To compare the "system", you need to add the governor cost.
Add $1500 to your $7900, and I would guess that a three blade
Hartzell is about the same as the three blade MT prop in 2010 $$$$....:^)
Is it really more for an equivalent MT prop???
gil A
At 07:05 AM 2/6/2010, you wrote:
>Forgot to mention that the price I mentioned INCLUDED the spinner assembly.
>
>Cliff
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>flyv35b
>To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 5:45 AM
>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement
>
>Five years ago I paid $7900 for a new 3 blade (more expensive than a
>2 blade) for a Hartzell Scimitar prop for my Bonanza, including
>shipping from Ohio and the STC. Of course it is more than that
>now. My point was, MT props are considerably more expensive than
>Hartzell props, model for model.
>
>Cliff
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:gilalex(at)earthlink.net>Gil Alexander
>To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:30 PM
>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement
>
>My Hartzell estimate was a bit low.
>
>Vans Aircraft volume OEM price - to be installed on a RV-X only - is
>$6600 for the new blended airfoil O-360 prop.
>So, without the Vans discount, a better estimate may be -
>
>$7200 + $500 + $1500 ????
>
>Still less than the MT, but getting closer.
>
>BO is screwing up the $$, but the Euro folks aren't doing too well
>either - check the slope of the 4 month graph...:^)
>
>http://www.x-rates.com/d/EUR/USD/graph120.html
>
>gil A
>
>
>>But a full price comparison with a Harzell would have to include a
>>new spinner and a new certified governor to add onto your O-360-xxx...
>>
>>$6000 + $500 + $1500 ????
>>
>>gil A
>>
>>
>>>With regard to performance or price? Performance is similar I
>>>think and price is considerably more than a Hartzell. When BO
>>>gets done devaluating our dollar the MT prop will cost even more!
>>>
>>>Cliff
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>
>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>
>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"923te" <923te(at)att.net>
Subject:
Anouncement MT compared to Hartzel
Date:
Feb 06, 2010
The spinner assembly is also included with the MT.
The MT is not inexpensive but until our resident rocket scientist and
Grumman Guy gets the O360B1E approved it's the only game in town for a
controllable pitch prop.
Comparing to your Bonanza prop is really an apples to oranges
comparison.
The Hartzell being hydraulic while the MT is electric with the
associated computer controller box that senses rpm and issues electronic
signals to the motor to make fine pitch adjustments. All this technology
costs more than the older hydraulic technology.
In addition, the MT has features the Hartzell does not have. The MT can
be put in manual mode allowing the prop to function like a fixed pitch
prop. This has a few advantages one being that you can lean to best
power by watching your Tach. Can't do that with a hydraulic prop.
Hartzell does make an electric controlled prop so there is really no
comparison.
But let's run the numbers anyway:
If your not getting some kind of discount then the hydraulic Hartzell
for an O360 powered Cessna is $9750 It also weighs 67 lbs; 13 lbs more
than the MT.
Let's see using the estimate of $1500 for a governor, Hartzel costs
$9750 + $1500 = $11,250 compared to the MT at $11,232 for the first 10
purchasers until March 15.
So the MT is less than the Hartzell!
Considering all the above it's really not a bad deal.
Your Fellow Grumman Enthusiast,
ned
Forgot to mention that the price I mentioned INCLUDED the spinner
assembly.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"923te" <923te(at)att.net>
Subject:
Re: Anouncement MT compared to Hartzel
Date:
Feb 06, 2010
typo correction where it says Hartel does make change to does NOT make
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 10:39 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement MT compared to Hartzel
The spinner assembly is also included with the MT.
The MT is not inexpensive but until our resident rocket scientist and
Grumman Guy gets the O360B1E approved it's the only game in town for a
controllable pitch prop.
Comparing to your Bonanza prop is really an apples to oranges
comparison.
The Hartzell being hydraulic while the MT is electric with the
associated computer controller box that senses rpm and issues electronic
signals to the motor to make fine pitch adjustments. All this technology
costs more than the older hydraulic technology.
In addition, the MT has features the Hartzell does not have. The MT
can be put in manual mode allowing the prop to function like a fixed
pitch prop. This has a few advantages one being that you can lean to
best power by watching your Tach. Can't do that with a hydraulic prop.
Hartzell does make an electric controlled prop so there is really no
comparison.
But let's run the numbers anyway:
If your not getting some kind of discount then the hydraulic Hartzell
for an O360 powered Cessna is $9750 It also weighs 67 lbs; 13 lbs more
than the MT.
Let's see using the estimate of $1500 for a governor, Hartzel costs
$9750 + $1500 = $11,250 compared to the MT at $11,232 for the first 10
purchasers until March 15.
So the MT is less than the Hartzell!
Considering all the above it's really not a bad deal.
Your Fellow Grumman Enthusiast,
ned
Forgot to mention that the price I mentioned INCLUDED the spinner
assembly.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: Anouncement
Date:
Feb 06, 2010
I already had a governor. MT now has a prop for the Bonanza (520/550
engines) and I believe it is around $1000 or so more than the Hartzell.
I'll check on that.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: Gil Alexander
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 7:15 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement
To compare the "system", you need to add the governor cost.
Add $1500 to your $7900, and I would guess that a three blade Hartzell
is about the same as the three blade MT prop in 2010 $$$$....:^)
Is it really more for an equivalent MT prop???
gil A
At 07:05 AM 2/6/2010, you wrote:
Forgot to mention that the price I mentioned INCLUDED the spinner
assembly.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: flyv35b
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 5:45 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement
Five years ago I paid $7900 for a new 3 blade (more expensive than
a 2 blade) for a Hartzell Scimitar prop for my Bonanza, including
shipping from Ohio and the STC. Of course it is more than that now. My
point was, MT props are considerably more expensive than Hartzell props,
model for model.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: Gil Alexander
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:30 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement
My Hartzell estimate was a bit low.
Vans Aircraft volume OEM price - to be installed on a RV-X only
- is $6600 for the new blended airfoil O-360 prop.
So, without the Vans discount, a better estimate may be -
$7200 + $500 + $1500 ????
Still less than the MT, but getting closer.
BO is screwing up the $$, but the Euro folks aren't doing too
well either - check the slope of the 4 month graph...:^)
http://www.x-rates.com/d/EUR/USD/graph120.html
gil A
But a full price comparison with a Harzell would have to
include a new spinner and a new certified governor to add onto your
O-360-xxx...
$6000 + $500 + $1500 ????
gil A
With regard to performance or price? Performance is similar
I think and price is considerably more than a Hartzell. When BO gets
done devaluating our dollar the MT prop will cost even more!
Cliff
href="
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="
http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
">http://www.matronics.com/c
href="
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="
http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
">http://www.matronics.com/c
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: Anouncement MT compared to Hartzel
Date:
Feb 06, 2010
The Hartzell being hydraulic while the MT is electric with the
associated computer controller box that senses rpm and issues electronic
signals to the motor to make fine pitch adjustments. All this technology
costs more than the older hydraulic technology.
Are you sure the MT prop for the Bonanza is electric?
In addition, the MT has features the Hartzell does not have. The MT can
be put in manual mode allowing the prop to function like a fixed pitch
prop. This has a few advantages one being that you can lean to best
power by watching your Tach. Can't do that with a hydraulic prop.
I wouldn't want to lean that way. It's a crude way of leaning.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 8:39 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement MT compared to Hartzel
The spinner assembly is also included with the MT.
The MT is not inexpensive but until our resident rocket scientist and
Grumman Guy gets the O360B1E approved it's the only game in town for a
controllable pitch prop.
Comparing to your Bonanza prop is really an apples to oranges
comparison.
The Hartzell being hydraulic while the MT is electric with the
associated computer controller box that senses rpm and issues electronic
signals to the motor to make fine pitch adjustments. All this technology
costs more than the older hydraulic technology.
In addition, the MT has features the Hartzell does not have. The MT
can be put in manual mode allowing the prop to function like a fixed
pitch prop. This has a few advantages one being that you can lean to
best power by watching your Tach. Can't do that with a hydraulic prop.
