Commander-Archive.digest.vol-by
March 07, 2006 - April 02, 2006
>
>
> Tom. The shimmy is from the brake shoe tension on the strut. There are
> shims that set the spacing and tension of these. Over the years, the
shoes wear
> and allow for a lack of tension. Simply remove the friction brake by
> loosening the two #3 bolts, remove the brake shoes and springs.
Reassemble,
> leaving on shim removed and you will be OK. Or, you can do what I do.
Buy some
> disc brake cleaner in an aerosol can form the local auto parts store.
> Liberally spray the friction brake and watch all of the old good run out.
When the
> can is empty, the cleaning id complete and the shimmy will almost
certainly be
> gone for at leas another year. I do have those pages and can fax them
this
> evening if you send you fax number. Good luck (Ps, keep at least 45psi
in
> the nose tire). jb
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi Jimbob!
Doug's fax number:
01144207 7921053
That's the number including the International Code etc.
Sincere Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 6:45 PM
Subject: Commander-List: DOUG J.
|
| HI BARRY.
|
| I need to fax Doug J. a document regarding the STC. The fax number
| he gave me wont work?? Would it be possible for you to contact him and have
| him email me his contact info?? Thanks so much!! jb
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Addington" <jtaddington(at)charter.net> |
Tom,
I can send you pages 9 & 10 from my 500A manual if it would help.
Jim Addington
N444BD
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tom
Fisher
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 10:52 AM
Subject: Commander-List: Shop manual
Gentlemen,
In reviewing my shop manual for a nose wheel shimmy that I have developed I
discovered that I am missing Page 6-9 & 6-10 from my manual.
Would someone be able to fax/Email me these two pages?
Tom F.
Voice: 604-649-9320
Fax: 604-274-1281
Eamil: tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Addington" <jtaddington(at)charter.net>
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 11:30
Subject: RE: Commander-List: cooler search
>
> I forwarded this to Don Kelly and he said he would get to it some time
this
> afternoon.
>
> Jim
> N444BD
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> br549phil(at)mindspring.com
> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 12:52 PM
> To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: cooler search
>
>
> Thanks Barry,
>
> The phone #s are current, new Email is: hr(at)hicksandlawrence.com
> Unfortunately no 560F coolers. If you can think of any other possible
> sources please let me know.
>
> Phil Stubbs
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Barry Collman <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
> > To:
> > Date: 3/3/2006 2:10:54 PM
> > Subject: Re: Commander-List: cooler search
> >
> <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
> >
> > Hicks & Lawrence may possibly be contacted by the following methods:
> >
> > Email: duane(at)hickslawrence.com
> > Phone: 807 937 5544
> > Fax: 807 937 2464
> >
> > I say 'possibly', as they may not be current!
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Barry
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 5:36 PM
> > Subject: Re: Commander-List: cooler search
> >
> >
> > |
> > |
> > | In a message dated 3/2/2006 6:50:56 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> > | br549phil(at)mindspring.com writes:
> > |
> > | Please, If anyone knows of a junkyard that has commanders I'd love
to
> have
> > | the name or number.
> > | Something servicable or repairable.
> > | Been grounded for two weeks now. Corrosion made mine unrepairable.
> > | Thanks,
> > |
> > |
> > | Hick & Lawrnce has the salvage from a 560F. They operate Commanders
in
> > | Canada on a fire contract. I dont have their contact info any more,
> sorry.
> > jb
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca> |
No thanks, I would like to bring my 680 manual to completion.
I still have my 500B manual.
Tom F.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Addington" <jtaddington(at)charter.net>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 13:53
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Shop manual
>
> Tom,
> I can send you pages 9 & 10 from my 500A manual if it would help.
>
> Jim Addington
> N444BD
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tom
> Fisher
> Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 10:52 AM
> To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Commander-List: Shop manual
>
>
>
>
> Gentlemen,
>
> In reviewing my shop manual for a nose wheel shimmy that I have developed
I
> discovered that I am missing Page 6-9 & 6-10 from my manual.
> Would someone be able to fax/Email me these two pages?
>
> Tom F.
> Voice: 604-649-9320
> Fax: 604-274-1281
> Eamil: tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Addington" <jtaddington(at)charter.net>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 11:30
> Subject: RE: Commander-List: cooler search
>
>
>
> >
> > I forwarded this to Don Kelly and he said he would get to it some time
> this
> > afternoon.
> >
> > Jim
> > N444BD
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> > br549phil(at)mindspring.com
> > Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 12:52 PM
> > To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Commander-List: cooler search
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks Barry,
> >
> > The phone #s are current, new Email is: hr(at)hicksandlawrence.com
> > Unfortunately no 560F coolers. If you can think of any other possible
> > sources please let me know.
> >
> > Phil Stubbs
> >
> >
> > > [Original Message]
> > > From: Barry Collman <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
> > > To:
> > > Date: 3/3/2006 2:10:54 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Commander-List: cooler search
> > >
> > <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
> > >
> > > Hicks & Lawrence may possibly be contacted by the following methods:
> > >
> > > Email: duane(at)hickslawrence.com
> > > Phone: 807 937 5544
> > > Fax: 807 937 2464
> > >
> > > I say 'possibly', as they may not be current!
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Barry
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 5:36 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Commander-List: cooler search
> > >
> > >
> > > |
> > > |
> > > | In a message dated 3/2/2006 6:50:56 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> > > | br549phil(at)mindspring.com writes:
> > > |
> > > | Please, If anyone knows of a junkyard that has commanders I'd love
> to
> > have
> > > | the name or number.
> > > | Something servicable or repairable.
> > > | Been grounded for two weeks now. Corrosion made mine
unrepairable.
> > > | Thanks,
> > > |
> > > |
> > > | Hick & Lawrnce has the salvage from a 560F. They operate
Commanders
> in
> > > | Canada on a fire contract. I dont have their contact info any
more,
> > sorry.
> > > jb
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > > |
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
THANKS, That is the number I have but it wont go through?? jb
________________________________________________________________________________
Hi JimBob,
Well, I don't know what the problem is, but I checked the number 3 or 4 times
with Doug before passing it on!
I still have the number here on my desk, exactly as you need to dial (01144 207
792 1053).
I haven't got a fax machine here, otherwise you could try sending it to me, to
forward on to him. I don't think any of my neighbours have either.
What is it you're trying to fax? Is it something that can be scanned & emailed
as an attached file?
Sincere Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 4:19 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: DOUG J.
|
| THANKS, That is the number I have but it wont go through?? jb
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca> |
Mason, thanks for faxing those two pages, Tom F.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 3/8/2006 2:20:34 AM Pacific Standard Time,
barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk writes:
Well, I don't know what the problem is, but I checked the number 3 or 4
times
with Doug before passing it on!
Got it. Thanks!! jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Addington" <jtaddington(at)charter.net> |
I talked to Charlie Davis yesterday and he has decided to sell his 500B
N121SP (and his J-3 Cub). It is an exceptionally clean airplane, very loaded
and he just spent some where around $50,000 on radios, autopilot and new
carpet. Any one interested call him at 940-383-1606 or on his cell
817-925-0252. The plane is the one that was in AOPA three or four years ago.
Call him or call me at 940-566-2651
Jim Addington
N444BD
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 500B For sale |
I thought the 'N' number rang a bell. It was at the Kansas City Fly-In in 2004
and I took a photo of it, which is on airliners.net
http://www.airliners.net/search/?
Just search on "N121SP", or on Photo ID 0861217.
Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Addington" <jtaddington(at)charter.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 9:19 PM
Subject: Commander-List: 500B For sale
|
|
| I talked to Charlie Davis yesterday and he has decided to sell his 500B
| N121SP (and his J-3 Cub). It is an exceptionally clean airplane, very loaded
| and he just spent some where around $50,000 on radios, autopilot and new
| carpet. Any one interested call him at 940-383-1606 or on his cell
| 817-925-0252. The plane is the one that was in AOPA three or four years ago.
| Call him or call me at 940-566-2651
|
| Jim Addington
| N444BD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Owens" <dowens(at)aerialviewpoint.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 500B For sale |
The Link for your (Barry) pic is
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=0861217&WxsIERv=Nreb%20Pbzznaqre%20500O%20Pbzznaqre&Wm=0&WdsYXMg=Hagvgyrq&QtODMg=Xnafnf%20Pvgl%20-%20Qbjagbja%20%28Zhavpvcny%29%20%28ZXP%20%2F%20XZXP%29&ERDLTkt=HFN%20-%20Zvffbhev&ktODMp=Frcgrzore%2024%2C%202004&BP=1&WNEb25u=Oneel%20W%20Pbyyzna&xsIERvdWdsY=A121FC&MgTUQtODMgKE=&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=491&NEb25uZWxs=2005-06-17%2008%3A36%3A11&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=984-25&static=yes&width=1024&height=696&sok=JURER%20%20%28ert%20%3D%20%27A121FC%27%29%20%20BEQRE%20OL%20cubgb_vq%20QRFP&photo_nr=1&prev_id=&next_id=NEXTID
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: 500B For sale
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
>
> I thought the 'N' number rang a bell. It was at the Kansas City Fly-In in
2004
> and I took a photo of it, which is on airliners.net
>
> http://www.airliners.net/search/?
>
> Just search on "N121SP", or on Photo ID 0861217.
>
> Best Regards,
> Barry
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Addington" <jtaddington(at)charter.net>
> To: "COMMANDER-LIST"
> Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 9:19 PM
> Subject: Commander-List: 500B For sale
>
>
>
> |
> |
> | I talked to Charlie Davis yesterday and he has decided to sell his 500B
> | N121SP (and his J-3 Cub). It is an exceptionally clean airplane, very
loaded
> | and he just spent some where around $50,000 on radios, autopilot and new
> | carpet. Any one interested call him at 940-383-1606 or on his cell
> | 817-925-0252. The plane is the one that was in AOPA three or four years
ago.
> | Call him or call me at 940-566-2651
> |
> | Jim Addington
> | N444BD
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Addington" <jtaddington(at)charter.net> |
That's it and we were there enjoying every minute. Nice picture.
Jim
N444BD
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of David
Owens
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: 500B For sale
The Link for your (Barry) pic is
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=0861217&WxsIERv=Nreb%20Pbzznaqre%20500
O%20Pbzznaqre&Wm=0&WdsYXMg=Hagvgyrq&QtODMg=Xnafnf%20Pvgl%20-%20Qbjagbja%20%2
8Zhavpvcny%29%20%28ZXP%20%2F%20XZXP%29&ERDLTkt=HFN%20-%20Zvffbhev&ktODMp=Frc
grzore%2024%2C%202004&BP=1&WNEb25u=Oneel%20W%20Pbyyzna&xsIERvdWdsY=A121FC&Mg
TUQtODMgKE=&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=491&NEb25uZWxs=2005-06-17%2008%3A36%3A11&ODJ9dv
CE=&O89Dcjdg=984-25&static=yes&width=1024&height=696&sok=JURER%20%20%28ert%2
0%3D%20%27A121FC%27%29%20%20BEQRE%20OL%20cubgb_vq%20QRFP&photo_nr=1&prev_id&next_id=NEXTID
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: 500B For sale
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
>
> I thought the 'N' number rang a bell. It was at the Kansas City Fly-In in
2004
> and I took a photo of it, which is on airliners.net
>
> http://www.airliners.net/search/?
>
> Just search on "N121SP", or on Photo ID 0861217.
>
> Best Regards,
> Barry
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Addington" <jtaddington(at)charter.net>
> To: "COMMANDER-LIST"
> Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 9:19 PM
> Subject: Commander-List: 500B For sale
>
>
>
> |
> |
> | I talked to Charlie Davis yesterday and he has decided to sell his 500B
> | N121SP (and his J-3 Cub). It is an exceptionally clean airplane, very
loaded
> | and he just spent some where around $50,000 on radios, autopilot and new
> | carpet. Any one interested call him at 940-383-1606 or on his cell
> | 817-925-0252. The plane is the one that was in AOPA three or four years
ago.
> | Call him or call me at 940-566-2651
> |
> | Jim Addington
> | N444BD
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "" <br549phil(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: FW: Re: oil cooler |
In my search for 560F oil coolers Roland told me about Doug Turner who apparently
has two straight 560s for parts.
If anyone is interested his address is copters8(at)cs.com
Still looking for a Harrison cooler #8530341...
Phil Stubbs
----- Original Message -----
From: Doug Turner
Sent: 3/12/2006 11:13:44 AM
Subject: Re: oil cooler
Phil, I DON'T REMEMBER WHICH MODEL THEY ARE AND I HAVEN'T GONE OUT TO LOOK AT THEM
YET, I SENT ONE OF MY GUYS TO GET THE PHOTOS...I THINK THE ENGINES ARE LYCOMING
GO 480. I WANT TO GET RID ALL OF IT. I BOUGHT BOTH OF THEM SIGHT UNSEEN
AND WAS TOLD THEY COULD BE FERRIED OUT...I SPENT 10K SENDING MECHANICS DOWN TO
GET THEM READY FOR ME TO FLY OUT...ONLY TO FIND OUT IT WOULD COST 3 TIMES WHAT
YOU COULD BUY ONE IN THE STATES AND FLYING FOR.. I WOULD MAKE SOMEONE A HELL
OF A DEAL JUST NOT TO HAVE TO LOOK AT THEM ANY MORE..
DOUG
----- Original Message -----
From: br549phil(at)mindspring.com
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 9:09 AM
Subject: Re: oil cooler
Unfortunately it is not a 560F. But if you let me know what they are, some other
folks on the Commander list might be interested and I would be happy to post
it there.
Thanks,
Phil
Phil Stubbs
----- Original Message -----
From: Doug Turner
Sent: 3/11/2006 10:25:05 PM
Subject: Re: oil cooler
it's a 560 ....i think.. i will get you a part number mnonday..
\Goug
----- Original Message -----
From: br549phil(at)mindspring.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: oil cooler
Hi Doug,
Thanks for the reply. The lower cooler on the 560F came in two sizes. The one
I have is installed on 560Fs up to and including serial# 1330.
The Harrison part #is 8530341.
Phil
Phil Stubbs
----- Original Message -----
From: Doug Turner
Sent: 3/7/2006 9:19:23 PM
Subject: Re: oil cooler
Phil, I have a cooler for your 560. i have just returned after 9 days on the road..I'll
get a photo of it and contact you wednesday...you can call me at 270
437-3940.
Doug Turner
----- Original Message -----
From: br549phil(at)mindspring.com
Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 11:39 PM
Subject: oil cooler
Hi,
Someone on the Commander list suggested I contact you regarding my search for a
lower oil cooler on my 560F.
If you have one or know of any possible sources please contact me.
Thanks,
Phil Stubbs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
HI KIDS.
Later this month I will be attending the FAA meeting on aging
aircraft to be held in Kansas City. With me will be Mr. Gary Rankin, the pres.
of
the Navion Society. Many other type groups will be represented as well as
type certificate holders. The FAA is seeking guidance for proposals that will
effect the long term life of our airframes.
I am told on good authority that the FAA has no hidden agenda here but
is sincerely looking for help from the industry regarding this issue. The
recent wing failure of the Chauks Airline Grumman Mallard precipitated this
meeting.
There are a few sugestions already making there way to the surface.
One, sponsored by the EAA, would allow all aircraft certificate under the old
CAR-3 standards to "opt out" of the normal category and be placed in a new
category allowing for much more flexibility in the use of parts and
modifications. Although I have not seen a hard draft of this proposal, it appears
it
would be similar to the Canadian "owner maintained" category, we shall see.
While I don't see this as a bad proposal, and support the concept, it doesn't
seem to address the FAAs real concern. The airframes would soldier on, albeit
with new parts etc, with no regard to the main issue, old airframes.
Another idea is that type certificate holders and type groups join
forces and create a "super annual" inspection. This would be done at a
predetermined time, ether years of flight hours or both. It could only be done
by an
approved (special training) facility. It may or may not be reoccurring.
I have spoken to the new owner of Twin Commander, Jim Mathison. There
will be a representative from Twin, there and we plan to meet.
This may be one of the most significant meetings with the FAA to happen
in years, maybe ever. Input there will help guide the decision making
process for many years to come.
What are your thoughts?? Do you have any input you would like me to
carry tot he floor from you?? jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "MASON Chevaillier" <kamala(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: FW: Re: oil cooler |
see if pete harrison still lives in atlanta, he might help. mason
>From: "" <br549phil(at)mindspring.com>
>Reply-To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
>To: "commander-list"
>Subject: Commander-List: FW: Re: oil cooler
>Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 19:55:20 -0500
>
>
>In my search for 560F oil coolers Roland told me about Doug Turner who
>apparently has two straight 560s for parts.
>If anyone is interested his address is copters8(at)cs.com
>Still looking for a Harrison cooler #8530341...
>Phil Stubbs
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Doug Turner
>To: br549phil(at)mindspring.com
>Sent: 3/12/2006 11:13:44 AM
>Subject: Re: oil cooler
>
>
>Phil, I DON'T REMEMBER WHICH MODEL THEY ARE AND I HAVEN'T GONE OUT TO LOOK
>AT THEM YET, I SENT ONE OF MY GUYS TO GET THE PHOTOS...I THINK THE ENGINES
>ARE LYCOMING GO 480. I WANT TO GET RID ALL OF IT. I BOUGHT BOTH OF THEM
>SIGHT UNSEEN AND WAS TOLD THEY COULD BE FERRIED OUT...I SPENT 10K SENDING
>MECHANICS DOWN TO GET THEM READY FOR ME TO FLY OUT...ONLY TO FIND OUT IT
>WOULD COST 3 TIMES WHAT YOU COULD BUY ONE IN THE STATES AND FLYING FOR.. I
>WOULD MAKE SOMEONE A HELL OF A DEAL JUST NOT TO HAVE TO LOOK AT THEM ANY
>MORE..
>DOUG
>----- Original Message -----
>From: br549phil(at)mindspring.com
>To: Doug Turner
>Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 9:09 AM
>Subject: Re: oil cooler
>
>
>Unfortunately it is not a 560F. But if you let me know what they are, some
>other folks on the Commander list might be interested and I would be happy
>to post it there.
>Thanks,
>Phil
>
>Phil Stubbs
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Doug Turner
>To: br549phil(at)mindspring.com
>Sent: 3/11/2006 10:25:05 PM
>Subject: Re: oil cooler
>
>
>it's a 560 ....i think.. i will get you a part number mnonday..
>\Goug
>----- Original Message -----
>From: br549phil(at)mindspring.com
>To: Doug Turner
>Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 9:46 AM
>Subject: Re: oil cooler
>
>
>Hi Doug,
>Thanks for the reply. The lower cooler on the 560F came in two sizes. The
>one I have is installed on 560Fs up to and including serial# 1330.
>The Harrison part #is 8530341.
>Phil
>
>Phil Stubbs
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Doug Turner
>To: br549phil(at)mindspring.com
>Sent: 3/7/2006 9:19:23 PM
>Subject: Re: oil cooler
>
>
>Phil, I have a cooler for your 560. i have just returned after 9 days on
>the road..I'll get a photo of it and contact you wednesday...you can call
>me at 270 437-3940.
>Doug Turner
>----- Original Message -----
>From: br549phil(at)mindspring.com
>To: copters8(at)cs.com
>Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 11:39 PM
>Subject: oil cooler
>
>
>Hi,
>Someone on the Commander list suggested I contact you regarding my search
>for a lower oil cooler on my 560F.
>If you have one or know of any possible sources please contact me.
>Thanks,
>
>Phil Stubbs
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WINGFLYER1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
I would like to know if a study has been done on aircraft that were built
during the fifties as far as in-flight break up or wing seperations measure up.
And how long will the airframes/wings last under normal flying conditions.
What is the projected life/safety of my 680. Gil Walker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Captain Jimbob,
I would especially like to see the really high time airframes of the
Commander world championed, like John Towner's 23,000-hr.+ airframe and my
own 18,000-hr. airframe. I think showing well maintained older, high time
airframes in excellent running condition as evidence of their durability
would go a long way towards setting reasonable standards were the FAA to
implement inspection timeframes.
I would also like some methods of airframe life extension addressed, like
new spar caps etc. You might want to dig for the Australian CAA document
that, after research, recommended a lifespan for Aero Commander 500B's to be
35,000 hours, at which time a spar cap replacement is mandated. The document
further states that after spar cap replacement, the airframe would be good
for another 35,000 hours.
We have the benefit of flying an airplane that is exceptionally well built
and designed to be rugged far beyond the limits for which it is approved.
Since building new Commanders is out of the question (regardless of type
certificate ownership, tooling, and cost), we need to be very creative in
ensuring that these airplanes will fly for years to come.
Good luck,
/John
PS: I need about 50 more years out of my airframe (if I decide to quit
flying at 87, that is).
----- Original Message -----
From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 7:18 PM
Subject: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
> HI KIDS.
>
> Later this month I will be attending the FAA meeting on aging
> aircraft to be held in Kansas City. With me will be Mr. Gary Rankin, the
> pres. of
> the Navion Society. Many other type groups will be represented as well
> as
> type certificate holders. The FAA is seeking guidance for proposals that
> will
> effect the long term life of our airframes.
> I am told on good authority that the FAA has no hidden agenda here but
> is sincerely looking for help from the industry regarding this issue.
> The
> recent wing failure of the Chauks Airline Grumman Mallard precipitated
> this
> meeting.
> There are a few sugestions already making there way to the surface.
> One, sponsored by the EAA, would allow all aircraft certificate under the
> old
> CAR-3 standards to "opt out" of the normal category and be placed in a
> new
> category allowing for much more flexibility in the use of parts and
> modifications. Although I have not seen a hard draft of this proposal,
> it appears it
> would be similar to the Canadian "owner maintained" category, we shall
> see.
> While I don't see this as a bad proposal, and support the concept, it
> doesn't
> seem to address the FAAs real concern. The airframes would soldier on,
> albeit
> with new parts etc, with no regard to the main issue, old airframes.
> Another idea is that type certificate holders and type groups join
> forces and create a "super annual" inspection. This would be done at a
> predetermined time, ether years of flight hours or both. It could only
> be done by an
> approved (special training) facility. It may or may not be reoccurring.
> I have spoken to the new owner of Twin Commander, Jim Mathison. There
> will be a representative from Twin, there and we plan to meet.
> This may be one of the most significant meetings with the FAA to
> happen
> in years, maybe ever. Input there will help guide the decision making
> process for many years to come.
> What are your thoughts?? Do you have any input you would like me to
> carry tot he floor from you?? jb
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
In a message dated 3/12/2006 9:54:45 PM Pacific Standard Time,
john(at)vormbaum.com writes:
John Towner's 23,000-hr.+ airframe and my
own 18,000-hr. airframe.
I have spoken to Andy Towner and he or John will be at this meeting. You
comments are well taken. There are also stories of very high time Cessna and
Beech products. What we need to do is create an affordable inspection program
that will insure that every airframe can be maintained in a way that will
mimic the high time airframes we know are out there. What is different about
them that has allowed them to stand that test of time? We also need to fine
the trouble areas and inspect?repair?modify these areas.
