAC's error in the original SB-223 was saying that ONLY named Commander
Service Centers could perform the work. How totally untrue.
Not only is that not legal, but gives the appearance of "make work" bulletins
and thus fosters a bad image of the OEM.
I have not seen this service letter and I'm not up on the state of the art of
AD legal language, but I am glad you're meeting with the FAA. You may come
away with a different or modified interpretation.
I allow myself to be wrong on this topic today; I am using a historical
perspective, so excuse me if necessary.
... With my hand on the lid of Pandorra's Box ...
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | garyloff <n27kb(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Required replacement of the sump |
NOW WE WILL SEE IF THE LEOPARD HAD BEEN ABLE TO CHANGE IT'S SPOTS.
----- Original Message -----
From: CloudCraft(at)aol.com
To: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 1:43 AM
Subject: Required replacement of the sump
In a message dated 05/14/01 19:14:10 Pacific Daylight Time, YOURTCFG writes:
I will keep my personal feelings to myself for the time being, except
to say that I feel this requirement, and the elimination of any alternative
repair, is unfair to owners.
You are more of a diplomat that I am, Capt. Jimbob.
TCAC pulled the same stunt with SB-223 and that got swatted down after the
TCFG went to the FAA directorate and reminded them of the provisions of SBs
and ADs.
Alternative methods can be used to comply. (Note the Saunders Spar kit, and
Central Airlines' SB-223 inspection / fix program as two examples)
TCAC's error in the original SB-223 was saying that ONLY named Commander
Service Centers could perform the work. How totally untrue.
Not only is that not legal, but gives the appearance of "make work" bulletins
and thus fosters a bad image of the OEM.
I have not seen this service letter and I'm not up on the state of the art of
AD legal language, but I am glad you're meeting with the FAA. You may come
away with a different or modified interpretation.
I allow myself to be wrong on this topic today; I am using a historical
perspective, so excuse me if necessary.
... With my hand on the lid of Pandorra's Box ...
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | garyloff <n27kb(at)erols.com> |
In the past when given the opportunity TCAC has gone for the juglar and had done
everything in their preceived power to stick it to the owner.
We will now see if JBs good works have gone for naught. Here's an opportunity for
TCAC to stand up and say "Hey we don't really think you piston guys are "bottom
feeders" and if we had our way your airplanes would be red tagged.
Inviting us to what is little more than a showcase for their products was nice
(yes I know about all the seminars) but now is the time for something substantive
and not a repeat of the attempted wingstrap piracy.
Your move TCAC.
GL
----- Original Message -----
From: Bow
To: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com ; CloudCraft(at)aol. com
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 12:58 AM
Subject: Re: sump
It is reasonable to me. If we can rap Twinkies in a product that will last 500
years in our landfills, we should be able to "rap" our magnesium fuel sumps
in something that will last another 40 years. Which by the way, would probably
outlast the aluminum sump.
bilbo
----- Original Message -----
From: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
To: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com ; CloudCraft(at)aol.com ; w.bow(at)att.net
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 11:40 PM
Subject: Re: sump
In a message dated 5/14/01 7:14:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time, YOURTCFG writes:
REAL breaking news! TCAC has just released SB 230 and it WILL become an
AD
note (see Flight Group News, DEC issue). I have a copy and it REQUIRES the
REPLACEMENT of ALL magnesium sumps (repaired or not).
A CORRECTION, By ALL sumps I meant to sat ALL EFFECTED sumps. All of the
bathtub airplanes are exempt. Read the SB closely to make certain your
airplane is included. Sorry for the error. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Allen Reed <allen_reed2(at)hotmail.com> |
Hi Gang, If Lucilles' little stubby nose,DD engine nacells,and geared
engines are soooo outdated,then why is it that she,unlike all of your
pointed nosed,flat chested,under torquing,so quiet,super rides is she never
threatened by all of yall's little problems.Could it be that they had it
right the first time and could not leave well enough alone? BIG AL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
HI KIDS.....
Welcome another new member to the TCFG. David White is the
President of Continental Labs, in California. He is looking to buy his
second Commander. He has previously owned a 500 A colemill with all the
toys, including a Shrike nose, F door and gap seals.
Welcome David! capt jimbob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Furlong5(at)aol.com <Furlong5(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 5/15/01 9:27:38 AM Pacific Daylight Time, YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
writes:
<<
HI KIDS.....
Welcome another new member to the TCFG. David White is the
President of Continental Labs, in California. He is looking to buy his
second Commander. He has previously owned a 500 A colemill with all the
toys, including a Shrike nose, F door and gap seals.
Welcome David! capt jimbob
>>
That's what I'm buying. If I ever get it from Gadberry. I'd like to know
how David liked it. What to look for - specific problems etc.
Jim Furlong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bow <w.bow(at)att.net> |
Is there any information on the time line for this "soon to be" sump AD? What
is the time period for compliance? I'm looking at spending money NOW to get this
thing flying with a serviceable magnesium sump. I am wondering if I am buying
more "Lucent stock".
bilbo
----- Original Message -----
From: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
To: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com ; CloudCraft(at)aol.com ; w.bow(at)att.net
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 11:40 PM
Subject: Re: sump
In a message dated 5/14/01 7:14:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time, YOURTCFG writes:
REAL breaking news! TCAC has just released SB 230 and it WILL become an AD
note (see Flight Group News, DEC issue). I have a copy and it REQUIRES the
REPLACEMENT of ALL magnesium sumps (repaired or not).
A CORRECTION, By ALL sumps I meant to sat ALL EFFECTED sumps. All of the
bathtub airplanes are exempt. Read the SB closely to make certain your
airplane is included. Sorry for the error. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
Thought I'd bounce this off y'all and see if I can get some substantial
information to base a decision on.
I'm looking at a 500S. Without getting into a discussion over
attributes
of various models, can anyone provide some further insight into the
spar issue? This is a very clean, low time airframe with a "clean
spar". What has the service history on this spar design been? ie: if
it's clean now will I absolutely eventually have problems, or not?
If I purchase this aircraft, I'll likely have it for a long time and
I have not heard any real FACTS regarding how many aircraft have had
problems or about aircraft that have developed problems after having
been given a clean bill of health previously. If the spar suddenly
fails an inspection, what's the true repair cost?
I know we've got a few TCAC folks here. I would sincerely appreciate
some feedback on this topic. I'm sure you guys have the info that would
tell me what to expect over the next 10 years if I purchase this a/c
Thanks,
Chris Schuermann
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
HI BILL........
First, there is no absolute guarantee that it will ever become
an AD. Not all SBs make all the way up the food chain. However, I feel very
strongly that this one will make for a couple of reasons including the fact
that the FAA is pretty touchy about fuel related problems (flight 800).
To answer your question regarding compliance, the SB requires that an
inspection be performed on the sump and filter bodies for seepage prior to
each flight. If seepage is found, they must (and I really mean MUST) be
replaced before further flight. They are to be replaced within 100 hrs or at
the next annual inspection.
Guys, this is the real deal. These sumps really do fail and need to
be taken seriously. The sumps should never have been produced from Magnesium
but they were. The good news is that TCAC has tooled up and has the parts in
stock to keep you flying. Jeff C. at Commander is checking now to see if
only the sump can be changed or if the complete "kit" will be required. The
way I read the SB is that all the parts will need to be changed. The sump
only, is about $1400, the "kit" is About $2200, (- 10% from Aero Air)
depending on the model.
There are some "O" rings and gaskets, etc., that will need changed as
well and I don't know how much labor will cost, but they probably wont jump
out of the box and onto your airplane, so $3000 is probably not that far off.
If you already have the sump off, It might pay to bolt a new one on,
just to be sure?? I will contact John Bosch at Commander Aero today for his
thoughts and let you know later. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bow <w.bow(at)att.net> |
JB
Thank you, however these dollar amounts do not resemble the numbers I got from
Down Town Airpark. Their figures are $3469.03 less 10% for the sump only.
bilbo
----- Original Message -----
From: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
To: w.bow(at)att.net ; YOURTCFG(at)aol.com ; CloudCraft(at)aol.com
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: sump
HI BILL........
First, there is no absolute guarantee that it will ever become
an AD. Not all SBs make all the way up the food chain. However, I feel very
strongly that this one will make for a couple of reasons including the fact
that the FAA is pretty touchy about fuel related problems (flight 800).
To answer your question regarding compliance, the SB requires that an
inspection be performed on the sump and filter bodies for seepage prior to
each flight. If seepage is found, they must (and I really mean MUST) be
replaced before further flight. They are to be replaced within 100 hrs or at
the next annual inspection.
Guys, this is the real deal. These sumps really do fail and need to
be taken seriously. The sumps should never have been produced from Magnesium
but they were. The good news is that TCAC has tooled up and has the parts in
stock to keep you flying. Jeff C. at Commander is checking now to see if
only the sump can be changed or if the complete "kit" will be required. The
way I read the SB is that all the parts will need to be changed. The sump
only, is about $1400, the "kit" is About $2200, (- 10% from Aero Air)
depending on the model.
There are some "O" rings and gaskets, etc., that will need changed as
well and I don't know how much labor will cost, but they probably wont jump
out of the box and onto your airplane, so $3000 is probably not that far off.
If you already have the sump off, It might pay to bolt a new one on,
just to be sure?? I will contact John Bosch at Commander Aero today for his
thoughts and let you know later. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
HI KIDS.......
Let me start by saying that while I and this group my not always
agree with TCAC, it is refreshing to have a seat at the table. As I have
said in the past, they are listening. This interaction with the factory
simply would not have been possible a few short months ago and it is a good
thing. I have had a couple of calls from Jeff Cousins today and need to
clarify a couple of things.
Bill's quote of $3480 appears to be correct. The SB calls for the
replacement of not just the sump but the fuel filter bodies as well, hence
the $3480 total. This price my vary a bit depending on the type of fuel
pumps you have. This would not include installation but should include all
necessary "O"rings, gaskets etc. It seems that the best guess on labor time
is 10-15 hr., just an estimate, you can do the math with your shop rate.
Looks a lot like $5000 to me.
Second, I was mistaken when I posted that 135 operators would be
required to comply. According to Jeff, they are required to comply with SBs
on accessories, propellers and engines but not on the airframe?? I don't
write the rules, I just pass the info along.
I want to thank all of you who have sent personal emails and phone
calls. I understand the importance of the issue. I want to thank Jeff for
his quick reply as well. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bow <w.bow(at)att.net> |
JB
I was hoping YOU were going to be correct.
Now that the price has escalated somewhat isn't it reasonable that if a serviceable
magnesium sump can be coated with a finish to prevent corrosion that it would
be safe and economically feasible?
bilbo
----- Original Message -----
From: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
To: TCFG(at)listbot.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 7:17 PM
Subject: SUMPS
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
HI KIDS.......
Let me start by saying that while I and this group my not always
agree with TCAC, it is refreshing to have a seat at the table. As I have
said in the past, they are listening. This interaction with the factory
simply would not have been possible a few short months ago and it is a good
thing. I have had a couple of calls from Jeff Cousins today and need to
clarify a couple of things.
Bill's quote of $3480 appears to be correct. The SB calls for the
replacement of not just the sump but the fuel filter bodies as well, hence
the $3480 total. This price my vary a bit depending on the type of fuel
pumps you have. This would not include installation but should include all
necessary "O"rings, gaskets etc. It seems that the best guess on labor time
is 10-15 hr., just an estimate, you can do the math with your shop rate.
Looks a lot like $5000 to me.
Second, I was mistaken when I posted that 135 operators would be
required to comply. According to Jeff, they are required to comply with SBs
on accessories, propellers and engines but not on the airframe?? I don't
write the rules, I just pass the info along.
I want to thank all of you who have sent personal emails and phone
calls. I understand the importance of the issue. I want to thank Jeff for
his quick reply as well. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
Chris,
Your question about the 500-S spar future is best answered by Miss Cleo or
any of the other 900-Psychic Hotlines.
Here is some stuff to ponder. As always, I promise you some fact, some of it
anecdotal, some of it urban legend.
I think Sir Barry may be able to come up with specific serial numbers that
were taken out of service due to failed spars.
When I tried to interview TCAC a few years ago on this very subject, I was
given the phrase over and over again, "We've elected not to answer that
question at this time."
Getting the spar inspection done is not hard science. It's an ultrasound NDT
process and things like adhesive or other ... gick ... can appear as
corrosion. The opinion of the NDT specialist plays big into this inspection.
There are many stories of failed spars, and brokers who bought the doomed
Commander, only to have it re-emerge as a "36 month spar." Bad NDT or bad
spar-karma? These airplanes have gone through subsequent inspections and no
stories of them dropping off the registry.
If a spar is clean now, chances are it will remain so. In the early days of
this AD, there was no valid trend in which spars were failing. One of the
first ones was in Phoenix or some other desert area where corrosion would not
be expected.
As Matt Hagan of Eagle Creek and I discussed back then, it seems to be as
random as how the guy spraying the zinc chromate on that day was swinging his
arm.
As with a cancer diagnosis, if you get a failed spar, get a second opinion.
Next, (and TCAC will really hate me this week) as far as the thinking deep
within the FAA goes, TCAC kit does not eliminate the problem. There is still
dissimilar metal contact.
Yes, yes, they know there's epoxy and mylar and other high tech stuff, but
they still consider it dissimilar metal contact. Will that force the NDT
inspection of all Commanders, even those with factory spar kits, in the
future? Miss Cleo thinks so.
Crystal balling: Boeing's efforts in developing NDT processes for the Aging
Aircraft Program may trickle down to us. It's not impossible to imagine a
non-invasive scan of the spar in the future.
If you had a clean spar, over 10 years, you'd look at it 3 times. I'd gamble
on that.
If you want the sure-fire fix, go with the Saunders spar mod. It's aluminum,
so no dissimilar metal contact, strengthens the spar and reduces fatigue as
well. But you'll be flying your old Citation Jet by the time you have to
deal with that.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
HI KIDS..........
If you haven't taken time to visit our web site lately, I
encourage you to do so. Chris has found and posted some GREAT old Commander
ads. I have a small collection of ads that will begin to appear in the
newsletter, but Chris has put together a fun collection of "how it was".
I hope you will take a few minutes and check it out. THANKS CHRIS!!
jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dennis Polito W6DEN <cloudhopper(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Sumps and my .02 worth. |
Here we go again, yet another big bucks AD in the works. Sure, safety is everyone's
main concern, especially me, the person sitting next to 156 gallons of fuel,
but I kinda get the feeling that the folks at TCFG would just as soon see
the piston operators disappear. Not enough money to be made on those measly 100LL
machines for their liking. Let's see now, how many of the fleet can we retire
with this latest assault? Is that the real goal? Hey TCFG folks, how about
showing some support here? Or is it your goal to profit from the failure of
your product?
I for one would like to know what the failure rate (in numbers) has been on the
sump. Can the good folks at TCFG supply us with the data?
Surely there must be an alternative method of insuring the integrity of the sumps
that pass visual and NDT inspection, perhaps a coating of some sort. Too easy
a concept though, it will never work. I inspected my sump during a recent
fuel cell replacement and I did not see even a hint of corrosion. Who wants to
scrap a perfectly serviceable component?
My preflight sniff o meter is ever vigilant and I am happy to report the absence
of errant misplaced 100LL in the baggage compartment. Ditto with the filter
housings.
Now is TCFG's opportunity to show support.
Hartzell did, they showed tremendous support. Remember the 50% off list regarding
the prop replacement program? Bet that a deeply discounted sump and filter
kit would get a higher and quicker compliance percentage throughout the fleet!
You bet!
JB: Thanks ever so much for all of the effort and time that you have given to the
group, I for one appreciate it! I am looking forward to meeting you on 24 August,
that is if my aircraft is still airworthy at that time.
Dennis Polito
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harry Merritt <avtec(at)scci.net> |
Capt JB
It took 3 Hrs to Defuel, Then removed the sump, with the pumps mounted
in the bottom. 1 HRS to remove the necel drain sumps, @- orings and 4
Gaskets
I will give you the information on the best epoxy paint to use,
Crazy Harry
Bow wrote:
>
> 1. Fill in the brief application
> 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
> 3. Get rates as low as 2.99% Intro or 9.99% Ongoing APR and no annual
> fee!
> JBI was hoping YOU were going to be correct. Now that the price has
> escalated somewhat isn't it reasonable that if a serviceable magnesium
> sump can be coated with a finish to prevent corrosion that it would be
> safe and economically feasible? bilbo
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
> To: TCFG(at)listbot.com
> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 7:17 PM
> Subject: SUMPS
>
> 1. Fill in the brief application
> 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
> 3. Get rates as low as 2.99% Intro or 9.99% Ongoing APR and
>
> HI KIDS.......