Hartzell does make an electric controlled prop so there is really no
comparison.
But let's run the numbers anyway:
If your not getting some kind of discount then the hydraulic Hartzell
for an O360 powered Cessna is $9750 It also weighs 67 lbs; 13 lbs more
than the MT.
Let's see using the estimate of $1500 for a governor, Hartzel costs
$9750 + $1500 = $11,250 compared to the MT at $11,232 for the first 10
purchasers until March 15.
So the MT is less than the Hartzell!
Considering all the above it's really not a bad deal.
Your Fellow Grumman Enthusiast,
ned
Forgot to mention that the price I mentioned INCLUDED the spinner
assembly.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Anouncement
Date:
Feb 06, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
When time comes to do the IO360 into a Tiger, I'm going to be looking at
the cost effectiveness, weight, and performance advantages of both.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gil Alexander <gilalex(at)earthlink.net>
Sent: Fri, Feb 5, 2010 6:36 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement
But a full price comparison with a Harzell would have to include a newspin
ner and a new certified governor to add onto yourO-360-xxx...
$6000 + $500 + $1500 ????
gil A
With regard toperformance or price? Performance is similar I think and pr
ice isconsiderably more than a Hartzell. When BO gets done devaluatingour
dollar the MT prop will cost even more!
Cliff
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Anouncement
Date:
Feb 06, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
what about the weight of a two blade Hartzell? I'll have to do more homew
ork. . . . . .
-----Original Message-----
From: discover <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sat, Feb 6, 2010 4:28 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Anouncement
I'm having trouble getting this posted. Here is the third try...
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 1:51 PM
Subject: MT Prop Questions
I have tried to answer some of the questions below.
The new STC has blades that look very comparable to the Hartzel Scimitar
design.
It is supposed to give me another couple of knots of speed do to it's bett
er
efficeincy. I should know by the end of February after I have it installed
.
Hartzell Scimitar propeller for the IO470 Bonanza's are $9550 come with a
2400
hour/6 year TBO and weigh 80 lbs
For the O-360 powered Cessna's are $9750 come with a 2400 hour/6 year TBO
and
weigh 67 lbs
These prices and weights do not include prop governor and controls.
The O-360 A4K engine in the Tiger can only get a constant speed prop thru
MT
propeller as it is the only existing manufacture of a certified electric
controlled prop on the planet.
http://www.hartzellprop.com/top_prop/conversion_cutsheet.asp?manufacturer
=Beechcraft&conversion_kit=B002
http://www.hartzellprop.com/top_prop/conversion_cutsheet.asp?manufacturer
=Cessna&conversion_kit=C020
The lowest price is available only from Less Drag Products. Special agreem
ents
were negotiated in order to induce MT propeller to accomplish the STC whic
h
allow Less Drag to sell the prop exclusively at a discount.
Shipped Assembled door-to-door from Germany - $1,100 estimated. Varies wi
th
destination. To the closest port of entry $1050 estimated plus customs and
pickup.
Shipped Disassembled from Germany to Less Drag Products, Inc. in Southern
California - $360
It is an option to have the prop shipped assembled to your place of choice
. It
will may end up costing more.
The MT prop weighs itself 44-lbs
Total installation 54-lbs
McCauley 41.9-lbs
The Sensenich 42.25lbs
Prestolite MZ4222 18.5-lbs
Sky-Tec 149-12L5 8.25-lbs
OEM 24v Alternator 12.25-lbs
Plane Power 24v Alternator 9.8-lbs
Hand propping should be no different than any other 3 bladed prop.
In addition to what is called out in the Manuals of 6 years and 1800hrs TB
O.
http://www.mt-propeller.com/pdf/sbs/sb1ag.pdf
I can give this testimonial:
I have flown the prop for the past 6 years and have had absolutely no
maintenance or operational issues with the prop. I have spent $0 for
maintenance. It is a very durable prop. Having the stainless steel leading
edge it can be redressed similarly to the Sensenich. Withstands rain and
racing. It was designed for up to 300hp and 2800 RPM.
As far as performance goes:
Back in 2004 I did extensive flight testing comparing the Sensenich and MT
propellers. David Fletcher donated the labor to remove the MT and reinstal
l
the Sensenich and then reinstall the MT. I was very confident of at least
one
data point at 4000'DA. This comparison data was presented to the grumman
gang
and is available in the archive or in an easier to read format here:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0Ad6U0DSgjX1QZGRwd3IybjZfMGhwMnJzbWQ4&h
l=en
Lots of gangers told me my plane would be a lot slower with a 3 bladed pro
p. I
found it was the same speed but burned less fuel. The comments at the AYA
fly
in's gave me some motivation to race. After I started racing I found my pl
ane
was able to compete with the fastest Tigers. It was very rewarding to win
the
last USA held LoPresti race at the AYA convention in Iowa. While returning
from a race last November I was in a flight of two with a grand champion
Tiger
racer. He could barely keep up with me and was burning over 2gph more fuel
at
something above 2900rpm....he had to throttle way back in order to have en
ough
fuel to make his 4 hour flight nonstop....
It is also a very economical prop to fly. You can reduce RPMs to 2450 WOT
and
save a couple gph and only loose around 10 knots.
Comparing to the fixed pitch 2 blade prop I have found the MT prop to give
the
same as or better cruise speed and remarkably better climb AND descent spe
eds
and rates. You can descend at Vne and not overspeed the engine.
It really does make a whole new airplane out of the Tiger.
Best Regards,
Ned
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=285040#285040
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Anouncement MT compared to Hartzel
Date:
Feb 06, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
My bottom line will be predicated on weight.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sat, Feb 6, 2010 8:39 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement MT compared to Hartzel
The spinner assembly is also included with the MT.
The MT is not inexpensive but until our resident rocket scientist and Grum
man Guy gets the O360B1E approved it's the only game in town for a control
lable pitch prop.
Comparing to your Bonanza prop is really an apples to oranges comparison.
The Hartzell being hydraulic while the MT is electric with the associated
computer controller box that senses rpm and issues electronic signals to
the motor to make fine pitch adjustments. All this technology costs more
than the older hydraulic technology.
In addition, the MT has features the Hartzell does not have. The MT can be
put in manual mode allowing the prop to function like a fixed pitch prop.
This has a few advantages one being that you can lean to best power by wa
tching your Tach. Can't do that with a hydraulic prop.
Hartzell does make an electric controlled prop so there is really no compa
rison.
But let's run the numbers anyway:
If your not getting some kind of discount then the hydraulic Hartzell for
an O360 powered Cessna is $9750 It also weighs 67 lbs; 13 lbs more than
the MT.
Let's see using the estimate of $1500 for a governor, Hartzel costs $9750
+ $1500 = $11,250 compared to the MT at $11,232 for the first 10 purcha
sers until March 15.
So the MT is less than the Hartzell!
Considering all the above it's really not a bad deal.
Your Fellow Grumman Enthusiast,
ned
Forgot to mention that the price I mentioned INCLUDED the spinner assemb
ly.
Cliff
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: Anouncement MT compared to Hartzel
Date:
Feb 06, 2010
The composite blade props will be lighter weight than and all aluminum
blade. I seem to recall that Hartzell is now making a composite blade
prop for experimental use. If you are starting with a whole different
engine model why not look at a lighter weight composite prop. I just
think that with MT's requirement to ship the prop back to one service
center and maybe weight weeks for it to get repaired as compared to
having most any prop shop repair a Hartzell has to be a detracting
factor for the MT. I know of one experimental owner who had a MT who
waited weeks and weeks to get a governor for his MT prop from Germany.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement MT compared to Hartzel
My bottom line will be predicated on weight.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sat, Feb 6, 2010 8:39 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement MT compared to Hartzel
The spinner assembly is also included with the MT.
The MT is not inexpensive but until our resident rocket scientist and
Grumman Guy gets the O360B1E approved it's the only game in town for a
controllable pitch prop.
Comparing to your Bonanza prop is really an apples to oranges
comparison.
The Hartzell being hydraulic while the MT is electric with the
associated computer controller box that senses rpm and issues electronic
signals to the motor to make fine pitch adjustments. All this technology
costs more than the older hydraulic technology.