Thanks John. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
In a message dated 3/12/2006 8:02:24 PM Pacific Standard Time,
WINGFLYER1(at)aol.com writes:
I would like to know if a study has been done on aircraft that were built
during the fifties as far as in-flight break up or wing seperations
I don't know of any studies. The FAA has so far been reactionary to this
growing concern. Several airframes have, over the last decade, ether failed
catastrophically (Beech model 18, Beech T-34, Cessna 400 series and the recent
Mallard) of been found to have serious defects. In some cases there were
extenuating circumstance (aerobatic trining?dodfighting) But in many others,
simply fatigue and age appear to be the culprit.
I think the Commander is one of the best built airframes ever, but there
are areas that are showing signs of deterioration. Landing gear trusses in
your 680 are all showing some degree of corrosion. I have looked at many of
these airframes and have never seen one with no corrosion present. The wings
will probably not be the most problematic area for an older Commander, but
the replacement of the gear trusses would be a huge burden for an owner.
As a type group, we need to address this and other issues that will make
cretin our airplane fly on another fifty years. Thanks Gill jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Interesting comment, John. If one owns the type certification and the
tooling, surely if cost is not a factor, one can build new Commanders, or am
I missing something. I would opt for a new power plant, of course, perhaps
something like a new generation diesel engine.
Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
> Captain Jimbob,
>
> I would especially like to see the really high time airframes of the
> Commander world championed, like John Towner's 23,000-hr.+ airframe and my
> own 18,000-hr. airframe. I think showing well maintained older, high time
> airframes in excellent running condition as evidence of their durability
> would go a long way towards setting reasonable standards were the FAA to
> implement inspection timeframes.
>
> I would also like some methods of airframe life extension addressed, like
> new spar caps etc. You might want to dig for the Australian CAA document
> that, after research, recommended a lifespan for Aero Commander 500B's to
be
> 35,000 hours, at which time a spar cap replacement is mandated. The
document
> further states that after spar cap replacement, the airframe would be good
> for another 35,000 hours.
>
> We have the benefit of flying an airplane that is exceptionally well built
> and designed to be rugged far beyond the limits for which it is approved.
> Since building new Commanders is out of the question (regardless of type
> certificate ownership, tooling, and cost), we need to be very creative in
> ensuring that these airplanes will fly for years to come.
>
> Good luck,
>
> /John
>
> PS: I need about 50 more years out of my airframe (if I decide to quit
> flying at 87, that is).
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 7:18 PM
> Subject: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> >
> > HI KIDS.
> >
> > Later this month I will be attending the FAA meeting on aging
> > aircraft to be held in Kansas City. With me will be Mr. Gary Rankin,
the
> > pres. of
> > the Navion Society. Many other type groups will be represented as well
> > as
> > type certificate holders. The FAA is seeking guidance for proposals
that
> > will
> > effect the long term life of our airframes.
> > I am told on good authority that the FAA has no hidden agenda here
but
> > is sincerely looking for help from the industry regarding this issue.
> > The
> > recent wing failure of the Chauks Airline Grumman Mallard precipitated
> > this
> > meeting.
> > There are a few sugestions already making there way to the surface.
> > One, sponsored by the EAA, would allow all aircraft certificate under
the
> > old
> > CAR-3 standards to "opt out" of the normal category and be placed in a
> > new
> > category allowing for much more flexibility in the use of parts and
> > modifications. Although I have not seen a hard draft of this proposal,
> > it appears it
> > would be similar to the Canadian "owner maintained" category, we shall
> > see.
> > While I don't see this as a bad proposal, and support the concept, it
> > doesn't
> > seem to address the FAAs real concern. The airframes would soldier on,
> > albeit
> > with new parts etc, with no regard to the main issue, old airframes.
> > Another idea is that type certificate holders and type groups join
> > forces and create a "super annual" inspection. This would be done at a
> > predetermined time, ether years of flight hours or both. It could only
> > be done by an
> > approved (special training) facility. It may or may not be
reoccurring.
> > I have spoken to the new owner of Twin Commander, Jim Mathison.
There
> > will be a representative from Twin, there and we plan to meet.
> > This may be one of the most significant meetings with the FAA to
> > happen
> > in years, maybe ever. Input there will help guide the decision making
> > process for many years to come.
> > What are your thoughts?? Do you have any input you would like me to
> > carry tot he floor from you?? jb
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Nico,
Funny enough, at some point in the near future I'm going to Arizona to take
a look at a (certified, I think) 350hp turbodiesel that would hang nicely on
a Commander wing.
There are a few things that make building a "new" Commander extremely
unlikely:
1) Twin Commander Corp. owns the tooling & type certificate for the piston
airplanes and has no interest in supporting them
2) From what I've heard, the tooling/jigs for the pistons are very worn out,
and if new ones were to be built, any mfr. would have to re-tool....at great
cost.
The real clincher is the parts count in Commanders (Sir Barry, do you have a
number?). Just the nacelle alone has an extraordinary number of parts if I
recall correctly. To build a new airplane in an even remotely cost-effective
method, the airplane would have to be re-engineered. You could probably
redesign the nacelles and the rest of the fuselage with far fewer parts,
maybe even mix in some composites, but the man-hours required would still be
a killer. I don't think there's a way you could build them and sell them at
a profit for under $1M, which is quite steep for a piston twin (see many new
2005 Barons flying around? I bet they only built 20 of them last year). The
man-hours were such a problem, they even stopped flat-riveting the lower
fuselages on Shrikes to cut corners. It didn't help keep the line alive.
Even if you could clean-sheet the design, preserving the original
aerodynamics & appearance, it would still take a HUGE amount of capital to
build something that wouldn't be too competitive in today's market. For the
price you'd have to sell them, you could probably step into a turbine
utility aircraft or even a VLJ.
I personally have a fantasy that some lottery winning aviation fool *will*
resurrect the design, maybe even the turbines too, with a fair bit of
composite structure, wet wings instead of bladders, none of the AD's, and
all modern accoutrements, but I just don't see it happening.
Cheers,
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 10:21 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> Interesting comment, John. If one owns the type certification and the
> tooling, surely if cost is not a factor, one can build new Commanders, or
> am
> I missing something. I would opt for a new power plant, of course, perhaps
> something like a new generation diesel engine.
>
> Nico
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 9:50 PM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
>>
>> Captain Jimbob,
>>
>> I would especially like to see the really high time airframes of the
>> Commander world championed, like John Towner's 23,000-hr.+ airframe and
>> my
>> own 18,000-hr. airframe. I think showing well maintained older, high time
>> airframes in excellent running condition as evidence of their durability
>> would go a long way towards setting reasonable standards were the FAA to
>> implement inspection timeframes.
>>
>> I would also like some methods of airframe life extension addressed, like
>> new spar caps etc. You might want to dig for the Australian CAA document
>> that, after research, recommended a lifespan for Aero Commander 500B's to
> be
>> 35,000 hours, at which time a spar cap replacement is mandated. The
> document
>> further states that after spar cap replacement, the airframe would be
>> good
>> for another 35,000 hours.
>>
>> We have the benefit of flying an airplane that is exceptionally well
>> built
>> and designed to be rugged far beyond the limits for which it is approved.
>> Since building new Commanders is out of the question (regardless of type
>> certificate ownership, tooling, and cost), we need to be very creative in
>> ensuring that these airplanes will fly for years to come.
>>
>> Good luck,
>>
>> /John
>>
>> PS: I need about 50 more years out of my airframe (if I decide to quit
>> flying at 87, that is).
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
>> To:
>> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 7:18 PM
>> Subject: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>>
>>
>> >
>> > HI KIDS.
>> >
>> > Later this month I will be attending the FAA meeting on aging
>> > aircraft to be held in Kansas City. With me will be Mr. Gary Rankin,
> the
>> > pres. of
>> > the Navion Society. Many other type groups will be represented as
>> > well
>> > as
>> > type certificate holders. The FAA is seeking guidance for proposals
> that
>> > will
>> > effect the long term life of our airframes.
>> > I am told on good authority that the FAA has no hidden agenda here
> but
>> > is sincerely looking for help from the industry regarding this issue.
>> > The
>> > recent wing failure of the Chauks Airline Grumman Mallard precipitated
>> > this
>> > meeting.
>> > There are a few sugestions already making there way to the surface.
>> > One, sponsored by the EAA, would allow all aircraft certificate under
> the
>> > old
>> > CAR-3 standards to "opt out" of the normal category and be placed in a
>> > new
>> > category allowing for much more flexibility in the use of parts and
>> > modifications. Although I have not seen a hard draft of this
>> > proposal,
>> > it appears it
>> > would be similar to the Canadian "owner maintained" category, we shall
>> > see.
>> > While I don't see this as a bad proposal, and support the concept, it
>> > doesn't
>> > seem to address the FAAs real concern. The airframes would soldier
>> > on,
>> > albeit
>> > with new parts etc, with no regard to the main issue, old airframes.
>> > Another idea is that type certificate holders and type groups join
>> > forces and create a "super annual" inspection. This would be done at
>> > a
>> > predetermined time, ether years of flight hours or both. It could
>> > only
>> > be done by an
>> > approved (special training) facility. It may or may not be
> reoccurring.
>> > I have spoken to the new owner of Twin Commander, Jim Mathison.
> There
>> > will be a representative from Twin, there and we plan to meet.
>> > This may be one of the most significant meetings with the FAA to
>> > happen
>> > in years, maybe ever. Input there will help guide the decision making
>> > process for many years to come.
>> > What are your thoughts?? Do you have any input you would like me
>> > to
>> > carry tot he floor from you?? jb
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Great points, Jim. I knew you had all this stuff well in hand, but I thought
I'd point out some of the obvious things anyway :-).
/J
----- Original Message -----
From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 10:01 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> In a message dated 3/12/2006 9:54:45 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> john(at)vormbaum.com writes:
>
> John Towner's 23,000-hr.+ airframe and my
> own 18,000-hr. airframe.
>
>
> I have spoken to Andy Towner and he or John will be at this meeting. You
> comments are well taken. There are also stories of very high time Cessna
> and
> Beech products. What we need to do is create an affordable inspection
> program
> that will insure that every airframe can be maintained in a way that will
> mimic the high time airframes we know are out there. What is different
> about
> them that has allowed them to stand that test of time? We also need to
> fine
> the trouble areas and inspect?repair?modify these areas.
> Thanks John. jb
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Hi John,
Nope, I'm sorry, but I don't have the parts count for a Commander.
But, if you bring yours to the next Fly-In, we could strip it down and find out!
Maybe 'down-under' Richard has an 'ball-park' figure after his extensive
restoration of a 680E?
Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
|
| Nico,
|
| Funny enough, at some point in the near future I'm going to Arizona to take
| a look at a (certified, I think) 350hp turbodiesel that would hang nicely on
| a Commander wing.
|
| There are a few things that make building a "new" Commander extremely
| unlikely:
|
| 1) Twin Commander Corp. owns the tooling & type certificate for the piston
| airplanes and has no interest in supporting them
| 2) From what I've heard, the tooling/jigs for the pistons are very worn out,
| and if new ones were to be built, any mfr. would have to re-tool....at great
| cost.
|
| The real clincher is the parts count in Commanders (Sir Barry, do you have a
| number?). Just the nacelle alone has an extraordinary number of parts if I
| recall correctly. To build a new airplane in an even remotely cost-effective
| method, the airplane would have to be re-engineered. You could probably
| redesign the nacelles and the rest of the fuselage with far fewer parts,
| maybe even mix in some composites, but the man-hours required would still be
| a killer. I don't think there's a way you could build them and sell them at
| a profit for under $1M, which is quite steep for a piston twin (see many new
| 2005 Barons flying around? I bet they only built 20 of them last year). The
| man-hours were such a problem, they even stopped flat-riveting the lower
| fuselages on Shrikes to cut corners. It didn't help keep the line alive.
|
| Even if you could clean-sheet the design, preserving the original
| aerodynamics & appearance, it would still take a HUGE amount of capital to
| build something that wouldn't be too competitive in today's market. For the
| price you'd have to sell them, you could probably step into a turbine
| utility aircraft or even a VLJ.
|
| I personally have a fantasy that some lottery winning aviation fool *will*
| resurrect the design, maybe even the turbines too, with a fair bit of
| composite structure, wet wings instead of bladders, none of the AD's, and
| all modern accoutrements, but I just don't see it happening.
|
| Cheers,
|
| /John
|
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
| To:
| Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 10:21 PM
| Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
|
|
| >
| >
| > Interesting comment, John. If one owns the type certification and the
| > tooling, surely if cost is not a factor, one can build new Commanders, or
| > am
| > I missing something. I would opt for a new power plant, of course, perhaps
| > something like a new generation diesel engine.
| >
| > Nico
| >
| >
| > ----- Original Message -----
| > From: "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com>
| > To:
| > Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 9:50 PM
| > Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
| >
| >
| >>
| >> Captain Jimbob,
| >>
| >> I would especially like to see the really high time airframes of the
| >> Commander world championed, like John Towner's 23,000-hr.+ airframe and
| >> my
| >> own 18,000-hr. airframe. I think showing well maintained older, high time
| >> airframes in excellent running condition as evidence of their durability
| >> would go a long way towards setting reasonable standards were the FAA to
| >> implement inspection timeframes.
| >>
| >> I would also like some methods of airframe life extension addressed, like
| >> new spar caps etc. You might want to dig for the Australian CAA document
| >> that, after research, recommended a lifespan for Aero Commander 500B's to
| > be
| >> 35,000 hours, at which time a spar cap replacement is mandated. The
| > document
| >> further states that after spar cap replacement, the airframe would be
| >> good
| >> for another 35,000 hours.
| >>
| >> We have the benefit of flying an airplane that is exceptionally well
| >> built
| >> and designed to be rugged far beyond the limits for which it is approved.
| >> Since building new Commanders is out of the question (regardless of type
| >> certificate ownership, tooling, and cost), we need to be very creative in
| >> ensuring that these airplanes will fly for years to come.
| >>
| >> Good luck,
| >>
| >> /John
| >>
| >> PS: I need about 50 more years out of my airframe (if I decide to quit
| >> flying at 87, that is).
| >>
| >>
| >> ----- Original Message -----
| >> From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
| >> To:
| >> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 7:18 PM
| >> Subject: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
| >>
| >>
| >> >
| >> > HI KIDS.
| >> >
| >> > Later this month I will be attending the FAA meeting on aging
| >> > aircraft to be held in Kansas City. With me will be Mr. Gary Rankin,
| > the
| >> > pres. of
| >> > the Navion Society. Many other type groups will be represented as
| >> > well
| >> > as
| >> > type certificate holders. The FAA is seeking guidance for proposals
| > that
| >> > will
| >> > effect the long term life of our airframes.
| >> > I am told on good authority that the FAA has no hidden agenda here
| > but
| >> > is sincerely looking for help from the industry regarding this issue.
| >> > The
| >> > recent wing failure of the Chauks Airline Grumman Mallard precipitated
| >> > this
| >> > meeting.
| >> > There are a few sugestions already making there way to the surface.
| >> > One, sponsored by the EAA, would allow all aircraft certificate under
| > the
| >> > old
| >> > CAR-3 standards to "opt out" of the normal category and be placed in a
| >> > new
| >> > category allowing for much more flexibility in the use of parts and
| >> > modifications. Although I have not seen a hard draft of this
| >> > proposal,
| >> > it appears it
| >> > would be similar to the Canadian "owner maintained" category, we shall
| >> > see.
| >> > While I don't see this as a bad proposal, and support the concept, it
| >> > doesn't
| >> > seem to address the FAAs real concern. The airframes would soldier
| >> > on,
| >> > albeit
| >> > with new parts etc, with no regard to the main issue, old airframes.
| >> > Another idea is that type certificate holders and type groups join
| >> > forces and create a "super annual" inspection. This would be done at
| >> > a
| >> > predetermined time, ether years of flight hours or both. It could
| >> > only
| >> > be done by an
| >> > approved (special training) facility. It may or may not be
| > reoccurring.
| >> > I have spoken to the new owner of Twin Commander, Jim Mathison.
| > There
| >> > will be a representative from Twin, there and we plan to meet.
| >> > This may be one of the most significant meetings with the FAA to
| >> > happen
| >> > in years, maybe ever. Input there will help guide the decision making
| >> > process for many years to come.
| >> > What are your thoughts?? Do you have any input you would like me
| >> > to
| >> > carry tot he floor from you?? jb
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >> >
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >>
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
Good Morning Gil,
I agree with the intent of your message, but I question your inclusion of
the Beech 18. I have heard of NO instances of catastrophic failure in a Twin
Beech airframe over the last decade.
Fact is, I know of no such failure in the history of the aircraft, though
there may well have been a few. The currently required spar strap was mandated
after inspections showed corrosion and few cracks.
I agree that inspections are needed and there are problems, but if you know
of specific Twin Beech difficulties, I would appreciate your letting me know
what they were.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 3/13/2006 12:14:10 A.M. Central Standard Time,
YOURTCFG(at)aol.com writes:
I don't know of any studies. The FAA has so far been reactionary to this
growing concern. Several airframes have, over the last decade, ether
failed
catastrophically (Beech model 18, Beech T-34, Cessna 400 series and the
recent
Mallard) of been found to have serious defects. In some cases there were
extenuating circumstance (aerobatic trining?dodfighting) But in many
others,
simply fatigue and age appear to be the culprit.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
| From: | "N395V" <N395V(at)direcway.com> |
> I would like to know if a study has been done
Cessna did a government funded joint study on their 400 series Twins looking mainly
at wing spars. This was a result of 2 High time (20,000 hrs plus) wing spar
failures on 401/402s. Both were in air taxi service (heavy pax load, light
fuel lots of TO and LDGS) Both failures involved either a manufactuuring defect
or faulty structural repairs at the point of failure.
Twin Cessnas with tip tanks oddly enough suffer less spar fatigue with high fuel
loads and low pax loads (the condition most owner operators fly)
As a result the FAA ultimately issued an AD (approx $60,000) requiring a spar
strap kit at relatively conservative number of hours. The hours were based on
the Cessna study funded by the FAA. Cesna refuses to make the data public because
it contains "proprietary information" and apparently proprietary info is excluded
from discovery under the freedom of info act. My guess is that Cessna
would not be unhappy if the entire piston Twin Fleet was grounded.
The numbers of aircraft involved were so large that it was estimated it would take
6-8 years to manufacture all the kits and train enough shops to do the fix.
As such the FAA at a public meeting relented and came up with a schedule that
fixed 121 operators first and at lower times. Part 91 later at higher times.
Jim Bob.........
Talk to John Frank or Mike Busch at CPA Cessna Pilot's assoc. They spent a lot
of time with the FAA small airplane directorate on this and accomplished a lot.
I am certain both will be at the meeting. I would also imagine teaming up with
Dick Ward and the Twin Bonanza society might be a good idea.
John V.....
At one time I thought "Mr. RPM had a maint Facility in Costa Rica doing Twin Commander
wing spar caps at a bargain price (relatively speaking).
I think clearly the spar cap and engine mount trusses are going to be the issues
on the Twin Commanders. It saddened me to see my old 560 (SN#52) go on e bay
because of intragranular wing spar corrosion. (Corrosion in the web not the cap)
--------
Milt
N395V
F1 Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=21445#21445
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Funny enough, I, too, have toyed with the lottery-winning-fool idea. It just
hasn't happened yet. And as soon as it does, if it does, one would probably
be swayed by the logic of the investment and not do it. Pity, though.
Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 4:26 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
>
> Hi John,
>
> Nope, I'm sorry, but I don't have the parts count for a Commander.
>
> But, if you bring yours to the next Fly-In, we could strip it down and
find out!
>
> Maybe 'down-under' Richard has an 'ball-park' figure after his extensive
> restoration of a 680E?
>
> Best Regards,
> Barry
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:44 AM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> |
> | Nico,
> |
> | Funny enough, at some point in the near future I'm going to Arizona to
take
> | a look at a (certified, I think) 350hp turbodiesel that would hang
nicely on
> | a Commander wing.
> |
> | There are a few things that make building a "new" Commander extremely
> | unlikely:
> |
> | 1) Twin Commander Corp. owns the tooling & type certificate for the
piston
> | airplanes and has no interest in supporting them
> | 2) From what I've heard, the tooling/jigs for the pistons are very worn
out,
> | and if new ones were to be built, any mfr. would have to re-tool....at
great
> | cost.
> |
> | The real clincher is the parts count in Commanders (Sir Barry, do you
have a
> | number?). Just the nacelle alone has an extraordinary number of parts if
I
> | recall correctly. To build a new airplane in an even remotely
cost-effective
> | method, the airplane would have to be re-engineered. You could probably
> | redesign the nacelles and the rest of the fuselage with far fewer parts,
> | maybe even mix in some composites, but the man-hours required would
still be
> | a killer. I don't think there's a way you could build them and sell them
at
> | a profit for under $1M, which is quite steep for a piston twin (see many
new
> | 2005 Barons flying around? I bet they only built 20 of them last year).
The
> | man-hours were such a problem, they even stopped flat-riveting the lower
> | fuselages on Shrikes to cut corners. It didn't help keep the line alive.
> |
> | Even if you could clean-sheet the design, preserving the original
> | aerodynamics & appearance, it would still take a HUGE amount of capital
to
> | build something that wouldn't be too competitive in today's market. For
the
> | price you'd have to sell them, you could probably step into a turbine
> | utility aircraft or even a VLJ.
> |
> | I personally have a fantasy that some lottery winning aviation fool
*will*
> | resurrect the design, maybe even the turbines too, with a fair bit of
> | composite structure, wet wings instead of bladders, none of the AD's,
and
> | all modern accoutrements, but I just don't see it happening.
> |
> | Cheers,
> |
> | /John
> |
> | ----- Original Message -----
> | From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
> | To:
> | Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 10:21 PM
> | Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> |
> |
> | >
> | >
> | > Interesting comment, John. If one owns the type certification and the
> | > tooling, surely if cost is not a factor, one can build new Commanders,
or
> | > am
> | > I missing something. I would opt for a new power plant, of course,
perhaps
> | > something like a new generation diesel engine.
> | >
> | > Nico
> | >
> | >
> | > ----- Original Message -----
> | > From: "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com>
> | > To:
> | > Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 9:50 PM
> | > Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> | >
> | >
> | >>
> | >> Captain Jimbob,
> | >>
> | >> I would especially like to see the really high time airframes of the
> | >> Commander world championed, like John Towner's 23,000-hr.+ airframe
and
> | >> my
> | >> own 18,000-hr. airframe. I think showing well maintained older, high
time
> | >> airframes in excellent running condition as evidence of their
durability
> | >> would go a long way towards setting reasonable standards were the FAA
to
> | >> implement inspection timeframes.