>
> Let me start by saying that while I and this
> group my not always
> agree with TCAC, it is refreshing to have a seat at the
> table. As I have
> said in the past, they are listening. This interaction with
> the factory
> simply would not have been possible a few short months ago
> and it is a good
> thing. I have had a couple of calls from Jeff Cousins today
> and need to
> clarify a couple of things.
> Bill's quote of $3480 appears to be correct. The SB
> calls for the
> replacement of not just the sump but the fuel filter bodies
> as well, hence
> the $3480 total. This price my vary a bit depending on the
> type of fuel
> pumps you have. This would not include installation but
> should include all
> necessary "O"rings, gaskets etc. It seems that the best
> guess on labor time
> is 10-15 hr., just an estimate, you can do the math with
> your shop rate.
> Looks a lot like $5000 to me.
> Second, I was mistaken when I posted that 135
> operators would be
> required to comply. According to Jeff, they are required to
> comply with SBs
> on accessories, propellers and engines but not on the
> airframe?? I don't
> write the rules, I just pass the info along.
> I want to thank all of you who have sent personal
> emails and phone
> calls. I understand the importance of the issue. I want to
> thank Jeff for
> his quick reply as well. jb
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
YOURTCFG(at)aol.com wrote:
> If you haven't taken time to visit our web site lately, I
> encourage you to do so. Chris has found and posted some GREAT old
> Commander
> ads.
Thanks for the kind words JB. I also have to make sure to credit Bert
(one of our members) for contributing a bunch of new ads. Many of
the pictures on the site have come from other Commander enthusiasts.
Please feel free to submit anything you think will be of interest
to others on the site!
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | res00rbl <res00rbl(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sumps and my .02 worth. |
Hey Dennis, I think you meant to aim your frustration at TCAC, not
TCFG, the piston Twin Commander association. Jimbo (not Jimbob)
You wrote:
Here we go again, yet another big bucks AD in the works. Sure, safety is
everyone's main concern, especially me, the person sitting next to 156
gallons of fuel, but I kinda get the feeling that the folks at TCFG would
just as soon see the piston operators disappear. Not enough money to be made
on those measly 100LL machines for their liking. Let's see now, how many of
the fleet can we retire with this latest assault? Is that the real goal? Hey
TCFG folks, how about showing some support here? Or is it your goal to
profit from the failure of your product?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
Sir Barry,
I have an odd specimen for you. At least, it's nothing I've ever come across.
Today I was treated to a tour of the North Las Vegas Airport by Mike Macosko
who is on this list and learning about Commanders with us.
He brought me to one N29DE, a 680-T with it's engines yanked off, struts and
tires flat and in general tragic condition.
Here's what I need your help with; the data plate gives the following:
s/n 1699-76
Type certificate 2-A-4
Production Certificate 203
engine type TPE 331-43
Mfgrs. Ass'n data plate #315623
All standard stuff, eh what?
Now, below this is a small data plate that says:
Type cert 2-A-4
Production Cert. 203
engine: IGSO-540 B1A
Do I take this to mean this was built as a 680FLP and run back through the
production line to emerge as a 680T? Never seen this.
Next, and not so odd, is N1187D, with the s/n 680-626-252. I stood looking
thinkng I was looking at a long wing, but Mike paced it off and it's about
44'. "Pre E" style gear and flap handles, hand hydraulic pump, so it's not
an E, but wouldn't the data plate say 680-S in this case, or is the "S" not
standard nomenclature?
Thanks for your help, old boy.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: What is this plane worth? |
> Nico van Niekerk wrote:
> He wants about $100K.
> Do you think this could be a good buy?
Something doesn't sound quite right to me Nico. If the airplane is
truely as nice as it sounds, I'd expect it to bring considerably more.
If you don't want it, I'd sure like to take a look! :-)
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jjleon(at)att.net <Jjleon(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: What is this plane worth? |
If you believe the Bluebook (Spring 2001 edition) which
sometimes tends to overestimate these values for
Commanders....
The 680FL earliest models - 1963 S/N 1244 to 1375 show a
retail of $121 k and wholesale of $100-106 k. The last
ones built in 1969, S/N 1765-1852, show a retail of 140
k and a wholesale of 116-123. This is based on the
usual: mid-times engines (with 1200 TBO - so you have a
plus there which the Bluebook says to add $30.20 per
hour for low engine times), no damage history, good
compression, excellent P&I, 6 month annual, etc. There
is one important footnote which says "prices do not
reflect spar cap mod, costing $70,000 to 105,000." I am
not an expert on the mechanical side of things, but it
looks like you better research the spar status on this
bird.
BTW I am a Commander fan with a lot of hours on old 500
series birds, but I am treading carefully before I buy
one because of these spar problems which can make a
potential investment worth its weight in beer cans....
To me it sounds like the current or previous owner spent
big bucks on a major avionics upgrade, so if I were you
I would be a little curious as to why he wants out the
airplane now.
You may have a true bargain there, but as they
say, "buyer beware". Invest in a thorough pre-buy
inspection. Good luck.
Juan Leon
PS please drop me a line and let me know what happens.
It is always helpful to have actual sales prices.
Thanks.
>
>
> Chief,
>
> I can get a 680FL with IGSO-540-B1A (380 HP) WITH L 208 / R 588, props 27 Snew
L
> & R. Total time 2,800! Interior and exterior 10/10
>
> Panel kit:
> New century 2000 auto pilot with altitude hold and pre select. Coupled to GPS.
> New Sandals digital RMI.
> New Garmin GNS430 GPS, NAV, COM.
> New Garmin 340 audio panal.
> New JPIntenational engine monitoring system.
> Shadin Digiflo fuel computer
> 1 x King KDX 150 color radar.
> 1 x King KY 97 com
> 1 x King KT76A Transponder with mode c encoding altimeter.
> 1 x King KN 52 Nav with glide slop.
> 2 x King K___ digital A.D.F
>
> The owner says that there is no need for spar inspections or mods. Is this right
> on the 680FL?
>
> He wants about $100K.
> Do you think this could be a good buy? An educated guess would be appreciated.
> Thanks
> Nico
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Odd Specimen |
In a message dated 05/17/01 01:30:39 Pacific Daylight Time,
Barry.Collman(at)airclaims.co.uk writes:
> The aircraft is
> registered to a Gene Forsthofel, of Palm Coast, Florida and has been so
> since February 1989, but the new FAA database on the web indicates mail is
> undeliverable.
>
Exellent, Sir Barry.
I have the current name and local phone number of who pays the tie-down fee,
so will call and realy what I find out.
I didn't see the Experimental legend -- either it's far too faded to see now,
or, I just wasn't observant enough.
Of course, I was terribly distracted by two rods that were stuck through the
nose area, seeming to go to or through the nose wheel strut. One entered via
an inspection panel on the left side, the other through a drilled hold.
Mike and I just couln't figure it out and I left well enough alone in
accordance with Aviation Prime Directive #1: "If you don't know what it
does, don't touch it."
N29DE does indeed have turbine engine nacelles and it looks like the engines
were removed with some degree of care - - lines capped off -- as if it was to
have engines put back on.
Will follow up and let you know. Thanks for the info! I hope at least one
of those steady streams of lunches will be on me next time.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Woodley Earthlink <woodlema(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sumps and my .02 worth. |
I know I personally took advantage of the 50% Hartzell deal. After evaluating
the cost of overhaul, vs. new, I had a $3,000.00 difference in cost. I opted
for the new, since overhauled is always overhauled. But New, has a much better
ring to it, and a higher resale value in the long haul.
I have not seen the "NEW" AD yet on the sump, but I imaging it is not gonna be
cheap.
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: garyloff
To: Dennis Polito W6DEN ; TCFG(at)listbot.com
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 5:48 AM
Subject: Re: Sumps and my .02 worth.
LATER WHEN I GET INTO THE OFFICE I WILL PUBLISH WHAT THE FAA HAS SAID ABOUT
SBs AND ADs. TO PARAPHRASE THEY ARE THE ONLY ONES WITH THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE
THESE. LIGHT AC MANUFACTURERS DONNOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY PERIOD. LIKE I SAID I'LL
SUPPLY THE DIRECT QUOTE AND REFERENCE.
JUST BECAUSE SOME MANUFACTURER DECIDES THEY HAVE FOUND A NEW PROFIT CENTER IT
IS NOT SO AND THE FAA IS PUTTING A STOP TO IT.
CHANCES ARE IF YOU SHIP HAS FLOWN ON A REGULAR BASIS AND WATER DIDN'T GET A CHANCE
TO SIT FOR MONTHS YOU'RE PROPABLY IN GOOD SHAPE.
THE LAST TIME TCAC MADE SUCH A NAKED GRAB FOR YOU MONEY WAS OVER THE WING STRAP
AD. THEY CLAIMED TO BE THE ONLY ONES QUALIFIED AND PETITIONED THE FAA TO HAVE
ONLY THEIR SHOPS APPROVED TO DO THE WORK.
HAD THIS BEEN THE CASE MY LESS THAN 3K EVENT WOULD HAVE BEEN OVER 12.
----- Original Message -----
From: Dennis Polito W6DEN
To: TCFG(at)listbot.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 2:47 AM
Subject: Sumps and my .02 worth.
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
Here we go again, yet another big bucks AD in the works. Sure, safety is everyone's
main concern, especially me, the person sitting next to 156 gallons of
fuel, but I kinda get the feeling that the folks at TCFG would just as soon
see the piston operators disappear. Not enough money to be made on those measly
100LL machines for their liking. Let's see now, how many of the fleet can we
retire with this latest assault? Is that the real goal? Hey TCFG folks, how
about showing some support here? Or is it your goal to profit from the failure
of your product?
I for one would like to know what the failure rate (in numbers) has been on
the sump. Can the good folks at TCFG supply us with the data?
Surely there must be an alternative method of insuring the integrity of the
sumps that pass visual and NDT inspection, perhaps a coating of some sort. Too
easy a concept though, it will never work. I inspected my sump during a recent
fuel cell replacement and I did not see even a hint of corrosion. Who wants
to scrap a perfectly serviceable component?
My preflight sniff o meter is ever vigilant and I am happy to report the absence
of errant misplaced 100LL in the baggage compartment. Ditto with the filter
housings.
Now is TCFG's opportunity to show support.
Hartzell did, they showed tremendous support. Remember the 50% off list regarding
the prop replacement program? Bet that a deeply discounted sump and filter
kit would get a higher and quicker compliance percentage throughout the fleet!
You bet!
JB: Thanks ever so much for all of the effort and time that you have given
to the group, I for one appreciate it! I am looking forward to meeting you on
24 August, that is if my aircraft is still airworthy at that time.
Dennis Polito
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Furlong5(at)aol.com <Furlong5(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sumps and my .02 worth. |
In a message dated 5/17/01 8:03:57 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
woodlema(at)earthlink.net writes:
<<
I have not seen the "NEW" AD yet on the sump, but I imaging it is not gonna
be cheap.
Mark >>
My understanding from Gary Gadberry is that the sump issue is a service
letter and he does not believe it will become an AD but just an inspection.
Is he right or wrong.
Jim Furlong
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bow <w.bow(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sumps and my .02 worth. |
At this point it is a Service Letter ONLY. JB says it is to be a Service
Bulletin soon. Running the progression on out COULD have it as an AD in the
future.
bilbo
----- Original Message -----
From: <Furlong5(at)aol.com>
To: ;
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: Sumps and my .02 worth.
>
>
> In a message dated 5/17/01 8:03:57 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> woodlema(at)earthlink.net writes:
>
> <<
> I have not seen the "NEW" AD yet on the sump, but I imaging it is not
gonna
> be cheap.
>
> Mark >>
>
>
> My understanding from Gary Gadberry is that the sump issue is a service
> letter and he does not believe it will become an AD but just an
inspection.
>
> Is he right or wrong.
>
> Jim Furlong
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Cool Hand Luke flies a Commander |
==============================
The following is an open letter to TCAC from myself as an individual and NOT
the expressed opinion of the TCFG, its members or affiliates.
"What we have here is a failure to communicate."
The recent volley about the sump replacement bulletin demonstrates yet
another link in a chain of "sneak attacks" that cause the piston
owner/operators in particular, to believe that they are not receiving support
from you as the OEM.
The reason this kind of sentiment exists is because you lob these grenades
from your bunker and then don't emerge again until it's Twin Commander
University time and you can troop about the Grand Renaissance program.
Other OEMs do a better job of keeping their fleets informed of continuing
airworthiness concerns and may, from time to time, solicit input, suggestions
and solutions from outside vendors and service providers.
Of course, the topic of outside vendors and service providers has always been
a contentious one, hasn't it?
You have the means to improve your public relations. This forum is open to
you as it is to me (much to your dismay, I'm sure) and everyone else.
You have a web site. You publish a magazine. Have Mark Twombly write a
breezy-yet0-compelling article to explain what you're doing and why. Have
Maintenance and Operators' meetings in different regions around the country
and inform your customers of what's on your mind. Work with the TCFG!
When the TCFG was originally formed in 1994 by an outside public relations
firm at your behest, it was to do exactly the above. There was a rift in
philosophy between you and that P.R. firm and you retreated from the scene.
The current TCFG is a grass roots owners' club; you have no investment in it,
except for the fact that it's attracted a growing percentage of your
customers.
Your concerns about this fleet are legitimate -- obviously right now you have
a concern about fuel sumps on certain models of Commanders. You also have a
resentful customer base, which you could have minimized.
Even politicians take the time to communicate with their constituents. I
realize you're not running for reelction, but it wouldn't hurt to keep your
owner/operators in the loop.
Remember that this letter is from me, not the TCFG, and take it as my
priceless offer of free advice.
Regards,
Keith S. Gordon
former TCFG coordinator
former Flight Group News editor
former Twin Commander training provider
current and long-standing TCAC black-list member
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: What is this plane worth? |
Nico van Niekerk wrote:
>
> Chris,
> Thanks for the response. I would like to buy this plane but am a little
> worried about hidden costs
Nico,
The engines are IGSO-540 Lycomings. They're generally a pretty durable
motor, but definitly can be torn up quickly due to improper operation.
They are supercharged and work pretty hard. I understand that it's not
unusual to "top" a few jugs before getting to TBO. Definitly a great
airplane, it it will cost some money to keep her in top shape.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sumps and my .02 worth. |
HI JIM.....
This action started as a service letter (379) I reported this in
the DEC FGN (remember, you heard it here first) It has now become a
(mandatory) service bulletin, SB230A. This is the usual progression of an
action unless the FAA feels there is immediate danger. From here, who
knows?? It is my personal belief that it almost certainly will become an AD.
I plan to meet with the TCAC and the FAA soon regarding this action.
I have had a couple of contacts with Jeff Cousins at TCAC, and he also
believes it will become an AD and Commander has already invested in an
inventory of new parts in anticipation of this.
There are several options open now. First, I will meet with the Feds
and discuss the possibility of an optional means of compliance. As a group,
we own or care for a large number of piston commanders and we may be able to
use our "field experience" to defer the SB from becoming an AD. Next, we can
lobby that the factory authorized inspection procedure should be adequate to
comply. While I would agree that Magnesium is the wrong material to have
made the sumps from, Most have lasted a long time and may still be
serviceable. An inspection would determine this.
Lastly, it has been mentioned that Hartzell offered a substantial discount to
owners. This seems like a reasonable approach assuming the sumps really
require replacement. I will propose this to TCAC when we meet.
I want to say that I have checked with a few Commander Gurus and it is
widely agreed that sump corrosion is a problem but no one has any hard data.
I don't know how many replacement sumps TCAC has sold over the last 5 years,
and there seems to be no information on the results of SL379. For sure, some
airplanes have been found with unsafe sumps, others have been checked and no
corrosion was found.
If you have any sump history, please email me personally with that
information. Thanks jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: What is this plane worth? |
HI NICO......
If that airplane is "as represented" it is a steal!!! Call
Morris Kernick for a pre buy inspection, it will be the best Commander $$ you
will spend. GOOD LUCK!! jb
Morris Kernick Commander Services, 510-783-3041
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
I've had my nose against the grindstone all this week and havn't even
had a chance to catch up on the list email, but I wanted to thank
everyone who took the time to answer some of my questions regarding the
500S wing spar. Jeff Cousins (TCAC) wrote me an extensive letter which
does somewhat put my mind at ease. The summary was that if the airplane
has passed several inspections with no problems, that the likelyhood of
finding a problem in the near future is probably quite low. Evidently
there were about 10 percent of the Shrikes that required immediate spar
replacement when first insepcted, and once those were weeded out that
things are pretty stable now.