In addition, the MT has features the Hartzell does not have. The MT
can be put in manual mode allowing the prop to function like a fixed
pitch prop. This has a few advantages one being that you can lean to
best power by watching your Tach. Can't do that with a hydraulic prop.
Hartzell does make an electric controlled prop so there is really no
comparison.
But let's run the numbers anyway:
If your not getting some kind of discount then the hydraulic Hartzell
for an O360 powered Cessna is $9750 It also weighs 67 lbs; 13 lbs more
than the MT.
Let's see using the estimate of $1500 for a governor, Hartzel costs
$9750 + $1500 = $11,250 compared to the MT at $11,232 for the first 10
purchasers until March 15.
So the MT is less than the Hartzell!
Considering all the above it's really not a bad deal.
Your Fellow Grumman Enthusiast,
ned
Forgot to mention that the price I mentioned INCLUDED the spinner
assembly.
Cliff
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"923te" <923te(at)att.net>
Subject:
Anouncement MT compared to Hartzel
Date:
Feb 06, 2010
I was comenting on your comparison and trying to connect that comparison
to what is actually available. Hartzell props are not electric but
hydraulic.
On the leaning for best power by using the Tach. That is the method
prescribed in the Lycoming Engine Operators Book and it seems to work
very well. Can you tell me a better way to lean for best power?
Are you sure the MT prop for the Bonanza is electric?
In addition, the MT has features the Hartzell does not have. The MT
can be put in manual mode allowing the prop to function like a fixed
pitch prop. This has a few advantages one being that you can lean to
best power by watching your Tach. Can't do that with a hydraulic prop.
I wouldn't want to lean that way. It's a crude way of leaning.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Feb 06, 2010
From:
Carlos Hernandez <carlosh(at)structuralaz.com>
Subject:
Flap wiring question
Hello! I'm new here and I have a question for you. I have a Grumman flap
motor and I need a little help with wire identification. There are 4
wires from the motor which are black, red, yellow and brown. I know two
of them are for the limit switches but I don't have a wiring diagram for
which is + and -. I've seen a diagram on the web that showed a black and
orange wire for flaps but I don't have an orange wire. I have a project
I'd like to use this on.
Thanks in advance for your assistance!
Carlos in Arizona
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"923te" <923te(at)att.net>
Subject:
Re: Anouncement MT compared to Hartzel
Date:
Feb 06, 2010
When was it that the experimental owner waitd weeks to get a governor?
Was it perhaps several years ago? The required governor is stocked by
Van's htese days and manuy other supply houses. I bought the PCU 5000
which works for the MT for my RV9A Whirlwing prop about 5 years ago from
a shop in Illinois and it took 3 days shipping to receive.
I will be getting my 6 year TBO on my MT prop done this month in Oxnard.
It is expected to take one week and most of that time is the 4 days
round trip shipping.
It just sounds like you don't like the idea of MT props in general?
Are you saying that MT props are not a good thing for the Tiger?
Ned
..... I just think that with MT's requirement to ship the prop back to
one service center and maybe weight weeks for it to get repaired as
compared to having most any prop shop repair a Hartzell has to be a
detracting factor for the MT. I know of one experimental owner who had
a MT who waited weeks and weeks to get a governor for his MT prop from
Germany.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"923te" <923te(at)att.net>
Subject:
Re: Anouncement
Date:
Feb 06, 2010
http://www.mt-propellerusa.com/pdf/stcflyer/bonanza.pdf
No price but says the MT is 26 lbs lighter.....and something abojut an
RPM of 2650 vs Hartzells limit?
----- Original Message -----
From: flyv35b
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement
I already had a governor. MT now has a prop for the Bonanza (520/550
engines) and I believe it is around $1000 or so more than the Hartzell.
I'll check on that.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Flap wiring question
Date:
Feb 07, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
If you looked at my wiring diagram, I think I put orange because that is
what it said in the original paperwork/drawing. The motor is a simple DC
motor. The limit switches have nothing to do with the motor. I don't re
call what the colors are from the switches.
Take a look at my wiring diagram
www.AuCountry.com
click on Technical Stuff.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Carlos Hernandez <carlosh(at)structuralaz.com>
Sent: Sat, Feb 6, 2010 6:36 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Flap wiring question
alaz.com>
Hello! I'm new here and I have a question for you. I have a Grumman flap
motor and I need a little help with wire identification. There are 4 wire
s from the motor which are black, red, yellow and brown. I know two of the
m are for the limit switches but I don't have a wiring diagram for which
is + and -. I've seen a diagram on the web that showed a black and orange
wire for flaps but I don't have an orange wire. I have a project I'd like
to use this on.
Thanks in advance for your assistance!
Carlos in Arizona
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Anouncement
Date:
Feb 07, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Look at the TCDS on the MT prop. It's redlined at 2800 rpm and no yellow
arcs. If they, MT, can get a decent prop profile that isn't from the 50'
s, I'd seriously consider it for the IO360 project plane.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sat, Feb 6, 2010 6:59 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement
http://www.mt-propellerusa.com/pdf/stcflyer/bonanza.pdf
No price but says the MT is 26 lbs lighter.....and something abojut an RPM
of 2650 vs Hartzells limit?
----- Original Message -----
From: flyv35b
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Anouncement
I already had a governor. MT now has a prop for the Bonanza (520/550 en
gines) and I believe it is around $1000 or so more than the Hartzell.
I'll check on that.
Cliff
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Feb 06, 2010
From:
carlosh(at)structuralaz.com
Subject:
Re: Flap wiring question
Thank you Gary. I'll take another look. Is there a place I can send this
in for repair or motor replacement if necessary?
Carlos
>-- Original Message --
>To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Flap wiring question
>Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2010 00:04:24 -0500
>From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
>Reply-To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
>If you looked at my wiring diagram, I think I put orange because that is
>what it said in the original paperwork/drawing. The motor is a simple DC
>motor. The limit switches have nothing to do with the motor. I don't recall
>what the colors are from the switches.
>
>
>Take a look at my wiring diagram
>
>
>www.AuCountry.com
>
>
>click on Technical Stuff.
>
>
>Gary
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Carlos Hernandez <carlosh(at)structuralaz.com>
>To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Sat, Feb 6, 2010 6:36 pm
>Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Flap wiring question
>
>
>
>Hello! I'm new here and I have a question for you. I have a Grumman flap
>motor and I need a little help with wire identification. There are 4 wires
>from the motor which are black, red, yellow and brown. I know two of them
>are for the limit switches but I don't have a wiring diagram for which is
>+ and -. I've seen a diagram on the web that showed a black and orange wire
>for flaps but I don't have an orange wire. I have a project I'd like to
use
>this on.
>
>Thanks in advance for your assistance!
>Carlos in Arizona
>
>====================================
>====================================
>====================================
>====================================
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Flap wiring question
Date:
Feb 07, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
A few of years ago I opened up a Cheetah on which the flap didn't work.
The area around the flap was full of water. The motor was rusty. I took
it to a local shop that specializes in small motors and alternators. The
y took it apart, cleaned it up, put in new brushes, bead blasted it, powde
r coated it and gave it back, all for $50.00.
Find a shop that specializes in small electric motors. Find someone who
may charge more, but is an obsessive compulsive.
-----Original Message-----
From: carlosh(at)structuralaz.com
Sent: Sat, Feb 6, 2010 9:47 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Flap wiring question
Thank you Gary. I'll take another look. Is there a place I can send this
in for repair or motor replacement if necessary?
Carlos
>-- Original Message --
>To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Flap wiring question
>Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2010 00:04:24 -0500
>From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
>Reply-To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
>If you looked at my wiring diagram, I think I put orange because that is
>what it said in the original paperwork/drawing. The motor is a simple DC
>motor. The limit switches have nothing to do with the motor. I don't re
call
>what the colors are from the switches.
>
>
>Take a look at my wiring diagram
>
>
>www.AuCountry.com
>
>
>click on Technical Stuff.