> | >>
> | >> I would also like some methods of airframe life extension addressed,
like
> | >> new spar caps etc. You might want to dig for the Australian CAA
document
> | >> that, after research, recommended a lifespan for Aero Commander
500B's to
> | > be
> | >> 35,000 hours, at which time a spar cap replacement is mandated. The
> | > document
> | >> further states that after spar cap replacement, the airframe would be
> | >> good
> | >> for another 35,000 hours.
> | >>
> | >> We have the benefit of flying an airplane that is exceptionally well
> | >> built
> | >> and designed to be rugged far beyond the limits for which it is
approved.
> | >> Since building new Commanders is out of the question (regardless of
type
> | >> certificate ownership, tooling, and cost), we need to be very
creative in
> | >> ensuring that these airplanes will fly for years to come.
> | >>
> | >> Good luck,
> | >>
> | >> /John
> | >>
> | >> PS: I need about 50 more years out of my airframe (if I decide to
quit
> | >> flying at 87, that is).
> | >>
> | >>
> | >> ----- Original Message -----
> | >> From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
> | >> To:
> | >> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 7:18 PM
> | >> Subject: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> | >>
> | >>
> | >> >
> | >> > HI KIDS.
> | >> >
> | >> > Later this month I will be attending the FAA meeting on
aging
> | >> > aircraft to be held in Kansas City. With me will be Mr. Gary
Rankin,
> | > the
> | >> > pres. of
> | >> > the Navion Society. Many other type groups will be represented as
> | >> > well
> | >> > as
> | >> > type certificate holders. The FAA is seeking guidance for
proposals
> | > that
> | >> > will
> | >> > effect the long term life of our airframes.
> | >> > I am told on good authority that the FAA has no hidden agenda
here
> | > but
> | >> > is sincerely looking for help from the industry regarding this
issue.
> | >> > The
> | >> > recent wing failure of the Chauks Airline Grumman Mallard
precipitated
> | >> > this
> | >> > meeting.
> | >> > There are a few sugestions already making there way to the
surface.
> | >> > One, sponsored by the EAA, would allow all aircraft certificate
under
> | > the
> | >> > old
> | >> > CAR-3 standards to "opt out" of the normal category and be placed
in a
> | >> > new
> | >> > category allowing for much more flexibility in the use of parts
and
> | >> > modifications. Although I have not seen a hard draft of this
> | >> > proposal,
> | >> > it appears it
> | >> > would be similar to the Canadian "owner maintained" category, we
shall
> | >> > see.
> | >> > While I don't see this as a bad proposal, and support the concept,
it
> | >> > doesn't
> | >> > seem to address the FAAs real concern. The airframes would
soldier
> | >> > on,
> | >> > albeit
> | >> > with new parts etc, with no regard to the main issue, old
airframes.
> | >> > Another idea is that type certificate holders and type groups
join
> | >> > forces and create a "super annual" inspection. This would be done
at
> | >> > a
> | >> > predetermined time, ether years of flight hours or both. It could
> | >> > only
> | >> > be done by an
> | >> > approved (special training) facility. It may or may not be
> | > reoccurring.
> | >> > I have spoken to the new owner of Twin Commander, Jim Mathison.
> | > There
> | >> > will be a representative from Twin, there and we plan to meet.
> | >> > This may be one of the most significant meetings with the FAA
to
> | >> > happen
> | >> > in years, maybe ever. Input there will help guide the decision
making
> | >> > process for many years to come.
> | >> > What are your thoughts?? Do you have any input you would like
me
> | >> > to
> | >> > carry tot he floor from you?? jb
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >> >
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> | >>
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "steve2" <steve2(at)sover.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Ever since the CASA did a hatchet job on running lean of peak (by blaming a
Navajo accident on it) I've been suspicious of their conclusions. The
following links make interesting reading, but I don't take this fellow's
writings as the last word. From what I've read and learned, the way in which
an aircraft is flown and loaded (aerodynamically and weighted) over its life
has more to do with fatigue than the number of hours.
With that being said, it seems there were a couple of bad design decisions
in the spar. Be interested in if any of you folks have better insight.
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/AeroCommander.pdf
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/littleairliners.pdf
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: <WINGFLYER1(at)aol.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 11:01 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
> I would like to know if a study has been done on aircraft that were built
> during the fifties as far as in-flight break up or wing seperations
> measure up.
> And how long will the airframes/wings last under normal flying conditions.
> What is the projected life/safety of my 680. Gil Walker
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Hi Steve,
That's an interesting document
(http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/AeroCommander.pdf).
It mentions on page 17, an accident to ZK-BWA. This was a Model 680, s/n
437-109.
I have a copy of the Accident Report (No. 25/3/1192). This showed a catalogue of
incidents which eventually gave rise to the wing failure:
"At some time after the aircraft was purchased by Bay of Plenty Airways it was
involved in an accident which resulted in complete fracture of the rear spar
lower cap and partial fracture of the rear spar upper cap of the starboard
wing."
(The aircraft did have a hard landing in the US while a Bay of Plenty Airways
pilot was familiarising himself with the aircraft. Structural repairs were
necessary before the aircraft could be flown again).
"For a considerable time before the last flight those defects permitted a
transference of load from the rear spar structure to the front spar structure
and a fatigue crack developed in the lower cap of the front spar".
"A number of incidents which occurred during the operation of the aircraft in
New Zealand had a cumulatively adverse effect on a structure weakened by the
spar cap defects referred to".
"The pilot flew across the summit of Mount Ruapehu at a height which contravened
regulation 38 of the Civil Aviation Regulations in respect of minimum safe
heights".
"In the summit area, turbulence, or some manoeuvre involving the pilot's
judgment, caused the starboard propeller, and possibly an adjacent portion of
the bottom of the fuselage, to strike a part of the mountain".
"Vibration induced by the damaged propeller coupled with turbulence of a violent
character caused the fatigue crack in the front spar lower cap to propoagate
very rapidly to complete failure, with consequent separation of the starboard
wing from the rest of the structure".
"The turbulence encountered by the aircraft on its last flight would no, by
itself, have caused separation of the wing from the rest of the of the
structure, despite the existence of the defects referred to. Nor would the
propeller strike in similar isolation".
"As a result of this investigation the structural integrity of the Aero
Commander 680S aircraft as a type is unquestioned".
I just thought I'd pass that detail on.
Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: "steve2" <steve2(at)sover.net>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 3:16 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
|
| Ever since the CASA did a hatchet job on running lean of peak (by blaming a
| Navajo accident on it) I've been suspicious of their conclusions. The
| following links make interesting reading, but I don't take this fellow's
| writings as the last word. From what I've read and learned, the way in which
| an aircraft is flown and loaded (aerodynamically and weighted) over its life
| has more to do with fatigue than the number of hours.
|
| With that being said, it seems there were a couple of bad design decisions
| in the spar. Be interested in if any of you folks have better insight.
|
| http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/AeroCommander.pdf
|
| http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/littleairliners.pdf
|
| Steve
|
|
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: <WINGFLYER1(at)aol.com>
| To:
| Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 11:01 PM
| Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
|
|
| >
| > I would like to know if a study has been done on aircraft that were built
| > during the fifties as far as in-flight break up or wing seperations
| > measure up.
| > And how long will the airframes/wings last under normal flying conditions.
| > What is the projected life/safety of my 680. Gil Walker
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
In a message dated 3/12/2006 10:24:47 PM Pacific Standard Time,
nico(at)cybersuperstore.com writes:
If one owns the type certification and the
tooling,
Unfortunately, not all of the tooling exists. When the Commander line was
abandoned by Gulfstream, much of the tooling was simply left outside to rust.
Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
concern and the tooling was scraped. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
In a message dated 13-Mar-06 07:19:39 Pacific Standard Time, steve2(at)sover.net
writes:
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/AeroCommander.pdf
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/littleairliners.pdf
<><><><><><>
Steve,
Thank you for those links. They make for interesting reading -- and I'll
devote some time to that this week.
Capt. JimBob,
What ever the outcome, I want to thank you for making the journey to meet
with the FAA. I know what these meetings are like: they're not at all fun but
very necessary. (I've been on teleconferences with the Small Airplane
Directorate and that was bad enough.)
Taking your personal time to represent the fleet is above and beyond.
Wing Commander Gordon
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:06:17 Pacific Standard Time,
barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk writes:
"The pilot flew across the summit of Mount Ruapehu at a height which
contravened
regulation 38 of the Civil Aviation Regulations in respect of minimum safe
heights".... caused the starboard propeller, and possibly an adjacent portion
of
the bottom of the fuselage, to strike a part of the mountain".
Hey! That's a good idea! We need to get ourselves one of those laws!
Wing Commander Gordon
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time, YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
writes:
Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
concern and the tooling was scraped.
<><><><><>
Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
construction now.
Wing Commander Gordon
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "steve2" <steve2(at)sover.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Lead hasn't been used for bodywork for some time now.
----- Original Message -----
From: <CloudCraft(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
> In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
> YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
> writes:
> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
> concern and the tooling was scraped.
> <><><><><>
>
> Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
> construction now.
>
> Wing Commander Gordon
>
> Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <cschuerm(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
YOURTCFG(at)aol.com wrote:
> What are your thoughts??
What a wonderful opportunity Jim!
I think Commanders are a little unique from an "Aging Aircraft"
perspective. It's fairly well proven that Commanders are so well built
that they don't suffer as much from fatigue as many other models. They
do have a few environmental weakness that are unique though. Many
Commanders have seen a lot of heavy use (because they are so good at it)
and also many spend most of their lives outside due to lack of large
enough hangars. They also have an unusual number of various alloy
extrusions throughout the airframe. Due to these items, I think that
corrosion is far more an issue than either age or hours. As we know,
corrosion in many aluminum alloys is greatly accelerated by stress -
especially in the presence of water. The nacelle trusses are a prime
example of the results of a hard alloy which is under significan stress
and often is exposed to an electrolyte. I can say that every bathtub
commander I've seen in the last 10 years has significant exfoliating
corrosion on the little extrusion where the sway brace attaches to the
spar cap on the outboard side of the nacelle.
For my two cents worth, I think that an inventory of extruded parts
which are both under stress AND are subject to exposure to water would
be an excellent starting point for your "super annual" concept. There
are several hidden parts which I believe should be uncovered and
inspected every decade or so. The vertical hangars behind the firewall
on the front of the spar - for example - have probably never been looked
at on most Commanders. They're a prime candidate for failure at some point.
This is a great opportunity to eliminate the possibility of an in-flight
failure of a Commander with the resulting knee-jerk reaction of the FAA.
cheers
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
> John V.....
>
> At one time I thought "Mr. RPM had a maint Facility in Costa Rica doing
> Twin Commander wing spar caps at a bargain price (relatively speaking).
>
>
Hi Milt,
I think there is still a "bargain spar cap replacement deal", but the
bargain is right around $60k. I'm really hoping that won't be necessary
until 35,000 hours or so.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
In a message dated 3/13/2006 9:40:27 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
cschuerm(at)cox.net writes:
I believe should be uncovered and
inspected every decade or so. The vertical hangars behind the firewall
on the front of the spar - for example - have probably never been looked
at on most Commanders.
Thanks Chris Another area is the flap/aileron/rudder and elevator hangars.
The aileron hangars have been problematic for some years, the rest need a
good look. I did an appraisal on an 840 Commander in Cartrgena Columbia. The
aileron hangars had corroded clear off and the ailerons were laying on the
ground right were they had fallen off!! jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Yet more proof that regardless of how robust an aircraft is, some people
just shouldn't be pilots!!!
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:01 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> That's an interesting document
> (http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/AeroCommander.pdf).
>
> It mentions on page 17, an accident to ZK-BWA. This was a Model 680, s/n
> 437-109.
>
> I have a copy of the Accident Report (No. 25/3/1192). This showed a
> catalogue of
> incidents which eventually gave rise to the wing failure:
>
> "At some time after the aircraft was purchased by Bay of Plenty Airways it
> was
> involved in an accident which resulted in complete fracture of the rear
> spar
> lower cap and partial fracture of the rear spar upper cap of the starboard
> wing."
> (The aircraft did have a hard landing in the US while a Bay of Plenty
> Airways
> pilot was familiarising himself with the aircraft. Structural repairs were
> necessary before the aircraft could be flown again).
>
> "For a considerable time before the last flight those defects permitted a
> transference of load from the rear spar structure to the front spar
> structure
> and a fatigue crack developed in the lower cap of the front spar".
>
> "A number of incidents which occurred during the operation of the aircraft
> in
> New Zealand had a cumulatively adverse effect on a structure weakened by
> the
> spar cap defects referred to".
>
> "The pilot flew across the summit of Mount Ruapehu at a height which
> contravened
> regulation 38 of the Civil Aviation Regulations in respect of minimum safe
> heights".
>
> "In the summit area, turbulence, or some manoeuvre involving the pilot's
> judgment, caused the starboard propeller, and possibly an adjacent portion
> of
> the bottom of the fuselage, to strike a part of the mountain".
>
> "Vibration induced by the damaged propeller coupled with turbulence of a
> violent
> character caused the fatigue crack in the front spar lower cap to
> propoagate
> very rapidly to complete failure, with consequent separation of the
> starboard
> wing from the rest of the structure".
>
> "The turbulence encountered by the aircraft on its last flight would no,
> by
> itself, have caused separation of the wing from the rest of the of the
> structure, despite the existence of the defects referred to. Nor would the
> propeller strike in similar isolation".
>
> "As a result of this investigation the structural integrity of the Aero
> Commander 680S aircraft as a type is unquestioned".
>
> I just thought I'd pass that detail on.
>
> Best Regards,
> Barry
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "steve2" <steve2(at)sover.net>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 3:16 PM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> |
> | Ever since the CASA did a hatchet job on running lean of peak (by
> blaming a
> | Navajo accident on it) I've been suspicious of their conclusions. The
> | following links make interesting reading, but I don't take this fellow's
> | writings as the last word. From what I've read and learned, the way in
> which
> | an aircraft is flown and loaded (aerodynamically and weighted) over its
> life
> | has more to do with fatigue than the number of hours.
> |
> | With that being said, it seems there were a couple of bad design
> decisions
> | in the spar. Be interested in if any of you folks have better insight.
> |
> | http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/AeroCommander.pdf
> |
> | http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/littleairliners.pdf
> |
> | Steve
> |
> |
> | ----- Original Message -----
> | From: <WINGFLYER1(at)aol.com>
> | To:
> | Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 11:01 PM
> | Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> |
> |
> | >
> | > I would like to know if a study has been done on aircraft that were
> built
> | > during the fifties as far as in-flight break up or wing seperations
> | > measure up.
> | > And how long will the airframes/wings last under normal flying
> conditions.
> | > What is the projected life/safety of my 680. Gil Walker
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
I hate hearing that. As a certifiable Tool Nut, it breaks my heart to hear
about good tools being abused in that fashion.
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:15 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> In a message dated 3/12/2006 10:24:47 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> nico(at)cybersuperstore.com writes:
>
> If one owns the type certification and the
> tooling,
>
>
> Unfortunately, not all of the tooling exists. When the Commander line
> was
> abandoned by Gulfstream, much of the tooling was simply left outside to
> rust.
> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
> concern and the tooling was scraped. jb
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <cschuerm(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
YOURTCFG(at)aol.com wrote:
> Thanks Chris Another area is the flap/aileron/rudder and elevator hangars.
Wow - just fell right off? Sounds like that would have been a good
subject airplane for overall damage investigation.
Interesting that there's no AD on the flap hangars isn't it? Seems like
almost every other airplane has some form of "inspect for
cracks/damage/etc" in this area (my Aztec included). Just another one
of those alloy plate/extrusion areas with a high load and subject to water.
chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
I was just patting myself on the back for being mature enough to not
capitalize on that typo ;-).
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: <CloudCraft(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:36 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
> In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
> YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
> writes:
> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
> concern and the tooling was scraped.
> <><><><><>
>
> Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
> construction now.
>
> Wing Commander Gordon
>
> Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | W J R HAMILTON <wjrhamilton(at)optusnet.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Folks,
Re. Richard's 680E, at least he has the luxury of an aircraft
corrosion proofed "to MilSpec" standards, the 680Es bought by the old
Australian Department of Civil Aviation were all corrosion proofed
during manufacture, and it shows. Lucky chap !! The contrast sits
right behind him, my 500A, " corrosion proofed" after manufacture, I
suspect well after.
My Commander experience says ( amongst other things) that every lap
joint is suspect ( as well as the other comments so far). I am also
having to replace a number of fluted skins on aileron/flaps and
horizontal stab/elevators.
In my opinion you have to be very careful about the Australian
approach to " hard" fatigue lives, "they got religion".
But having said that, there are some really serious problems with
C400 series, and various Beech, particularly Barons, all a
combination of a hard life, corrosion and cracking. An emerging story
is serious cracking in pressure cracking in a number of Kingairs,
several here are probably headed for the scrap heap. On one recent
402B, just about every fastener hole around the engine/undercarriage
mounts and spar structure had to be reworked, and there was much
replacing of various bits of the structure. The same aeroplane had
extensive corrosion for most of the length ( height) in the fin.
We are also seeing VERY serious corrosion in some strutted Cessna, if
I was to buy a C172/182, having seen what I have seen, I would factor
in stripping down both wings, it is the sandwich spar from the root
to just outboard of the fuel tank, and one aircraft that had to be
rebuilt was an ex-USAF version of the 172, that had spent most of its
life in the dry reaches of inland Texas.
An entirely subjective comment ( a personal opinion, no science
behind it) is that the bigger Pipers seem to throw up fewer
unexpected horror stories.
An interesting issue arises about inspection techniques, many of the
FAA " GA approved" inspection techniques are about a generation out
of date, compared to Boeing/Airbus "manufacturer's maintenance
manual" techniques, which causes us quite a few problems, as some
CASA individuals ( inspectors) are in the habit of demanding
compliance with FAA/SID in detail, including use of ultrasonic crack
detection that has been superseded by equipment that does not require
every fastener to be removed. Needless to say, the practitioners of
the black magic of ultrasonic and eddy current crack detection have
long since junked their superseded equipment.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton
At 23:26 13/03/2006, you wrote:
><barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
>
>Hi John,
>
>Nope, I'm sorry, but I don't have the parts count for a Commander.
>
>But, if you bring yours to the next Fly-In, we could strip it down
>and find out!
>
>Maybe 'down-under' Richard has an 'ball-park' figure after his extensive
>restoration of a 680E?
>
>Best Regards,
>Barry
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com>
>To:
>Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:44 AM
>Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
>|
>| Nico,
>|
>| Funny enough, at some point in the near future I'm going to Arizona to take
>| a look at a (certified, I think) 350hp turbodiesel that would hang nicely on
>| a Commander wing.
>|
>| There are a few things that make building a "new" Commander extremely
>| unlikely:
>|
>| 1) Twin Commander Corp. owns the tooling & type certificate for the piston
>| airplanes and has no interest in supporting them
>| 2) From what I've heard, the tooling/jigs for the pistons are very worn out,
>| and if new ones were to be built, any mfr. would have to re-tool....at great
>| cost.
>|
>| The real clincher is the parts count in Commanders (Sir Barry, do you have a
>| number?). Just the nacelle alone has an extraordinary number of parts if I
>| recall correctly. To build a new airplane in an even remotely cost-effective
>| method, the airplane would have to be re-engineered. You could probably
>| redesign the nacelles and the rest of the fuselage with far fewer parts,
>| maybe even mix in some composites, but the man-hours required would still be
>| a killer. I don't think there's a way you could build them and sell them at
>| a profit for under $1M, which is quite steep for a piston twin (see many new
>| 2005 Barons flying around? I bet they only built 20 of them last year). The
>| man-hours were such a problem, they even stopped flat-riveting the lower
>| fuselages on Shrikes to cut corners. It didn't help keep the line alive.
>|
>| Even if you could clean-sheet the design, preserving the original
>| aerodynamics & appearance, it would still take a HUGE amount of capital to
>| build something that wouldn't be too competitive in today's market. For the
>| price you'd have to sell them, you could probably step into a turbine
>| utility aircraft or even a VLJ.
>|
>| I personally have a fantasy that some lottery winning aviation fool *will*
>| resurrect the design, maybe even the turbines too, with a fair bit of
>| composite structure, wet wings instead of bladders, none of the AD's, and
>| all modern accoutrements, but I just don't see it happening.
>|
>| Cheers,
>|
>| /John
>|
>| ----- Original Message -----
>| From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
>| To:
>| Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 10:21 PM
>| Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>|
>|
>| >
>| >
>| > Interesting comment, John. If one owns the type certification and the
>| > tooling, surely if cost is not a factor, one can build new Commanders, or
>| > am
>| > I missing something. I would opt for a new power plant, of course, perhaps
>| > something like a new generation diesel engine.
>| >
>| > Nico
>| >
>| >
>| > ----- Original Message -----
>| > From: "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com>
>| > To:
>| > Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 9:50 PM
>| > Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>| >
>| >
>| >>
>| >> Captain Jimbob,
>| >>
>| >> I would especially like to see the really high time airframes of the
>| >> Commander world championed, like John Towner's 23,000-hr.+ airframe and
>| >> my
>| >> own 18,000-hr. airframe. I think showing well maintained older, high time
>| >> airframes in excellent running condition as evidence of their durability
>| >> would go a long way towards setting reasonable standards were the FAA to
>| >> implement inspection timeframes.
>| >>
>| >> I would also like some methods of airframe life extension addressed, like
>| >> new spar caps etc. You might want to dig for the Australian CAA document
>| >> that, after research, recommended a lifespan for Aero Commander 500B's to
>| > be
>| >> 35,000 hours, at which time a spar cap replacement is mandated. The
>| > document
>| >> further states that after spar cap replacement, the airframe would be
>| >> good
>| >> for another 35,000 hours.
>| >>
>| >> We have the benefit of flying an airplane that is exceptionally well
>| >> built
>| >> and designed to be rugged far beyond the limits for which it is approved.
>| >> Since building new Commanders is out of the question (regardless of type
>| >> certificate ownership, tooling, and cost), we need to be very creative in
>| >> ensuring that these airplanes will fly for years to come.
>| >>
>| >> Good luck,
>| >>
>| >> /John
>| >>
>| >> PS: I need about 50 more years out of my airframe (if I decide to quit
>| >> flying at 87, that is).
>| >>
>| >>
>| >> ----- Original Message -----
>| >> From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
>| >> To:
>| >> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 7:18 PM
>| >> Subject: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>| >>
>| >>
>| >> >
>| >> > HI KIDS.
>| >> >
>| >> > Later this month I will be attending the FAA meeting on aging
>| >> > aircraft to be held in Kansas City. With me will be Mr. Gary Rankin,
>| > the
>| >> > pres. of
>| >> > the Navion Society. Many other type groups will be represented as
>| >> > well
>| >> > as
>| >> > type certificate holders. The FAA is seeking guidance for proposals
>| > that
>| >> > will
>| >> > effect the long term life of our airframes.