Thanks again,
Chris Schuermann
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Vormbaum <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cool Hand Luke flies a Commander |
Bravo, Keith.
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: CloudCraft(at)aol.com
To: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 8:58 AM
Subject: Cool Hand Luke flies a Commander
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
==============================
The following is an open letter to TCAC from myself as an individual and NOT
the expressed opinion of the TCFG, its members or affiliates.
"What we have here is a failure to communicate."
The recent volley about the sump replacement bulletin demonstrates yet
another link in a chain of "sneak attacks" that cause the piston
owner/operators in particular, to believe that they are not receiving support
from you as the OEM.
The reason this kind of sentiment exists is because you lob these grenades
from your bunker and then don't emerge again until it's Twin Commander
University time and you can troop about the Grand Renaissance program.
Other OEMs do a better job of keeping their fleets informed of continuing
airworthiness concerns and may, from time to time, solicit input, suggestions
and solutions from outside vendors and service providers.
Of course, the topic of outside vendors and service providers has always been
a contentious one, hasn't it?
You have the means to improve your public relations. This forum is open to
you as it is to me (much to your dismay, I'm sure) and everyone else.
You have a web site. You publish a magazine. Have Mark Twombly write a
breezy-yet0-compelling article to explain what you're doing and why. Have
Maintenance and Operators' meetings in different regions around the country
and inform your customers of what's on your mind. Work with the TCFG!
When the TCFG was originally formed in 1994 by an outside public relations
firm at your behest, it was to do exactly the above. There was a rift in
philosophy between you and that P.R. firm and you retreated from the scene.
The current TCFG is a grass roots owners' club; you have no investment in it,
except for the fact that it's attracted a growing percentage of your
customers.
Your concerns about this fleet are legitimate -- obviously right now you have
a concern about fuel sumps on certain models of Commanders. You also have a
resentful customer base, which you could have minimized.
Even politicians take the time to communicate with their constituents. I
realize you're not running for reelction, but it wouldn't hurt to keep your
owner/operators in the loop.
Remember that this letter is from me, not the TCFG, and take it as my
priceless offer of free advice.
Regards,
Keith S. Gordon
former TCFG coordinator
former Flight Group News editor
former Twin Commander training provider
current and long-standing TCAC black-list member
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bow <w.bow(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cool Hand Luke flies a Commander |
Well I had no idea this(Sump Monster) was going to raise anybody's blood pressure
but mine.
As of today we,really Harry Merritt & Co., are going to continue with a sump from
Yoda that will be coated to preserve it for use in the twenty second century.
My only hope, in addition to safely fixing the problem, is the investment
will cover any future AD plans buy any group.
After that quote, Luke you should duck. I think that's when the gunfire broke
out and Luke was dropped. Luke,I mean Keith, I'd be glade to join you on the
Black List. They can't get my Birthday.
bilbo
----- Original Message -----
From: John Vormbaum
To: TCFG(at)listbot.com
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: Cool Hand Luke flies a Commander
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
Bravo, Keith.
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: CloudCraft(at)aol.com
To: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 8:58 AM
Subject: Cool Hand Luke flies a Commander
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
==============================
The following is an open letter to TCAC from myself as an individual and NOT
the expressed opinion of the TCFG, its members or affiliates.
"What we have here is a failure to communicate."
The recent volley about the sump replacement bulletin demonstrates yet
another link in a chain of "sneak attacks" that cause the piston
owner/operators in particular, to believe that they are not receiving support
from you as the OEM.
The reason this kind of sentiment exists is because you lob these grenades
from your bunker and then don't emerge again until it's Twin Commander
University time and you can troop about the Grand Renaissance program.
Other OEMs do a better job of keeping their fleets informed of continuing
airworthiness concerns and may, from time to time, solicit input, suggestions
and solutions from outside vendors and service providers.
Of course, the topic of outside vendors and service providers has always been
a contentious one, hasn't it?
You have the means to improve your public relations. This forum is open to
you as it is to me (much to your dismay, I'm sure) and everyone else.
You have a web site. You publish a magazine. Have Mark Twombly write a
breezy-yet0-compelling article to explain what you're doing and why. Have
Maintenance and Operators' meetings in different regions around the country
and inform your customers of what's on your mind. Work with the TCFG!
When the TCFG was originally formed in 1994 by an outside public relations
firm at your behest, it was to do exactly the above. There was a rift in
philosophy between you and that P.R. firm and you retreated from the scene.
The current TCFG is a grass roots owners' club; you have no investment in it,
except for the fact that it's attracted a growing percentage of your
customers.
Your concerns about this fleet are legitimate -- obviously right now you have
a concern about fuel sumps on certain models of Commanders. You also have
a
resentful customer base, which you could have minimized.
Even politicians take the time to communicate with their constituents. I
realize you're not running for reelction, but it wouldn't hurt to keep your
owner/operators in the loop.
Remember that this letter is from me, not the TCFG, and take it as my
priceless offer of free advice.
Regards,
Keith S. Gordon
former TCFG coordinator
former Flight Group News editor
former Twin Commander training provider
current and long-standing TCAC black-list member
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Lycoming Exhaust Studs |
Owners,
I just came into 250 brand new Lycoming exhaust studs. Please let me
know if you need any. I know Yoda and the engine shops sell them for
around $6.00 apiece. I'll let them go for $2.50 each. You guys can pay
the shipping.
I know there are alot of lousy studs out there. I just did all of mine.
They are GREAT now. Also put on the good exhaust gaskets.
Keep the shiny side down !
Signing the paperwork today (hopefully) with my new partner, and TCFG
member (hopefully), Barry Hancock.
If Barry shows up on the list wish a a great TCFG welcome !
I'll be expecting your orders.
Thanks guys !
Paul
P51PAUL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard E. Brown, Sr. <pawpaw(at)dallas.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lycoming Exhaust Studs |
Gee Paul, thought I was the only exhausted stud out there.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Odum" <calnet01(at)gte.net>
To: ;
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 3:47 PM
Subject: Lycoming Exhaust Studs
>
>
> Owners,
>
> I just came into 250 brand new Lycoming exhaust studs. Please let me
> know if you need any. I know Yoda and the engine shops sell them for
> around $6.00 apiece. I'll let them go for $2.50 each. You guys can pay
> the shipping.
>
> I know there are alot of lousy studs out there. I just did all of mine.
> They are GREAT now. Also put on the good exhaust gaskets.
>
> Keep the shiny side down !
>
> Signing the paperwork today (hopefully) with my new partner, and TCFG
> member (hopefully), Barry Hancock.
>
> If Barry shows up on the list wish a a great TCFG welcome !
>
> I'll be expecting your orders.
>
> Thanks guys !
>
> Paul
> P51PAUL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tylor Hall <tylorh(at)sound.net> |
| Subject: | Re: What is this plane worth? |
Nico,
I had a conversation with Jay Armstrong at Suburban Air in Omaha, NB. They
run 8- 680FLs.
They get 1500 hours out of their engines. They do not exceed 40 MP on take
off and climb. They cruse at 30 MP and 2400 RPM (engine RPM, props are
much slower turning). Doing this they can haul 2000 lbs for 500 miles at
165KTS.
They can get an engine overhauled for under $30,000 with new cylinders from
Central Cylinder in Omaha. Central Cylinder owns the rights to the Simmons
Fuel Controller used on that airframe and are the only place in the world to
get one fixed.
They are selling all 8 aircraft. Asking price is $116,000 and up with only
cargo interior.
http://www.subair.com/
The seller should be able to show you what they paid to have the new
avionics installed.
The autopilot is $11,000+, the 430 are $9,000+, and the JPI is super at
about $7,500. I am just guessing they put $25,000+ into it.
You would be buying the basic airplane at $75,000, which is a lot of
airplane for the dollar.
Major item to watch out for is the fuel cells and any thing rubber. If one
fuel cells needs replacement, you need to replace all of them and all the
fuel lines. Look into the logs to see when they were replaced. Any thing
out of rubber that is 40 years old needs to be replaced. It is age not time
on the airframe. Also check out the hoses in the engine and landing gear
for age. Most hoses only last 10 years. Again it is age not time on
airframe.
The MR RPM engine swap is available to the IO-720s with 400 HP.
If the 680FL fits your mission, it is a good buy.
This is only one opinion and it is your money.
Get good type specific training in it. And Have Fun.
Regards,
Tylor Hall
tylorh(at)sound.net
913-422-8869
-----Original Message-----
From: Nico van Niekerk [mailto:nico(at)cybersuperstore.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 12:47 AM
To: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Subject: What is this plane worth?
_____
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
_____
Chief,
I can get a 680FL with IGSO-540-B1A (380 HP) WITH L 208 / R 588, props 27
Snew L & R. Total time 2,800! Interior and exterior 10/10
Panel kit:
New century 2000 auto pilot with altitude hold and pre select. Coupled to
GPS.
New Sandals digital RMI.
New Garmin GNS430 GPS, NAV, COM.
New Garmin 340 audio panal.
New JPIntenational engine monitoring system.
Shadin Digiflo fuel computer
1 x King KDX 150 color radar.
1 x King KY 97 com
1 x King KT76A Transponder with mode c encoding altimeter.
1 x King KN 52 Nav with glide slop.
2 x King K___ digital A.D.F
The owner says that there is no need for spar inspections or mods. Is this
right on the 680FL?
He wants about $100K.
Do you think this could be a good buy? An educated guess would be
appreciated.
Thanks
Nico
_____
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Cousins <jcousins(at)twincommander.com> |
| Subject: | Twin Commander Support of Your Airplane |
As the new (6 month) General Manager of Twin Commander it has been
educational (and certainly interesting) interacting with you, our customer,
the Twin Commander Owner. Ithas been my goal since before moving to
Arlington to see more dialog between TCFG and TCAC. I can refer you to Jim
Metzger and the discussions we held last summer while I was visiting Seattle
and getting the opportunity to see Puget Sound in his floatplane.The goal
then and I believe in every meeting we've had since then has been to support
your association as the type certificate holder for the Twin Commander
models. We have made no attempt to drag out old issues, have not in any way
entered into the discussions you have had concerning your organization or
expressed opinions on you individually. Twin has responded when one of you
has made a request for information that we could provide and are happy to
continue doing so. I personally have referred two new owners to Jim for
membership in TCFG which I believe falls under being judged by your actions.
Twin wants very much to support TCFG and will continue to do so as long as
it remains a productive relationship.
I couldn't agree more with the observation that we should communicate with
our customers. Four separate letters from me have been mailed either to
specific groups of owners or to all owners of record since I arrived six
months ago. The letters encouraged owners to contact me if you had concerns,
(which several of you have) and have strived to inform you of Twin's
programs. That included our plans for our website to provide you, the owner,
with updated information on your aircraft. Some of those changes are in
place and the rest are scheduled for completion in the next few weeks. If
you are an owner and are not receiving these letters and Twin's SBs and
other mailings please go to our website and register your current info
including model and serial number to insure you are receiving all our
communiqus.
Twin Commander is the holder ofthe Type Certificates for the twin engined
Commander aircraft. Assuch we are required to report any information we
receive that has the possibility of affecting safety of flight to the FAA's
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office within 24 hours. The reports we make
invariably result in a request from the ACO to keep them appraised of our
follow up investigation. The system of Service Letters, Service Bulletins,
and Mandatory AD's (Which are issued by the FAA) works in the following way.
Twin Commander can independently issue a Service Letter for issues we do not
believe create an immediate threat to safety of flight. That was donewith
SL379after the first reports of sump problems aroseover two years ago. SL
379 required only a visualinspection for leaks and then a structural
inspection to verify the integrity of the sumpif leaks were found. As a
result of reports from those inspections including one where the inspector
was able to punch his finger through the side of the sump and another where
the wall was corroded away and had been repaired with JB Weld it was
determined that the non safety of flight status of a SL was not appropriate
for this problem. Because Twin does not issue Service Bulletins without FAA
review and because of the location of the sump in the fuselage, the extent
of corrosion discovered, the past history of Aero Commander replacing the
magnesium sumps in the earlier models, and the very significant consequences
of having a 100 octane and associated vaporleak in a confined area with
electrical contactors present it was decidedto recommend replacing the
sumps. The communication with the FAA culminated with a meeting with Mr.
Mike Paison and Mrs. Della Reese in March of this year. At that time the
status as an AD had not been made and was to be referred to the Small
Aircraft Directorate in Kansas City for a final decision. It is Twin
Commanders belief that these sumps should be replaced for your benefit, but
the FAA, who is the only authority to require replacement via an AD has not
yet reached that decision.Certainly the process was open to discussion
thought SL 379, and SB 230A. The personnel involved in reaching the
consensus are dedicated, professional engineers with years of Commander
experience. Theyare under a great deal of pressurefrom owners, service
centers, and the FAA todetermine a solution for these situations.Another
consequence of the recommendation to replace the sumps is that TCAC (Without
an AD requiring replacement) has spent a year and a half, countless
engineering and purchasing hoursand significant dollars insuring that the
components required will be available for this SB.
The alternative to this process would be that no action was taken, the FAA
would make a determination that the sumps should be replaced, issue an AD,
and owners would find their aircraft grounded without replacement parts. We
went through that scenario with lower spar caps in the early 90's and do not
intend for it to happen again.
The last issue I will try to address is the requirement for specifying by
whom the work can be accomplished. Both SL 379 and SB 230Aspecify that any
A&P mechanic may accomplish these items. Several years ago Twin Commander
issuedSB 218 on thelater turbine models that called for significant
modifications to the vertical and horizontal stabilizers. That SB required
only an A&P for the work as had all our bulletins to that point.Over the
next couple of years aircraft returned to Service Centers for other
workwere discoveredto havespars in the horizontal stabilizerswithholes
drilled through them because of ignorance on the part of the people
accomplishing the work. Twin (as well as other manufactures) have struggled
with how to insure that complicated bulletins are accomplished by properly
trained personnel. The current requirements for completing this type work is
not that it be done by a service center but by someone who has attended the
appropriate training at the Flight Safety/Twin Commander training center in
Bethany, OK.
I have listened with interest and pride as Commander owners have described
their $100,000 plus piston Commanders that werepurchased for prices as low
as $10,000-$15,000. The appreciation of your investments would not have
occurred if the only parts and engineering support available were used
partsand field repairs. Jim Metzger has already addressed the value Twin
Commander adds to your aircraft and though you may not agree with the
decision we reached concerning the fuels sumps I hope you can acceptour
commitment to supporting your aircraft.
Twin Commander depends heavily on our Service Center network for the
technical information they provide, the countless days spent in support of
the airframe, and the hundreds of years of collective experience their
personnel represent. The Twin Commander Service Center Network is one of the
greatest resources available to the Commander Owner and I heartily encourage
you to utilize them. The team effort between Twin Commander and its Service
Centers benefits you the Commander owner.
Jeff Cousins
Vice President/General Manager
Twin Commander Aircraft Corporation
Tel: 360-435-9797
Fax:360-435-1112
Cell:425-210-2907
Email: jcousins(at)twincommander.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Commander Support of Your Airplane |
Very nice letter, Mr. Cousins; very nice look inside TCAC.
Keep it up.
Keith S. Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Commander Support of Your Airplane |
I forgot to say Thank You.
Keith S. Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Vormbaum <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Commander Support of Your Airplane |
Untitled StationeryJeff,
Thanks for the very educational reply, and thanks for reaching out to the TCFG.
I appreciate the personal attention!
Regards,
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Cousins
To: 'tcfg(at)listbot.com'
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 4:52 PM
Subject: Twin Commander Support of Your Airplane
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
As the new (6 month) General Manager of Twin Commander it has been educational
(and certainly interesting) interacting with you, our customer, the Twin Commander
Owner. It has been my goal since before moving to Arlington to see more
dialog between TCFG and TCAC. I can refer you to Jim Metzger and the discussions
we held last summer while I was visiting Seattle and getting the opportunity
to see Puget Sound in his floatplane. The goal then and I believe in every
meeting we've had since then has been to support your association as the type
certificate holder for the Twin Commander models. We have made no attempt to
drag out old issues, have not in any way entered into the discussions you have
had concerning your organization or expressed opinions on you individually. Twin
has responded when one of you has made a request for information that we could
provide and are happy to continue doing so. I personally have referred two
new owners to Jim for membership in TCFG which I believe falls under being judged
by your actions. Twin wants very much to support TCFG and will continue
to do so as long as it remains a productive relationship.