>
>
>Gary
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Carlos Hernandez <carlosh(at)structuralaz.com>
>To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Sat, Feb 6, 2010 6:36 pm
>Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Flap wiring question
>
>
ralaz.com>
>
>
>Hello! I'm new here and I have a question for you. I have a Grumman flap
>motor and I need a little help with wire identification. There are 4 wire
s
>from the motor which are black, red, yellow and brown. I know two of them
>are for the limit switches but I don't have a wiring diagram for which is
>+ and -. I've seen a diagram on the web that showed a black and orange wi
re
>for flaps but I don't have an orange wire. I have a project I'd like to
use
>this on.
>
>Thanks in advance for your assistance!
>Carlos in Arizona
>
>========================
============
>========================
============
>========================
============
>========================
============
>
>
>
>
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Fwd: YouTube - The Long Way Home-The Pacific Clipper.m4v
Date:
Feb 07, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Subject: YouTube - The Long Way Home-The Pacific Clipper.m4v
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms84WfJwalI
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Feb 08, 2010
From:
Carlos Hernandez <carlosh(at)structuralaz.com>
Subject:
Re: Flap wiring question
Thanks for the tip. I'll try to find someone local.
Carlos
teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
> A few of years ago I opened up a Cheetah on which the flap didn't
> work. The area around the flap was full of water. The motor was
> rusty. I took it to a local shop that specializes in small motors and
> alternators. They took it apart, cleaned it up, put in new brushes,
> bead blasted it, powder coated it and gave it back, all for $50.00.
>
> Find a shop that specializes in small electric motors. Find someone
> who may charge more, but is an obsessive compulsive.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: carlosh(at)structuralaz.com
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sat, Feb 6, 2010 9:47 pm
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Flap wiring question
>
>
> Thank you Gary. I'll take another look. Is there a place I can send this
> in for repair or motor replacement if necessary?
>
> Carlos
>
> >-- Original Message --
> >To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> >Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Flap wiring question
> >Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2010 00:04:24 -0500
> >From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com <mailto:teamgrumman(at)aol.com>
> >Reply-To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> >
> >
> >If you looked at my wiring diagram, I think I put orange because that is
> >what it said in the original paperwork/drawing. The motor is a simple DC
> >motor. The limit switches have nothing to do with the motor. I don't recall
> >what the colors are from the switches.
> >
> >
> >Take a look at my wiring diagram
> >
> >
> >www.AuCountry.com <http://www.AuCountry.com>
> >
> >
> >click on Technical Stuff.
> >
> >
> >Gary
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Carlos Hernandez <carlosh(at)structuralaz.com <mailto:carlosh(at)structuralaz.com>>
> >To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> >Sent: Sat, Feb 6, 2010 6:36 pm
> >Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Flap wiring question
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Hello! I'm new here and I have a question for you. I have a Grumman flap
> >motor and I need a little help with wire identification. There are 4 wires
> >from the motor which are black, red, yellow and brown. I know two of them
> >are for the limit switches but I don't have a wiring diagram for which is
> >+ and -. I've seen a diagram on the web that showed a black and orange wire
> >for flaps but I don't have an orange wire. I have a project I'd like to
> use
> >this on.
> >
> >Thanks in advance for your assistance!
> >Carlos in Arizona
> >
> >====================================
> >====================================
> >====================================
> >====================================
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ===================================
> ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> ===================================
> ttp://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
> "_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
--
Carlos Hernandez <carlosh@sec-engr.com>
Structural Engineers Company
2963 W. Elliot Rd. - Suite 3
Chandler, AZ 85224
Phone: 480.968.8600
Fax: 480.968.8608
www.sec-engr.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.
This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or
organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient or
an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any review, dissemination or copyingof this email and
its attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is
prohibited. If you havereceived this email in error, please
immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email
from your system.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Dick Butz <dickbutz(at)therock.bm>
Subject:
Prop
Date:
Feb 17, 2010
Who is offering the best price for a Sensenich prop for a 1979 Tiger?
Dick Butz
79 Tiger N4532P
20N, Kingston, NY
dickbutz(at)therock.bm
Cell: 441-335-6932
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Windshield for sale
From:
"dan300" <danhouseman(at)charter.net>
Date:
Feb 17, 2010
L.P. Aero #965 for AA-5, AA-5A, AA-5B. Never installed, has protective covering.
$100 St Louis area. danhouseman at charter dot net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=286890#286890
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Davesbox1(at)AOL.COM
Date:
Feb 18, 2010
Subject:
Re: airplane
i have a nice 1976 aa5b, recent top end over haul, sensenich prop. garmin
300 xl, nice tiger....im looking to sell...would take 40k...
dave/ texas
In a message dated 2/17/2010 4:01:39 P.M. Central Standard Time,
dickbutz(at)therock.bm writes:
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Dick Butz
Who is offering the best price for a Sensenich prop for a 1979 Tiger?
Dick Butz
79 Tiger N4532P
20N, Kingston, NY
dickbutz(at)therock.bm
Cell: 441-335-6932
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Prop
Date:
Feb 18, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
I get my props from Fletcher. He gives a better price than anyone else I
know.
And, regarding the yokes: I haven't received the check yet.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dick Butz <dickbutz(at)therock.bm>
Sent: Wed, Feb 17, 2010 2:00 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Prop
Who is offering the best price for a Sensenich prop for a 1979 Tiger?
Dick Butz
79 Tiger N4532P
20N, Kingston, NY
dickbutz(at)therock.bm
Cell: 441-335-6932
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Windshield for sale
Date:
Feb 18, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Hi Dan,
I'll take it. How are you going to ship it? I've seen a lot of windshiel
ds damaged in shipping.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: dan300 <danhouseman(at)charter.net>
Sent: Wed, Feb 17, 2010 7:30 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Windshield for sale
L.P. Aero #965 for AA-5, AA-5A, AA-5B. Never installed, has protective cov
ering.
$100 St Louis area. danhouseman at charter dot net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=286890#286890
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
The Hiller Aviation Museum in San Carlos, CA could use a couple of more
recent Mac computers for their library staff and volunteers. Currently they
have one PC of still useful vintage but do a lot of work on Macs of which
the NEWEST is a G4 upgraded to OS9. They'd really benefit from upgrading
from stuff that's 10+ years old to something Intel-based capable of running
a recent version of OSX. Thus, if any of you find yourselves replacing a
3-5 year old Mac and wondering what to do with the old you could make a
tax-deductable donation of it to the museum and the folks there would be
very appreciative.
Thanks!
Jamey
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: here is something you might like
From:
"CollinLeon" <collinleon(at)chron.spambob.net>
Date:
Feb 19, 2010
I spoke with one of the engineers on the project many years ago and she said that
to say that the SR-71 leaks like a sieve is to insult all the sieves out there...
Basically, it has to refuel very soon after takeoff. Once up to speed
and the aircraft sufficiently warmed up and the metal expanded, it quits leaking...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=287203#287203
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 19, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
I'm going to try attaching a pic of an instrument panel I did in a Cheetah
. If it doesn't come through, let me know and I'll send you a pic.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Rick Pollack <rdp123(at)verizon.net>
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 19, 2010
Came through just fine. I need one Gary!
On Feb 19, 2010, at 7:26 PM, TeamGrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
> I'm going to try attaching a pic of an instrument panel I did in a
Cheetah. If it doesn't come through, let me know and I'll send you a
pic.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Scott Trejo <md11strejo(at)YAHOO.COM>
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 19, 2010
Needs an Aspen EFD1000 Pro
Scott Trejo
On Feb 19, 2010, at 9:26 PM, teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM wrote:
> I'm going to try attaching a pic of an instrument panel I did in a
Cheetah. If it doesn't come through, let me know and I'll send you a
pic.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"923te" <923te(at)att.net>
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 19, 2010
Gary V does awesome panels!