>| >> > I am told on good authority that the FAA has no hidden agenda here
>| > but
>| >> > is sincerely looking for help from the industry regarding this issue.
>| >> > The
>| >> > recent wing failure of the Chauks Airline Grumman Mallard precipitated
>| >> > this
>| >> > meeting.
>| >> > There are a few sugestions already making there way to the surface.
>| >> > One, sponsored by the EAA, would allow all aircraft certificate under
>| > the
>| >> > old
>| >> > CAR-3 standards to "opt out" of the normal category and be placed in a
>| >> > new
>| >> > category allowing for much more flexibility in the use of parts and
>| >> > modifications. Although I have not seen a hard draft of this
>| >> > proposal,
>| >> > it appears it
>| >> > would be similar to the Canadian "owner maintained" category, we shall
>| >> > see.
>| >> > While I don't see this as a bad proposal, and support the concept, it
>| >> > doesn't
>| >> > seem to address the FAAs real concern. The airframes would soldier
>| >> > on,
>| >> > albeit
>| >> > with new parts etc, with no regard to the main issue, old airframes.
>| >> > Another idea is that type certificate holders and type groups join
>| >> > forces and create a "super annual" inspection. This would be done at
>| >> > a
>| >> > predetermined time, ether years of flight hours or both. It could
>| >> > only
>| >> > be done by an
>| >> > approved (special training) facility. It may or may not be
>| > reoccurring.
>| >> > I have spoken to the new owner of Twin Commander, Jim Mathison.
>| > There
>| >> > will be a representative from Twin, there and we plan to meet.
>| >> > This may be one of the most significant meetings with the FAA to
>| >> > happen
>| >> > in years, maybe ever. Input there will help guide the decision making
>| >> > process for many years to come.
>| >> > What are your thoughts?? Do you have any input you would like me
>| >> > to
>| >> > carry tot he floor from you?? jb
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >> >
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >>
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>
>
CONFIDENTIALITY & PRIVILEGE NOTICE
W.J.R.Hamilton,Glenalmond Group Companies,Fighter Flights Internet
Services and Warbirds.Net. & .
This message is intended for and should only be used by the
addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged
information.If you are not the intended recipient any use
distribution,disclosure or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited.Confidentiality and legal privilege attached to this
communication are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken
delivery to you.If you have received this message in error, please
notify us immediately to:
Australia 61 (0)408 876 526
Dolores capitis non fero. Eos do.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Just JimBob keeping abreast of the situation.
Then, we're fortunate that he's so up-front about everything.
Seriously though, this once again emphasises the need for owners to join the
Flight Group. The more Members we have, the more the FAA are likely to take
notice of us.
It also emphasises, yet again, that we have a Leader who is truly looking after
your interests.
Once again, as WinG Commander Gordon said, we have to say a big "Thank You" to
Jim.
Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 6:23 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
|
| I was just patting myself on the back for being mature enough to not
| capitalize on that typo ;-).
|
| /John
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: <CloudCraft(at)aol.com>
| To:
| Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:36 AM
| Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
|
|
| >
| > In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
| > YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
| > writes:
| > Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
| > concern and the tooling was scraped.
| > <><><><><>
| >
| > Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
| > construction now.
| >
| > Wing Commander Gordon
| >
| > Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <cschuerm(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
W J R HAMILTON wrote:
> the 680Es bought by the old
> Australian Department of Civil Aviation were all corrosion proofed
> during manufacture
That's an interesting bit of trivia that I was unaware of. Thanks!
> We are also seeing VERY serious corrosion in some strutted Cessna
I've seen some pretty serious corrosion here in the midwest lately on
Cessnas as well. Cessna did virtually nothing for corrosion-proofing
except on the few birds set up for float ops. Amazing how much
corrosion I've seen inside the wings of Cessnas that have been hangared
in Oklahoma their entire lives. Just condensation will do it.
> the bigger Pipers seem to throw up fewer
> unexpected horror stories.
That's been my observation as well Bill. Piper did a pretty darn good
job of slathering zinc chromate all over in many of their models. I
havn't found any corossion at all in my '65 Aztruk even after a total
tear-down restoration. Pitty that everybody didn't do the same.
chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WINGFLYER1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Just want you guys to know,as a new owner I appreciate learning about my 680
and other commanders as well. I appreciate the opportunity to read your
comments Again,many thanks.Gil Walker .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Gil,
You're not scared stiff yet?
----- Original Message -----
From: <WINGFLYER1(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 3:55 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
> Just want you guys to know,as a new owner I appreciate learning about my
680
> and other commanders as well. I appreciate the opportunity to read your
> comments Again,many thanks.Gil Walker .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
In a message dated 3/13/2006 1:27:36 PM Pacific Standard Time,
barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk writes:
Once again, as WinG Commander Gordon said, we have to say a big "Thank You"
to
Jim.
Thanks guys. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
I've stopped laughing now. Oh, the depth of the intellect in this group.
----- Original Message -----
From: <CloudCraft(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:36 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
> In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
> writes:
> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an environmental
> concern and the tooling was scraped.
> <><><><><>
>
> Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
> construction now.
>
> Wing Commander Gordon
>
> Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
I hear you, Nico....but do you think that Principal Fatigue Engineers ever
have this much fun?
----- Original Message -----
From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:51 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> I've stopped laughing now. Oh, the depth of the intellect in this group.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <CloudCraft(at)aol.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:36 AM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
>>
>> In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
> YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
>> writes:
>> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an
>> environmental
>> concern and the tooling was scraped.
>> <><><><><>
>>
>> Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
>> construction now.
>>
>> Wing Commander Gordon
>>
>> Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
You know, I've watched that typo for a while and didn't know what to do with
it. It took an expert to finish that job.
I don't think other flyers have this much. It's an honor to be among these
guys.
:-)
Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:48 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
> I hear you, Nico....but do you think that Principal Fatigue Engineers ever
> have this much fun?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:51 PM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> >
> >
> > I've stopped laughing now. Oh, the depth of the intellect in this group.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <CloudCraft(at)aol.com>
> > To:
> > Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:36 AM
> > Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
> >
> >
> >>
> >> In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
> > YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
> >> writes:
> >> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an
> >> environmental
> >> concern and the tooling was scraped.
> >> <><><><><>
> >>
> >> Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
> >> construction now.
> >>
> >> Wing Commander Gordon
> >>
> >> Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Addington" <jtaddington(at)charter.net> |
If I am out of line with this I apologize ahead of time, but thought it
interesting.
-------Original Message-------
Subject: Fwd-Thunderstorm
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 22:44:13 -0600
> From: <> Subject: Baron Von Richthofen On Flying Through A
Thunderstorm
> For The
> Thrill Of It
>
>
> Before the battle of Verdun our activity was disturbed by frequent
> thunderstorms. Nothing is more disagreeable for flying men than to
have
> to fly through a thunder storm. During the Battle of the Somme, a
whole
> English Flying Squadron came down behind our lines and became our
> prisoners of war because they had all been surprised by a
thunderstorm.
>
> I had never yet made an attempt to get through thunder clouds,
however I
> could not suppress my desire to make the experiment. During one whole
> day, thunder was in the air. But in order to look after various
things,
> I had flown over to the nearby fortress of Metz.
>
> I had an adventure during my return journey.
>
> After visiting the aerodrome of Metz, I had intended to return to my
own
> quarters, when an approaching thunderstorm became noticeable. As it
> approached from the north, its clouds looked like a gigantic,
> pitch-black wall. Old, experienced pilots urged me not to fly.
> However, I had promised to return to my base. I should have
considered
> myself a coward if I had failed to come back because of a silly
thunder
> storm.
>
> But I decided to try.
>
> I was in the air when the rain began falling. I had to throw away my
> goggles, other- wise I should not have seen anything. The trouble was
> that I had to travel over the mountains of the Moselle where the
> thunderstorm was now raging. And as I rapidly approached the black
cloud
> which reached down to the earth, I said to myself that probably I
> should be lucky to get through it.
>
> As I flew at the lowest possible altitude, I was compelled
absolutely
> to leap over
> houses and trees with my machine. Very soon I no longer knew where I
> was. The gale seized my machine as if it were a piece of paper and
> drove it along. My heart sank within me. I could not land among the
> hills. I was compelled to go on.
>
> I was surrounded by an inky blackness. Beneath me the trees bent down
in
> the gale. Suddenly, I saw right in front of me a wooded hill. I could
> not avoid it. I was able to fly only in a straight line. My Albatross
> managed to take it. And now I had to take every obstacle that I
> encountered. My flight became a jumping competition. Purely and
simply.
> I had to jump over trees, villages, spires and steeples, for I had to
> keep within a few yards of the ground . . otherwise I should have
seen
> nothing at all.
>
> The lightning was playing around me. At that time I did not yet know
> that lightning cannot touch flying machines. I felt certain of my
death
> for it seemed to me inevitable that the gale would throw me at any
> moment into a village or a forest. Had the motor stopped working I
> should have been done for.
>
> Suddenly, I saw that on the horizon the darkness had become less
thick.
> The thunderstorm had passed, over there. If I were able to get that
> far, I would be saved. Concentrating all my energy I steered towards
the
> light. Suddenly I got out of the thundercloud. The rain was still
> falling in torrents, but still I felt - saved.
>
> In pouring rain I landed at my aerodrome. Everyone had been waiting
for
> me. Metz had reported my start and had told them that I had been
> swallowed up by a thunder cloud. Withstanding the dangers during my
> flight, I had experienced glorious moments - and I now realize that
it
> was all very beautiful.
>
> But I shall never again fly through a thunderstorm unless the
> Fatherland should demand I should do this.
>
> Source : Von Richthofen's Journal
>
> [ abridged ]
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
As much as I admire WCG, I have to give credit where it's due. Sir Barry, in
his typical British fashion, capitalized on that typo with exceptionally
droll doublespeak, nearly knocking me off my chair.
Sir Barry, you're the best!
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> You know, I've watched that typo for a while and didn't know what to do
> with
> it. It took an expert to finish that job.
> I don't think other flyers have this much. It's an honor to be among these
> guys.
> :-)
> Nico
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:48 PM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
>>
>> I hear you, Nico....but do you think that Principal Fatigue Engineers
>> ever
>> have this much fun?
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
>> To:
>> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:51 PM
>> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > I've stopped laughing now. Oh, the depth of the intellect in this
>> > group.
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: <CloudCraft(at)aol.com>
>> > To:
>> > Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:36 AM
>> > Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> In a message dated 13-Mar-06 08:16:18 Pacific Standard Time,
>> > YOURTCFG(at)aol.com
>> >> writes:
>> >> Some had lead involved in tit's construction. There was an
>> >> environmental
>> >> concern and the tooling was scraped.
>> >> <><><><><>
>> >>
>> >> Some of those girls worked in Las Vegas. Most use silicone for tits
>> >> construction now.
>> >>
>> >> Wing Commander Gordon
>> >>
>> >> Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
In a message dated 3/13/2006 10:58:28 PM Pacific Standard Time,
john(at)vormbaum.com writes:
capitalized on that typo
WHHHAT TYPOR>?/?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
Jim Addington, pleaese call me 360-903-6901 Thanks jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Pesronally JmiBob, I dno'nt fink your Speel-chequer is wurking coorektly.
Try re-boobing your machine.
Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 5:58 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
|
| In a message dated 3/13/2006 10:58:28 PM Pacific Standard Time,
| john(at)vormbaum.com writes:
| capitalized on that typo
|
|
| WHHHAT TYPOR>?/?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Barshalom(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Please change the subject kine for these emails to:
AGING AIRCRAFT OWNER/ENTHUSIASTS
Thank you :-)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca> |
Mason, thanks for faxing those two pages (6-9 & 6-10) to me at
(604-274-1281),
unfortunately these pages are from the "Illistrated parts" book, more on
this in a minute.
What I need are the pages from the "Aircraft Shop Manual" (6-9 & 6-10).
Would you have these pages?
Now, back to the pages you sent me, when I noticed that on the top of the
sheets refered to the "Illistrated parts" book I looked at mine and low and
behold I don't even have "6-" sections in it ! hmmmmmmmm, will have to look
into that. If I have any money for "go juice" I will try to make my first
Commander gathering this summer so you guys bring your manuals.
Tom F.
C-GISS
680FLP (Mr.RPM)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
In a message dated 3/14/2006 10:06:14 AM Pacific Standard Time,
barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk writes:
Try re-boobing
MY MACHINEE DOENT HAUV ANY BOOBS!! I guiess i need to upgraid. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
I need to shine mine up.
TF
----- Original Message -----
From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 19:42
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> In a message dated 3/14/2006 10:06:14 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk writes:
>
> Try re-boobing
>
>
> MY MACHINEE DOENT HAUV ANY BOOBS!! I guiess i need to upgraid. jb
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
Well there is always hope, since Ted Smith also worked for Donald Douglas,
that it could turn out to be like the DC-8. It turned out to be the only
aircraft in the Aging Fleet Program that was found to have "No discernable
life span".
There is always hope.
bilbo
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
Schuermann
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
W J R HAMILTON wrote:
> the 680Es bought by the old
> Australian Department of Civil Aviation were all corrosion proofed
> during manufacture
That's an interesting bit of trivia that I was unaware of. Thanks!
> We are also seeing VERY serious corrosion in some strutted Cessna
I've seen some pretty serious corrosion here in the midwest lately on
Cessnas as well. Cessna did virtually nothing for corrosion-proofing
except on the few birds set up for float ops. Amazing how much
corrosion I've seen inside the wings of Cessnas that have been hangared
in Oklahoma their entire lives. Just condensation will do it.
> the bigger Pipers seem to throw up fewer
> unexpected horror stories.
That's been my observation as well Bill. Piper did a pretty darn good
job of slathering zinc chromate all over in many of their models. I
havn't found any corossion at all in my '65 Aztruk even after a total
tear-down restoration. Pitty that everybody didn't do the same.
chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <cschuerm(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
Bill Bow wrote:
> Well there is always hope, since Ted Smith also worked for Donald Douglas,
> that it could turn out to be like the DC-8. It turned out to be the only
> aircraft in the Aging Fleet Program that was found to have "No discernable
> life span".
I seem to recall being told that there was a fatigue life determination
done on the Commander. I don't recall details of the results, but I do
remember that no "issues" were found with the wing design.
My personal speculation is that the tail surfaces would be one of the
first places to show significant fatigue damage. Commanders have a
pretty obvious propensity to develope cracks in the tail feathers. I
imagine it is mostly due to prop beat since it seems to be far more
prevelant on the big-engined models such as the 680F/FL.
Maybe Jim or Barry knows more.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
| From: | "N395V" <N395V(at)direcway.com> |
> seems to be far more
> prevelant on the big-engined models
There is an SB for massive reinforcement of the aft fuselage of the 685s starting
at the aft pressure bulkhead out to the tail cone. Required on all 135 and
121 aircraft. Cost around $25,000 to do it about 5 years ago.
--------
Milt
N395V
F1 Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22086#22086
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
I imagine it is mostly due to prop beat since it seems to be far more
prevelant on the big-engined models such as the 680F/FL.
I'm safe.
bilbo
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
Schuermann
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 10:13 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
Bill Bow wrote:
> Well there is always hope, since Ted Smith also worked for Donald Douglas,
> that it could turn out to be like the DC-8. It turned out to be the only
> aircraft in the Aging Fleet Program that was found to have "No discernable
> life span".
I seem to recall being told that there was a fatigue life determination
done on the Commander. I don't recall details of the results, but I do
remember that no "issues" were found with the wing design.
My personal speculation is that the tail surfaces would be one of the
first places to show significant fatigue damage. Commanders have a
pretty obvious propensity to develope cracks in the tail feathers. I
imagine it is mostly due to prop beat since it seems to be far more
prevelant on the big-engined models such as the 680F/FL.
Maybe Jim or Barry knows more.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: |
How come I'm on the list's Junk Mail List?
BB
---------------------------------------------------
The message you sent was regarded as junk e-mail by the recipient's email
server.
To help ensure delivery make sure you are on the recipient's known address
list.
Thank You.
-------------
Original Message Contained:
I imagine it is mostly due to prop beat since it seems to be far more
prevelant on the big-engined models such as the 680F/FL.
I'm safe.
bilbo
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
Schuermann
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 10:13 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
-------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Owens" <dowens(at)aerialviewpoint.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: |
Mabey its all the comments about the "tits" Rebuilder... hehehe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 3:47 PM
Subject: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
>
> How come I'm on the list's Junk Mail List?
> BB
> ---------------------------------------------------
> The message you sent was regarded as junk e-mail by the recipient's email
> server.
>
> To help ensure delivery make sure you are on the recipient's known address
> list.
>
> Thank You.
>
> -------------
> Original Message Contained:
>
>
> I imagine it is mostly due to prop beat since it seems to be far more
> prevelant on the big-engined models such as the 680F/FL.
>
> I'm safe.
>
> bilbo
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
> Schuermann
> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 10:13 PM
> To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> -------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brock Lorber <blorber(at)southwestcirrus.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT [bcc][faked-from] |
> What are your thoughts?? Do you have any input you would like me to
>carry tot he floor from you?? jb
>
>
I'm assuming "Get out of the way and let folks build new and better
airplanes without other folks who don't know a darn thing about
engineering or business interfering" wouldn't be received well?
Well, then, how about, "Get out of the way and let folks with CAD and
CNC machines that can crank out new parts in a couple of hours do it
without a business plan that includes years of prostheletizing before
the FAA alter"?
No? Well how about, "Since you approved the parts, mandated the
inspection program, licesned and inspected the operator, and created the
mess where the manufacturer is penalized for supporting their product as
it ages, you should take all the liability"?
Well, then, I've got nothing.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT [bcc][faked-from] |
Wow, Brock, hear hear!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brock Lorber" <blorber(at)southwestcirrus.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 8:43 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT [bcc][faked-from]
>
>
>
>> What are your thoughts?? Do you have any input you would like me to
>>carry tot he floor from you?? jb
>>
>>
> I'm assuming "Get out of the way and let folks build new and better
> airplanes without other folks who don't know a darn thing about
> engineering or business interfering" wouldn't be received well?
>
> Well, then, how about, "Get out of the way and let folks with CAD and
> CNC machines that can crank out new parts in a couple of hours do it
> without a business plan that includes years of prostheletizing before
> the FAA alter"?
>
> No? Well how about, "Since you approved the parts, mandated the
> inspection program, licesned and inspected the operator, and created the
> mess where the manufacturer is penalized for supporting their product as
> it ages, you should take all the liability"?
>
> Well, then, I've got nothing.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Brady" <westwind(at)hdiss.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT [bcc][faked-from] |
"Brock"----Your assumtion that those statements would be unacceptable to the
powers that be was right on the money! We all know the last thing a
gov.reg.agency wants to hear is the truth.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brock Lorber" <blorber(at)southwestcirrus.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 8:43 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT [bcc][faked-from]
>
>
>
>> What are your thoughts?? Do you have any input you would like me to
>>carry tot he floor from you?? jb
>>
>>
> I'm assuming "Get out of the way and let folks build new and better
> airplanes without other folks who don't know a darn thing about
> engineering or business interfering" wouldn't be received well?
>
> Well, then, how about, "Get out of the way and let folks with CAD and
> CNC machines that can crank out new parts in a couple of hours do it
> without a business plan that includes years of prostheletizing before
> the FAA alter"?
>
> No? Well how about, "Since you approved the parts, mandated the
> inspection program, licesned and inspected the operator, and created the
> mess where the manufacturer is penalized for supporting their product as
> it ages, you should take all the liability"?
>
> Well, then, I've got nothing.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT [bcc][faked-from] |
In a message dated 3/16/2006 8:46:20 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
blorber(at)southwestcirrus.com writes:
"Since you approved the parts, mandated the
inspection program, licesned and inspected the operator, and created the
mess where the manufacturer is penalized for supporting their product as
it ages, you should take all the liability"?
AMEN!! jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: |
I did not "touch" the "tits" string.
And it is still sending me the messages that I'm junk.
bilbo
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Owens
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 5:20 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
Mabey its all the comments about the "tits" Rebuilder... hehehe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 3:47 PM
Subject: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
>
> How come I'm on the list's Junk Mail List?
> BB
> ---------------------------------------------------
> The message you sent was regarded as junk e-mail by the recipient's email
> server.
>
> To help ensure delivery make sure you are on the recipient's known address
> list.
>
> Thank You.
>
> -------------
> Original Message Contained:
>
>
> I imagine it is mostly due to prop beat since it seems to be far more
> prevelant on the big-engined models such as the 680F/FL.
>
> I'm safe.
>
> bilbo
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
> Schuermann
> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 10:13 PM
> To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> -------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <cschuerm(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: |
Bill Bow wrote:
> And it is still sending me the messages that I'm junk.
Don't take it personally. The great ones are never appreciated in their
time. It's either that or the listserver has an artificial intelligence
routine that evaluates humor :-)
cs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: |
I think it has been talking to my wife.
bilbo
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
Schuermann
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
Bill Bow wrote:
> And it is still sending me the messages that I'm junk.
Don't take it personally. The great ones are never appreciated in their
time. It's either that or the listserver has an artificial intelligence
routine that evaluates humor :-)
cs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Deneal Schilmeister (Portege)" <deneals(at)sbcglobal.net> |
Cc:
| Subject: | RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: |
Actually, it sounds to me like Bill's earthlink needs to be made aware that
commanderlist messages are not spam.
Earthlink should be able to tell you how.
___________________________
Deneal Schilmeister
St. Louis - Cincinnati
1997 SL500
http://homepage.mac.com/deneals/SL500.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
Schuermann
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 8:14 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
Bill Bow wrote:
> And it is still sending me the messages that I'm junk.
Don't take it personally. The great ones are never appreciated in their
time. It's either that or the listserver has an artificial intelligence
routine that evaluates humor :-)
cs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Brady" <westwind(at)hdiss.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: |
It's bouncing mine too----I figure it's because I had the audacity to speak
ill of a govt. reg. agency :-(
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net>
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 6:40 AM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
>
> I think it has been talking to my wife.
>
> bilbo
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
> Schuermann
> Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 9:14 AM
> To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
>
>
>
> Bill Bow wrote:
>> And it is still sending me the messages that I'm junk.
>
> Don't take it personally. The great ones are never appreciated in their
> time. It's either that or the listserver has an artificial intelligence
> routine that evaluates humor :-)
>
> cs
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Deneal Schilmeister (Portege)" <deneals(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | DELIVERED - To: - Subject: RE: |
Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
Looks like Bill's earthlink does not like me, either, as I sent this message
to the list AND to Bilbo personally.
___________________________
Deneal Schilmeister
St. Louis - Cincinnati
1997 SL500
http://homepage.mac.com/deneals/SL500.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: deneals(at)sbcglobal.net [mailto:deneals(at)sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 9:58 AM
Subject: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject: RE:
Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
The message you sent was regarded as junk e-mail by the recipient's email
server.
To help ensure delivery make sure you are on the recipient's known address
list.
Thank You.