I couldn't agree more with the observation that we should communicate with our
customers. Four separate letters from me have been mailed either to specific
groups of owners or to all owners of record since I arrived six months ago. The
letters encouraged owners to contact me if you had concerns, (which several
of you have) and have strived to inform you of Twin's programs. That included
our plans for our website to provide you, the owner, with updated information
on your aircraft. Some of those changes are in place and the rest are scheduled
for completion in the next few weeks. If you are an owner and are not receiving
these letters and Twin's SBs and other mailings please go to our website
and register your current info including model and serial number to insure you
are receiving all our communiqus.
Twin Commander is the holder of the Type Certificates for the twin engined Commander
aircraft. As such we are required to report any information we receive
that has the possibility of affecting safety of flight to the FAA's Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office within 24 hours. The reports we make invariably result
in a request from the ACO to keep them appraised of our follow up investigation.
The system of Service Letters, Service Bulletins, and Mandatory AD's
(Which are issued by the FAA) works in the following way. Twin Commander can independently
issue a Service Letter for issues we do not believe create an immediate
threat to safety of flight. That was done with SL379 after the first reports
of sump problems arose over two years ago. SL 379 required only a visual
inspection for leaks and then a structural inspection to verify the integrity
of the sump if leaks were found. As a result of reports from those inspections
including one where the inspector was able to punch his finger through the
side of the sump and another where the wall was corroded away and had been repaired
with JB Weld it was determined that the non safety of flight status of a
SL was not appropriate for this problem. Because Twin does not issue Service
Bulletins without FAA review and because of the location of the sump in the fuselage,
the extent of corrosion discovered, the past history of Aero Commander
replacing the magnesium sumps in the earlier models, and the very significant
consequences of having a 100 octane and associated vapor leak in a confined area
with electrical contactors present it was decided to recommend replacing the
sumps. The communication with the FAA culminated with a meeting with Mr. Mike
Paison and Mrs. Della Reese in March of this year. At that time the status
as an AD had not been made and was to be referred to the Small Aircraft Directorate
in Kansas City for a final decision. It is Twin Commanders belief that these
sumps should be replaced for your benefit, but the FAA, who is the only authority
to require replacement via an AD has not yet reached that decision.Certainly
the process was open to discussion thought SL 379, and SB 230A. The personnel
involved in reaching the consensus are dedicated, professional engineers
with years of Commander experience. They are under a great deal of pressure
from owners, service centers, and the FAA to determine a solution for these
situations. Another consequence of the recommendation to replace the sumps is
that TCAC (Without an AD requiring replacement) has spent a year and a half, countless
engineering and purchasing hours and significant dollars insuring that
the components required will be available for this SB.
The alternative to this process would be that no action was taken, the FAA would
make a determination that the sumps should be replaced, issue an AD, and owners
would find their aircraft grounded without replacement parts. We went through
that scenario with lower spar caps in the early 90's and do not intend for
it to happen again.
The last issue I will try to address is the requirement for specifying by whom
the work can be accomplished. Both SL 379 and SB 230A specify that any A&P mechanic
may accomplish these items. Several years ago Twin Commander issued SB
218 on the later turbine models that called for significant modifications to
the vertical and horizontal stabilizers. That SB required only an A&P for the
work as had all our bulletins to that point. Over the next couple of years aircraft
returned to Service Centers for other work were discovered to have spars
in the horizontal stabilizers with holes drilled through them because of ignorance
on the part of the people accomplishing the work. Twin (as well as other
manufactures) have struggled with how to insure that complicated bulletins are
accomplished by properly trained personnel. The current requirements for completing
this type work is not that it be done by a service center but by someone
who has attended the appropriate training at the Flight Safety/Twin Commander
training center in Bethany, OK.
I have listened with interest and pride as Commander owners have described their
$100,000 plus piston Commanders that were purchased for prices as low as $10,000-$15,000.
The appreciation of your investments would not have occurred if
the only parts and engineering support available were used parts and field repairs.
Jim Metzger has already addressed the value Twin Commander adds to your
aircraft and though you may not agree with the decision we reached concerning
the fuels sumps I hope you can accept our commitment to supporting your aircraft.
Twin Commander depends heavily on our Service Center network for the technical
information they provide, the countless days spent in support of the airframe,
and the hundreds of years of collective experience their personnel represent.
The Twin Commander Service Center Network is one of the greatest resources
available to the Commander Owner and I heartily encourage you to utilize them.
The team effort between Twin Commander and its Service Centers benefits you the
Commander owner.
Jeff Cousins
Vice President/General Manager
Twin Commander Aircraft Corporation
Tel: 360-435-9797
Fax:360-435-1112
Cell:425-210-2907
Email: jcousins(at)twincommander.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Commander Support of Your Airplane |
> Jeff Cousins wrote:
> though you may not agree with the decision we reached concerning the
> fuels sumps I hope you can accept our commitment to supporting your
> aircraft.
Jeff,
First I would like to express my sincere appreciation at you taking
the time to explain TCAC's point of view on this topic as well as thank
you personally for jumping in to what has become a public forum filled
with great discussions on a broad range of topics. When I first
created this list, I did indeed have concerns about how it would be
taken by TCAC managment. It has been my strongest hope since inception
that
the very open dialog as well as expression of concerns would be of value
to all Commander enthusiasts as well as TCAC if accepted with an open
mind
and an ability to listen to both positive and negative feedback as of
potential value.
As a business owner myself, I can definitly empathize with how difficult
it can be to receive negative comments regarding an action that you
honestly believe was made in the customers best interests. I have
found (via the school of hard knocks) that keeping my customers
abreast of any issue which may negativly (or positivly) affect them
often
results in a much greater acceptance of any problems.
This sump issue is a great case and point - most of the frustration that
I've heard so far is primarily rooted in a lack of understanding. Given
the somewhat fragmented user base, most owners will only understand that
they've been presented with a solution to a problem they don't think
they
have unless dialog such as you just presented occurs.
TCAC is to be applauded for taking the initiative to not only proactivly
address the problem, but also actually produce parts so that owners will
not be "stuck" when the paperwork hits. Your letter pointed out several
issues which I, for one, was not clear on such as the fact that without
TCACs intervention that this issue could have jumped straight to AD
status
without much warning.
I hope that this is not the last time you decide to participate in such
a
valuable way to this list Jeff. Please consider the door open. I
believe
I speak for the majority of the members of this list when I say that
direct information is very much appreciated. As you noted, there WILL
be
disagreement with various actions and decisions from time to time, but I
think that most owners will be vastly more supportive if they truely
understand the facts that drive these actions.
Chris Schuermann
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tylor Hall <thall5(at)kc.rr.com> |
Hay gang, I hate to ask the dumb question, but.
Where do I read the full text of SL 379 and SB 230 ????
Can someone give us the link to it on the web??
Jeff C TCAC. Hurray, someone as least has the volume turned up a little.
I must give you one good Atta Boy for your response. This may be a new
day.
I like to sum up things into small words. It is how my daughter teaches me
computers.
1.The subject sump has a documented corrosion problem. Hence SL 379. JB
weld is not the answer. It is more than just the can, but all related
connections. Only on a certain model and SN Twin Commanders and not the
entire fleet.
2. TCAC (after many hours of eng.) Concludes that all affected sumps must be
replaced. Hence SB 230.
Est. cost is the better part of $4,000.
3. The FAA may take it to a required AD level.
4. TCFG is working with TCAC and FAA to find the next best solution? (Go
Capt JB.)
What about a sump that has no corrosion after inspection??
There is no data on number of inspections, number of failed sumps, and
number of replacements made??
Is there a FIX short of replacement? Coating, replace only the sump?
Am I close???
Regards,
Tylor Hall
tylorh(at)sound.net
913-422-8869
JB-My check is in the mail.
TH
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard E. Brown, Sr. <pawpaw(at)dallas.net> |
| Subject: | Twin Commander support |
Dear Jeff,
Thank you for your reply to our concerns. I too think it is very important
to communicate with piston owners. A lot of your Turbine Customers, (many more
than you may imagine) first heard of or became interested in your Turbine aircraft
as a result of seeing our 5 and 600 series piston aircraft on the local
ramps accross the country.
My first experience with Twin Commanders was October 15, 1963 when we purchased
a 500B s/n 1302-117 from Brown Aero Corp. (My Uncle was a Commander Dealer)
We flew this aircraft for several years in business and pleasure activities.
I have always loved Twin Commanders. Recently, I decided that it was time to
unload the 414 and buy a Twin Commander, as my mission had changed since retirement.
After searching for SN 1302-117, our old plane, I was frustrated at being unable
to locate it. Then things turned great. I discovered 500B s/n 893-1, the
first 500B made, and I had to have it. Now I am in Commander heaven again.
The purpose of relating this story to you is to demonstrate the love and loyalty
that Twin Commander owners have for their aircraft. I belive Twin commander
owners are more loyal and radical in their love of their babies than Piper
Comanche owenrs. (I owned a PA 24-260 and know of what I speak, still love Comanches).
This is why owners get worried when they think TCAC is gouging or not
communicating.
You mentioned the process for SL, SB and ADs in your e-mail. We all understand
the process, but thank you for reminding us. The type of info your company
gleaned from field reports that generate potential serious SL, SB, or ADs could
have been communicated to TCFG at earlier stages.
I feel this would eliminate this type of uproar in the future.
Jeff, I do appreciate your intrest and concern for piston Commander owners. We
love our aircraft. (what other 6500lb+ twin can you operate from 1000ft?) I also
very much appreciate TCAC's attempt to place parts on hand to prevent our
birds form being grounded for lengthy periods in case of an AD issuance. This
does a lot to show TCAC's care and support of Piston Twins. Thank you.
One final question, in case of the dreaded AD, is TCAC, as Hartzel did for Comanche
250 owners and Twin Commander owners, going to offer the sump at a one-time
reduced price for compliance?
Thank you,
Richard Brown
N108RG
pawpaw(at)dallas.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ricardo A. Otaola <otayca(at)telcel.net.ve> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Commander Support of Your Airplane |
I sencond that!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com>
To: Jeff Cousins ;
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 8:44 PM
Subject: Re: Twin Commander Support of Your Airplane
>
>
> > Jeff Cousins wrote:
> > though you may not agree with the decision we reached concerning the
> > fuels sumps I hope you can accept our commitment to supporting your
> > aircraft.
>
>
> Jeff,
> First I would like to express my sincere appreciation at you taking
> the time to explain TCAC's point of view on this topic as well as thank
> you personally for jumping in to what has become a public forum filled
> with great discussions on a broad range of topics. When I first
> created this list, I did indeed have concerns about how it would be
> taken by TCAC managment. It has been my strongest hope since inception
> that
> the very open dialog as well as expression of concerns would be of value
> to all Commander enthusiasts as well as TCAC if accepted with an open
> mind
> and an ability to listen to both positive and negative feedback as of
> potential value.
> As a business owner myself, I can definitly empathize with how difficult
> it can be to receive negative comments regarding an action that you
> honestly believe was made in the customers best interests. I have
> found (via the school of hard knocks) that keeping my customers
> abreast of any issue which may negativly (or positivly) affect them
> often
> results in a much greater acceptance of any problems.
> This sump issue is a great case and point - most of the frustration that
> I've heard so far is primarily rooted in a lack of understanding. Given
> the somewhat fragmented user base, most owners will only understand that
> they've been presented with a solution to a problem they don't think
> they
> have unless dialog such as you just presented occurs.
>
> TCAC is to be applauded for taking the initiative to not only proactivly
> address the problem, but also actually produce parts so that owners will
> not be "stuck" when the paperwork hits. Your letter pointed out several
> issues which I, for one, was not clear on such as the fact that without
> TCACs intervention that this issue could have jumped straight to AD
> status
> without much warning.
>
> I hope that this is not the last time you decide to participate in such
> a
> valuable way to this list Jeff. Please consider the door open. I
> believe
> I speak for the majority of the members of this list when I say that
> direct information is very much appreciated. As you noted, there WILL
> be
> disagreement with various actions and decisions from time to time, but I
> think that most owners will be vastly more supportive if they truely
> understand the facts that drive these actions.
>
> Chris Schuermann
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
HI KIDS.......
I wanted to ad my thanks to Jeff for his response. I know that
his days are full and I appreciate him taking this time. It also reminds me
of what I have said before, "They are listening"
Many good ideas have already come from this forum and feel confident
that a livable solution can be found. I look forward to meeting with Jeff
and the Commander crew this coming week (I am moving back to my summer home
in SEA on Monday, 15 min drive to the FAA office and a 15 min flight to
TCAC).
We all want the same thing here, to see Twin Commanders live on for
many years, and to have enough $$ left over for gas.
Thanks to all for your many great ideas. Next week will be a busy
time. I will keep you posted. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | garyloff <n27kb(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sumps and my .02 worth. |
The SB in questions has it been issued by the FED's or TCAC?
----- Original Message -----
From: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
To: Furlong5(at)aol.com ; woodlema(at)earthlink.net ; TCFG(at)listbot.com
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: Sumps and my .02 worth.
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
HI JIM.....
This action started as a service letter (379) I reported this in
the DEC FGN (remember, you heard it here first) It has now become a
(mandatory) service bulletin, SB230A. This is the usual progression of an
action unless the FAA feels there is immediate danger. From here, who
knows?? It is my personal belief that it almost certainly will become an AD.
I plan to meet with the TCAC and the FAA soon regarding this action.
I have had a couple of contacts with Jeff Cousins at TCAC, and he also
believes it will become an AD and Commander has already invested in an
inventory of new parts in anticipation of this.
There are several options open now. First, I will meet with the Feds
and discuss the possibility of an optional means of compliance. As a group,
we own or care for a large number of piston commanders and we may be able to
use our "field experience" to defer the SB from becoming an AD. Next, we can
lobby that the factory authorized inspection procedure should be adequate to
comply. While I would agree that Magnesium is the wrong material to have
made the sumps from, Most have lasted a long time and may still be
serviceable. An inspection would determine this.
Lastly, it has been mentioned that Hartzell offered a substantial discount to
owners. This seems like a reasonable approach assuming the sumps really
require replacement. I will propose this to TCAC when we meet.
I want to say that I have checked with a few Commander Gurus and it is
widely agreed that sump corrosion is a problem but no one has any hard data.
I don't know how many replacement sumps TCAC has sold over the last 5 years,
and there seems to be no information on the results of SL379. For sure, some
airplanes have been found with unsafe sumps, others have been checked and no
corrosion was found.
If you have any sump history, please email me personally with that
information. Thanks jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AOPA ePilot Newsletter <aopa_news(at)aopa.org> |
| Subject: | AOPA ePilot -- Vol. 3, Issue 20 |
AOPA ePilot--Vol. 3, Issue 20
Departments
Inside AOPA
On Capitol Hill
Airport Support Network
ASF News
Quiz Me!
2001 Bonanza
Sweepstakes
ePilot Calendar
Weekend Weather
You can receive a 5-percent discount at Sportys Pilot Shop with the AOPA
credit card and your valid AOPA member number. Click here to apply for the AOPA
credit card.
CAF grounds unit following fatal crash
Murphy heavy-hauler makes maiden flight
AOPA underscores need for real-time SUA data
Shoot-down law must be repealed, says AOPA
Volume 3, Issue 20
May 18, 2001
GA News
AOPA LAUNCHES TV SPOTS TO SAVE MEIGS FIELD
AOPA is launching an unusual airwaves campaign to save Chicago's Meigs
Field airport. An AOPA-produced television commercial designed to convince
Illinois state legislators and the public to keep Merrill C. Meigs Field open
will begin airing this Sunday evening on TV stations in Springfield, the Illinois
capitol. The timing is critical as the Illinois legislature adjourns next
Friday. "At a time when the nation's attention has turned to airport capacity
problems, particularly in Chicago, should a reliever airport like Meigs be closed?"
asked AOPA President Phil Boyer. "Our 370,000 members want to draw attention
to this issue that is so important to Illinois and the nation's air transportation
system." Chicago Mayor Richard Daley intends to close Meigs Field in
February 2002. AOPA is working for a solution that will keep the airport open
and meet Daley's desire for more parks. In a recent independent survey, a majority
of Chicago residents were in favor
CAF GROUNDS UNIT FOLLOWING FATAL CRASH
The Confederate Air Force has grounded one of its units following a
fatal crash on Monday. CAF members Dan Secker, 61, and Neal Clifton, 54, died
when their Vultee BT-13A military trainer crashed at Bates Field near Odessa,
Texas. The NTSB and the FAA are investigating. The CAF board of directors voted
to ground the High Sky Wing pending a review of the wing's operations and maintenance
procedures. Exactly one month earlier on April 14, another aircraft
assigned to the High Sky Wing, a Fairchild PT-19, crashed, killing CAF member
Roy Green. The High Sky Wing has one remaining airplane in service, an AT-6/SNJ-4
Texan. The grounding does not affect other CAF units. For more, see the Web
site.