Wow that's a great looking one Gary.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"WILLIAM KELLY" <v1rotate(at)verizon.net>
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 19, 2010
Hey, this looks great. Kind of reminds me of my panel. The only thing
I would have done differently is swap the positions of the nav head and
JPI for a better scan when shooting an approach in the clouds. I like
the style of the yokes too. The pebbled look sort of hints of spots on
a real Cheetah's coat. I see the Mitchell gauges. That reminds me,
don't know if I ever mentioned it or not, but since you changed the
connector style on my fuel pressure tranducer I've never had a
questionable needle fluctuation again. I will save this pic to my
Grumman favorites.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 7:26 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Instrument panel
I'm going to try attaching a pic of an instrument panel I did in a
Cheetah. If it doesn't come through, let me know and I'll send you a
pic.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 20, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
I'm sure as soon as Corl gets enough money he'll put another indicator in
his plane. Corl wanted his indicators there. He's an airline pilot also
. Did you notice the circuit breakers? There are additional locations,
pre-drilled for more if needed. His panel also has idiot lights for low
voltage and low vacuum.
I'm glad to hear the fuel pressure problem was that spade connector. Easy
fix.
-----Original Message-----
From: WILLIAM KELLY <v1rotate(at)verizon.net>
Sent: Fri, Feb 19, 2010 9:38 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Instrument panel
Hey, this looks great. Kind of reminds me of my panel. The only thing I
would have done differently is swap the positions of the nav head and JPI
for a better scan when shooting an approach in the clouds. I like the st
yle of the yokes too. The pebbled look sort of hints of spots on a real
Cheetah's coat. I see the Mitchell gauges. That reminds me, don't know
if I ever mentioned it or not, but since you changed the connector style
on my fuel pressure tranducer I've never had a questionable needle fluctu
ation again. I will save this pic to my Grumman favorites.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 7:26 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Instrument panel
I'm going to try attaching a pic of an instrument panel I did in a Cheet
ah. If it doesn't come through, let me know and I'll send you a pic.
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Bruce Smith <haveblue1(at)mac.com>
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 20, 2010
Gary,
Freakin' awesome!
Bruce Smith
On Feb 19, 2010, at 10:26 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
> I'm going to try attaching a pic of an instrument panel I did in a Cheetah.
If it doesn't come through, let me know and I'll send you a pic.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Panel Photos
Date:
Feb 20, 2010
Here are a couple of photos of the panel on my Lynx which I did about 4
years ago using Gary's eyebrow.
Cliff
The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link
attachments:
P1000158.JPG
P1000160.JPG
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 20, 2010
Nice looking panel! The only thing I would add would be a manifold
pressure gauge to the right of the tach, and swap the JPI and nav head
as Bill suggested.
I assume the yokes are powdercoated? What do you call that textured
finish?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 7:26 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Instrument panel
I'm going to try attaching a pic of an instrument panel I did in a
Cheetah. If it doesn't come through, let me know and I'll send you a
pic.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"923te" <923te(at)att.net>
Subject:
Re: Panel Photos
Date:
Feb 20, 2010
Real nice Cliff. I like the EI gauges. Is your altimeter crystal
cracked?
----- Original Message -----
From: flyv35b
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 8:14 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Panel Photos
Here are a couple of photos of the panel on my Lynx which I did about
4 years ago using Gary's eyebrow.
Cliff
The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link
attachments:
P1000158.JPG
P1000160.JPG
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: Panel Photos
Date:
Feb 20, 2010
I think you mean the VSI? I think that is some odd light reflection.
Here is another photo of it.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 6:24 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Panel Photos
Real nice Cliff. I like the EI gauges. Is your altimeter crystal
cracked?
----- Original Message -----
From: flyv35b
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 8:14 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Panel Photos
Here are a couple of photos of the panel on my Lynx which I did
about 4 years ago using Gary's eyebrow.
Cliff
The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link
attachments:
P1000158.JPG
P1000160.JPG
Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: Panel Photos
Date:
Feb 20, 2010
If I was doing it over again I might use the Mitchell instruments as
they are much cheaper and take up a lot less panel space. I do like the
accuracy of the EI instruments and having a volt and ammeter in the same
instrument as well as oil pressure and temperature. The FP-5L is the
primary one so that fuel pressure is shown on that instrument. Adding
the EI instruments at the top of the standard panel was only possible
because of Gary's eyebrow which angles up so that you can now see clear
to the top of the panel (a very nice mod). A full length light strip is
hidden up under the lip of the eyebrow and floods the entire panel.
Note that I have a separate analog voltmeter on the RH side which is
tied in to an emergency buss.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 6:24 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Panel Photos
Real nice Cliff. I like the EI gauges. Is your altimeter crystal
cracked?
----- Original Message -----
From: flyv35b
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 8:14 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Panel Photos
Here are a couple of photos of the panel on my Lynx which I did
about 4 years ago using Gary's eyebrow.
Cliff
The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link
attachments:
P1000158.JPG
P1000160.JPG
Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 20, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
The yokes are powder coated in hammer tone. The instrument panel is too.
Just a different color.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Sent: Sat, Feb 20, 2010 6:17 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Instrument panel
Nice looking panel! The only thing I would add would be a manifold pressu
re gauge to the right of the tach, and swap the JPI and nav head as Bill
suggested.
I assume the yokes are powdercoated? What do you call that textured finis
h?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 7:26 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Instrument panel
I'm going to try attaching a pic of an instrument panel I did in a Cheet
ah. If it doesn't come through, let me know and I'll send you a pic.
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
From:
"cwleach" <corl(at)aya.org>
Date:
Feb 20, 2010
[quote="flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com"]Nice looking panel! The only thing I would
add would be a manifold pressure gauge to the right of the tach, and swap the
JPI and nav head as Bill suggested.
I put the Nav head next to the ... NAV RADIO! What a concept, huh! :-)
"In the clouds" I have GPS 1 showing the CDI and numerical ground track and desired
track information while GPS 2 shows the moving map display. In this way I
can simply match the #1 displayed Actual Track with Desired Track numbers, check
the deviation from Course on the adjacent CDI, then adjust heading 1 or 2
degrees to change the actual track to correct any error. I've found the "digital
approach procedure" to be far more accurate than chasing needles anyway. YMMV.
I only purchased 1 Nav head because eventually an HSI (Aspen?) will replace the
DG leaving the CDI for Nav 2. Why buy two when you'll be replacing one soon-ish?
My airplane seems to be getting heavy despite leaving stuff out!
... just curious what true benefit a manifold pressure gauge would serve other
than to give Gary a little more $$ for installation costs?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=287430#287430
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 20, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Corl, I have a CHT in my plane. It also shows on my JPI 800. Other than
comparing book values, I rarely use it.
-----Original Message-----
From: cwleach <corl(at)aya.org>
Sent: Sat, Feb 20, 2010 6:26 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Instrument panel
[quote="flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com"]Nice looking panel! The only thing
I would
add would be a manifold pressure gauge to the right of the tach, and swap
the
JPI and nav head as Bill suggested.
I put the Nav head next to the ... NAV RADIO! What a concept, huh! :-)
"In the clouds" I have GPS 1 showing the CDI and numerical ground track an
d
desired track information while GPS 2 shows the moving map display. In thi
s way
I can simply match the #1 displayed Actual Track with Desired Track number
s,
check the deviation from Course on the adjacent CDI, then adjust heading
1 or 2
degrees to change the actual track to correct any error. I've found the "d
igital
approach procedure" to be far more accurate than chasing needles anyway.
YMMV.
I only purchased 1 Nav head because eventually an HSI (Aspen?) will replac
e the
DG leaving the CDI for Nav 2. Why buy two when you'll be replacing one soo
n-ish?
My airplane seems to be getting heavy despite leaving stuff out!
... just curious what true benefit a manifold pressure gauge would serve
other
than to give Gary a little more $$ for installation costs?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=287430#287430
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 21, 2010
I think that Bill suggested putting the nav CDI next to the flight
instruments is probably because when using it for an ILS approach you want
to keep your scan confined to as small and area as possible. You are
constantly looking at the CDI and comparing that with the DG and AI and VSI,
so closer is better.