-------------
Original Message Contained:
Actually, it sounds to me like Bill's earthlink needs to be made aware that
commanderlist messages are not spam.
Earthlink should be able to tell you how.
___________________________
Deneal Schilmeister
St. Louis - Cincinnati
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | DELIVERED - To: - Subject: RE: |
Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
I got 3 from you, Smiley, all through the list.
bb
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deneal
Schilmeister (Portege)
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 11:05 AM
Subject: FW: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject:
RE: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
Looks like Bill's earthlink does not like me, either, as I sent this message
to the list AND to Bilbo personally.
___________________________
Deneal Schilmeister
St. Louis - Cincinnati
1997 SL500
http://homepage.mac.com/deneals/SL500.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: deneals(at)sbcglobal.net [mailto:deneals(at)sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 9:58 AM
Subject: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject: RE:
Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
The message you sent was regarded as junk e-mail by the recipient's email
server.
To help ensure delivery make sure you are on the recipient's known address
list.
Thank You.
-------------
Original Message Contained:
Actually, it sounds to me like Bill's earthlink needs to be made aware that
commanderlist messages are not spam.
Earthlink should be able to tell you how.
___________________________
Deneal Schilmeister
St. Louis - Cincinnati
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
Sorry to bother everybody, but someone on the list has tagged my address or
domain as junk mail. Could you check and remove me from your junk mail list
PLEASE? It generates a nuisance response when I post anything to the list.
Thanks,
Bowing74(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Owens" <dowens(at)aerialviewpoint.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: |
Well, then... It's probably not wise to mention area 51 here either ;)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Brady" <westwind(at)hdiss.net>
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
>
> It's bouncing mine too----I figure it's because I had the audacity to
speak
> ill of a govt. reg. agency :-(
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 6:40 AM
> Subject: RE: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
>
>
>
> >
> > I think it has been talking to my wife.
> >
> > bilbo
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
> > Schuermann
> > Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 9:14 AM
> > To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Bill Bow wrote:
> >> And it is still sending me the messages that I'm junk.
> >
> > Don't take it personally. The great ones are never appreciated in their
> > time. It's either that or the listserver has an artificial intelligence
> > routine that evaluates humor :-)
> >
> > cs
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Addington" <jtaddington(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: |
They must have found out about that fly by night ought fit you work for, or
is that fly at night he he. Of course I can't say a whole lot as it look's
like the out fit I worked for may not be flying at night or day either.
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bill Bow
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 7:53 AM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
I did not "touch" the "tits" string.
And it is still sending me the messages that I'm junk.
bilbo
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Owens
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 5:20 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
Mabey its all the comments about the "tits" Rebuilder... hehehe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 3:47 PM
Subject: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
>
> How come I'm on the list's Junk Mail List?
> BB
> ---------------------------------------------------
> The message you sent was regarded as junk e-mail by the recipient's email
> server.
>
> To help ensure delivery make sure you are on the recipient's known address
> list.
>
> Thank You.
>
> -------------
> Original Message Contained:
>
>
> I imagine it is mostly due to prop beat since it seems to be far more
> prevelant on the big-engined models such as the 680F/FL.
>
> I'm safe.
>
> bilbo
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
> Schuermann
> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 10:13 PM
> To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT
>
>
> -------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brock Lorber <blorber(at)southwestcirrus.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT [bcc][faked-from] |
John Vormbaum wrote:
>
>Wow, Brock, hear hear!
>
>
Heh. After 7.5 flying through snowstorms (P-static is soooo much fun),
taxiing on "ramps" that I wouldn't drive my car on (Pagosa Springs is
going to buy some props I swear!), and freezing my buns off outside FBOs
that are locked up tight in the middle of the day (three in two days -
that has to be some sort of record) I tend to get a little grouchy.
Then, my libertarian rants slip by my thought-checker. :)
The good news is, I had some agreement this time. Usually when that
happens, I wake up to find half the world ready to bring the FBI to my
house and execute me in the town square for unauthorized use of the
libertarian soapbox.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT [bcc][faked-from] |
I tend to be quite the Libertarian myself....so I'm in absolute agreement
with you!
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brock Lorber" <blorber(at)southwestcirrus.com>
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 12:47 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: AGING AIRCRAFT [bcc][faked-from]
>
>
> John Vormbaum wrote:
>
>>
>>Wow, Brock, hear hear!
>>
>>
> Heh. After 7.5 flying through snowstorms (P-static is soooo much fun),
> taxiing on "ramps" that I wouldn't drive my car on (Pagosa Springs is
> going to buy some props I swear!), and freezing my buns off outside FBOs
> that are locked up tight in the middle of the day (three in two days -
> that has to be some sort of record) I tend to get a little grouchy.
> Then, my libertarian rants slip by my thought-checker. :)
>
> The good news is, I had some agreement this time. Usually when that
> happens, I wake up to find half the world ready to bring the FBI to my
> house and execute me in the town square for unauthorized use of the
> libertarian soapbox.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "crunk12" <crunk12(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: |
Bilbo,
If you had just gotten on the 'tits' string you wouldn't be junk...... you
would be trashy!!
Crunk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: |
I've always been a little trashy. Thanks for noticing.
bb
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of crunk12
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 5:46 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To:
Bilbo,
If you had just gotten on the 'tits' string you wouldn't be junk...... you
would be trashy!!
Crunk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "steve" <steveg(at)nternet.com> |
OK guys. I finally got back the pics I took of a few derelict ACommanders
at Herrerra airport Santo Domingo Dominican Republic. I will send to Nico
for post on his server.
Steve G.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Allen Reed" <allen_reed2(at)hotmail.com> |
If you've ever had your"DOMAIN" tagged as junk mail,,you might be a a
"RED-NECK" Commander pilot!! Big Al
>From: "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net>
>Reply-To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Commander-List: Junk Mail
>Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 12:33:44 -0500
>
>
>Sorry to bother everybody, but someone on the list has tagged my address or
>domain as junk mail. Could you check and remove me from your junk mail list
>PLEASE? It generates a nuisance response when I post anything to the list.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Bowing74(at)earthlink.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Broken Aerocommanders |
Steve,
I posted the Aero Commander pictures to the folder "Broken Commanders" Click the
link below and find Broken Commanders. to view you beautiful V-tail, the link
below will take you there if you find Steve's Trip to Dominican Rep.
http://www.teletuition.org/documents/Aviation/Aero%20Commanders/
Thanks
Nico
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Fw: Quantas air lines |
Subject: Fw: Quantas air lines
These have been around before, but still funny....
Begin forwarded message:
These will bring a smile to your face, or maybe even more.
Subject: Quantas air lines
Remember, it takes a college degree to fly a plane but only a high school diploma
to fix one. Reassurance for those of us who fly routinely in our jobs.
After every flight, Qantas pilots fill out a form, called a "gripe sheet," which
tells mechanics about problems with the aircraft. The mechanics correct the
problems, document their repairs on the form, and then pilots review the gripe
sheets before the next flight. Never let it be said that ground crews lack
a sense of humor.
Here are some actual maintenance complaints submitted by Qantas' pilots (marked
with a P) and the solutions recorded (marked with an S) by maintenance engineers.
By the way, Qantas is the only major! airline that has never had an accident.
P: Left inside main tire almost needs replacement.
S: Almost replaced left inside main tire.
P: Test flight OK, except auto-land very rough.
S: Auto-land not installed on this aircraft.
P: Something loose in cockpit.
S: Something tightened in cockpit.
P: Dead bugs on windshield.
S: Live bugs on back-order.
P: Autopilot in altitude-hold mode produces a 200 feet per minute descent.
S: Cannot reproduce problem on ground.
P: Evidence of leak on right main landing gear.
S: Evidence removed.
P: DME volume unbelievably loud.
S: DME volume set to more believable level.
P: Friction locks cause throttle levers to stick.
S: That's what they're for.
P: IFF inoperative.
S: IFF always inoperative in OFF mode.
P: Suspected crack in windshield.
S: Suspect you're right.
P: Number 3 engine missing.
S: Engine found on right wing after brief search.
P: Aircraft handles funny. (I love this one!)
S: Aircraft warned to straighten up, fly right, and be serious.
P: Target radar hums.
S: Reprogrammed target radar with lyrics.
P: Mouse in cockpit.
S: Cat installed
And the best one for last .................
P: Noise coming from under instrument panel. Sounds like a midget pounding on
something with a hammer.
S: Took hammer away from midget.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BertBerry1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Dom Rep pics |
Great Pictures Steve, did you happen to get a serial number for HI-662CA?
Thanks,
Bert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Moe" <moe(at)rosspistons.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dom Rep pics |
Gents:
Some advice please. At what temperature is it advisable to get an engine
preheat with geared engines. Looks like I can't avoid cold weather this
year.
Regards.
Moe
N680RR
680F(p)
----- Original Message -----
From: <BertBerry1(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:02 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
>
> Great Pictures Steve, did you happen to get a serial number for HI-662CA?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bert
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "steve" <steveg(at)nternet.com> |
Sorry, no. The guards, one sitting under the wing of an AC were not
likening me even taking the pictures.
Steve G
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BertBerry1(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
Great Pictures Steve, did you happen to get a serial number for HI-662CA?
Thanks,
Bert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BertBerry1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Dom Rep pics |
SMART MAN.
Thanks Much,
Bert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Moe" <moe(at)rosspistons.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dom Rep pics |
Gents:
Some advice please....at what temperature is it advisable to get a preheat
on geared engines before starting....looks like I can't avoid the cold this
year...
Moe
N680RR
680F(p)
----- Original Message -----
From: <BertBerry1(at)aol.com>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:18 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
>
> SMART MAN.
>
> Thanks Much,
>
> Bert
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dom Rep pics |
Hi All,
For anyone who is interested, the serial numbers of the Commanders photographed
by Steve at Santo Domingo-Herrera are:
HI-662CA - 560A-233, formerly N2733B.
HI-587CT - 500-720, formerly N3828C.
HI-522CA - 680E-749-39, formerly HI-522, N140L.
Sad to see some 'oldies' in poor shape, but grateful thanks to Steve for a good
'roving report'!
Best Regards,
Barry C.
----- Original Message -----
From: "steve" <steveg(at)nternet.com>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:13 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
|
| Sorry, no. The guards, one sitting under the wing of an AC were not
| likening me even taking the pictures.
|
| Steve G
|
| -----Original Message-----
| From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
| [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
| BertBerry1(at)aol.com
| Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 9:02 AM
| To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
| Subject: Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
|
|
| Great Pictures Steve, did you happen to get a serial number for HI-662CA?
|
| Thanks,
|
| Bert
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca> |
Gentlemen,
I have not so far been able to locate the missing pages from the "Aircraft
Shop Manual"(6-9 & 6-10).
Can anyone help?
Tom F.
C-GISS
680FLP (Mr.RPM)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re: |
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
Did everyone get this message OK, sent to the chatlist?
I did, but also got this one saying it was junk mail!
Barry C.
----- Original Message -----
From: <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:44 PM
Subject: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re:
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
| The message you sent was regarded as junk e-mail by the recipient's email
server.
|
| To help ensure delivery make sure you are on the recipient's known address
list.
|
| Thank You.
|
| Original Message Contained:
|
|
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
|
| Hi All,
|
| For anyone who is interested, the serial numbers of the Commanders
photographed
| by Steve at Santo Domingo-Herrera are:
|
| HI-662CA - 560A-233, formerly N2733B.
| HI-587CT - 500-720, formerly N3828C.
| HI-522CA - 680E-749-39, formerly HI-522, N140L.
|
| Sad to see some 'oldies' in poor shape, but grateful thanks to Steve for a
good
| 'roving report'!
|
| Best Regards,
| Barry C.
|
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "steve" <steveg(at)nternet.com>
| To:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BertBerry1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: NOT DELIVERED - To: |
- Subject: Re: Command...
I got it Barry.
Bert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Donnie Rose <aquadiver99(at)yahoo.com> |
Morning Tom,
All I have are 500B books but, if same, will share.
Hope you get what you need.
Regards,
--- Tom Fisher wrote:
>
>
> Gentlemen,
>
> I have not so far been able to locate the missing
> pages from the "Aircraft
> Shop Manual"(6-9 & 6-10).
> Can anyone help?
>
> Tom F.
> C-GISS
> 680FLP (Mr.RPM)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Donnie Rose
205/492-8444
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "steve" <steveg(at)nternet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re: |
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
Yes, I am receiving the same. One that goes through and one that shows a
failure notice.
Steve G.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re: |
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
SEEEEE.........It's not just me. So there!
bilbo
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry
Collman
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject:
Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Did everyone get this message OK, sent to the chatlist?
I did, but also got this one saying it was junk mail!
Barry C.
----- Original Message -----
From: <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:44 PM
Subject: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re:
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
| The message you sent was regarded as junk e-mail by the recipient's email
server.
|
| To help ensure delivery make sure you are on the recipient's known address
list.
|
| Thank You.
|
| Original Message Contained:
|
|
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
|
| Hi All,
|
| For anyone who is interested, the serial numbers of the Commanders
photographed
| by Steve at Santo Domingo-Herrera are:
|
| HI-662CA - 560A-233, formerly N2733B.
| HI-587CT - 500-720, formerly N3828C.
| HI-522CA - 680E-749-39, formerly HI-522, N140L.
|
| Sad to see some 'oldies' in poor shape, but grateful thanks to Steve for a
good
| 'roving report'!
|
| Best Regards,
| Barry C.
|
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "steve" <steveg(at)nternet.com>
| To:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Dom Rep pics |
In a message dated 3/20/2006 7:15:07 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
moe(at)rosspistons.com writes:
At what temperature is it advisable to get an engine
preheat with geared engines.
About 35F. Above that, should be no problem. I have started GO-480s at "0"
but it not the best thing to do. The gearbox gets its oil last, so keep the
revs low as long as possible. The blowers are also turning at about 10
times engine speed so that is another reason to keep the revs down until the
blower bearings have warm oil.
Also remember when operation in below std temps, the engine makes over
rated HP. At "0" F I thing your 380 hp engines will make about 420hp. so I
back off the MP a few inches when it is really cold (below 30) jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca> |
Thanks, I too have a 500B manual but it is not the same, I will keep trying.
Tom F.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Donnie Rose" <aquadiver99(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 08:07
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Shop manual
>
>
> Morning Tom,
> All I have are 500B books but, if same, will share.
> Hope you get what you need.
> Regards,
> --- Tom Fisher wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Gentlemen,
> >
> > I have not so far been able to locate the missing
> > pages from the "Aircraft
> > Shop Manual"(6-9 & 6-10).
> > Can anyone help?
> >
> > Tom F.
> > C-GISS
> > 680FLP (Mr.RPM)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > browse
> > Subscriptions page,
> > FAQ,
> > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
> >
> > Admin.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Donnie Rose
> 205/492-8444
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <avtec2(at)bellsouth.net> |
Tom I Have the books you need pages out of
send ne again what you need
Harry
321 267-3141
What about the tear drop beacon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Donnie Rose" <aquadiver99(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 11:07 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Shop manual
>
>
> Morning Tom,
> All I have are 500B books but, if same, will share.
> Hope you get what you need.
> Regards,
> --- Tom Fisher wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Gentlemen,
>>
>> I have not so far been able to locate the missing
>> pages from the "Aircraft
>> Shop Manual"(6-9 & 6-10).
>> Can anyone help?
>>
>> Tom F.
>> C-GISS
>> 680FLP (Mr.RPM)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> browse
>> Subscriptions page,
>> FAQ,
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
>>
>> Admin.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Donnie Rose
> 205/492-8444
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Addington" <jtaddington(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re: |
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
Yea, but you started it. Hehe
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bill Bow
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10:52 AM
Subject: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: -
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
SEEEEE.........It's not just me. So there!
bilbo
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry
Collman
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject:
Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Did everyone get this message OK, sent to the chatlist?
I did, but also got this one saying it was junk mail!
Barry C.
----- Original Message -----
From: <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:44 PM
Subject: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re:
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
| The message you sent was regarded as junk e-mail by the recipient's email
server.
|
| To help ensure delivery make sure you are on the recipient's known address
list.
|
| Thank You.
|
| Original Message Contained:
|
|
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
|
| Hi All,
|
| For anyone who is interested, the serial numbers of the Commanders
photographed
| by Steve at Santo Domingo-Herrera are:
|
| HI-662CA - 560A-233, formerly N2733B.
| HI-587CT - 500-720, formerly N3828C.
| HI-522CA - 680E-749-39, formerly HI-522, N140L.
|
| Sad to see some 'oldies' in poor shape, but grateful thanks to Steve for a
good
| 'roving report'!
|
| Best Regards,
| Barry C.
|
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "steve" <steveg(at)nternet.com>
| To:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <avtec2(at)bellsouth.net> |
Yes i can
Harry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10:41 AM
Subject: Commander-List: Shop manual
>
>
> Gentlemen,
>
> I have not so far been able to locate the missing pages from the "Aircraft
> Shop Manual"(6-9 & 6-10).
> Can anyone help?
>
> Tom F.
> C-GISS
> 680FLP (Mr.RPM)
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
Tom,
Have you tried Morris Kernick at 321-403-8813? I bet he has the 680FLP
manual, and I know he'd help you out.
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 9:32 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Shop manual
>
>
> Thanks, I too have a 500B manual but it is not the same, I will keep
> trying.
> Tom F.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Donnie Rose" <aquadiver99(at)yahoo.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 08:07
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: Shop manual
>
>
>>
>>
>> Morning Tom,
>> All I have are 500B books but, if same, will share.
>> Hope you get what you need.
>> Regards,
>> --- Tom Fisher wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Gentlemen,
>> >
>> > I have not so far been able to locate the missing
>> > pages from the "Aircraft
>> > Shop Manual"(6-9 & 6-10).
>> > Can anyone help?
>> >
>> > Tom F.
>> > C-GISS
>> > 680FLP (Mr.RPM)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > browse
>> > Subscriptions page,
>> > FAQ,
>> > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
>> >
>> > Admin.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Donnie Rose
>> 205/492-8444
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Re: DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re: |
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
All,
I am aware of this issue. These messages are *not* coming from Matronics. They
are coming from someone subscribed to the Commander-List (and a number of others,
such as the Kitfox-list, Pietenpol-List and Kolb-List) and who has some
Spam filtering software mis-configured. The problem I'm having is that my posts
to the List don't seem to cause me to get one of the bounces.
I need to dissect in detail the full headers of one of these messages to determine
(hopefully) where they are actually coming from. If someone that has received
one of these could forward me a complete copy of the message including all
of the headers (in Unix email format with all of the "Received: " lines intact),
hopefully I can get this guy removed from the List.
Its looking like it might be coming from the "seawave.net" ISP, but I'm not positive.
If your mail goes through this ISP, please contact me ASAP.
Sorry for the hassle,
Matt Dralle
Matronics List Admin
At 07:55 AM 3/20/2006 Monday, you wrote:
>
>Did everyone get this message OK, sent to the chatlist?
>
>I did, but also got this one saying it was junk mail!
>
>Barry C.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
>To: <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
>Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:44 PM
>Subject: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re:
>Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
>
>
>| The message you sent was regarded as junk e-mail by the recipient's email
>server.
>|
>| To help ensure delivery make sure you are on the recipient's known address
>list.
>|
>| Thank You.
>|
>| Original Message Contained:
>|
>|
><barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
>|
>| Hi All,
>|
>| For anyone who is interested, the serial numbers of the Commanders
>photographed
>| by Steve at Santo Domingo-Herrera are:
>|
>| HI-662CA - 560A-233, formerly N2733B.
>| HI-587CT - 500-720, formerly N3828C.
>| HI-522CA - 680E-749-39, formerly HI-522, N140L.
>|
>| Sad to see some 'oldies' in poor shape, but grateful thanks to Steve for a
>good
>| 'roving report'!
>|
>| Best Regards,
>| Barry C.
>|
>| ----- Original Message -----
>| From: "steve" <steveg(at)nternet.com>
>| To:
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>|
>
>
>
>
>
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re: |
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
Was I married to you once?
bb
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Addington
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:50 PM
Subject: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject:
Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
Yea, but you started it. Hehe
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bill Bow
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10:52 AM
Subject: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: -
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
SEEEEE.........It's not just me. So there!
bilbo
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry
Collman
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject:
Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Did everyone get this message OK, sent to the chatlist?
I did, but also got this one saying it was junk mail!
Barry C.
----- Original Message -----
From: <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:44 PM
Subject: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re:
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
| The message you sent was regarded as junk e-mail by the recipient's email
server.
|
| To help ensure delivery make sure you are on the recipient's known address
list.
|
| Thank You.
|
| Original Message Contained:
|
|
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
|
| Hi All,
|
| For anyone who is interested, the serial numbers of the Commanders
photographed
| by Steve at Santo Domingo-Herrera are:
|
| HI-662CA - 560A-233, formerly N2733B.
| HI-587CT - 500-720, formerly N3828C.
| HI-522CA - 680E-749-39, formerly HI-522, N140L.
|
| Sad to see some 'oldies' in poor shape, but grateful thanks to Steve for a
good
| 'roving report'!
|
| Best Regards,
| Barry C.
|
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "steve" <steveg(at)nternet.com>
| To:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca> |
Thanks Harry, I guess my last Email went astray.
I need the "Shop Manual" pages (6-9 & 6-10).
My fax number is 604-274-1281.
Thanks again, I hope it matches this time, my page 6-11 starts with a
paragraph "J".
Tom F.
----- Original Message -----
From: <avtec2(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 09:44
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Shop manual
>
> Tom I Have the books you need pages out of
> send ne again what you need
> Harry
> 321 267-3141
> What about the tear drop beacon
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Donnie Rose" <aquadiver99(at)yahoo.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 11:07 AM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: Shop manual
>
>
> >
> >
> > Morning Tom,
> > All I have are 500B books but, if same, will share.
> > Hope you get what you need.
> > Regards,
> > --- Tom Fisher wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Gentlemen,
> >>
> >> I have not so far been able to locate the missing
> >> pages from the "Aircraft
> >> Shop Manual"(6-9 & 6-10).
> >> Can anyone help?
> >>
> >> Tom F.
> >> C-GISS
> >> 680FLP (Mr.RPM)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> browse
> >> Subscriptions page,
> >> FAQ,
> >> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
> >>
> >> Admin.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Donnie Rose
> > 205/492-8444
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca> |
Oh yes, about the tear drop tail light, As I mentioned I want to put a
strobe up there but my idea was to put the strobe inside the teardrop lens
but I guess that is not practical so I will just use the lens that comes
with the strobe (when I buy it that is).
Tom F.
----- Original Message -----
From: <avtec2(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 09:45
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Shop manual
>
> Yes i can
> Harry
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10:41 AM
> Subject: Commander-List: Shop manual
>
>
> >
> >
> > Gentlemen,
> >
> > I have not so far been able to locate the missing pages from the
"Aircraft
> > Shop Manual"(6-9 & 6-10).