RACE CAR LEGEND TAKES ROBINSON R44 TO THE TRACK
Legendary auto racer Bob Bondurant has found yet another use for the
Robinson R44 helicopter. Bondurant will use the Raven to observe and photograph
racing lines around corners for student drivers at the Bob Bondurant School
of High Performance Driving in Phoenix. He bought the aircraft in partnership
with professional helicopter pilot Barry Sprague. Bondurant became interested
in helicopters and auto racing at about the same time in the early 1960s. For
more on Robinson, see the Web site.
MURPHY HEAVY-HAULER MAKES MAIDEN FLIGHT
The Murphy SR3500 Super Rebel kitplane made its first flight recently.
Based on the SR2500, it features a 1,759-pound useful load with a nine-cylinder
M-14P radial engine. Switching to a lighter Lycoming IO-540 increases the
useful load even more. At gross weight, the four- to six-place taildragger climbs
at 1,400 feet per minute and cruises at 143 knots. Murphy Aircraft said
fast-build kits are available for the all-metal airplane. For more, see the Web
site.
AIRSHOW PERFORMER GOES SOLO
Former Northern Lights pilot Michael Mancuso will be performing alone
this season in his Extra 300L. He is being sponsored by Klein Tools, a manufacturer
of professional-grade hand tools and protective equipment. Mancuso left
the competitive aerobatic arena in 1998 to join the Northern Lights aerobatic
team. He was with the team until last year. The Northern Lights team will be
flying L-39C Albatross jets instead of the Extra 300s for the 2001 season. Mancuso's
next performance is at Air Expo 2001 at the Patuxent River Naval Air
Station, Maryland, May 25 through 27. For a complete performance schedule, see
the Web site.
For daily news updates, see AOPA Online.
Inside AOPA
AOPA UNDERSCORES NEED FOR REAL-TIME SUA DATA
Pilots need improved "real-time" information on special use airspace,
AOPA told the FAA recently. In the agency's Operational Evolution Plan (a 10-year
blueprint for improving safety, increasing capacity, and managing delays),
the FAA calls for better coordination and more efficient utilization of special
use airspace when not in use by the military. AOPA said the agency has to
go further. AOPA wants the FAA to add controlling agency radio frequencies and
telephone numbers to charts so that pilots can ask if the airspace is actually
in use. AOPA also said that flight service stations and general aviation pilots
should have access to special airspace management system (SAMS) scheduling
data. As part of a test program with the FAA, AOPA members can currently access
the SAMS database on AOPA Online.
COURT OVERTURNS WINGS FIELD RESTRICTION
A Pennsylvania court has overturned a 1998 state law that restricted
which airports could receive federal and state funds. The law was targeted at
just four airports and it singled out AOPA's birthplace, Wings Field, outside
of Philadelphia. "This is a significant decision not only for Wings Field, but
for other airports as well," said Phil Boyer, AOPA president. "Had this law
remained on the books, it could have set a precedent in other states and given
local agencies the power to interfere with the national air transportation system."
For more, see AOPA Online.
NEW SKYDIVING RULE NEEDS REPACKING, AOPA SAYS
Last week the FAA issued final changes to FAR Part 105the regulations
governing skydiving operations. The agency refused to address two issues raised
by AOPA: the need for flight service notification (the FAA said that the
requirement is implicit in the existing regulation) and the issue of a pilot's
being held responsible for the actions of individuals not on board the pilot's
aircraft. But the FAA did agree to eliminate the proposed accident-reporting
requirements for pilots, stating that it did not have the resources to administer
the program. See AOPA Online.
FAA ISSUES NOTAM FOR AOPA FLY-IN
The FAA has issued a notam for the eleventh annual AOPA Fly-In and
Open House at Frederick Municipal Airport (FDK), Maryland, on Saturday, June 2.
The notam includes special VFR arrival procedures and information on the temporary
control tower that will be operating from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. Reduced runway
separation and simultaneous arrivals to intersecting runways will be in effect.
Arrival/departure information and a map are available on AOPA Online. For
a copy of the notam, see the Web site.
Changing your mailing or e-mail addresses? Click here to update.
On Capitol Hill
SHOOT-DOWN LAW MUST BE REPEALED, SAYS AOPA
AOPA is urging Congress to repeal the law brought to light in the shoot-down
of an American missionary aircraft in Peru. In a letter to all members
of the House, AOPA President Phil Boyer asked for support of House Bill 1818,
which was introduced by Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), a pilot and AOPA member.
That bill would prohibit employees and agents of the U.S. government from
assisting foreign countries in interdiction of aircraft suspected of drug-related
operations. For more, see AOPA Online.
Airport Support Network
ASN LOOKS FOR PILOTS TO SAVE NATION'S AIRPORTS
What would you do if your airport closed tomorrow? Every day 915 AOPA
Airport Support Network volunteers are working with AOPA headquarters on a
local level to help save their airports. That's a lot, but not enough. Ask yourself
these questions: Has my flying been affected by development, new restrictions,
or negative public relations about my local airport? Have local issues
or political pressures affected my use and the efficiency of my local airport?
If the answer is "yes" to either question, you may be just the kind of person
we're looking for to help ensure the health and availability of your airport.
See your regional section under the calendar below for a list of airports that
are particularly in need. To learn more about ASN, see AOPA Online.
AOPA Air Safety Foundation News
MINNESOTA LIFE DONATES $100,000 TO ASF
Minnesota Life Insurance Company has marked the fiftieth anniversary
of its relationship with AOPA by creating a $100,000 special endowment fund
for the AOPA Air Safety Foundation. "The excellent partnership between AOPA and
Minnesota Life is now enhanced with the addition of ASF programs," said Bruce
Landsberg, ASF executive director. "It is in our collective best interest to
continue to improve general aviation safety." For more, see AOPA Online.
ASF RELEASES NEW COLLISION AVOIDANCE BOOKLET
The AOPA Air Safety Foundation has released a new Safety Advisor to
supplement its acclaimed collision avoidance seminar. The booklet can also serve
as a self-study course. The new 16-page publication, Collision Avoidance:
Strategies and Tactics, is illustrated with dramatic photographs and graphics.
It includes concise information on the physiology of vision, points out when
and where most midair collisions occur, and suggests techniques and resources
for avoiding such accidents. Click to download it from AOPA Online.
Quiz Me!
Heres a question asked by an AOPA member last week of our AOPA technical
specialists. Test your knowledge.
Question: I'm a military pilot. Can I receive a civilian rating for
my military experience?
Answer: Under FAR 61.73, current and former military pilots may, depending
on experience, receive: (1) a commercial pilot certificate; (2) an aircraft
rating in the category and class of aircraft for which that military pilot
is qualified; (3) an instrument rating with appropriate aircraft rating for
which that pilot is qualified; or (4) a type rating, if appropriate. The pilot
must present documentation showing compliance to an FAA flight standards district
office in the pilot's area. The military pilot must pass a military competency
knowledge test for the certificate or rating sought, and if not on active
flight status within the past 12 months, pass a practical examination. See
AOPA Online for a copy of the regulation.
Got a technical question for AOPA specialists? Call 800/872-2672 or
e-mail to inforequest(at)aopa.org. Send comments on our Quiz Me! questions to epilot(at)aopa.org.
AOPA Sweepstakes Bonanza Update
If you're not convinced yet that the AOPA 2001 Sweepstakes Bonanza
is on the cutting edge of technology, try an oxygen system with computerized delivery.
Thanks to Mountain High Equipment and Supply Company of Redmond, Oregon,
the airplane will have a much safer and more efficient oxygen system for those
high-speed, high-altitude cross-country sorties. For the latest project update,
see AOPA Online.
On The Road To Expo
MACHADO TO OFFER FOUR SEMINARS AT AOPA EXPO
Rod Machado, aviation humorist and columnist for AOPA Pilot, will conduct
four seminars at AOPA Expo 2001 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. The programs
are titled Defensive Flying, Handling In-Flight Emergencies, Pilots, Poets,
and PsychologistsHow Literature Can Help Us Make Better Cockpit Decisions, and
Aviation HumorReducing Cockpit Stress by Developing Your Aviation Sense of
Humor. For complete Expo information, see AOPA Online.
What's New At AOPA Online
If you know someone who hasn't yet experienced the wealth of information
available in AOPA's Airport Directory Online, have them take a tour. It
requires a Macromedia Flash browser plug-in.
ePilot Calendar
WEEKEND FLYING DESTINATIONS
Pine Bluff, Arkansas. "Operation Skyhook," the Black Pilots of America
Memorial Day Fly-In, takes place May 24 through 28 at Grider Field (PBF).
Call 870/879-6612 for event information.
Watsonville, California. Annual Fly-In and Airshow takes place at Watsonville
Municipal Airport (WVI) May 25 through 27. Call 831/763-5600 for event
information.
Patuxent River Naval Air Station, Maryland. Air Expo 2001 takes place
May 26 and 27. Call 301/757-3976 for event information.
Brunswick, Georgia. The World Beechcraft Society Fly-In takes place
May 31 through June 3 at Glynco Jetport (BQK). Call 800/345-9066 for event information.
REGIONAL INFORMATION AND EVENTS
ASN SEEKS VOLUNTEERS The AOPA Airport Support Network is looking for
volunteers at several airports in California, including L45, BNG, BIH, CRQ,
2O6, O22, COM, and CEC. To sign up, see ( http://www.aopa.org/asn/ ). FLYING DESTINATIONS
IN YOUR AREA CHICO, CALIFORNIA. "Wings to Victory," a tribute to the
pilots and personnel of Chico Army Airfield, takes place May 23 at Chico Municipal
Airport (CIC). Call 530/342-0651 for event information.
LLANO, CALIFORNIA. The "World's Smallest Airshow" takes place May 26
and 17 at Brian Ranch Airport. Call 661/261-3216 for event information.
SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA. The Museum of Flying at Santa Monica Municipal
Airport (SMO) commemorates the sixtieth anniversary of the sinking of the
German battleship Bismarck with a display of one of the few remaining Fairey
Swordfish aircraft on May 27. Call 310/392-8822 for event information.
AOPA PILOT TOWN MEETINGS Featuring AOPA President Phil Boyer (7:30
p.m.; admission is free). The next Pilot Town Meetings in California are in Sacramento
June 5, Santa Rosa June 6, and Fresno June 7. For more information, see
( http://www.aopa.org/prez/ptmsked.html ).
For more airport details, see AOPA's Airport Directory Online. For
more events, see Aviation Calendar of Events
ASF SAFETY SEMINARS
The next AOPA ASF Safety Seminars are scheduled in Spruce Pine, North
Carolina, May 19 and 20; Charlotte, North Carolina, and Baltimore May 21; Jamestown,
North Carolina, May 22; and Raleigh, North Carolina, May 23. See AOPA
Online for more information.
ASF FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR REFRESHER CLINICS
(All clinics start at 7:30 a.m.)
The next AOPA Air Safety Foundation Flight Instructor Refresher Clinic
is scheduled in Austin, Texas, June 2 and 3. For the Flight Instructor Refresher
Clinic schedule, see AOPA Online.
ASF PINCH-HITTER GROUND-SCHOOL COURSES
(Pinch-Hitter courses start at 9:30 a.m.)
The next Pinch-Hitter Ground School will take place June 10 in San
Jose, California. For more Pinch-Hitter courses, see AOPA Online.
For comments on calendar items or to make submissions, contact Julie
S. Walker at julie.walker(at)aopa.org.
Contacting ePilot
Got news tips? Contact ePilot editor Nathan A. Ferguson at nate.ferguson(at)aopa.org.
Having difficulty using this service? Visit the ePilot Frequently Asked
Questions now at AOPA Online or write to epilot(at)aopa.org.
You are currently subscribed as NAME-NICO VAN NIEKERK eMail Address-NICO(at)CYBERSUPERSTORE.COM.
Changing your mailing or e-mail addresses? Click here to update.
To UNSUBSCRIBE: Click here Unsubscribe, then hit the "Send" button. Do not
include a message. To SUBSCRIBE: visit http://www.aopa.org/members/epilot.html.
AOPA, 421 Aviation Way, Frederick, MD 21701 Tel: 800/USA-AOPA or 301/695-2000
Copyright 2001. Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association.
Sponsors
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | garyloff <n27kb(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Twin Commander Support of Your Airplane |
Untitled StationeryAn open letter to Jeff Cousins. I am only a provisional member
of TCAC waiting to see if it is worth renewal and do not represent TCFG or
anyone else.
I would like to propose the following approach to the sump problem. I hope both
you and the other owners will consider it fair and equitable foer both sides.
Mr. Cousins,
As a successful businessman I can trace the origin of much of my sucess to customer
service and product support.
When my company makes a mistake regardless of the age we assume the responsibility
for it as a corporation and replace the item or make the circumstances right.
This is my (our) policy regardless of wheather it was our mistake or former management/owner.
In the case of the sumps that obviously happened long before this current ieteration
of TCAC you have inherited a responsibility to make it right and stand behind
a product defect. Is this to say you should give every agrieved owner a
new sump, in my opinion no. But neither should you profit from it.
I would suggest the following approach. I woould say this was not "our" design
and happened long before we came along but as the company now is ours and our
personal honor and integrety is a stake we will do everything in our power to
mitigate the costs. Whatever the cost of manufacturer will be your purchase cost.This
of course should reflect real costs admin, s&h etc. TCAC will not take
this opportunity to profit from a design flaw or mistake but nor should we to
pay every cent of something that was done long before we owned the company or
we would soon be out of business.
This is what I as a owner and customer would consider fair. It's not the traditional
"bend over and smile approach" of many GA manufacturers where SBs and ADs
are considered profit centers.
Charge what you want for innovations, improvements etc. If you take this opportunity
to show us it's not "your daddies TCAC" then a new day will have dawned
at TCAC and it will be safe to do business with you again.
My sumps by the way are fine.
I eagerly await your response.
Best regards,
Gary Pudaloff
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Cousins
To: 'tcfg(at)listbot.com'
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 7:52 PM
Subject: Twin Commander Support of Your Airplane
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
As the new (6 month) General Manager of Twin Commander it has been educational
(and certainly interesting) interacting with you, our customer, the Twin Commander
Owner. It has been my goal since before moving to Arlington to see more
dialog between TCFG and TCAC. I can refer you to Jim Metzger and the discussions
we held last summer while I was visiting Seattle and getting the opportunity
to see Puget Sound in his floatplane. The goal then and I believe in every
meeting we've had since then has been to support your association as the type
certificate holder for the Twin Commander models. We have made no attempt to
drag out old issues, have not in any way entered into the discussions you have
had concerning your organization or expressed opinions on you individually. Twin
has responded when one of you has made a request for information that we could
provide and are happy to continue doing so. I personally have referred two
new owners to Jim for membership in TCFG which I believe falls under being judged
by your actions. Twin wants very much to support TCFG and will continue
to do so as long as it remains a productive relationship.
I couldn't agree more with the observation that we should communicate with our
customers. Four separate letters from me have been mailed either to specific
groups of owners or to all owners of record since I arrived six months ago. The
letters encouraged owners to contact me if you had concerns, (which several
of you have) and have strived to inform you of Twin's programs. That included
our plans for our website to provide you, the owner, with updated information
on your aircraft. Some of those changes are in place and the rest are scheduled
for completion in the next few weeks. If you are an owner and are not receiving
these letters and Twin's SBs and other mailings please go to our website
and register your current info including model and serial number to insure you
are receiving all our communiqus.
Twin Commander is the holder of the Type Certificates for the twin engined Commander
aircraft. As such we are required to report any information we receive
that has the possibility of affecting safety of flight to the FAA's Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office within 24 hours. The reports we make invariably result
in a request from the ACO to keep them appraised of our follow up investigation.