As far as the MP gauge is concerned it is hard to explain the value of it
unless you have flown a plane with a CS prop for awhile, which most Grumman
owners have not. It is a more precise way to set power and it reacts
instantly and is beneficial even with a fixed pitch prop. Granted, it is
not mandatory, just useful. For instance, what is your power setting and
how much did it change when you drop the nose significantly and start a
decent from altitude when you were near redline at cruise? A manifold
pressure gauge will tell you that whereas your tachometer will stay right at
2700 rpm for a maximum speed descent. It's pretty much accepted practice
that you want to maintain at least 15" MP at least so as to no unduly cool
the cylinders and not backdrive the engine. Also during climb if you choose
to make a power reduction, how far back to you pull the throttle as the rpm
doesn't react immediately or change much. Manifold pressure tells you
exactly how far to pull the throttle back - 2" hg, 3" or whatever.
And finally, if you have a modified plane such as a 2 place with a bigger
engine then the POH is of little help in determining what the power setting
is. With a MP gauge you can go to Lycoming's curves for a specific engine
and determine that, but you must know MP. Make up a little chart of MP vs.
RPM vs. fuel flow and % power. I have a Lynx with an O-320 engine and a MP
gauge and I use it all the time to adjust power. The tachometer just
follows along and ends up wherever and is mainly used to prevent excessive
RPM.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: "cwleach" <corl(at)aya.org>
Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 6:26 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Instrument panel
>
> [quote="flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com"]Nice looking panel! The only thing I
> would add would be a manifold pressure gauge to the right of the tach,
> and swap the JPI and nav head as Bill suggested.
>
>
> I put the Nav head next to the ... NAV RADIO! What a concept, huh! :-)
>
> "In the clouds" I have GPS 1 showing the CDI and numerical ground track
> and desired track information while GPS 2 shows the moving map display. In
> this way I can simply match the #1 displayed Actual Track with Desired
> Track numbers, check the deviation from Course on the adjacent CDI, then
> adjust heading 1 or 2 degrees to change the actual track to correct any
> error. I've found the "digital approach procedure" to be far more accurate
> than chasing needles anyway. YMMV.
>
> I only purchased 1 Nav head because eventually an HSI (Aspen?) will
> replace the DG leaving the CDI for Nav 2. Why buy two when you'll be
> replacing one soon-ish? My airplane seems to be getting heavy despite
> leaving stuff out!
>
> ... just curious what true benefit a manifold pressure gauge would serve
> other than to give Gary a little more $$ for installation costs?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=287430#287430
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Richard Mutzman <rcmutz(at)msn.com>
Subject:
Re: Pannel
Date:
Feb 21, 2010
Gary=2C
Nice pannel in the Cheetah. I had your overlay powder coated in almost the
same color and texture. Looks good with the new glareshield I also instal
led.
How much do you charge for the drilled yokes?
Richard Mutzman
N399RM
Dayton=2C OH (Home of AYA 2010)
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 21, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
A couple of things.
I think that Bill suggested putting the nav CDI next to the flight instrum
ents is probably because when using it for an ILS approach you (he, SIC)
want to keep your (his) scan confined to as small and area as possible.
You (he) are (is) constantly looking at the CDI and comparing that with
the DG and AI and VSI, so closer is better.
CDI Location: The factory put the VOR indicators next to the avionics sta
ck. I wonder if they new about scan techniques. But, then, I asked that
same question when I bought my first plane 26 years ago. The first thing
I did was to exchange the ADF/tach and VOR indicators. I liked it closer
to my center-of-interest. Personally, I'd like to have a GMX 200 in the
middle of my scan. The Horizon gyro and the DG (or HSI) side-by-side abo
ve it.
It's pretty much accepted practice that you want to maintain at least 15"
MP at least so as to no unduly cool the cylinders and not backdrive the
engine.
15" MAP: This is interesting. I've been flying for 30 years. I've never
heard that the manifold pressure should be above 15 inches for a fixed pi
tch prop.
To unduly cool: This assumes that there is such a thing as shock cooling.
I don't buy the myth of shock cooling. Shock heating maybe, but not sho
ck cooling. There is just too much empirical evidence against the myth.
As far as the MP gauge is concerned it is hard to explain the value of it
unless you have flown a plane with a CS prop for awhile, which most Grumm
an owners have not. It is a more precise way to set power and it reacts in
stantly and is beneficial even with a fixed pitch prop.
More precise way to set power (using MAP): I don't buy this either. This
may be true in a plane with a constant speed prop, but not for a fixed pi
tch. If you use MAP to set power, it's only because the EI tach has 10 rp
m resolution. Then, of course a small change in MAP will show up faster
than rpm. A digital Horizon tach is a lot more useful than just being th
ere to tell me if I go over redline. I can fine tune less than 5 rpm with
out a vernier. All of my power charts, in the Grumman handbook, are based
on altitude and rpm. There is no mention of manifold pressure.
Interesting side note: During the Climb-Cooling and carb-heat-rise flight
tests for the Jaguar cowling, the FAA kept asking what the manifold press
ure was for a given flight test. It took six months for them to read, abs
orb and accept the fact that the POH only had altitude and rpm. When I ex
trapolated between altitudes and rpms I had to explain to them just what
the process was that allowed me to find a point not in the chart. Seriou
sly, they did not understand extrapolation.
For instance, what is your power setting and how much did it change when
you drop the nose significantly and start a decent from altitude when you
were near redline at cruise? A manifold pressure gauge will tell you that
whereas your tachometer will stay right at 2700 rpm for a maximum speed
descent.
Power setting: Question: why do I care what power setting I use during a
descent? If I were at 80% in cruise do I care if I'm at 78% (or even 60%
) during a descent? Some pilots might. I don't. Again, with a constant
speed prop, I might. I don't know.
I have a JPI 800 in my Tiger. It displays percent power all the time with
out the need to look up anything. Do I use the percent power feature? No
t really. I do look at it and think about it while leaning above 75% powe
r. I watch CHTs the most. And, that means, keeping the CHTs under 470 de
grees. I know there are those of you who will think that is insane. The
EI I used for a year told me that 470 on my JPI was about 390 to 400 on
the EI. We'll see when I pull the cylinders.
The only real use of percent power, aside from leaning, is for computing
fuel burn. In the old days, it was really important to know fuel burn be
cause fuel gauges were so inaccurate (imagine inaccurate fuel gauges being
accepted procedure in automobiles). With fuel flow displaying current fu
el burn, fuel used, and fuel remaining, there is seldom doubt what is in
the tanks.
The dozen or so times I flew N254 (after I installed the first MT constant
speed prop on a Grumman in the United States; sorry, had to throw that in
) I still flew it at redline during a descent. I still climbed at WOT and
as near to 2700 rpm as I could. Perhaps over a long time of flying it,
I might rely on MAP.
And finally, if you have a modified plane such as a 2 place with a bigger
engine then the POH is of little help in determining what the power setti
ng is. With a MP gauge you can go to Lycoming's curves for a specific engi
ne and determine that, but you must know MP. Make up a little chart of MP
vs. RPM vs. fuel flow and % power. I have a Lynx with an O-320 engine and
a MP gauge and I use it all the time to adjust power. The tachometer just
follows along and ends up wherever and is mainly used to prevent excessiv
e RPM.
No POH for an O320 in an AA1x: OK Bill, tell us, what do you do for perce
nt power in your O320 powered 2-seater? If you had a JPI 800, it would di
splay percent power for you. In fact, if you let my put in a JPI 830, you
will have, at all times, in one unit:
RPM, Manifold Pressure, EGT/CHT, Oil Temp, Oil Pressure, OAT, Volts, Carb
Temp, % power, EGT delta, Fuel Flow, Gallons used, Gallons remaining, AND
miles per gallon. And it takes up a lot less space than you are currentl
y occupying.
The tachometer just follows along and ends up wherever and is mainly used
to prevent excessive RPM.
Question: What is excessive rpm? What is excessive CHT?
At my current rate of flying my plane, I will have 1000 hrs on my LyCon ma
ssaged cylinders in about 3 years. At that time, 7 years since installati
on, the engine will have about 2100 hours and 35 years on it. It's never
been off the plane. I plan on having LyCon do a complete tear down and
thorough inspection at that time. Why? Because most of that 1000 hours
will be at CHTs in the neighborhood of 420 to 430 degrees (on a JPI) and
at rpms in the neighborhood of 2800. My engine/prop combination has a sw
eet spot at about 2825 rpm.