> > Can anyone help?
> >
> > Tom F.
> > C-GISS
> > 680FLP (Mr.RPM)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
Cc: "Commander-List(at)Matronics.Com"
| Subject: | NOT Delivered email |
Matt, this is one I received sending an email to the Rocket list.
I hope this helps. I attached the entire email hoping that the headers are included.
If not, then let me know and I can open it up and cut and paste the contents
for you.
Thanks
Nico
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: NOT Delivered email |
Remember you can't attach things at this site, you will have to send it
directly to him.
Tom F.
----- Original Message -----
From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
Cc: "Commander-List(at)Matronics.Com"
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 11:28
Subject: Commander-List: NOT Delivered email
>
> Matt, this is one I received sending an email to the Rocket list.
> I hope this helps. I attached the entire email hoping that the headers are
included. If not, then let me know and I can open it up and cut and paste
the contents for you.
> Thanks
> Nico
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re: |
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
Hi Matt,
The following is copied by accessing "Properties", then "Details" and is shown
as "Internet headers for this message". Don't know whether it helps, but
"mail.seawave.net" is in there:
Return-path: <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Envelope-to: bcollman@air-britain.co.uk
Received: from airbrit5 by townshend.uk-noc.com with local-bsmtp (Exim 4.52)
id 1FLMYP-0008Q9-Ej
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on
townshend.uk-noc.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_RCVD_HELO,
NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=3.1.0
Received: from host-64-179-92-102.pro.choiceone.net ([64.179.92.102]
helo=mail.seawave.net)
by townshend.uk-noc.com with esmtp (Exim 4.52)
id 1FLMYP-0008Q0-5n
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mail.seawave.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7533815C0ECD
Received: from mail.seawave.net ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (linux02 [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP
id 01181-02 for <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>;
Received: by mail.seawave.net (Postfix, from userid 0)
From: barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk
Subject: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re:
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:44:27 +0000 (UTC)
X-Antivirus-Scanner: ClamAV check passed
X-NAS-Language: English
X-NAS-Bayes: #0: 0; #1: 1
X-NAS-Classification: 0
X-NAS-MessageID: 4254
X-NAS-Validation: {F9991EBD-5743-4473-8212-5960A9354802}
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Dralle" <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 6:04 PM
Subject: Re: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re:
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
|
| All,
|
| I am aware of this issue. These messages are *not* coming from Matronics.
They are coming from someone subscribed to the Commander-List (and a number of
others, such as the Kitfox-list, Pietenpol-List and Kolb-List) and who has some
Spam filtering software mis-configured. The problem I'm having is that my posts
to the List don't seem to cause me to get one of the bounces.
|
| I need to dissect in detail the full headers of one of these messages to
determine (hopefully) where they are actually coming from. If someone that has
received one of these could forward me a complete copy of the message including
all of the headers (in Unix email format with all of the "Received: " lines
intact), hopefully I can get this guy removed from the List.
|
| Its looking like it might be coming from the "seawave.net" ISP, but I'm not
positive. If your mail goes through this ISP, please contact me ASAP.
|
| Sorry for the hassle,
|
| Matt Dralle
| Matronics List Admin
|
|
| At 07:55 AM 3/20/2006 Monday, you wrote:
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
| >
| >Did everyone get this message OK, sent to the chatlist?
| >
| >I did, but also got this one saying it was junk mail!
| >
| >Barry C.
| >
| >----- Original Message -----
| >From: <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
| >To: <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
| >Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:44 PM
| >Subject: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re:
| >Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
| >
| >
| >| The message you sent was regarded as junk e-mail by the recipient's email
| >server.
| >|
| >| To help ensure delivery make sure you are on the recipient's known address
| >list.
| >|
| >| Thank You.
| >|
| >| Original Message Contained:
| >|
| >|
| ><barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
| >|
| >| Hi All,
| >|
| >| For anyone who is interested, the serial numbers of the Commanders
| >photographed
| >| by Steve at Santo Domingo-Herrera are:
| >|
| >| HI-662CA - 560A-233, formerly N2733B.
| >| HI-587CT - 500-720, formerly N3828C.
| >| HI-522CA - 680E-749-39, formerly HI-522, N140L.
| >|
| >| Sad to see some 'oldies' in poor shape, but grateful thanks to Steve for a
| >good
| >| 'roving report'!
| >|
| >| Best Regards,
| >| Barry C.
| >|
| >| ----- Original Message -----
| >| From: "steve" <steveg(at)nternet.com>
| >| To:
| >|
| >|
| >|
| >|
| >|
| >|
| >|
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
|
|
|
| Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
| 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email
| http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Addington" <jtaddington(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re: |
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
No, that was something I learned from my wife.
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bill Bow
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:50 PM
Subject: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: -
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
Was I married to you once?
bb
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Addington
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:50 PM
Subject: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject:
Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
Yea, but you started it. Hehe
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bill Bow
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10:52 AM
Subject: RE: NOT DELIVERED - To: -
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
SEEEEE.........It's not just me. So there!
bilbo
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry
Collman
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject:
Re: Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Did everyone get this message OK, sent to the chatlist?
I did, but also got this one saying it was junk mail!
Barry C.
----- Original Message -----
From: <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:44 PM
Subject: NOT DELIVERED - To: - Subject: Re:
Commander-List: Dom Rep pics
| The message you sent was regarded as junk e-mail by the recipient's email
server.
|
| To help ensure delivery make sure you are on the recipient's known address
list.
|
| Thank You.
|
| Original Message Contained:
|
|
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
|
| Hi All,
|
| For anyone who is interested, the serial numbers of the Commanders
photographed
| by Steve at Santo Domingo-Herrera are:
|
| HI-662CA - 560A-233, formerly N2733B.
| HI-587CT - 500-720, formerly N3828C.
| HI-522CA - 680E-749-39, formerly HI-522, N140L.
|
| Sad to see some 'oldies' in poor shape, but grateful thanks to Steve for a
good
| 'roving report'!
|
| Best Regards,
| Barry C.
|
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "steve" <steveg(at)nternet.com>
| To:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: NOT Delivered email |
You had me worried there for a moment, Tom. I did send it to him directly
and just copied the list to see if it will allow this message through.
Thanks anyway.
Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: NOT Delivered email
>
> Remember you can't attach things at this site, you will have to send it
> directly to him.
> Tom F.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
> To:
> Cc: "Commander-List(at)Matronics.Com"
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 11:28
> Subject: Commander-List: NOT Delivered email
>
>
>
> >
> > Matt, this is one I received sending an email to the Rocket list.
> > I hope this helps. I attached the entire email hoping that the headers
are
> included. If not, then let me know and I can open it up and cut and paste
> the contents for you.
> > Thanks
> > Nico
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | W J R HAMILTON <wjrhamilton(at)optusnet.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Quantas air lines |
Nico,
With all due respect, ain't no such animal as QUantas, although we
have to list it under QU---- in all the North American phone books.
The world's second oldest international airline started as Queensland
& Northern Territory Aerial Services, hence QANTAS.
Or have a look at John Travolta's B707-138B, one of our original (
and one of two remaining) -138 models ( and not a -120, as many
claim, and thereby hangs another story) where you will see it spelt correctly.
Have a look at
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton.
PS
We have had accidents, but the last fatal accident (to an airline
service, as opposed to developmental air services in Papua/New
Guinea) was a Lancastrian ( passenger version of the Avro Lancaster)
shot down by the Japanese of the NW Australian coast, en route
Australia to Ceylon.
We have never had a jet fatal accident or even a serious injury,
despite being the first non-US operator of Boeing jets. We have just
ordered 115 B787.
Re. the snags joke, I first saw this list attached to BOAC in the
late '60's/early 70's, what goes around, comes around. Just fill in
airline name of choice.
At 16:19 20/03/2006, you wrote:
>
>Subject: Fw: Quantas air lines
> These have been around before, but still funny....
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> These will bring a smile to your face, or maybe even more.
>
> Subject: Quantas air lines
>
> Remember, it takes a college degree to fly a plane but only a
> high school diploma to fix one. Reassurance for those of us who fly
> routinely in our jobs.
>
> After every flight, Qantas pilots fill out a form, called a
> "gripe sheet," which tells mechanics about problems with the
> aircraft. The mechanics correct the problems, document their
> repairs on the form, and then pilots review the gripe sheets before
> the next flight. Never let it be said that ground crews lack a sense of humor.
>
> Here are some actual maintenance complaints submitted by Qantas'
> pilots (marked with a P) and the solutions recorded (marked with an
> S) by maintenance engineers. By the way, Qantas is the only major!
> airline that has never had an accident.
>
> P: Left inside main tire almost needs replacement.
> S: Almost replaced left inside main tire.
>
> P: Test flight OK, except auto-land very rough.
> S: Auto-land not installed on this aircraft.
>
> P: Something loose in cockpit.
> S: Something tightened in cockpit.
>
> P: Dead bugs on windshield.
> S: Live bugs on back-order.
>
> P: Autopilot in altitude-hold mode produces a 200 feet per minute descent.
> S: Cannot reproduce problem on ground.
>
> P: Evidence of leak on right main landing gear.
> S: Evidence removed.
>
> P: DME volume unbelievably loud.
> S: DME volume set to more believable level.
>
> P: Friction locks cause throttle levers to stick.
> S: That's what they're for.
>
> P: IFF inoperative.
> S: IFF always inoperative in OFF mode.
>
> P: Suspected crack in windshield.
> S: Suspect you're right.
>
> P: Number 3 engine missing.
> S: Engine found on right wing after brief search.
>
> P: Aircraft handles funny. (I love this one!)
> S: Aircraft warned to straighten up, fly right, and be serious.
>
> P: Target radar hums.
> S: Reprogrammed target radar with lyrics.
>
> P: Mouse in cockpit.
> S: Cat installed
>
> And the best one for last .................
>
> P: Noise coming from under instrument panel. Sounds like a midget
> pounding on something with a hammer.
> S: Took hammer away from midget.
>
>
CONFIDENTIALITY & PRIVILEGE NOTICE
W.J.R.Hamilton,Glenalmond Group Companies,Fighter Flights Internet
Services and Warbirds.Net. & .
This message is intended for and should only be used by the
addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged
information.If you are not the intended recipient any use
distribution,disclosure or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited.Confidentiality and legal privilege attached to this
communication are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken
delivery to you.If you have received this message in error, please
notify us immediately to:
Australia 61 (0)408 876 526
Dolores capitis non fero. Eos do.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BillLeff1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AGING AIRCRAFT |
In fact the Beech 18 had many wing failures. So many, in fact, that the US
post Office stopped allowing them to be used for certain charter flights.
Personal acquaintance of mine, Dick Kelly from Akron, Ohio, had a spar break in
flight at night in smooth air. He was able to get it on the ground before the
wing came off. It broke in the wheel well and the engine mount held it
together. This aircraft had been corporate flown and maintained since new. It
had
around 5000 hours on it as I remember. (Dick had 23,000 hours in a Twin Beech
when he retired). After that is when they came up with the several crack
detectors and straps.
Fred Gates did a report on the fatigue life of the commander airframe. I use
to have a copy but can not find it.
Bill Leff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: Quantas air lines |
Bill,
I stand corrected, even though I didn't write the story but only passed it
along. I should have made sure it is correct. Good point.
Thanks
Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: "W J R HAMILTON" <wjrhamilton(at)optusnet.com.au>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 7:42 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Fw: Quantas air lines
>
> Nico,
> With all due respect, ain't no such animal as QUantas, although we
> have to list it under QU---- in all the North American phone books.
> The world's second oldest international airline started as Queensland
> & Northern Territory Aerial Services, hence QANTAS.
> Or have a look at John Travolta's B707-138B, one of our original (
> and one of two remaining) -138 models ( and not a -120, as many
> claim, and thereby hangs another story) where you will see it spelt
correctly.
> Have a look at
> Cheers,
> Bill Hamilton.
>
> PS
> We have had accidents, but the last fatal accident (to an airline
> service, as opposed to developmental air services in Papua/New
> Guinea) was a Lancastrian ( passenger version of the Avro Lancaster)
> shot down by the Japanese of the NW Australian coast, en route
> Australia to Ceylon.
> We have never had a jet fatal accident or even a serious injury,
> despite being the first non-US operator of Boeing jets. We have just
> ordered 115 B787.
> Re. the snags joke, I first saw this list attached to BOAC in the
> late '60's/early 70's, what goes around, comes around. Just fill in
> airline name of choice.
>
>
> At 16:19 20/03/2006, you wrote:
> >
> >Subject: Fw: Quantas air lines
> > These have been around before, but still funny....
> >
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > These will bring a smile to your face, or maybe even more.
> >
> > Subject: Quantas air lines
> >
> > Remember, it takes a college degree to fly a plane but only a
> > high school diploma to fix one. Reassurance for those of us who fly
> > routinely in our jobs.
> >
> > After every flight, Qantas pilots fill out a form, called a
> > "gripe sheet," which tells mechanics about problems with the
> > aircraft. The mechanics correct the problems, document their
> > repairs on the form, and then pilots review the gripe sheets before
> > the next flight. Never let it be said that ground crews lack a sense of
humor.
> >
> > Here are some actual maintenance complaints submitted by Qantas'
> > pilots (marked with a P) and the solutions recorded (marked with an
> > S) by maintenance engineers. By the way, Qantas is the only major!
> > airline that has never had an accident.
> >
> > P: Left inside main tire almost needs replacement.
> > S: Almost replaced left inside main tire.
> >
> > P: Test flight OK, except auto-land very rough.
> > S: Auto-land not installed on this aircraft.
> >
> > P: Something loose in cockpit.
> > S: Something tightened in cockpit.
> >
> > P: Dead bugs on windshield.
> > S: Live bugs on back-order.
> >
> > P: Autopilot in altitude-hold mode produces a 200 feet per minute
descent.
> > S: Cannot reproduce problem on ground.
> >
> > P: Evidence of leak on right main landing gear.
> > S: Evidence removed.
> >
> > P: DME volume unbelievably loud.
> > S: DME volume set to more believable level.
> >
> > P: Friction locks cause throttle levers to stick.
> > S: That's what they're for.
> >
> > P: IFF inoperative.
> > S: IFF always inoperative in OFF mode.
> >
> > P: Suspected crack in windshield.
> > S: Suspect you're right.
> >
> > P: Number 3 engine missing.
> > S: Engine found on right wing after brief search.
> >
> > P: Aircraft handles funny. (I love this one!)
> > S: Aircraft warned to straighten up, fly right, and be serious.
> >
> > P: Target radar hums.
> > S: Reprogrammed target radar with lyrics.
> >
> > P: Mouse in cockpit.
> > S: Cat installed
> >
> > And the best one for last .................
> >
> > P: Noise coming from under instrument panel. Sounds like a midget
> > pounding on something with a hammer.
> > S: Took hammer away from midget.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY & PRIVILEGE NOTICE
> W.J.R.Hamilton,Glenalmond Group Companies,Fighter Flights Internet
> Services and Warbirds.Net. & .
> This message is intended for and should only be used by the
> addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged
> information.If you are not the intended recipient any use
> distribution,disclosure or copying of this message is strictly
> prohibited.Confidentiality and legal privilege attached to this
> communication are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken
> delivery to you.If you have received this message in error, please
> notify us immediately to:
> Australia 61 (0)408 876 526
> Dolores capitis non fero. Eos do.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BertBerry1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | SHREVEPORT 500B ACCIDENT |
******************************************************************************
**
** Report created 3/22/2006 Record 6
**
******************************************************************************
**
IDENTIFICATION
Regis#: 662MW Make/Model: AC50 Description: 500 COMMANDER 500,
SHRIKE COMMANDER
Date: 03/21/2006 Time: 0253
Event Type: Incident Highest Injury: None Mid Air: N Missing: N
Damage: Unknown
LOCATION
City: SHREVEPORT State: LA Country: US
DESCRIPTION
ACFT ON LANDING, HIT APPROACH LIGHTS ON RUNWAY, SHREVEPORT, LA
INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 0
# Crew: 1 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Pass: 1 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
WEATHER: SHV 210240Z 19006KT 1 1/2SM BR BKN001 BKN095 OVC200 14/13 A2973
OTHER DATA
Departed: Dep Date: Dep. Time:
Destination: SHREVEPORT, LA Flt Plan: IFR Wx Briefing:
Last Radio Cont: LOCAL CONTROL
Last Clearance: CLRD TO LAND
FAA FSDO: BATON ROUGE, LA (SW03) Entry date: 03/21/2006
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: SHREVEPORT 500B ACCIDENT |
| From: | "Deneal Schilmeister (iMac)" <deneals(at)sbcglobal.net> |
I saw that and wasn't going to mention it because its one of John Towner's.
His planes fly a boatload of hours, every day of the year, so the odds are
that one of those will have an incident/accident every now and then.
--
Deneal Schilmeister ATP Learjet
St. Louis, Missouri USA
http://homepage.mac.com/deneals
On 3/22/06 10:04 AM, "BertBerry1(at)aol.com" wrote:
>
> ******************************************************************************
> **
> ** Report created 3/22/2006 Record 6
> **
> ******************************************************************************
> **
>
> IDENTIFICATION
> Regis#: 662MW Make/Model: AC50 Description: 500 COMMANDER 500,
> SHRIKE COMMANDER
> Date: 03/21/2006 Time: 0253
>
> Event Type: Incident Highest Injury: None Mid Air: N Missing: N
> Damage: Unknown
>
> LOCATION
> City: SHREVEPORT State: LA Country: US
>
> DESCRIPTION
> ACFT ON LANDING, HIT APPROACH LIGHTS ON RUNWAY, SHREVEPORT, LA
>
> INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 0
> # Crew: 1 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Owens" <dowens(at)aerialviewpoint.com> |
What about those Engine Baffles???
----- Original Message -----
From: <avtec2(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 11:44 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Shop manual
>
> Tom I Have the books you need pages out of
> send ne again what you need
> Harry
> 321 267-3141
> What about the tear drop beacon
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Donnie Rose" <aquadiver99(at)yahoo.com>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 11:07 AM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: Shop manual
>
>
> >
> >
> > Morning Tom,
> > All I have are 500B books but, if same, will share.
> > Hope you get what you need.
> > Regards,
> > --- Tom Fisher wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Gentlemen,
> >>
> >> I have not so far been able to locate the missing
> >> pages from the "Aircraft
> >> Shop Manual"(6-9 & 6-10).
> >> Can anyone help?
> >>
> >> Tom F.
> >> C-GISS
> >> 680FLP (Mr.RPM)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> browse
> >> Subscriptions page,
> >> FAQ,
> >> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
> >>
> >> Admin.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Donnie Rose
> > 205/492-8444
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Moshluk" <gmosh(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | baggage compartment |
Fellow Commando's - need your help.
When I purchased my '54 Areo Commander 560, the interior had basically been completely
gutted including the baggage compartment. I've since made new trim panels
for the cabin (will tackle the seats one day soon) but all that was left
in the baggage area (beside gobs of spray glue and squares of fiberglass insulation
sticking to the stringers) was the padded curtain hanging in front of the
tail cone. There were remnants of diamond tufted (vinyl) wrapped onto a piece
of wood just below what was likely a zippered flap behind the couch for access
to the baggage compartment from the cabin?
I'm curious, how was the "original" baggage area trim is made up? Was it aluminum
panels covered with the same diamond tufted vinyl like the tail cone curtain
- or? My first thought is to trim it just like I did the cockpit side panels
- with some thin aluminum sheet covered either in vinyl or thin unbacked
automotive style carpet.
As far as the cabin trim when I bought the airplane, one of the former owners had
the cabin interior redone in basically pop-up camper fabrics; it was a shame
to dress the old girl in such cheap, poor taste. I did however find what I'm
certain was a piece of the original interior stuck to the bottom of the couch
(turquoise, black and white plaid - probably seat & side panel inserts in combination
with black leather). For its day, pretty spiffy!
One more question: Is anyone aware if the radio shelves can legally be removed,
all my avionics are panel mounted now. If not I might convert it to a small
smugglers bin for sleeping bags or pillows.
Gary Moshluk
N206DX
call sign: "Blaster"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Deneal Schilmeister (Portege)" <deneals(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | FW: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006 |
-----Original Message-----
From: John Towner [mailto:johntowner(at)centralairsouthwest.com]
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 5:35 AM
Subject: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006
Deneal,
Enclosed is the e-mail we have sent to all of our pilots. I cannot post
messages on the TCFG chat page due to my computer. Please feel free to post
it and share with the group. There is an old adage, "life is not long
enough to make all of the mistakes, you have to learn from others mistakes"
Hopefully the enclosed could help someone else not have the same thing
happen to them.
YOUR FRIEND,
JT :-)
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Friday MAR 24, 2006
RE: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006
shooting an ILS approach to Rwy 14 at SHV Shreveport LA. The weather was
700 overcast and there was some ground fog at about 100 feet that had been
reported. Our pilot told me when he transitioned from the instrument
approach, taking over visually he had the runway insight and then soon after
lost the runway in the ground fog
As it turned out our pilot hit several of the approach lights short of the
runway and then landed. The good thing, no one was hurt and the aircraft is
repairable. During training we have stressed the importance of staying on
the localizer and glide slope after transitioning to visual conditions and
if you encounter ground fog after going visual you must immediately execute
a missed approach. Ground fog can be a very dangerous situation seeing the
runway and lights and then not seeing it.
As a review, PLEASE make sure when shooting approaches that after
transitioning from instruments to visual on ILS approaches that you ALWAYS
continue to stay on the localizer and glide slope to touchdown. If you have
any questions or comments please feel free to contact me.
RESPECTFULLY,
John Towner
Chief Pilot
Central Air Southwest
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: FW: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006 |
In that situation, either in a helicopter or a fixed-wing, my scan of the
VSI gets prolonged for the two to three seconds of temporarily losing visual
just as in a glassy water float landing you wait for touchdown.
Tom F.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Deneal Schilmeister (Portege)" <deneals(at)sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 05:47
Subject: Commander-List: FW: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Towner [mailto:johntowner(at)centralairsouthwest.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 5:35 AM
> To: Deneal Schilmeister (iMac)
> Subject: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006
>
>
> Deneal,
>
> Enclosed is the e-mail we have sent to all of our pilots. I cannot post
> messages on the TCFG chat page due to my computer. Please feel free to
post
> it and share with the group. There is an old adage, "life is not long
> enough to make all of the mistakes, you have to learn from others
mistakes"
> Hopefully the enclosed could help someone else not have the same thing
> happen to them.
>
> YOUR FRIEND,
>
> JT :-)
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
>
> Friday MAR 24, 2006
> TO: All Company Pilots
> RE: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006
>
> shooting an ILS approach to Rwy 14 at SHV Shreveport LA. The weather was
> 700 overcast and there was some ground fog at about 100 feet that had been
> reported. Our pilot told me when he transitioned from the instrument
> approach, taking over visually he had the runway insight and then soon
after
> lost the runway in the ground fog
>
> As it turned out our pilot hit several of the approach lights short of the
> runway and then landed. The good thing, no one was hurt and the aircraft
is
> repairable. During training we have stressed the importance of staying on
> the localizer and glide slope after transitioning to visual conditions and
> if you encounter ground fog after going visual you must immediately
execute
> a missed approach. Ground fog can be a very dangerous situation seeing
the
> runway and lights and then not seeing it.