The system of Service Letters, Service Bulletins, and Mandatory AD's
(Which are issued by the FAA) works in the following way. Twin Commander can independently
issue a Service Letter for issues we do not believe create an immediate
threat to safety of flight. That was done with SL379 after the first reports
of sump problems arose over two years ago. SL 379 required only a visual
inspection for leaks and then a structural inspection to verify the integrity
of the sump if leaks were found. As a result of reports from those inspections
including one where the inspector was able to punch his finger through the
side of the sump and another where the wall was corroded away and had been repaired
with JB Weld it was determined that the non safety of flight status of a
SL was not appropriate for this problem. Because Twin does not issue Service
Bulletins without FAA review and because of the location of the sump in the fuselage,
the extent of corrosion discovered, the past history of Aero Commander
replacing the magnesium sumps in the earlier models, and the very significant
consequences of having a 100 octane and associated vapor leak in a confined area
with electrical contactors present it was decided to recommend replacing the
sumps. The communication with the FAA culminated with a meeting with Mr. Mike
Paison and Mrs. Della Reese in March of this year. At that time the status
as an AD had not been made and was to be referred to the Small Aircraft Directorate
in Kansas City for a final decision. It is Twin Commanders belief that these
sumps should be replaced for your benefit, but the FAA, who is the only authority
to require replacement via an AD has not yet reached that decision.Certainly
the process was open to discussion thought SL 379, and SB 230A. The personnel
involved in reaching the consensus are dedicated, professional engineers
with years of Commander experience. They are under a great deal of pressure
from owners, service centers, and the FAA to determine a solution for these
situations. Another consequence of the recommendation to replace the sumps is
that TCAC (Without an AD requiring replacement) has spent a year and a half, countless
engineering and purchasing hours and significant dollars insuring that
the components required will be available for this SB.
The alternative to this process would be that no action was taken, the FAA would
make a determination that the sumps should be replaced, issue an AD, and owners
would find their aircraft grounded without replacement parts. We went through
that scenario with lower spar caps in the early 90's and do not intend for
it to happen again.
The last issue I will try to address is the requirement for specifying by whom
the work can be accomplished. Both SL 379 and SB 230A specify that any A&P mechanic
may accomplish these items. Several years ago Twin Commander issued SB
218 on the later turbine models that called for significant modifications to
the vertical and horizontal stabilizers. That SB required only an A&P for the
work as had all our bulletins to that point. Over the next couple of years aircraft
returned to Service Centers for other work were discovered to have spars
in the horizontal stabilizers with holes drilled through them because of ignorance
on the part of the people accomplishing the work. Twin (as well as other
manufactures) have struggled with how to insure that complicated bulletins are
accomplished by properly trained personnel. The current requirements for completing
this type work is not that it be done by a service center but by someone
who has attended the appropriate training at the Flight Safety/Twin Commander
training center in Bethany, OK.
I have listened with interest and pride as Commander owners have described their
$100,000 plus piston Commanders that were purchased for prices as low as $10,000-$15,000.
The appreciation of your investments would not have occurred if
the only parts and engineering support available were used parts and field repairs.
Jim Metzger has already addressed the value Twin Commander adds to your
aircraft and though you may not agree with the decision we reached concerning
the fuels sumps I hope you can accept our commitment to supporting your aircraft.
Twin Commander depends heavily on our Service Center network for the technical
information they provide, the countless days spent in support of the airframe,
and the hundreds of years of collective experience their personnel represent.
The Twin Commander Service Center Network is one of the greatest resources
available to the Commander Owner and I heartily encourage you to utilize them.
The team effort between Twin Commander and its Service Centers benefits you the
Commander owner.
Jeff Cousins
Vice President/General Manager
Twin Commander Aircraft Corporation
Tel: 360-435-9797
Fax:360-435-1112
Cell:425-210-2907
Email: jcousins(at)twincommander.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | postmaster(at)mail3.9netway.com <postmaster(at)mail3.9netway.com> |
| Subject: | MasterCD2001 Disc - E-BIZ Marketing Sources |
Due to the many internet copyright pirates, and those who have copied and
released our products without our permission or consent, we have a very,
very special offer for you.
The Ultimate Internet Marketing Tool, MasterCD2001, now updated with
contacts representing 12 Million domains Worldwide! ***$99.95*** until
May 23rd!
OK, you held out at $999.00, at $799.00 and at $499.00, so here's a one
time offer you can't refuse to get: MasterCD2001 for only $99.95. We've
slashed the price to get you hooked on our data products.
Unlimited usage is yours permanently for just $99.95!
You can now access, import and export information about contacts for
nearly 12 Million domain names worldwide. All of the domain owners have
registered at least one .com, .net or .org domain name, which makes
them serious prospects for Internet related business.
Our newest database on CD-ROM contains the Names, Contact Information,
Physical Address, SIC, Phone #, Fax #, URL (Domain Name), and Contact
E-Mail Address which allows you to efficiently target companies
Worldwide.
Physical Addresses let you target businesses by, Country, State,
City, Province, Zip Code, Telephone Area Code, numerous SIC
codes and even Local Exchange Prefixes. The data is supplied
in a delimited ASCII text format which makes it easy to link
or import records into contact management, spreadsheet and all
other database related applications.
MasterCD2001 NOW ONLY $99.95(US) plus $20 shipping & handling for
2-Day UPS Air within the 48 contiguous United States, $40 shipping &
handling otherwise, which includes non-contiguous US and Canada.
We are currently shipping our April 2001 release.
Complete the buyer and shipping info, print and fax this form with
the completed credit card information.
Updates are available quarterly for $99.95 each.
This powerful marketing tool is a 100% tax-deductible business expense!
Time is running out quickly, so don't delay. ORDER NOW!
EVISION, USA
Must Be Received by: May 23rd
ORDER FORM
IMPORTANT: To reduce potential order delays, please type your
information if possible. If you cannot type your order, then please
be sure your writing is legible. Orders are accepted by fax only,
for maximum security. Orders will NOT be taken by e-mail or phone.
Due to this incredibly discounted promotional price, we are accepting
only credit card orders faxed to:
*** 305-513-5094 ***
Promotional Code: 518Q2C
Please Send Me:
MasterCD2001 for $99.95(US) plus $20 shipping & handling for
2-Day UPS Air within the contiguous US, $40 shipping & handling for
International orders (includes Canada and non-contiguous US.)
MasterCD2001 _______________$99.95 (plus shipping & handling)
S&H Contiguous US __________$20.00_______
S&H Non-Contiguous US_______$40.00_______
Total________
No orders will be accepted without the above shipping and handling fee.
I am entering the number of updates I wish to have automatically sent
to me, following this one time offer and the "locked in price" of $99.95,
plus the above shipping and handling charges, billed each quarter to my
credit card only after it is shipped to me.
YES_____ Automatically Ship [ ] updates at $99.95 plus the above S&H
and bill my credit card at the time of shipping.
NO THANK YOU ______ Do not ship any updates and bill my credit card one
time only.
Please note the required fields below:
* = required
Buyer/Shipping info:
*Name: __________________________________________________________________
Company Name (if applicable): ___________________________________________
*Shipping Address: ______________________________________________________
*City: ______________________________________
*State/Province: ____________________________
*Postal Code: _______________________________
*Country: ___________________________________
*Telephone: _______________________________________________
*Fax: _____________________________________________________
*E-mail Address: __________________________________________
This e-mail address will not be used for ANY purpose other
than communication from our company regarding your order.
Without providing an e-mail address, you will not be able
to track your order.
Promotional Code: 518Q2C
*Card Type-circle one: (MasterCard) (Visa) (Amex) (Discover)
*Credit Card Number: ______________________________________
*Expiration Date: _________________________________________
*Signature: _______________________________________________
*Name as appears on Card: _________________________________
*Billing Address of Credit Card if different than shipping:
___________________________________________________________
City & Province/State & Postal Code:
___________________________________________________________
Fax & Email are the only forms of correspondence available due to the
incredible pricing of this offer, so please be sure your email address
is legible & accurate.
EVISION Customer Service will be provided by E-mail or Fax only.
Please fax the completed form to >> 305-513-5094 <<
Promotional Code: 518Q2C
Evision, USA
END ORDER FORM
######################################################################
This message is not intended for residents in the States of WA, NV, CA,
TN, RI, NC & VA. Screening of addresses has been done to the best of
our technical ability. If you wish to remove yourself from future
communication, please reply with the word remove in the subject line.
One time limited offer only. We reserve the right to revert to standard
pricing after May 23rd.
................................................
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | [Twin Bonanza addition to Flight Simulator 2000] |
We need some flight simulators for our different model commanders guys !
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Brown <pawpaw1(at)starband.net> |
| Subject: | new E-mail address |
Hi Gang,
My new e-mail address is
pawpaw1(at)starband.com
Thanks
Richard Brown
N108RG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michrandi(at)aol.com <Michrandi(at)aol.com> |
Keith,
I haven't had any luck on making contact with either
owner, yes, joint owners, of N1187D. The phone #
that we received the other day was disconnected. I'm
going to get creative and see what I can come up with.
Any ideas from Commanderland?
Live from Las Vegas,
( lost wages)
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | garyloff <n27kb(at)erols.com> |
I'D LIKE TO POINT SOMETHING OUT REGARDLESS OF THE FUTURE OF THIS SB. THE MANUFACTURER
IS NOT ALLOWED TO ISSUE "MANDATORY" SBs.WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE FAA.
THEY KNOW THIS AND TO CONTINUE TO MISLEAD US. THIS IS DISHONEST AND THEY KNOW
IT.
I HAVE FORWARDED MY "MANDATORY" SB FROM TCAC TO THE FAA AND HAVE ASKED FOR CLARIFICATION.
I'VE ALSO CONTACTED A AVIATION ATTORNEY TO SEE IF THIS CONSTITUTES
FRAUD AND WHAT MY (OUR) RECOURSE IS.
IT'S TIME FOR THIS PRACTICE TO STOP.
I HAVE NOT CHECKED MY MAIL FOR SAT. I'M HOPING THEIR IS A NOTIFICATION FROM ED
McMHON ABOUT MY WINNING 10 MILLION DOLLARS.
I'LL LET YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENS ON BOTH COUNTS.
----- Original Message -----
From: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
To: w.bow(at)att.net ; YOURTCFG(at)aol.com ; CloudCraft(at)aol.com
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: sump
HI BILL........
First, there is no absolute guarantee that it will ever become
an AD. Not all SBs make all the way up the food chain. However, I feel very
strongly that this one will make for a couple of reasons including the fact
that the FAA is pretty touchy about fuel related problems (flight 800).
To answer your question regarding compliance, the SB requires that an
inspection be performed on the sump and filter bodies for seepage prior to
each flight. If seepage is found, they must (and I really mean MUST) be
replaced before further flight. They are to be replaced within 100 hrs or at
the next annual inspection.
Guys, this is the real deal. These sumps really do fail and need to
be taken seriously. The sumps should never have been produced from Magnesium
but they were. The good news is that TCAC has tooled up and has the parts in
stock to keep you flying. Jeff C. at Commander is checking now to see if
only the sump can be changed or if the complete "kit" will be required. The
way I read the SB is that all the parts will need to be changed. The sump
only, is about $1400, the "kit" is About $2200, (- 10% from Aero Air)
depending on the model.
There are some "O" rings and gaskets, etc., that will need changed as
well and I don't know how much labor will cost, but they probably wont jump
out of the box and onto your airplane, so $3000 is probably not that far off.
If you already have the sump off, It might pay to bolt a new one on,
just to be sure?? I will contact John Bosch at Commander Aero today for his
thoughts and let you know later. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | garyloff <n27kb(at)erols.com> |
----- Original Message -----
From: garyloff
To: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com ; w.bow(at)att.net ; CloudCraft(at)aol.com
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 6:49 AM
Subject: Re: sump
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
I'D LIKE TO POINT SOMETHING OUT REGARDLESS OF THE FUTURE OF THIS SB. THE MANUFACTURER
IS NOT ALLOWED TO ISSUE "MANDATORY" SBs.WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE FAA.
THEY KNOW THIS AND TO CONTINUE TO MISLEAD US. THIS IS DISHONEST AND THEY KNOW
IT.
I HAVE FORWARDED MY "MANDATORY" SB FROM TCAC TO THE FAA AND HAVE ASKED FOR CLARIFICATION.
I'VE ALSO CONTACTED A AVIATION ATTORNEY TO SEE IF THIS CONSTITUTES
FRAUD AND WHAT MY (OUR) RECOURSE IS.
IT'S TIME FOR THIS PRACTICE TO STOP.
I HAVE NOT CHECKED MY MAIL FOR SAT. I'M HOPING THEIR IS A NOTIFICATION FROM ED
McMHON ABOUT MY WINNING 10 MILLION DOLLARS.
IT'S ALMOST AS VALID AS THE MANDATORY SBs.
I'LL LET YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENS ON BOTH COUNTS.
----- Original Message -----
From: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
To: w.bow(at)att.net ; YOURTCFG(at)aol.com ; CloudCraft(at)aol.com
Cc: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: sump
HI BILL........
First, there is no absolute guarantee that it will ever become
an AD. Not all SBs make all the way up the food chain. However, I feel very
strongly that this one will make for a couple of reasons including the fact
that the FAA is pretty touchy about fuel related problems (flight 800).
To answer your question regarding compliance, the SB requires that an
inspection be performed on the sump and filter bodies for seepage prior to
each flight. If seepage is found, they must (and I really mean MUST) be
replaced before further flight. They are to be replaced within 100 hrs or at
the next annual inspection.
Guys, this is the real deal. These sumps really do fail and need to
be taken seriously. The sumps should never have been produced from Magnesium
but they were. The good news is that TCAC has tooled up and has the parts in
stock to keep you flying. Jeff C. at Commander is checking now to see if
only the sump can be changed or if the complete "kit" will be required. The
way I read the SB is that all the parts will need to be changed. The sump
only, is about $1400, the "kit" is About $2200, (- 10% from Aero Air)
depending on the model.
There are some "O" rings and gaskets, etc., that will need changed as
well and I don't know how much labor will cost, but they probably wont jump
out of the box and onto your airplane, so $3000 is probably not that far off.
If you already have the sump off, It might pay to bolt a new one on,
just to be sure?? I will contact John Bosch at Commander Aero today for his
thoughts and let you know later. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
In a message dated 5/20/01 7:54:58 AM Pacific Daylight Time, n27kb(at)erols.com
writes:
> I'D LIKE TO POINT SOMETHING OUT REGARDLESS OF THE FUTURE OF THIS SB. THE
> MANUFACTURER IS NOT ALLOWED TO ISSUE "MANDATORY" SBs.WITHOUT THE APPROVAL
> OF THE FAA. THEY KNOW THIS AND TO CONTINUE TO MISLEAD US. THIS IS DISHONEST
> AND THEY KNOW IT.
HI GARY......
You are correct, the FAA must approve all SBs. This was done in
this case. In an open letter to our group from Jeff Cousins, TCAC GM, he
states "Twin does not issue Service Bulletins without FAA review" (5-17-01).
Hope this helps to clarify jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | garyloff <n27kb(at)erols.com> |
I called TCAC. After speaking with several individuals and a very long time on
hold the answer I was given is the "FAA has reviewed the technical aspects of
the SB".
They said that approval was not sought only a review of the "technical aspects".
I asked for some documentation from the FAA that granted them the authority
to issue this "Mandatory SB" and at least the individuals I spoke with yesterday
had no documentation to offer and none would state categorically that they
had been directed to issue this SB.
I only got the very strong indication that they are playing with words and semantics.
If anyone can offer any documentation from the FAA granting this authority
to TCAC regarding SB 230A before todays date I'd like to see it as it would
go a long way in putting my mind at ease. Not that they shown it to them or
that they are aware of it, have discussed and all the other phrases that TCAC
threw at me about it but that the FAA has authorized, granted, directed TCAC to
issue this MANDATORY SERVICE BULLETIN.
I will offer my apologies in advance if the FAA has directed this SB. However I
am sick to death of manufaturers issuing these Mandatory SBs on their own and
then lobbying the authorities for the most extreme and thus most expensive fix.
Profits down issue a Service Bulletin.
G
From: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
To: n27kb(at)erols.com ; TCFG(at)listbot.com
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: sump
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
In a message dated 5/20/01 7:54:58 AM Pacific Daylight Time, n27kb(at)erols.com
writes:
I'D LIKE TO POINT SOMETHING OUT REGARDLESS OF THE FUTURE OF THIS SB. THE
MANUFACTURER IS NOT ALLOWED TO ISSUE "MANDATORY" SBs.WITHOUT THE APPROVAL
OF THE FAA. THEY KNOW THIS AND TO CONTINUE TO MISLEAD US. THIS IS DISHONEST
AND THEY KNOW IT.
HI GARY......
You are correct, the FAA must approve all SBs. This was done in
this case. In an open letter to our group from Jeff Cousins, TCAC GM, he
states "Twin does not issue Service Bulletins without FAA review" (5-17-01).
Hope this helps to clarify jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Motivation for SBs, ADs |
In a message dated 5/20/01 10:51:58 AM Pacific Daylight Time, n27kb(at)erols.com
writes:
> I will offer my apologies in advance if the FAA has directed this SB.
> However I am sick to death of manufaturers issuing these Mandatory SBs on
> their own and then lobbying the authorities for the most extreme and thus
> most expensive fix. Profits down issue a Service Bulletin.