Questions? Comments? Let's hear them . . . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Pannel
Date:
Feb 21, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
To drill your yokes: about $30 to $50. It's all in the setup time. I hav
e a jig and for the most part, it works first time out. Drilling a long
hole sometimes causes the drill bit to wander off.
Prepping the yoke: Stripping and sand blasting the yokes takes about an
hour, $90.
Powder coating: This can be a little as $65 for both or as much as $125.
It depends on how much of a hurry you want them and whether the powder
coater has to stop and clean the gun for your special color.
Wiring: The switches run about $10 each ($20 total) and the installation
takes about an hour ($90) including the wiring and drilling the shafts an
d the back of the yoke.
So, all together, with your yokes, about $295 to $375. Generally, the yok
es are in the $300 to $375 range. I have some yokes that need to be strip
ped and sand blasted if you don't want to wait. I would need yours in exc
hange.
You can save me a lot of time and you a lot of money if you strip and bead
blast the yokes.
I know that sounds like a lot of money, and it is. It's just very time co
nsuming to get it right.
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Mutzman <rcmutz(at)msn.com>
Sent: Sun, Feb 21, 2010 7:10 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Pannel
Gary,
Nice pannel in the Cheetah. I had your overlay powder coated in almost th
e same color and texture. Looks good with the new glareshield I also inst
alled.
How much do you charge for the drilled yokes?
Richard Mutzman
N399RM
Dayton, OH (Home of AYA 2010)
Hotmail: Trustedo/201469227/direct/01/' target='_new'>Sign up now.
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Nice panel...
Speaking of the Aspen...
I installed an Aspen and one side benefit is that it allowed me to
move my GNS530/NAV/COMM stack to dead
center of the panel. The Aspen DG/HSI is used as the primary for
ILS/GPS/WAAS approaches. I put the other head
and the tach on the other side of the GPS and use that for COMM 2 as
a secondary in the event the Aspen goes TU.
The VSI was sent to the great VSI graveyard in the sky and I moved
the steam AI to that spot.
The Aspen took a while to get used to but now I cant say enough good
about it. Of course YMMV.
Lawrence Massaro
'92 AG-5B KRNM
>Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Instrument panel
>From: "cwleach" <corl(at)aya.org>
>
>
>Nice looking panel! The only thing I would
>add would be a manifold pressure gauge to the right of the tach,
and swap the
>JPI and nav head as Bill suggested.
>
>
>I put the Nav head next to the ... NAV RADIO! What a concept, huh! :-)
>
>"In the clouds" I have GPS 1 showing the CDI and numerical ground
track and desired
>track information while GPS 2 shows the moving map display. In this way I
>can simply match the #1 displayed Actual Track with Desired Track
numbers, check
>the deviation from Course on the adjacent CDI, then adjust heading 1 or 2
>degrees to change the actual track to correct any error. I've found
the "digital
>approach procedure" to be far more accurate than chasing needles
anyway. YMMV.
>
>I only purchased 1 Nav head because eventually an HSI (Aspen?) will
replace the
>DG leaving the CDI for Nav 2. Why buy two when you'll be replacing
one soon-ish?
>My airplane seems to be getting heavy despite leaving stuff out!
>
>... just curious what true benefit a manifold pressure gauge would
serve other
>than to give Gary a little more $$ for installation costs?
________________________________________________________________________________
I replied to a recent post on the GG Saturday AM regarding an
interesting commentary on the AYA
website. Pretty simple post just telling any interested parties where
to find out info if they
are curious. As of today, the post has not been released.
WTF?
Is the moderator that much of an insecure A*S that cant take any criticism?
I thought I was responding to a open forum? Nothing in that response
broke any of the GG list rules as far as I can see.
MY RESPONSE
>Go to www.aucountry.com to find out why...
ORiGINAL POST
>Subject: AYA and the Gang
>
>(section removed)
>I have never visited the AYA forum, but have gotten considerable
>education and entertainment from the 'Gang. Many Star articles were old
>news that had been already covered on the gang and discussed by their
>authors. I am involved in aviation on many levels and can assure you
>that there is no room for any infighting or dilution of effort. The Gang
>lost a great resource in Gary Vogt, for reasons that I don't even
>recall, but Gary left and is now on Team Grumman. To further dilute the
>resource pool with parallel efforts does not make much sense. The Gang
>promotes AYA, while it seems that the the AYA discourages the Gang as a
>communication medium, even though is has a broader reach.
>(section removed)
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: GG censorship
From:
scott(at)hjermstad.com
Date:
Feb 22, 2010
I believe I got this message from GG...
Weird...
Scott Hjermstad
AA1B 9962L @ PMV
------Original Message------
From: Lawrence Massaro
Sender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
ReplyTo: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: GG censorship
Sent: Feb 22, 2010 10:34 AM
I replied to a recent post on the GG Saturday AM regarding an
interesting commentary on the AYA
website. Pretty simple post just telling any interested parties where
to find out info if they
are curious. As of today, the post has not been released.
WTF?
Is the moderator that much of an insecure A*S that cant take any criticism?
I thought I was responding to a open forum? Nothing in that response
broke any of the GG list rules as far as I can see.
MY RESPONSE
>Go to www.aucountry.com to find out why...
ORiGINAL POST
>Subject: AYA and the Gang
>
>(section removed)
>I have never visited the AYA forum, but have gotten considerable
>education and entertainment from the 'Gang. Many Star articles were old
>news that had been already covered on the gang and discussed by their
>authors. I am involved in aviation on many levels and can assure you
>that there is no room for any infighting or dilution of effort. The Gang
>lost a great resource in Gary Vogt, for reasons that I don't even
>recall, but Gary left and is now on Team Grumman. To further dilute the
>resource pool with parallel efforts does not make much sense. The Gang
>promotes AYA, while it seems that the the AYA discourages the Gang as a
>communication medium, even though is has a broader reach.
>(section removed)
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Bruce Smith <haveblue1(at)mac.com>
Subject:
Xerion AuRacle
Date:
Feb 22, 2010
Have you installed the Xerion AuRacle engine monitoring system? It
looks pretty cool. And it's approved for installation on the Grumman
series of aircraft.
Thanks,
Bruce Smith
Sent from my iPhone
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: GG censorship
Date:
Feb 22, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
What can I say?
The only rule you broke was mentioning my name.
-----Original Message-----
From: Lawrence Massaro <lmassaro@tac-eng.com>
Sent: Mon, Feb 22, 2010 8:34 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: GG censorship
.com>
I replied to a recent post on the GG Saturday AM regarding an interesting
commentary on the AYA
website. Pretty simple post just telling any interested parties where to
find out info if they
are curious. As of today, the post has not been released.
WTF?
Is the moderator that much of an insecure A*S that cant take any criticism
?
I thought I was responding to a open forum? Nothing in that response
broke any of the GG list rules as far as I can see.
MY RESPONSE
>Go to www.aucountry.com to find out why...
ORiGINAL POST
>Subject: AYA and the Gang
>
>(section removed)
>I have never visited the AYA forum, but have gotten considerable
>education and entertainment from the 'Gang. Many Star articles were old
>news that had been already covered on the gang and discussed by their
>authors. I am involved in aviation on many levels and can assure you
>that there is no room for any infighting or dilution of effort. The Gang
>lost a great resource in Gary Vogt, for reasons that I don't even
>recall, but Gary left and is now on Team Grumman. To further dilute the
>resource pool with parallel efforts does not make much sense. The Gang
>promotes AYA, while it seems that the the AYA discourages the Gang as a
>communication medium, even though is has a broader reach.
>(section removed)
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Xerion AuRacle
Date:
Feb 22, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.com
Jeff Keesaman is looking into doing just that.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Smith <haveblue1(at)mac.com>
Sent: Mon, Feb 22, 2010 11:01 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Xerion AuRacle
Have you installed the Xerion AuRacle engine monitoring system? It looks
pretty cool. And it's approved for installation on the Grumman series of
aircraft.