>
> As a review, PLEASE make sure when shooting approaches that after
> transitioning from instruments to visual on ILS approaches that you ALWAYS
> continue to stay on the localizer and glide slope to touchdown. If you
have
> any questions or comments please feel free to contact me.
>
> RESPECTFULLY,
>
> John Towner
> Chief Pilot
> Central Air Southwest
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Commander Upload |
Folks,
The latest upload of great Commander material is complete. Thanks to Bert.
It can be viewed at
http://www.teletuition.org/documents/Aviation/Aero%20Commanders/Articles%20M
anuals%20etc/_2006-3-24/
Thanks
Nico
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: FW: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006 |
Tom, If I understand what you are saying, is that a missed approach, to
avoid those brief seconds descending through ground fog, is unnecessary.
I also believe that if you are established at 100 or so feet above
touchdown, you need not execute a missed approach but just let the plane
land. Am I wrong? Certainly wandering off the GS is looking for trouble.
Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 9:55 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: FW: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20,
2006
>
> In that situation, either in a helicopter or a fixed-wing, my scan of the
> VSI gets prolonged for the two to three seconds of temporarily losing
visual
> just as in a glassy water float landing you wait for touchdown.
>
> Tom F.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Deneal Schilmeister (Portege)" <deneals(at)sbcglobal.net>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 05:47
> Subject: Commander-List: FW: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20,
2006
>
>
>
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Towner [mailto:johntowner(at)centralairsouthwest.com]
> > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 5:35 AM
> > To: Deneal Schilmeister (iMac)
> > Subject: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006
> >
> >
> >
> > Deneal,
> >
> > Enclosed is the e-mail we have sent to all of our pilots. I cannot post
> > messages on the TCFG chat page due to my computer. Please feel free to
> post
> > it and share with the group. There is an old adage, "life is not long
> > enough to make all of the mistakes, you have to learn from others
> mistakes"
> > Hopefully the enclosed could help someone else not have the same thing
> > happen to them.
> >
> > YOUR FRIEND,
> >
> > JT :-)
> >
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
> D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> >
> >
> > Friday MAR 24, 2006
> > TO: All Company Pilots
> > RE: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006
> >
> > shooting an ILS approach to Rwy 14 at SHV Shreveport LA. The weather
was
> > 700 overcast and there was some ground fog at about 100 feet that had
been
> > reported. Our pilot told me when he transitioned from the instrument
> > approach, taking over visually he had the runway insight and then soon
> after
> > lost the runway in the ground fog
> >
> > As it turned out our pilot hit several of the approach lights short of
the
> > runway and then landed. The good thing, no one was hurt and the
aircraft
> is
> > repairable. During training we have stressed the importance of staying
on
> > the localizer and glide slope after transitioning to visual conditions
and
> > if you encounter ground fog after going visual you must immediately
> execute
> > a missed approach. Ground fog can be a very dangerous situation seeing
> the
> > runway and lights and then not seeing it.
> >
> > As a review, PLEASE make sure when shooting approaches that after
> > transitioning from instruments to visual on ILS approaches that you
ALWAYS
> > continue to stay on the localizer and glide slope to touchdown. If you
> have
> > any questions or comments please feel free to contact me.
> >
> > RESPECTFULLY,
> >
> > John Towner
> > Chief Pilot
> > Central Air Southwest
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Owens" <dowens(at)aerialviewpoint.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Commander Upload |
For some reason, Nico the page cannot be displayed???
----- Original Message -----
From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 12:12 PM
Subject: Commander-List: Commander Upload
>
> Folks,
> The latest upload of great Commander material is complete. Thanks to Bert.
>
> It can be viewed at
>
>
http://www.teletuition.org/documents/Aviation/Aero%20Commanders/Articles%20M
> anuals%20etc/_2006-3-24/
>
> Thanks
> Nico
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: FW: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006 |
No, I am not saying that a missed approach is unnecessary but when you are
talking about a brief loss of visual contact, such as what you would
encounter with a fog layer just above the ground, that by the time you
decide to overshoot had you delayed another two seconds visual contact would
be reestablished, of course as you say one must be in a stabilized approach.
I am more concerned with the localizer over the GS especially in a crosswind
situation.
Over the years of helicopter IFR offshore flying in fog I have conducted a
number of ITO's (Instrument Take Offs) and a few zero zero landings during
SAR missions. Of course a RadAlt and IVSI is desired.
When I received my fixed-wing float endorsement it happened to be dead calm
all week so under tutorship the only landings I knew were essentially
instrument zero zero type landings where you reduce your sink rate to
minimum and wait till you touched down.
My more exciting landing memories are landing helicopters on drill ships
with their helideck heaving 20 feet and rolling 15 degrees either side of
vertical, in the civilian world we did not have winch down systems to use,
you had to do a slope landing right at the top of the heave or you better
get out of there before the deck comes up to hit you.
I think the Commander would be a good tilt rotor.
Tom F.
----- Original Message -----
From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 10:20
Subject: Re: Commander-List: FW: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20,
2006
>
> Tom, If I understand what you are saying, is that a missed approach, to
> avoid those brief seconds descending through ground fog, is unnecessary.
> I also believe that if you are established at 100 or so feet above
> touchdown, you need not execute a missed approach but just let the plane
> land. Am I wrong? Certainly wandering off the GS is looking for trouble.
> Nico
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 9:55 AM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: FW: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR
20,
> 2006
>
>
>
> >
> > In that situation, either in a helicopter or a fixed-wing, my scan of
the
> > VSI gets prolonged for the two to three seconds of temporarily losing
> visual
> > just as in a glassy water float landing you wait for touchdown.
> >
> > Tom F.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Deneal Schilmeister (Portege)" <deneals(at)sbcglobal.net>
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 05:47
> > Subject: Commander-List: FW: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20,
> 2006
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: John Towner [mailto:johntowner(at)centralairsouthwest.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 5:35 AM
> > > To: Deneal Schilmeister (iMac)
> > > Subject: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Deneal,
> > >
> > > Enclosed is the e-mail we have sent to all of our pilots. I cannot
post
> > > messages on the TCFG chat page due to my computer. Please feel free
to
> > post
> > > it and share with the group. There is an old adage, "life is not long
> > > enough to make all of the mistakes, you have to learn from others
> > mistakes"
> > > Hopefully the enclosed could help someone else not have the same thing
> > > happen to them.
> > >
> > > YOUR FRIEND,
> > >
> > > JT :-)
> > >
> >
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D3
>
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
> > D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > >
> > >
> > > Friday MAR 24, 2006
> > > TO: All Company Pilots
> > > RE: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006
> > >
was
> > > shooting an ILS approach to Rwy 14 at SHV Shreveport LA. The weather
> was
> > > 700 overcast and there was some ground fog at about 100 feet that had
> been
> > > reported. Our pilot told me when he transitioned from the instrument
> > > approach, taking over visually he had the runway insight and then soon
> > after
> > > lost the runway in the ground fog
> > >
> > > As it turned out our pilot hit several of the approach lights short of
> the
> > > runway and then landed. The good thing, no one was hurt and the
> aircraft
> > is
> > > repairable. During training we have stressed the importance of
staying
> on
> > > the localizer and glide slope after transitioning to visual conditions
> and
> > > if you encounter ground fog after going visual you must immediately
> > execute
> > > a missed approach. Ground fog can be a very dangerous situation
seeing
> > the
> > > runway and lights and then not seeing it.
> > >
> > > As a review, PLEASE make sure when shooting approaches that after
> > > transitioning from instruments to visual on ILS approaches that you
> ALWAYS
> > > continue to stay on the localizer and glide slope to touchdown. If
you
> > have
> > > any questions or comments please feel free to contact me.
> > >
> > > RESPECTFULLY,
> > >
> > > John Towner
> > > Chief Pilot
> > > Central Air Southwest
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Commander Upload |
Check for the line wrap on the address, be sure to include the entire
address.
Tom F.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Owens" <dowens(at)aerialviewpoint.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 11:13
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Commander Upload
>
> For some reason, Nico the page cannot be displayed???
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 12:12 PM
> Subject: Commander-List: Commander Upload
>
>
>
> >
> > Folks,
> > The latest upload of great Commander material is complete. Thanks to
Bert.
> >
> > It can be viewed at
> >
> >
>
http://www.teletuition.org/documents/Aviation/Aero%20Commanders/Articles%20M
> > anuals%20etc/_2006-3-24/
> >
> > Thanks
> > Nico
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Owens" <dowens(at)aerialviewpoint.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Commander Upload |
yes, Go To...
http://www.teletuition.org/documents/Aviation/Aero%20Commanders/Articles%20M
And see what happens??? We will get to the bottom of this!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Commander Upload
>
> Check for the line wrap on the address, be sure to include the entire
> address.
> Tom F.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Owens" <dowens(at)aerialviewpoint.com>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 11:13
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: Commander Upload
>
>
>
> >
> > For some reason, Nico the page cannot be displayed???
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 12:12 PM
> > Subject: Commander-List: Commander Upload
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Folks,
> > > The latest upload of great Commander material is complete. Thanks to
> Bert.
> > >
> > > It can be viewed at
> > >
> > >
> >
>
http://www.teletuition.org/documents/Aviation/Aero%20Commanders/Articles%20M
> > > anuals%20etc/_2006-3-24/
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Nico
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Commander Upload |
David,
The link is longer than the text message's width so it truncates it at about 80
characters. Try this one:
Articles
I just hid the long link underneat the word Articles. I will watch it too, and
if it doesn't work I will try something else.
Thanks
Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Owens" <dowens(at)aerialviewpoint.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Commander Upload
>
> For some reason, Nico the page cannot be displayed???
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 12:12 PM
> Subject: Commander-List: Commander Upload
>
>
>
> >
> > Folks,
> > The latest upload of great Commander material is complete. Thanks to Bert.
> >
> > It can be viewed at
> >
> >
> http://www.teletuition.org/documents/Aviation/Aero%20Commanders/Articles%20M
> > anuals%20etc/_2006-3-24/
> >
> > Thanks
> > Nico
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Commander Upload |
OK, guys, I fixed it now.
http://www.teletuition.org/articles.htm will always take you to the
Commander articles. Click on the one with today's date.
Thanks
Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Owens" <dowens(at)aerialviewpoint.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Commander Upload
>
> For some reason, Nico the page cannot be displayed???
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 12:12 PM
> Subject: Commander-List: Commander Upload
>
>
>
> >
> > Folks,
> > The latest upload of great Commander material is complete. Thanks to
Bert.
> >
> > It can be viewed at
> >
> >
>
http://www.teletuition.org/documents/Aviation/Aero%20Commanders/Articles%20M
> > anuals%20etc/_2006-3-24/
> >
> > Thanks
> > Nico
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Owens" <dowens(at)aerialviewpoint.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Commander Upload |
Thanks! That worked... Very cool stuff. Have a great weekend!
----- Original Message -----
From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Commander Upload
>
> OK, guys, I fixed it now.
>
> http://www.teletuition.org/articles.htm will always take you to the
> Commander articles. Click on the one with today's date.
>
> Thanks
> Nico
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Owens" <dowens(at)aerialviewpoint.com>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 11:13 AM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: Commander Upload
>
>
>
> >
> > For some reason, Nico the page cannot be displayed???
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com>
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 12:12 PM
> > Subject: Commander-List: Commander Upload
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Folks,
> > > The latest upload of great Commander material is complete. Thanks to
> Bert.
> > >
> > > It can be viewed at
> > >
> > >
> >
>
http://www.teletuition.org/documents/Aviation/Aero%20Commanders/Articles%20M
> > > anuals%20etc/_2006-3-24/
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Nico
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Some more stuff from Bert... |
http://www.teletuition.org/articles.htm will take you to the Commander
articles.
Since this is the second upload for today, click on the one with today's
date (2).
Thanks
Nico
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Some more stuff from Bert... |
In a message dated 3/24/2006 4:12:08 PM Pacific Standard Time,
nico(at)cybersuperstore.com writes:
Thanks
Nico
HI NICO.
Are you posting these on the Commander site?? jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mike floyd" <floydgm(at)hotmail.com> |
Just need to share the news in Commander land. I have been working with Dick
MaCoon and Arnold Blankenship of Firetruck Aviation in Centerville Tennesee
to put together an updated turbocharger conversion.
Commander 500S N210HD sports 4 RayJay turbos, Inconel wastegates, updated
actuator system (no cables) linear electric actuator, electronic wastegate
controller with manual override.
Relocated oil cooler.
No scavange pumps, improved gravity drain system.
A general clean up program to improve maintenance access and reliabilty.
Final STC certification details are pending but she will fly legally with a
DER's 8110 form.
System is based on the original RayJay STC and MR RPM improvements. Test
flights are scheduled for next Wendsday.
STC will cover 500B,U,S. and will feature a gross weight increase.
Bragging a bit but she will have all of a freight dog's maintenance
improvements, my contribution. She only makes a living when she flys. She
must be reliable and maintainable.
Contact Arnold or his most capable wife Charlene at 931-729-0007. Arnold is
the holder of the MR RPM STC's and tooling.
Or myself Mike Floyd 509-886-1036
Mike Floyd
Commander NW LTD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: MR RPM Turbos |
Hi Mike,
Quick question: I have a 500B with the original rayjay system installed
(electric wastegates). Is this a complete new installation, or is there a MR
RPM "upgrade" available? Additionally, can this package be offered on the
newer "wide-deck" IO-540's? I'd like to switch to those engines at some
point.
Also, can you share some information on the cost of the conversion/upgrade?
Thanks,
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: "mike floyd" <floydgm(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 6:44 PM
Subject: Commander-List: MR RPM Turbos
>
> Just need to share the news in Commander land. I have been working with
> Dick
> MaCoon and Arnold Blankenship of Firetruck Aviation in Centerville
> Tennesee
> to put together an updated turbocharger conversion.
> Commander 500S N210HD sports 4 RayJay turbos, Inconel wastegates, updated
> actuator system (no cables) linear electric actuator, electronic wastegate
> controller with manual override.
> Relocated oil cooler.
> No scavange pumps, improved gravity drain system.
> A general clean up program to improve maintenance access and reliabilty.
> Final STC certification details are pending but she will fly legally with
> a
> DER's 8110 form.
> System is based on the original RayJay STC and MR RPM improvements. Test
> flights are scheduled for next Wendsday.
> STC will cover 500B,U,S. and will feature a gross weight increase.
> Bragging a bit but she will have all of a freight dog's maintenance
> improvements, my contribution. She only makes a living when she flys. She
> must be reliable and maintainable.
> Contact Arnold or his most capable wife Charlene at 931-729-0007. Arnold
> is
> the holder of the MR RPM STC's and tooling.
> Or myself Mike Floyd 509-886-1036
>
> Mike Floyd
> Commander NW LTD
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: MR RPM Turbos |
In a message dated 24-Mar-06 18:46:30 Pacific Standard Time,
floydgm(at)hotmail.com writes:
Commander 500S N210HD sports 4 RayJay turbos, Inconel wastegates, updated
actuator system (no cables) linear electric actuator, electronic wastegate
controller with manual override.
Relocated oil cooler.
No scavange pumps, improved gravity drain system.
<><><><><><>
Sounds perfect! More questions:
How does one over ride the electric turbos without cables?
This must be full-time turbo-normalization, right?
Wing Commander Gordon
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mike floyd" <floydgm(at)hotmail.com> |
No the later wide deck engines are not supported thank Lycoming for that.
The original narrow deck IO-540s are supported. And so are the original
RayJay installations. No price info yet but if you have the system intalled
the upgrades are available.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mike floyd" <floydgm(at)hotmail.com> |
The electronic wastegate controllers can be overridden by the manual control
switches.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Some more stuff from Bert... |
Jim,
I will. It's a pity the window of opportunity I had passed by the time I got
a hold of the site. It's going much slower than I wanted because I am mostly
tied up with a new contract. Nevertheless, I am working on the site as much
as I can. The intention was to upload all the material directly to the new
Commander site, but it's just not ready for that yet, so I resumed
publishing the stuff on my site until the new site is ready.
Sorry about that.
Thanks
Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: <YOURTCFG(at)aol.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 5:06 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Some more stuff from Bert...
>
>
> In a message dated 3/24/2006 4:12:08 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> nico(at)cybersuperstore.com writes:
>
> Thanks
> Nico
>
>
> HI NICO.
>
> Are you posting these on the Commander site?? jb
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Vormbaum" <john(at)vormbaum.com> |
| Subject: | Re: MR RPM Turbos |
Mike,
Thanks for the response. I'm excited to see what the finished product looks
like.
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: "mike floyd" <floydgm(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 8:22 PM
Subject: Commander-List: MR RPM Turbos
>
> No the later wide deck engines are not supported thank Lycoming for that.
> The original narrow deck IO-540s are supported. And so are the original
> RayJay installations. No price info yet but if you have the system
> intalled
> the upgrades are available.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YOURTCFG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Some more stuff from Bert... |
In a message dated 3/24/2006 10:46:52 PM Pacific Standard Time,
nico(at)cybersuperstore.com writes:
Sorry about that.
Thanks Nico. jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mike floyd" <floydgm(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: MR RPM Turbos |
The electronic control box for the linear actuator is turned off by a switch
in the cockpit and it reverts to a manual open, closed switch system.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: MR RPM Turbos |
In a message dated 26-Mar-06 08:16:23 Pacific Standard Time,
floydgm(at)hotmail.com writes:
The electronic control box for the linear actuator is turned off by a switch
in the cockpit and it reverts to a manual open, closed switch system.
<><><><><>
So, in the event of power failure or simply circuit fault, does the waste
gate fail to full open or does it fail to present position?
Wing Commander Gordon
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mike floyd" <floydgm(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: MR RPM Turbos |
It fails to the present position in either instance. It would then be up to
the pilot to control MP. using the throttle.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tylor Hall <tylor.hall(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: MR RPM Turbos |
Mike,
Were you able to work in the intercoolers. When I was talking to
Dick, he had designed the intercoolers to be under the cowling with a
little scoop and the scoop for the oil cooler would be behind the
firewall in the wheel well. Has that configuration worked out?
Could an existing conversion add the intercooler and oil cooler?
Those two thing would help keep the engine cooler?
It is great to see those STC in hands that know what they are.
Tylor Hall
On Mar 26, 2006, at 2:18 PM, mike floyd wrote:
>
>
> It fails to the present position in either instance. It would then
> be up to
> the pilot to control MP. using the throttle.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CloudCraft(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Re: MR RPM Turbos |
In a message dated 26-Mar-06 13:20:30 Pacific Standard Time,
floydgm(at)hotmail.com writes:
It fails to the present position in either instance. It would then be up to
the pilot to control MP. using the throttle.
<><><><><><>
That was the answer I was hoping for! Sounds like yet another well
thought-out Mr. RPM innovation.
OK ... more questions. Hope you don't get annoyed, but I've been waiting for
this news for years.
Does the package use an updated EGT or TIT? (Don't get started on that
thread again, lads.)
I'm sure the STC would not specify a particular EGT or TIT gauge (so the
installation leaves it to the owner's discretion) but am curious if Mr. RPM is
advocating one reading over the other for the updated equipment.
Thanks!
Wing Commander Gordon
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mike floyd" <floydgm(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: MR RPM Turbos |
Yes the oil coolers have been moved behind the firewall. Works out well. No
development of the intercoolers yet.
The existing conversions could incorporate the oil coolers.
Between relocating the coolers and cleaning up the ducting and turbo oil
system it makes the engine compartments much easier to work in.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mike floyd" <floydgm(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: MR RPM Turbos |
No the STC will not have an EGT or TIT system specified. No I have never
discussed this with MR RPM. Both systems give you the same basic
information, where is the engine operating in relation to peak temp.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BillLeff1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: FW: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006 |
Right on John, it is one of my pet peves to get pilots to stay on the glide
slope and land in the "Touch Down Zone", not go for the numbers!
Bill Leff
See yo at MKC Airshow
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: FW: SHV Incident/Accident Monday night MAR 20, 2006 |
| From: | "Deneal Schilmeister (iMac)" <deneals(at)sbcglobal.net> |
On 3/26/06 8:31 PM, "BillLeff1(at)aol.com" wrote:
> See yo at MKC Airshow
Bill:
When is the MKC Air show?
You are performing?
In the _________________(fib)?
--
Deneal Schilmeister ATP Learjet
St. Louis, Missouri USA
http://homepage.mac.com/deneals
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matthew J. Hawkins" <hawkins(at)cms.udel.edu> |
All-
Well, we finally finished N2760B! Flew again for the first time weekend
before last! Wonderful sight to see.
If anyone is looking for a great, COMPLETELY REFURBISHED Commander
(except for paint job) - please let me know. See attached add. Thought
I'd send the word out to the group before I posted in Trade-A-Plane.
Happy to send more pictures/details if anyone needs them.
Matt
********************
Matthew Hawkins
Director, Marine Ops
R/V HUGH R. SHARP
302-645-4341
FAX: 302-645-4006
hawkins(at)udel.edu
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: N2760B FOR SALE |
Good Afternoon Matt,
All attachments are stripped before the message is sent on this mail list.
Could you supply an address where we may view your treasure?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 3/28/2006 1:31:12 P.M. Central Standard Time,
hawkins(at)cms.udel.edu writes:
Well, we finally finished N7260B! Flew again for the first time weekend
before last! Wonderful sight to see.
If anyone is looking for a great, COMPLETELY REFURBISHED Commander
(except for paint job) - please let me know. See attached add. Thought
I'd send the word out to the group before I posted in Trade-A-Plane.
Happy to send more pictures/details if anyone needs them.
Matt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matthew J. Hawkins" <hawkins(at)cms.udel.edu> |
Bob-
Darn - forgot about that! As my only e-mail address is with the
University, I don't have anything posted on a web site - can't do
personal stuff on the University's server.
Until I find another way - happy to send info to folk's personal
addresses if interested. Let me know.
Matt
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 2:42 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: N2760B FOR SALE
Good Afternoon Matt,
All attachments are stripped before the message is sent on this mail
list.
Could you supply an address where we may view your treasure?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BertBerry1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: N2760B FOR SALE |
I'd like to see the photos Matt.
bertberry1(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: N2760B FOR SALE |
Hi Matt,
I would certainly be interested in seeing the photos.
Congratulations on ensuring that one of the old Commanders is fully restored.