Gary, Group,
Whether or not there is a profit motive, one thing is sure: There is the
liability issue.
This is not TCAC specific. In today's legal climate, you'll see OEMs of any
airframe, avionic, gadget or gizmo issue a SB, and often go to the FAA for
backing by convincing them there needs to be an AD, to limit their liability
exposure.
In the end, you're right. It's to protect the bottom line, but I don't think
it's always about selling parts and drawing business to factory maintenance
centers.
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | D Monk <britmonk(at)swbell.net> |
| Subject: | Odd Specimen again |
Hi Guys,
A little more on the mysterious N29DE.
Originally 680T-76 serial no.1699 registered as N4638E. Later to Canada
as C-FIIG, Flying Fireman Ltd. I have a reference to it as a 680V but
this may have been after it left the factory.
D E Monk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
Anyone going in their Commander ? If so what date(s), etc. ?
Maybe we can all park together ? I am planning on being there on July
22nd around noon. Staying until Thursday or Friday.
Bought my RV-7 Empennage kit so I want to take the buildling classes and
all.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Brown <pawpaw1(at)starband.net> |
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Brown
To: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 5:04 PM
Subject: sump
If you have a problem with the fuel sump SB, quit gripping here. If you dont believe
what TCAC says, file a suit and have your Lawyer grab the records.
I, for one, am tired of hearing it. If you really feel this way, then fish or cut
bait.
Richard
N108RG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Woodley Earthlink <woodlema(at)earthlink.net> |
Here is my 2 pennies.
I called TCAC, and was told that my AC560, straight 560, was exempt from this SB.
I spoke at lenght with one of their folks, not sure which one, but I think
it was the one who initially recommended the SB in the first place. He told
me when he had checked a couple commanders, he was able to puch his finger throught
the bottom of one of the sumps, with no effort. The other was close to
the same condition.
Personally I am going to check my pumps, anyhow since I really don't want to swim
in 150 gal of 100LL at 10,000 feet.
Perhaps there is a business issue. Perhaps it is motivated to sell parts, perhaps
it is motivated by the Lawsuit happy moron jurers in this country, and the
ASSES that award mega-bucks to anyone who can convince them that someone else
is to blame for their problem.
I believe the latter. I would also like to point out 1 thing. How much support
would you have for ANYcommander if some aviator filed suit against TCAC and won
$100,000,000.00 putting them out of business. I can tell you in one word.
NONE.
As far as legal terms. TCAC will NOT be guilty of cuplable negilgence if they
put out a mandatory SB, if the owner/operator fails to comply. This puts all
liablilty on the owner operator for the safety of the aircraft concerning this
particular part, and TCAC has fulfilled its fiduciary responsibility to the safety
of the pilot, pilots family, others who may be injured by a falling plane
and the business interests of not only TCAC, but any and all stock holders.
Sorry if some don;t agree with me, but that is how I see it. I was not happy with
the AD against the Hartzell props. It cost me a shade over $20,000.00 to
fix it. It was necessary, and needed, after seeing the potential for blade seperation,
and seeing the results of the inspetion of my old props. Even though
they were within tolerances, they were just close enough I did not want to deal
with it, hence NEW props.
Mark Woodley
AC560 Driver.
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Brown
To: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 7:13 PM
Subject: Fw: sump
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Brown
To: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 5:04 PM
Subject: sump
If you have a problem with the fuel sump SB, quit gripping here. If you dont
believe what TCAC says, file a suit and have your Lawyer grab the records.
I, for one, am tired of hearing it. If you really feel this way, then fish or
cut bait.
Richard
N108RG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Allen Reed <allen_reed2(at)hotmail.com> |
If you want a pointy nose You gotta pay the price. BIG AL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | res00rbl <res00rbl(at)verizon.net> |
Amen, Brother Brown enough, already! Jimbo (not Jimbob)
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Brown [mailto:pawpaw1(at)starband.net]
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 4:13 PM
To: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Subject: Fw: sump
_____
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
_____
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Brown <mailto:pawpaw1(at)starband.net>
To: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 5:04 PM
Subject: sump
If you have a problem with the fuel sump SB, quit gripping here. If you
dont believe what TCAC says, file a suit and have your Lawyer grab the
records.
I, for one, am tired of hearing it. If you really feel this way, then fish
or cut bait.
Richard
N108RG
_____
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | nico(at)cybersuperstore.com <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TAKE A DEEP BREATH |
Wise action, Cappie, go for it. We should negotiate before we litigate. I know
people are PO'ed, but this is the time to demonstrate that we are different from
insects.
Nico
-----Original Message-----
From: YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
To: TCFG(at)listbot.com
Date: Monday, May 21, 2001 9:25 AM
Subject: TAKE A DEEP BREATH
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
HI KIDS.......
I just wanted to ask everybody to "count to 10" and take a deep
breath. As I have said, I will be meeting with the powers to be this week.
Lets hear what they have to say.
This is an important issue to those owners effected. Assuming a 1000
airplanes will need to be fixed, at a cost of about 5K each, this is a $5
million action against the fleet.
Now, let me state that as your director I HAVE NO INTENTION OF
ENTERING INTO A LAW SUIT OVER THIS, NONE. NOR WILL I ASSIST ANYONE IN DOING
SO, PERIOD. As important as the issue is, it would accomplish nothing and
almost certainly damage TCAC. They would have little choice but to raise the
price of parts to recover their cost.
Lets all see what the week brings.
Anybody have any weekend "was stories" to share?? capt jimbob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: TAKE A DEEP BREATH |
thanks Nico..........jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Russell Legg <rlegg(at)ozemail.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: TAKE A DEEP BREATH |
Hello all,
I have been a little quiet of late, but feel that it is highly important to
add my little bit from down here in Oz particularly surrounding the current
sump stuff etc.
As an inaugural member of this list I have been highly impressed by the
levels of professionalism with which we have done our business and the
potent exchange of information that has occurred since our inception last
year.
I salute all those regular contributors... Please keep the dream alive!
Those of us here in Oz are incredibly strong supporters of the TCFG and all
of its initiatives and see as it as performing an invaluable interface with
TCAC. It is a high imperative for the future of our beloved Twin Commanders,
that all of our lines of communication stay open.
As remote as we are, there are a number of projects currently under way in
Oz to preserve many piston and turbine Twin Commanders. Since the first 560E
models arrived here in 1960 we have relied heavily on support from the
greater ground swell of momentum that owners in the US have been able to
exercise.
As a group we must ensure that our core business; that is refining and
implementing a productive interface with TCAC and the Service Centres is our
highest priority.
Over the past little while we here in Oz have found the ongoing support of
the fleet a highly problematic issue. We continue to heavily rely on the
vibrant network of Service Centres and support networks which only the US
can provide.
Believe me, with the right support there are potentially at least another 3,
4 or 5 long term restorations of bath tub and older piston models that are
possible here. Every other week I fly into an airfield in the NT and gaze at
3 Turbine airframes which continue to rot away. As a group we must find
better ways to get these airframes and their international equivalents back
in the air!
We must preserve and support the ongoing initiatives of the TCAC...there are
ways to go about it.
Lets continue to pull together and support Captain Jimbob in his efforts!
Regards to all
Russell
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Brown <pawpaw1(at)starband.net> |
HELP!
Took good ole 108RG down to Alice TX today to visit a friend and conduct a little
revenue producing deal (HOPE HOPE).
While there, spied a C-47/DC-3 for sale. A real nice bird. Great appearance and
Great interior. Then, I asked the owner what a plane like that was worth. (REAL
BIG MISTAKE!!!) He said Oh! this ones for sale for X dollars. I said would
you sell it for X dollars.
Well, looks like I'm off to type rating school. (Big mistake #3, I bought it.
The bright side? If the 500B breaks down, I can stick it in the back and haul
it to the shop.
If yall see me comming, DUCK!
Richard Brown,
108RG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
HI KIDS..........
I just wanted to let everybody know that I have once again found
gainful employment for the summer (giving tourist flights in a biplane on
floats, hard work)! This means that I have moved onto our boat in downtown
SEA. If you need to reach me by phone, the number is 206-675-1039. I will
be on the boat Thursday through Sunday, Home the rest of the week. I check
my messages from Washougal each day, so I will return calls from there as
well, albeit a day late.
I have made arrngments to swap newsletters and information with Dick
Ward, the director of the "T" bone society. We share many of the same
challenges and vendors so I think we can "gang up" on some issues.
It has been a week since I last flew triple 2 and I miss her. I will be
using the Commander to commute throughout the summer (a three hour drive
becomes a 39 minute flight, past Mt St. Hellens, Mt. Rainier and Mt Hood) It
will sure feel good to slide back into the left seat next week.
I will be meeting with Jeff and the FAA this week and will let you know
any news. have a great eve. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <chris(at)skymaster.c2-tech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lost my mind |
> Richard Brown wrote:
> Well, looks like I'm off to type rating school. (Big mistake #3, I
> bought it.
WOW!
That's just amazing! So, you gonna fly the thing to the TCFG flyin?
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Allen Reed <allen_reed2(at)hotmail.com> |
Yooo cann do it Rickeee; Congrat's on your purchase. BIG AL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Woodley Earthlink <woodlema(at)earthlink.net> |
Congratulations. I love to be nosey, how much was X, and a DC3 is one of
the only planes I like as much as the Twin Commanders. There is a DC3 with
the Turbine conversion not to far from where I work. I love to watch it
come and go.
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allen Reed" <allen_reed2(at)hotmail.com>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 10:17 AM
Subject: mind
>
>
> Yooo cann do it Rickeee; Congrat's on your purchase. BIG AL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | When men were men |
When men were men (and yes, the sheep were satisfied) we U.S. Forest Service
Air Attack pilots flew AC-500s and AC-680Es.
These kids nowadays fly Turbo Commanders!
For Sir Barry's files, I spotted one N24GT, s/n 11254 in a hangar at Fresno,
California. It was getting a complete avionics, or, rather Forest Service
radio package, so watch for that Form 337.
This is the second Turbo Commander configured as such.
For my purposes, the thrill of flying a piston Commander over a blazing
conflagration for 10 hours a day can't be replaced by the relative quiet and
air-conditioned comfort of an AC-690A.
On the other hand, we must salute the U.S. Forest Service's fine taste in
aircraft; their contracts are written to nearly exclude any other make.
(Sure, the occasional Skymaster sneaks in, but it's not by choice.)
Wing Commander Gordon
yearning for the good old days of smoke and oil streaked nacells
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tylor Hall <thall5(at)kc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Thank you, Misc, and Sumps. |
TCFG,
Thank you for such a warm welcome.
WingCommander Gordon, Yes I just recently left Aero-News.net to rejoin
Garsite, LLC here in Kansas City. They are the largest builder of Aircraft
refueler trucks in the country. www.garsite.com <http://www.garsite.com/>
Pardon the commercial plug. I am now building a 30,000 BL fuel farm at the
Flamingo Airport in Bonaire, N. A. (that is about 60 miles off the coast of
Venezuela). The company has at Ted Smith Aerostar 602P 700 that I get to
fly right seat on. We spend a lot of airline time, but that may change
after this last trip. We can get there faster in the Aerostar.
Yes, I still build the AVGAS self service pumps and tanks.
I am also doing some consulting in Unleaded AVGAS replacement for 100LL.
Sumps. I wandered into my local friendly airfreight company last Friday.
Central Air at MCI Downtown Kansas City Airport. They are now running
38-500Bs. I asked about the sump situation there. The parts guy showed me
two sumps that they have replaced. One was full of JB weld and goop with
lots of cracks in it. The other looked ok from the outside until you looked
inside of it. It was over 50% gone due to corrosion pitting on the inside.
Paper thin in spots.
We may scream about the cost, but there is a problem here.
They can only be inspected from looking inside and that means draining the
fuel system just to inspect it. Once you see it, you would not want to put
it back in your airplane.
Central Air is working on their own solution. I am not sure what.
Do you want me to go take some photos of these sumps and send them to Chris
to put in the web site???
Can you get a photo of the new style sump and post in on TCAC web site?? Or
a drawing??
Any one going from the Mid West to the fly-in in Oregon that has an open
seat??
Regards,
Tylor Hall
tylorh(at)sound.net
913-422-8869
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Thank you, Misc, and Sumps. |
In a message dated 5/23/01 9:39:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time, thall5(at)kc.rr.com
writes:
> Yes I just recently left Aero-News.net to rejoin Garsite, LLC here in Kansas
> City. They are the largest builder of Aircraft refueler trucks in the
> country.
I know this guy who now owns a DC-3 that may need one of those trucks ... ;-)
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lost my mind |
Nico,
I'll be working on my airplane tomorrow morning and Friday morning. Come
on over. I have to get into the office.
I work is Westlake Village at Verizon if you want to have lunch out
there.
Are you interested in going to Oshkosh with us ?
Paul
work 805.230.3502
nico wrote:
> HI Paul,Yes, I live in Westlake Village and often have lunch at the
> Waypoint. Didn't know that there was an AC on the 'port. I will
> contact you maybe we could have lunch some time.ThanksNico(818)
> 225-1913 (office)(818) 421-4089 (Mobile)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net>
> To: Nico van Niekerk
> Date: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 8:03 AM
> Subject: Re: Lost my mind
> Nico,
>
> Are you locally based. I am at CMA also ! Come by sometime
> or give me a call. I am looking to sell half my Aero
> Commander 680E by the way.
>
> Paul Odum
> 805.582.1848 Home
> 805.230.3502 Work
>
> Nico van Niekerk wrote:
>
> >
> > 1. Fill in the brief application
> > 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
> > 3. Get rates as low as 2.99% Intro or 9.99% Ongoing APR
> > Well good for you. You may even use it in a local chapter
> > of the Confederate Air Force. Here in Camarillo there is
> > one which seems to be in beautiful condition.Nico
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Richard Brown
> > To: tcfg(at)listbot.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 8:12 PM
> > Subject: Lost my mind
> > Twin Commander Flight Group -
> > http://www.aerocommander.com
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------
> > 1. Fill in the brief application
> > 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
> > 3. Get rates as low as 2.99% Intro or 9.99%
> > -------------------------------------------------
> > HELP! Took good ole 108RG down to Alice TX today
> > to visit a friend and conduct a little revenue
> > producing deal (HOPE HOPE). While there, spied a
> > C-47/DC-3 for sale. A real nice bird. Great
> > appearance and Great interior. Then, I asked
> > the owner what a plane like that was worth.
> > (REAL BIG MISTAKE!!!) He said Oh! this ones
> > for sale for X dollars. I said would you sell
> > it for X dollars. Well, looks like I'm off to
> > type rating school. (Big mistake #3, I bought
> > it. The bright side? If the 500B breaks down, I
> > can stick it in the back and haul it to the
> > shop. If yall see me comming, DUCK! Richard
> > Brown,108RG
> > -------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, write to
> > TCFG-unsubscribe(at)listbot.com
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cyberbus <cyberbus(at)pacificnet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lost my mind |
I will stop by tomorrow morning. Where abouts are you, say relative to the Waypoint
Cafe and what time?
Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Odum
To: nico
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: Lost my mind
Nico,
I'll be working on my airplane tomorrow morning and Friday morning. Come on over.
I have to get into the office.
I work is Westlake Village at Verizon if you want to have lunch out there.
Are you interested in going to Oshkosh with us ?
Paul
work 805.230.3502
nico wrote:
HI Paul,Yes, I live in Westlake Village and often have lunch at the Waypoint.
Didn't know that there was an AC on the 'port. I will contact you maybe we
could have lunch some time.ThanksNico(818) 225-1913 (office)(818) 421-4089 (Mobile)
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net>
To: Nico van Niekerk
Date: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 8:03 AM
Subject: Re: Lost my mind
Nico,
Are you locally based. I am at CMA also ! Come by sometime or give me a call.
I am looking to sell half my Aero Commander 680E by the way.
Paul Odum
805.582.1848 Home
805.230.3502 Work
Nico van Niekerk wrote:
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
Well good for you. You may even use it in a local chapter of the Confederate
Air Force. Here in Camarillo there is one which seems to be in beautiful
condition.Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Brown
To: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 8:12 PM
Subject: Lost my mind
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
3. Get rates as low as 2.99% Intro or 9.99% Ongoing APR and no annual
fee!
HELP! Took good ole 108RG down to Alice TX today to visit a friend and
conduct a little revenue producing deal (HOPE HOPE). While there, spied a C-47/DC-3
for sale. A real nice bird. Great appearance and Great interior. Then,
I asked the owner what a plane like that was worth. (REAL BIG MISTAKE!!!)
He said Oh! this ones for sale for X dollars. I said would you sell it for X
dollars. Well, looks like I'm off to type rating school. (Big mistake #3, I bought
it. The bright side? If the 500B breaks down, I can stick it in the back
and haul it to the shop. If yall see me comming, DUCK! Richard Brown,108RG
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lost my mind |
Nico,
If you walk left out of the Waypoint and go down toward the wash rack
you will see the Commander to the right of the wash rack. I'll be down
there around 10:30 or 11:00. the wash rack is beside the Sheriff's
helicopter area behind Camarillo Aircraft Service.
I normally go to the gym in the morning and then go out to the airport.
I have to do some cleaning on my engine nacelles tomorrow.
Paul
Nico van Niekerk wrote:
> Paul,I will stop by tomorrow morning. Where about are you say from
> the Waypoint Cafe and what time would be good?ThanksNico
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul Odum
> To: nico
> Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 6:12 PM
> Subject: Re: Lost my mind
> Nico,
>
> I'll be working on my airplane tomorrow morning and Friday
> morning. Come on over. I have to get into the office.
>
> I work is Westlake Village at Verizon if you want to have
> lunch out there.
>
> Are you interested in going to Oshkosh with us ?
>
> Paul
> work 805.230.3502
>
> nico wrote:
>
> > HI Paul,Yes, I live in Westlake Village and often have
> > lunch at the Waypoint. Didn't know that there was an AC on
> > the 'port. I will contact you maybe we could have lunch
> > some time.ThanksNico(818) 225-1913 (office)(818) 421-4089
> > (Mobile)
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Paul Odum <calnet01(at)gte.net>
> > To: Nico van Niekerk
> > Date: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 8:03 AM
> > Subject: Re: Lost my mind
> > Nico,
> >
> > Are you locally based. I am at CMA also ! Come
> > by sometime or give me a call. I am looking to
> > sell half my Aero Commander 680E by the way.
> >
> > Paul Odum
> > 805.582.1848 Home
> > 805.230.3502 Work
> >
> > Nico van Niekerk wrote:
> >
> > > Twin Commander Flight Group -
> > > http://www.aerocommander.com
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------
> > > 1. Fill in the brief application
> > > 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
> > > 3. Get rates as low as 2.99% Intro or 9.99%
> > > ------------------------------------------------
> > > Well good for you. You may even use it in a
> > > local chapter of the Confederate Air Force.
> > > Here in Camarillo there is one which seems to
> > > be in beautiful condition.Nico
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Richard Brown
> > > To: tcfg(at)listbot.com
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 8:12 PM
> > > Subject: Lost my mind
> > > Twin Commander Flight Group -
> > > http://www.aerocommander.com
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------
> > > Get a low APR NextCard Visa in 30
> > > seconds!
> > > 1. Fill in the brief application
> > > 2. Receive approval decision within
> > > 30 seconds
> > > 3. Get rates as low as 2.99% Intro or
> > > http://www
> > > bcentral.com/listbot/NextCard
> > > --------------------------------------
> > > HELP! Took good ole 108RG down to
> > > Alice TX today to visit a friend and
> > > conduct a little revenue producing
> > > deal (HOPE HOPE). While there, spied
> > > a C-47/DC-3 for sale. A real nice
> > > bird. Great appearance and Great
> > > interior. Then, I asked the owner
> > > what a plane like that was worth.
> > > (REAL BIG MISTAKE!!!) He said Oh!
> > > this ones for sale for X dollars. I
> > > said would you sell it for X dollars.
> > > Well, looks like I'm off to type
> > > rating school. (Big mistake #3, I
> > > bought it. The bright side? If the
> > > 500B breaks down, I can stick it in
> > > the back and haul it to the shop. If
> > > yall see me comming, DUCK! Richard
> > > Brown,108RG
> > > --------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, write to
> > > TCFG-unsubscribe(at)listbot.com
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, write to
> > > TCFG-unsubscribe(at)listbot.com
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | MEMBER IN THE NEWS |
HI KIDS......
TCFG member Jack Lewis is in the news. "Lewis, who owns an Aero
Commander (685), said he believes the museum ultimately aims to take over the
parking on the South west corner of Boeing field..........."
He is quoted in the MAY 11, 2001, ISSUE OF FLYER MAGAZINE. GO GET UM
JACK!! JB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Brown <pawpaw1(at)starband.net> |
| Subject: | Re: lost my mind |
Was wifes idea, said OOOOh! that looks nice. What is that? Look at all the room.
I can take all the kids and my MOM on vacation together. (i had to make
that sacrifice, darn). It really was here idea. I begged and pleaded with her
not to make me buy it. She twisted my arm so hard.
MOTHER IN LAW!! Oh well, life aint all gravey.
Rich
----- Original Message -----
From: Milt Concannon
To: Twin Commander Flightgroup
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 1:19 PM
Subject: lost my mind
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
Man you have some thing that cahoneeeees! Has your wife divorced you yet?
I wondered what would get us off the issue of sumps but you really didnt have
to do anything that spectacular.
With all that space you can just pickup everyone and take us to th flyin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Brown <pawpaw1(at)starband.net> |
Some pics
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Vormbaum <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
AWESOME!!!!!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Brown
To: tcfg(at)listbot.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 9:53 PM
Subject: Big Bird
Some pics
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com <CloudCraft(at)aol.com> |
Richard,
That's a fine looking wheel house! Congrats! You'll have a blast flying
that.
You can strap your Commander to the roof rack and have a run-about -- kind of
like those people that tow a car behing their Winnebago.
Have fun,
Wing Commander Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harry Merritt <avtec(at)scci.net> |
| Subject: | Re: What is this plane worth? |
Yes If You dont buy please send me his Phone number
Harry 321-267-3141
Nico van Niekerk wrote:
>
> 1. Fill in the brief application
> 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
> 3. Get rates as low as 2.99% Intro or 9.99% Ongoing APR and no annual
> fee!
> Chief, I can get a 680FL with IGSO-540-B1A (380 HP) WITH L 208 / R
> 588, props 27 Snew L & R. Total time 2,800! Interior and exterior
> 10/10 Panel kit:New century 2000 auto pilot with altitude hold and pre
> select. Coupled to GPS.
> New Sandals digital RMI.
> New Garmin GNS430 GPS, NAV, COM.
> New Garmin 340 audio panal.
> New JPIntenational engine monitoring system.
> Shadin Digiflo fuel computer
> 1 x King KDX 150 color radar.
> 1 x King KY 97 com
> 1 x King KT76A Transponder with mode c encoding altimeter.
> 1 x King KN 52 Nav with glide slop.
> 2 x King K___ digital A.D.FThe owner says that there is no need for
> spar inspections or mods. Is this right on the 680FL? He wants about
> $100K.Do you think this could be a good buy? An educated guess would
> be appreciated.ThanksNico
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tylor Hall <thall5(at)kc.rr.com> |
Richard,
What does it say across the top of the fuselage??
Is that a USMC paint job?
What a great airplane. The photos show that someone has been hard at work.
It looks great. Enjoy.
Regards,
Tylor Hall
tylorh(at)sound.net
913-422-8869
________________________________________________________________________________
where is the picture of this thing?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AOPA ePilot Newsletter <aopa_news(at)aopa.org> |
| Subject: | AOPA ePilot -- Vol. 3, Issue 21 |
AOPA ePilot--Vol. 3, Issue 21
Departments
Inside AOPA
On Capitol Hill
Airport Support Network
ASF News
Quiz Me!
2001 Bonanza
Sweepstakes
ePilot Calendar
Weekend Weather
Polen Special to attempt world speed record
Golden Knight to jump from 130,000 feet
Italian company offers airplane to U.S. market
AOPA fights for threatened airports
Volume 3, Issue 21
May 25, 2001
GA News
CESSNA LAYS OFF WORKERS AT PISTON-ENGINE PLANT
Citing sluggish sales in a withering economy, Cessna Aircraft Company
laid off nearly 30 percent of its workforce this week at the Independence,
Kansas, facility where it makes piston-engine airplanes. Cessna cut 280 of the
1,000 jobs at the factory. "It's something we certainly didn't want to do," said
Cessna spokeswoman Marilyn Richwine. Cessna was planning to build 1,100 airplanes
this year but is now shooting for 900. Cessna noted a drop in sales after
the first of the year as potential buyers became more sensitive about discretionary
spending, she said. But the turbine market remains strong for both the
Citation and Caravan lines.
GOLDEN KNIGHT TO JUMP FROM 130,000 FEET
The first female member of the U.S. Army's famed Golden Knights parachute
team told The Washington Post that she will attempt next spring to jump
from a balloon flying at 130,000 feet. If Army reservist Cheryl Stearns is successful,
she will exceed the highest known jump to date of 102,000 feet by Air
Force Capt. Joe Kittinger Jr. in 1960. Stearns, a member of the current Golden
Knights team, is also a pilot for U.S. Airways. After jumping from a balloon
that she will pilot, Stearns will accelerate to 695 knots, exceeding the sound
barrier. Stearns told the newspaper that she hopes her efforts will help scientists
design escape mechanisms for astronauts.
POLEN SPECIAL TO ATTEMPT WORLD SPEED RECORD
Dick Keyt, owner of the Polen Special aircraft designed and built by
Dennis Polen, will attempt a world speed record in the single-seat tailwheel
aircraft this summer at Oshkosh. Keyt said he is making the record attempt to
honor Polen, who suffered a stroke following completion of the aircraft. Keyt
will attempt the 500-kilometer (270-nautical-mile) closed course record for aircraft
in the C-1.b category. He must exceed 285 mph (248 kt) to achieve the
record. A Questair Venture aircraft set the current record. The sporty red Polen
Special, powered by a 180-hp Lycoming O-360 engine, is expected to reach 260
kt in level flight. It is currently being modified and will use a Mattituck
engine and a Hartzell propeller.
ITALIAN COMPANY OFFERS AIRPLANE TO U.S. MARKET
Tecnam Costruzioni Aeronautiche, located in Naples, Italy, is offering
its two-passenger, 124-knot, all-metal high-wing P92-2000RG to the U.S. kitplane
market. The fast-build kit will cost $32,100. Completed with a 100-hp Rotax
912ULS engine and cockpit instrumentation, the average aircraft will cost
$45,000 to $55,000. The factory claims a build time of 350 hours for experienced
builders. The aircraft features side-by-side seating and uses pneumatically
retractable tricycle landing gear. There are thousands of older fixed-gear models
of the aircraft flying worldwide. The aircraft can operate in the United
States under the Experimental category. The aircraft is marketed in America by
Pacific Aerosystem; telephone 800/844-1441 or 858/571-1441; e-mail.
COMPANY BUYS ORBCOMM SATELLITE SYSTEM
International Licensees LLC announced that it has bought all the business
assets of Orbcomm Global LP, the world's first commercial low-Earth-orbit
(LEO) satellite-based data and communications system. Orbcomm had been under
Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection since last September. International Licensees
is a consortium of Orbcomm licensees and other investors. Orbcomm contracts
services to Echo Flight, which provides weather data and other services to light
aircraft. Although it now appears that Echo Flight can look toward a more
certain future, there was no interruption in service because of the bankruptcy.
For daily news updates, see AOPA Online.
Inside AOPA
AOPA FIGHTS FOR THREATENED AIRPORTS
AOPA and AOPA Airport Support Network volunteers are fighting developments
and restrictions that threaten airports. AOPA is supporting local pilot
groups and others who are resisting development proposals around airports that
would violate laws, regulations, or agreements that prohibit incompatible land
use with airport operations. Most recently, AOPA has lodged formal protests
with local authorities considering housing and other development proposals close
to airports at Kenosha, Wisconsin; Chico, California; and McCall, Idaho.
See AOPA Online.
AOPA JOINS CHICAGO TO CURB AIR TRAFFIC DELAYS
The City of Chicago and FAA officials have asked AOPA to help them
find solutions for regional airline delays. AOPA will join the 2001 Chicago Delay
Task Force, a group of technical experts that will recommend solutions for
reducing aircraft delays at O'Hare International Airport and its surrounding
airspace. "We want to make sure that the solutions take general aviation into
account," said AOPA President Phil Boyer. Over the weekend, U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin
(D-Iowa) warned that Congress would intervene if Chicago didn't take action
to reduce airline delays by July 1. Meanwhile, an AOPA-produced TV commercial
is airing on Illinois TV stations, reminding politicians and the public that
Meigs Field is part of the solution.
TEXAS AIRPORT BILL IS CLOSE TO BECOMING LAW
The Texas legislature is supporting the construction of a new general
aviation airport in central Texas. The Senate this week approved House Bill
2522 and sent it back to the House for concurrence. The governor has said that
he will sign the bill. The bill requires the state to build a new general aviation
airport to replace facilities lost after the City of Austin closed downtown
Austin-Mueller Airport. AOPA and the Texas Aviation Association lobbied extensively
for the bill, and AOPA Airport Support Network volunteers helped rally
Texas pilots to contact state legislators to push for the bill's passage.
FULL RAMP SLATED FOR AOPA FLY-IN
More than 50 aircraft are planned for the static display at the eleventh
annual AOPA Fly-In and Open House on June 2 at AOPA headquarters in Frederick,
Maryland. Fresh out of the avionics shop with a cutting-edge all-glass
panel, the 2001 AOPA Sweepstakes Bonanza is scheduled for its first public display.
See AOPA Online.
Changing your mailing or e-mail addresses? Click here to update.
On Capitol Hill
DEMOCRATS REGAIN SENATE CONTROL
Vermont Sen. Jim Jeffords announced Thursday that he is leaving the
Republican Party to become an Independent. This decision gave Democrats control
of the Senate for the first time since 1994. Pilot Tom Daschle of South Dakota
is now the majority leader of the Senate. Sen. John McCain of Arizona must
relinquish the chairmanship of the Senate Commerce Committee to user fee opponent
Ernest Hollings of South Carolina. And AOPA member Ted Stevens of Alaska
will no longer chair the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee. AOPA will continue
to monitor the ramifications for general aviation. See AOPA Online.
Airport Support Network
VOLUNTEER OF THE WEEKDAVID FAILE JR.
David Faile Jr. of Igor Sikorsky Memorial Airport (BDR) in Connecticut
advised AOPA that he has been working to improve runway safety. He has created
a multimedia presentation tailored to the unique characteristics of BDR.
Faile and the local FAA FSDO manager will make a regional presentation at the
New England Runway Safety Seminar this month.
ASN SEEKS VOLUNTEERS What would you do if your airport closed tomorrow?
The AOPA Airport Support Network is looking for volunteers at several airports
in California, including DAG, 2Q3, L18, FAT, HAF, HMT, and 1O2.
To learn more about the Airport Support Network, visit AOPA Online.
AOPA Air Safety Foundation News
STILL TIME TO APPLY FOR ASF SCHOLARSHIPS
ExxonMobil Lubricants and Petroleum Specialties and the Koch Corporation
are offering scholarships to mechanics and people in other aviation fields.
The application deadline is July 31. For complete information and applications
on scholarships administered by ASF, see AOPA Online.
Quiz Me!
Heres a question asked by an AOPA member last week of our AOPA technical
specialists. Test your knowledge.
Question: Are multifocal contact lenses approved by the FAA for pilot
medical certification?
Answer: No, according to the Guide for Aviation Medical Examiners.
The guide states, "Contact lenses that correct near vision acuity only or that
are bifocal or monofocal, are not considered acceptable for aviation duties.
Similarly, the use of a contact lens in one eye for distant visual acuity and
a lens in the other eye for near visual acuity (monovision) is not acceptable."
For more, see AOPA Online.
Got a technical question for AOPA specialists? Call 800/872-2672 or
e-mail to inforequest(at)aopa.org. Send comments on our Quiz Me! questions to epilot(at)aopa.org.
AOPA Sweepstakes Bonanza Update
It's amazing what a sloped windshield can do for an old Bonanza's appearance.
See what this mod has done for the 2001 AOPA Sweepstakes Bonanza in
our latest project update. See AOPA Online.
What's New At AOPA Online
A new medical report is available on AOPA Online about FAA certification
for pilots with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and related conditions.
See AOPA Online.
On The Road To Expo
Richard Jarvis of Haverhill, Massachusetts, flew 2,248.5 miles to Long
Beach, California, to attend an event last year. What would make him do that?
AOPA Expo. Jarvis picked up the award for the pilot who flew the farthest
in a general aviation aircraft. See why AOPA Expo 2001 will be even better in
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, on AOPA Online.
ePilot Calendar
April 29, 2001 - May 25, 2001
Commander-Archive.digest.vol-aa