Very Best Regards,
Barry C.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew J. Hawkins" <hawkins(at)cms.udel.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 9:32 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: N2760B FOR SALE
|
| Bob-
|
| Darn - forgot about that! As my only e-mail address is with the
| University, I don't have anything posted on a web site - can't do
| personal stuff on the University's server.
|
| Until I find another way - happy to send info to folk's personal
| addresses if interested. Let me know.
|
| Matt
|
| -----Original Message-----
| From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
| [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
| BobsV35B(at)aol.com
| Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 2:42 PM
| To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
| Subject: Re: Commander-List: N2760B FOR SALE
|
|
|
|
|
| Good Afternoon Matt,
|
| All attachments are stripped before the message is sent on this mail
| list.
| Could you supply an address where we may view your treasure?
|
| Happy Skies,
|
| Old Bob
| AKA
| Bob Siegfried
| Ancient Aviator
| Stearman N3977A
| Brookeridge Air Park LL22
| Downers Grove, IL 60516
| 630 985-8503
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "css nico" <nico(at)cybersuperstore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: N2760B FOR SALE |
Pop them over to me and I will get them on my site for all to see.
Nico
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: N2760B FOR SALE
<barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> I would certainly be interested in seeing the photos.
>
> Congratulations on ensuring that one of the old Commanders is fully
restored.
>
> Very Best Regards,
> Barry C.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matthew J. Hawkins" <hawkins(at)cms.udel.edu>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 9:32 PM
> Subject: RE: Commander-List: N2760B FOR SALE
>
>
>
> |
> | Bob-
> |
> | Darn - forgot about that! As my only e-mail address is with the
> | University, I don't have anything posted on a web site - can't do
> | personal stuff on the University's server.
> |
> | Until I find another way - happy to send info to folk's personal
> | addresses if interested. Let me know.
> |
> | Matt
> |
> | -----Original Message-----
> | From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
> | [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> | BobsV35B(at)aol.com
> | Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 2:42 PM
> | To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
> | Subject: Re: Commander-List: N2760B FOR SALE
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> | Good Afternoon Matt,
> |
> | All attachments are stripped before the message is sent on this mail
> | list.
> | Could you supply an address where we may view your treasure?
> |
> | Happy Skies,
> |
> | Old Bob
> | AKA
> | Bob Siegfried
> | Ancient Aviator
> | Stearman N3977A
> | Brookeridge Air Park LL22
> | Downers Grove, IL 60516
> | 630 985-8503
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WINGFLYER1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: N2760B FOR SALE |
Please send photos to _Wingflyer1(at)aol.com_ (mailto:Wingflyer1(at)aol.com)
Thanks Gil Walker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Moe" <moe(at)rosspistons.com> |
Gents,
Does anyone have a suggestion as to which body filler is best to use on plain aluminum,
where holes can not be drilled in the fuselage, to smooth out minor dents?
Thanks!
Moe
N680RR
680Fp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mike floyd" <floydgm(at)hotmail.com> |
Pro seal fuel tank sealant smoothed with a finger dipped in MEK works well.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
Pressurize it to about 30PSI!
bb
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Moe
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 6:44 PM
Subject: Commander-List: Bondo
Gents,
Does anyone have a suggestion as to which body filler is best to use on
plain aluminum, where holes can not be drilled in the fuselage, to smooth
out minor dents?
Thanks!
Moe
N680RR
680Fp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mike floyd" <floydgm(at)hotmail.com> |
Bill Bow
It takes too much bondo and then makes the airplane way too heavy to make it
useable again. And you need STRUCTURAL bondo.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "" <br549phil(at)mindspring.com> |
Moe,
There is an epoxy filler called SUPERFIL by Poly-Fiber that is a
corrosion-inhibiting filler designed to adhere to bare alluminum.
I have used it for about ten years with excellent results. Dry time is
longer than bondo but it is easy to mix and shape with excellent adhesion.
Available at Aircraft Spruce in Corona 877-477-7823.
Phil
Phil Stubbs
> [Original Message]
> From: Moe <moe(at)rosspistons.com>
> To:
> Date: 3/29/2006 6:55:02 PM
> Subject: Commander-List: Bondo
>
>
> Gents,
>
> Does anyone have a suggestion as to which body filler is best to use on
plain aluminum, where holes can not be drilled in the fuselage, to smooth
out minor dents?
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> Moe
> N680RR
> 680Fp
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Moe" <moe(at)rosspistons.com> |
Gents,
Thanks for the tips on filler.
Moe
----- Original Message -----
From: <br549phil(at)mindspring.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 6:11 AM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Bondo
>
> Moe,
> There is an epoxy filler called SUPERFIL by Poly-Fiber that is a
> corrosion-inhibiting filler designed to adhere to bare alluminum.
> I have used it for about ten years with excellent results. Dry time is
> longer than bondo but it is easy to mix and shape with excellent adhesion.
> Available at Aircraft Spruce in Corona 877-477-7823.
> Phil
>
> Phil Stubbs
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Moe <moe(at)rosspistons.com>
> > To:
> > Date: 3/29/2006 6:55:02 PM
> > Subject: Commander-List: Bondo
> >
> >
> > Gents,
> >
> > Does anyone have a suggestion as to which body filler is best to use on
> plain aluminum, where holes can not be drilled in the fuselage, to smooth
> out minor dents?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> > Moe
> > N680RR
> > 680Fp
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Bondo[Verification] |
Did anybody else get one of these?
bilbo
_____
From: yasir sabri [mailto:m_yasir_sabri(at)yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 9:05 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
Hello, thank you for your email.
Due to the amount of spams I used to receive in my mailbox, I am using
End2Spam anti-spam service to protect my email inbox. If you want your
messages to reach me you will need to click on the link below.
http://www.end2spam.com/public/thanks.php?VkZaU1JrMUZNVFpYVkZGNFRYcEpNMVJXVF
RCbGF6RkZXak5qUFE9PQ==
Thanks and regards
yasir sabri
If this link appears broken in your email client, please copy and paste the
entire link in one line in your web browser.
<http://www.end2spam.com/public/thanks.php?VkZaU1JrMUZNVFpYVkZGNFRYcEpNMVJXV
FRCbGF6RkZXak5qUFE9PQ==>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bondo[Verification] |
| From: | "N395V" <N395V(at)direcway.com> |
> Did anybody else get one of these?
Yep,
Got one in response to every post I made on every forum on the Matronis lists.
Best to put it in the trash bin.
--------
Milt
N395V
F1 Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=25274#25274
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Schuermann <cschuerm(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Bondo[Verification] |
Bill Bow wrote:
> Did anybody else get one of these?
Yup. The piper list also got annoyed by a couple of dimwits who did the
same thing. You'd think that anyone with two functioning brain cells
would be able to realize that they're going to spam hundreds of people
by doing that. Moddy on the piper list now immediatly unsubscribes
anyone who does that.... forever....
chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: N2760B FOR SALE |
Would like to see pics and specs.
Thanks
Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Moe" <moe(at)rosspistons.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bondo[Verification] |
Gents:
It appears that I have missed something. What does the "Did anybody else
get one of these?" from Bill, and the reply from Chris Schuermann refer to?
Since the Subject line includes "Bondo (verification)" did I do something
wrong?
Regards,
Moe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Schuermann" <cschuerm(at)cox.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 7:39 AM
Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
>
>
> Bill Bow wrote:
> > Did anybody else get one of these?
>
> Yup. The piper list also got annoyed by a couple of dimwits who did the
> same thing. You'd think that anyone with two functioning brain cells
> would be able to realize that they're going to spam hundreds of people
> by doing that. Moddy on the piper list now immediatly unsubscribes
> anyone who does that.... forever....
>
> chris
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Bondo[Verification] |
No Moe you missed nothing.
I got some kind of a spam filter notice from someone on the list. It was
under the "Did anybody else get one of these?"
BB
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Moe
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
Gents:
It appears that I have missed something. What does the "Did anybody else
get one of these?" from Bill, and the reply from Chris Schuermann refer to?
Since the Subject line includes "Bondo (verification)" did I do something
wrong?
Regards,
Moe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Schuermann" <cschuerm(at)cox.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 7:39 AM
Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
>
>
> Bill Bow wrote:
> > Did anybody else get one of these?
>
> Yup. The piper list also got annoyed by a couple of dimwits who did the
> same thing. You'd think that anyone with two functioning brain cells
> would be able to realize that they're going to spam hundreds of people
> by doing that. Moddy on the piper list now immediatly unsubscribes
> anyone who does that.... forever....
>
> chris
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Bow" <bowing74(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Bondo[Verification] |
Chris wrote
Unsubscribes anyone who does that.... forever....
Capital Punishment, I like that!!!!
BB
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
Schuermann
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
Bill Bow wrote:
> Did anybody else get one of these?
Yup. The piper list also got annoyed by a couple of dimwits who did the
same thing. You'd think that anyone with two functioning brain cells
would be able to realize that they're going to spam hundreds of people
by doing that. Moddy on the piper list now immediatly unsubscribes
anyone who does that.... forever....
chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Sather" <sather(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Bondo[Verification] |
Before using bondo or anything else. Try and remove the dent. If it is a
large oil can type, the local glass shop will have a suction carrier for
glass that you can suck down on to the metal and then gentley pull it out.
There are several size of these vacumn pullers available. If it is smaller
there some remarkable adhesives that you can apply let dry then pull the
dent then remove the adhesive with ketones or such. This works on bare
aluminum pretty good. If painted you will have to airbrush after removing
the dent.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moe" <moe(at)rosspistons.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 9:16 AM
Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
>
> Gents:
>
> It appears that I have missed something. What does the "Did anybody else
> get one of these?" from Bill, and the reply from Chris Schuermann refer
> to?
> Since the Subject line includes "Bondo (verification)" did I do something
> wrong?
>
> Regards,
>
> Moe
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris Schuermann" <cschuerm(at)cox.net>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 7:39 AM
> Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Bill Bow wrote:
>> > Did anybody else get one of these?
>>
>> Yup. The piper list also got annoyed by a couple of dimwits who did the
>> same thing. You'd think that anyone with two functioning brain cells
>> would be able to realize that they're going to spam hundreds of people
>> by doing that. Moddy on the piper list now immediatly unsubscribes
>> anyone who does that.... forever....
>>
>> chris
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Owens" <dowens(at)aerialviewpoint.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bondo[Verification] |
Bondo is not an aviation word, as are "tits" not an aviation word, and since
this is an aviation forum, the correct terminology must be used. Ask the
guys to explain that one. heheheheheee
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moe" <moe(at)rosspistons.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
>
> Gents:
>
> It appears that I have missed something. What does the "Did anybody else
> get one of these?" from Bill, and the reply from Chris Schuermann refer
to?
> Since the Subject line includes "Bondo (verification)" did I do something
> wrong?
>
> Regards,
>
> Moe
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris Schuermann" <cschuerm(at)cox.net>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 7:39 AM
> Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Bill Bow wrote:
> > > Did anybody else get one of these?
> >
> > Yup. The piper list also got annoyed by a couple of dimwits who did the
> > same thing. You'd think that anyone with two functioning brain cells
> > would be able to realize that they're going to spam hundreds of people
> > by doing that. Moddy on the piper list now immediatly unsubscribes
> > anyone who does that.... forever....
> >
> > chris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Fisher" <tfisher(at)commandergroup.bc.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Bondo[Verification] |
You could always add a rib from behind to push out the "oil can".
Tom F.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Sather" <sather(at)charter.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 10:06
Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
>
> Before using bondo or anything else. Try and remove the dent. If it is a
> large oil can type, the local glass shop will have a suction carrier for
> glass that you can suck down on to the metal and then gentley pull it out.
> There are several size of these vacumn pullers available. If it is
smaller
> there some remarkable adhesives that you can apply let dry then pull the
> dent then remove the adhesive with ketones or such. This works on bare
> aluminum pretty good. If painted you will have to airbrush after removing
> the dent.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Moe" <moe(at)rosspistons.com>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 9:16 AM
> Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
>
>
> >
> > Gents:
> >
> > It appears that I have missed something. What does the "Did anybody
else
> > get one of these?" from Bill, and the reply from Chris Schuermann refer
> > to?
> > Since the Subject line includes "Bondo (verification)" did I do
something
> > wrong?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Moe
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Chris Schuermann" <cschuerm(at)cox.net>
> > To:
> > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 7:39 AM
> > Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Bill Bow wrote:
> >> > Did anybody else get one of these?
> >>
> >> Yup. The piper list also got annoyed by a couple of dimwits who did
the
> >> same thing. You'd think that anyone with two functioning brain cells
> >> would be able to realize that they're going to spam hundreds of people
> >> by doing that. Moddy on the piper list now immediatly unsubscribes
> >> anyone who does that.... forever....
> >>
> >> chris
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Brady" <westwind(at)hdiss.net> |
| Subject: | possible A/C down |
Local SoCal T.V. has been reporting a Twin-Commander down in a wooded,mountainous
area supposedly based in Las Vegas.....Pix of crash site look very bad. Anybody
have any info? I understand we have some club members in the LAS area. I
pray for the best......Dan 77B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brock Lorber <blorber(at)southwestcirrus.com> |
| Subject: | Re: possible A/C down [bcc][faked-from] |
Dan Brady wrote:
>
>Local SoCal T.V. has been reporting a Twin-Commander down in a wooded,mountainous
area supposedly based in Las Vegas.....Pix of crash site look very bad. Anybody
have any info? I understand we have some club members in the LAS area. I
pray for the best......Dan 77B
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
I see a single-engine commander down east of Burbank. It is registered
to a Las Vegas resident, but I don't know him.
Brock Lorber - N400CH
http://www.southwestcirrus.com/n400ch/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | W J R HAMILTON <wjrhamilton(at)optusnet.com.au> |
Folks,
At the risk of sounding like I am trying to teach somebody to suck
eggs, can I suggest that, for anything more than minor cosmetic
damage,and I really mean minor, and anything with a score as part of
the ding, you should consider it in terms of damage limits, ( not
much in the older Commander manuals) and AC 43-13A/B, and proceed
accordingly. Small doubler plates, suitable fitted on the underside
of "panel beaten" sections, are really easy to do. A ding means the
metal is stretched, all the usual methods of shrinking the plate
(skin) do not restore the original strength.
Needless to say, never use bog ( English for bondo) on any control
surface. The results of flutter from unbalanced controls is not pretty.
Anything you use should be safe on aluminium, the results of stress
corrosion ain't pretty, even "ordinary" surface corrosion,
especially inside lap joints can ruin your day, not to mention your
bank balance.
We have had altogether too much experience with hail damage recently,
and have some very nasty disputes in progress with insurance
companies, who will not accept that, on the type involve, the fwd.
spar/leading edge structure is, in fact, a "box spar", not just a few
ribs with a bit of sheet wrapped around it.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton
At 13:53 31/03/2006, you wrote:
>
>
>You could always add a rib from behind to push out the "oil can".
>Tom F.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Robert Sather" <sather(at)charter.net>
>To:
>Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 10:06
>Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
>
>
> >
> > Before using bondo or anything else. Try and remove the dent. If it is a
> > large oil can type, the local glass shop will have a suction carrier for
> > glass that you can suck down on to the metal and then gentley pull it out.
> > There are several size of these vacumn pullers available. If it is
>smaller
> > there some remarkable adhesives that you can apply let dry then pull the
> > dent then remove the adhesive with ketones or such. This works on bare
> > aluminum pretty good. If painted you will have to airbrush after removing
> > the dent.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Moe" <moe(at)rosspistons.com>
> > To:
> > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 9:16 AM
> > Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Gents:
> > >
> > > It appears that I have missed something. What does the "Did anybody
>else
> > > get one of these?" from Bill, and the reply from Chris Schuermann refer
> > > to?
> > > Since the Subject line includes "Bondo (verification)" did I do
>something
> > > wrong?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Moe
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Chris Schuermann" <cschuerm(at)cox.net>
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 7:39 AM
> > > Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
> > >
> > >
>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Bill Bow wrote:
> > >> > Did anybody else get one of these?
> > >>
> > >> Yup. The piper list also got annoyed by a couple of dimwits who did
>the
> > >> same thing. You'd think that anyone with two functioning brain cells
> > >> would be able to realize that they're going to spam hundreds of people
> > >> by doing that. Moddy on the piper list now immediatly unsubscribes
> > >> anyone who does that.... forever....
> > >>
> > >> chris
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
CONFIDENTIALITY & PRIVILEGE NOTICE
W.J.R.Hamilton,Glenalmond Group Companies,Fighter Flights Internet
Services and Warbirds.Net. & .
This message is intended for and should only be used by the
addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged
information.If you are not the intended recipient any use
distribution,disclosure or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited.Confidentiality and legal privilege attached to this
communication are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken
delivery to you.If you have received this message in error, please
notify us immediately to:
Australia 61 (0)408 876 526
Dolores capitis non fero. Eos do.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Matronics Email List Wiki! |
Dear Listers,
I have added a new feature to the Email List Forums at Matronics called a Wiki. What's "Wiki" you ask? A Wiki is a website. You go to it and browse just like you would any other web site. The difference is, you can change it. You can put anything you want on this web site without having to be a web designer or even being the owner. You can write a new page just like writing an email message on the BBS. You don't need to send it off to anyone to install on the site. It is kind of like a Blog (weblog) in which anyone can post. Here is a great page on where the term Wiki came from and what it means in the context of a website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki
So on to the new Matronics Email List Wiki... I've created this site for anyone
from any of the Email Lists to use. I envision that there are a great many
things that can be added to this new Wiki since there are always new and interesting
tidbits of useful information traversing the Lists.
Off the main Matronics Email List Wiki page, you will find a link called "Community
Portal". Here you will find more links to stubs for all the various Lists
found at Matronics (and a few other links). Brian Lloyd and others from the
Yak-List have already begun adding content in a number of areas. Bob Nuckolls
of AeroElectric fame has added a great article on "Ageing Aircraft".
I have discussed the new Matronics Email List Wiki with Tedd McHenry and Dwight Frye of the RV Wiki Site and they have decided to merge their site over onto the new Matronics Wiki server giving everyone a single source for information on RV building and flying! This migration will begin today and you should be able to find all of the content currently found at www.rvwiki.org moved over to the Matronics Wiki within a few days.
To make edits to the Matronics Wiki, you will need to have a login account on the
Matronics Wiki and I have disabled anonymous edits. This protects the Wiki
site from automated spam engines and other nuisances that could compromise the
data at the site.
Signing up for an account is fast and easy and begins by clicking on the "create
an account or log in" link in the upper right hand corner of any page. Note
that you do not have to have a login or be logged in to view any of the content.
The Matronics Email List Wiki is YOUR Wiki! It is only as useful as the content
found within. The concept of the Wiki is that the people the use it and update
it. If you've got an interesting procedure for doing something, MAKE A WIKI
PAGE ON IT! You can even upload pictures. Saw something interesting at a
flyin? MAKE A WIKI PAGE ON IT! Don't be shy, this is YOUR site to share information
with others with similar interests.
Here is a users guide on using the Wiki implemented at Matronics: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents This gives a lot of great information on how to get started editing pages.
And finally, here is the URL for the Matronics Email List Wiki:
http://wiki.matronics.com
Brian Lloyd has written an excellent introduction to Wikis on the front page.
I encourage you to read it over, then drill into the "Community Portal" and HAVE
FUN!!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Allen Reed" <allen_reed2(at)hotmail.com> |
If your plane has over 10% red primer on it,,you might be a "RED-NECK"
commander pilot!!! Big Al
>From: W J R HAMILTON <wjrhamilton(at)optusnet.com.au>
>Reply-To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
>To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Commander-List: Bondo
>Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 18:46:17 +1100
>
>
>
>Folks,
>
>At the risk of sounding like I am trying to teach somebody to suck
>eggs, can I suggest that, for anything more than minor cosmetic
>damage,and I really mean minor, and anything with a score as part of
>the ding, you should consider it in terms of damage limits, ( not
>much in the older Commander manuals) and AC 43-13A/B, and proceed
>accordingly. Small doubler plates, suitable fitted on the underside
>of "panel beaten" sections, are really easy to do. A ding means the
>metal is stretched, all the usual methods of shrinking the plate
>(skin) do not restore the original strength.
>
>Needless to say, never use bog ( English for bondo) on any control
>surface. The results of flutter from unbalanced controls is not pretty.
>
>Anything you use should be safe on aluminium, the results of stress
>corrosion ain't pretty, even "ordinary" surface corrosion,
>especially inside lap joints can ruin your day, not to mention your
>bank balance.
>
>We have had altogether too much experience with hail damage recently,
>and have some very nasty disputes in progress with insurance
>companies, who will not accept that, on the type involve, the fwd.
>spar/leading edge structure is, in fact, a "box spar", not just a few
>ribs with a bit of sheet wrapped around it.
>
>Cheers,
>Bill Hamilton
>
>
>At 13:53 31/03/2006, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >You could always add a rib from behind to push out the "oil can".
> >Tom F.
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Robert Sather" <sather(at)charter.net>
> >To:
> >Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 10:06
> >Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
> >
> >
>
> > >
> > > Before using bondo or anything else. Try and remove the dent. If it
>is a
> > > large oil can type, the local glass shop will have a suction carrier
>for
> > > glass that you can suck down on to the metal and then gentley pull it
>out.
> > > There are several size of these vacumn pullers available. If it is
> >smaller
> > > there some remarkable adhesives that you can apply let dry then pull
>the
> > > dent then remove the adhesive with ketones or such. This works on
>bare
> > > aluminum pretty good. If painted you will have to airbrush after
>removing
> > > the dent.
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Moe" <moe(at)rosspistons.com>
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 9:16 AM
> > > Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Gents:
> > > >
> > > > It appears that I have missed something. What does the "Did anybody
> >else
> > > > get one of these?" from Bill, and the reply from Chris Schuermann
>refer
> > > > to?
> > > > Since the Subject line includes "Bondo (verification)" did I do
> >something
> > > > wrong?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Moe
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Chris Schuermann" <cschuerm(at)cox.net>
> > > > To:
> > > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 7:39 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: FW: Commander-List: Bondo[Verification]
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Bill Bow wrote:
> > > >> > Did anybody else get one of these?
> > > >>
> > > >> Yup. The piper list also got annoyed by a couple of dimwits who
>did
> >the
> > > >> same thing. You'd think that anyone with two functioning brain
>cells
> > > >> would be able to realize that they're going to spam hundreds of
>people
> > > >> by doing that. Moddy on the piper list now immediatly unsubscribes
> > > >> anyone who does that.... forever....
> > > >>
> > > >> chris
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>CONFIDENTIALITY & PRIVILEGE NOTICE
>W.J.R.Hamilton,Glenalmond Group Companies,Fighter Flights Internet
>Services and Warbirds.Net. & .
>This message is intended for and should only be used by the
>addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged
>information.If you are not the intended recipient any use
>distribution,disclosure or copying of this message is strictly
>prohibited.Confidentiality and legal privilege attached to this
>communication are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken
>delivery to you.If you have received this message in error, please
>notify us immediately to:
> Australia 61 (0)408 876 526
March 07, 2006 - April 02, 2006
Commander-Archive.digest.vol-by