Thanks,
Bruce Smith
Sent from my iPhone
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Feb 22, 2010
Subject:
Re: GG censorship
From:
Wes Chapman <weschapmanpc(at)gmail.com>
Yes...I got the message via GG as well. Ironically, that is how I found out
about the TG list.
Wes
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 2:00 PM, wrote:
>
> I believe I got this message from GG...
>
> Weird...
>
> Scott Hjermstad
> AA1B 9962L @ PMV
>
> ------Original Message------
> From: Lawrence Massaro
> Sender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> ReplyTo: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: GG censorship
> Sent: Feb 22, 2010 10:34 AM
>
> lmassaro@tac-eng.com>
>
> I replied to a recent post on the GG Saturday AM regarding an
> interesting commentary on the AYA
> website. Pretty simple post just telling any interested parties where
> to find out info if they
> are curious. As of today, the post has not been released.
>
> WTF?
>
> Is the moderator that much of an insecure A*S that cant take any criticism?
> I thought I was responding to a open forum? Nothing in that response
> broke any of the GG list rules as far as I can see.
>
>
> MY RESPONSE
> >Go to www.aucountry.com to find out why...
>
> ORiGINAL POST
> >Subject: AYA and the Gang
> >
> >(section removed)
> >I have never visited the AYA forum, but have gotten considerable
> >education and entertainment from the 'Gang. Many Star articles were old
> >news that had been already covered on the gang and discussed by their
> >authors. I am involved in aviation on many levels and can assure you
> >that there is no room for any infighting or dilution of effort. The Gang
> >lost a great resource in Gary Vogt, for reasons that I don't even
> >recall, but Gary left and is now on Team Grumman. To further dilute the
> >resource pool with parallel efforts does not make much sense. The Gang
> >promotes AYA, while it seems that the the AYA discourages the Gang as a
> >communication medium, even though is has a broader reach.
> >(section removed)
>
>
--
Wes Chapman
Wes Chapman PC
PO Box 718
Vidalia, GA 30475
912-293-3794
1709 Green Acres Drive
Vidalia, GA 30474
912-538-8289
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: GG censorship
Date:
Feb 22, 2010
From:
n26390(at)aol.com
Sorry, but I also seem to remember reading your post on the GG.
Roger Rucker
AA5A '78 HWO
-----Original Message-----
From: scott(at)hjermstad.com
Sent: Mon, Feb 22, 2010 2:00 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: GG censorship
I believe I got this message from GG...
Weird...
Scott Hjermstad
A1B 9962L @ PMV
------Original Message------
rom: Lawrence Massaro
ender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
o: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
eplyTo: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
ubject: TeamGrumman-List: GG censorship
ent: Feb 22, 2010 10:34 AM
.com>
I replied to a recent post on the GG Saturday AM regarding an
nteresting commentary on the AYA
ebsite. Pretty simple post just telling any interested parties where
o find out info if they
re curious. As of today, the post has not been released.
WTF?
Is the moderator that much of an insecure A*S that cant take any criticism
?
thought I was responding to a open forum? Nothing in that response
roke any of the GG list rules as far as I can see.
Y RESPONSE
>Go to www.aucountry.com to find out why...
ORiGINAL POST
>Subject: AYA and the Gang
>
>(section removed)
>I have never visited the AYA forum, but have gotten considerable
>education and entertainment from the 'Gang. Many Star articles were old
>news that had been already covered on the gang and discussed by their
>authors. I am involved in aviation on many levels and can assure you
>that there is no room for any infighting or dilution of effort. The Gang
>lost a great resource in Gary Vogt, for reasons that I don't even
>recall, but Gary left and is now on Team Grumman. To further dilute the
>resource pool with parallel efforts does not make much sense. The Gang
>promotes AYA, while it seems that the the AYA discourages the Gang as a
>communication medium, even though is has a broader reach.
>(section removed)
-========================
========================
===========
-= - The TeamGrumman-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"WILLIAM KELLY" <v1rotate(at)verizon.net>
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 22, 2010
Good question. Because there is no official POH performace reference for
an O320 AA1X, I created my own charts. Our plane has a 62 inch pitch
prop. I don't remember what the stock Cheetah prop pitch is, but the
closest I could get (and I figured it would be close enough) was to scab
the % power data out of my old Cheetah manual which I converted to an
easy to read card I carry in the cockpit. That's what I use, plus the
old standard of full rich to 5000' DA (conveniently displayed on my EI
Super Clock), and thereafter lean for all full throttle operations.
Under 5000' DA I refer to the scabbed Cheetah data for leaning below 75%
RPM settings. I think it works.
As for the rest of the data, like takeoff distances, cruise speeds and
fuel flows, and rates of climb, being an obsessive former flight test
engineer I undertood a mini program using a combination of many flights
and accepted formulas to create what has been a reliable reference card
which presents all this information. Takeoff distance for weights from
1450# to 1684# and DA's from sea level to 8000' are in a table. Cruise
speeds and fuel flows are listed for DA's from 4000' to 15000' and rates
of climb for the entire weight range are listed from DA's of sea level
to 15000'. I have added a safety buffer to the calculations where it
seemed prudent and have had not had any surprises. Last year my wife
and I departed the Grand Canyon airport early in the morning. For the
reported conditions we lifted off and climbed out very close to the
performance predicted on the card. It was the first time we had the
airplane in a truly high DA situation at max weight and, at least on
that day, it did a good job..
Bill K.
No POH for an O320 in an AA1x: OK Bill, tell us, what do you do for
percent power in your O320 powered 2-seater? If you had a JPI 800, it
would display percent power for you. In fact, if you let my put in a
JPI 830, you will have, at all times, in one unit:
RPM, Manifold Pressure, EGT/CHT, Oil Temp, Oil Pressure, OAT, Volts,
Carb Temp, % power, EGT delta, Fuel Flow, Gallons used, Gallons
remaining, AND miles per gallon. And it takes up a lot less space than
you are currently occupying.
________________________________________________________________________________
>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: GG censorship
>From: scott(at)hjermstad.com
>
>I believe I got this message from GG...
>
>Weird...
>
>Scott Hjermstad
>AA1B 9962L @ PMV
Interesting.
I get the GG mail where numerous post are attached. I dont get them
individually. I checked every volume
from Sat AM to todays and never saw it. If you get the post
individually, maybe they're not moderated or
should i say "censored".
VOL 7, 108 (22 Feb)
1. Re: Making my mechanic fly with me after major work...
(Michael Wei)
2. Re: Annual @ True Flight (Ken Blackman)
3. RE: NYC Class B Routing (Steve Roberts)
4. My plane is slower than my prop (Bob Hodo)
5. Brand new "future Pilot" arrives. (Ken Blackman)
6. Re: Weak Com Radio on AA1-C (Ken Blackman)
7. Re: Fuel tank leaks (ntenfyt(at)aol.com)
8. AA1 serries front bulk head is not required if a DMA
composite spinner is used, with the factory or 0-320 engines.
(Gene / Dma / pdq.net)
9. FAA Help (Roscoe)
10. Re: My plane is slower than my prop (Bob Hodo)
11. Re: My plane is slower than my prop (Michael Wei)
12. RE: My plane is slower than my prop (David Fletcher)
13. O&N fuel tank (Bill Scott)
VOL 7, 107 (22 Feb)
1. RE: Fuel tank leaks (Bob Steward)
2. RE: Fuel tank leaks (Frank "Ginzo" Fella)
3. Re: AYA Website: Communication perspective (Gordon Arbeitman)
4. Re: Fuel tank leaks (Collin Leon)
5. Prop balancing (Jeff Garrison)
6. SB 388c (Frank & Jean Presti)
7. Re: AA-1B prop (maynardccrosby(at)earthlink.net)
8. A poor little Traveler that needs a new home with love
(AExpressofVa(at)aol.com)
9. PF cabin heat hose routing Q. (Gil Alexander)
10. Re: Prop balancing (Linn Walters)
11. RE: Fuel tank leaks (Steven Lindrooth)
12. Re: Prop balancing (flyv35b)
13. RE: Making my mechanic fly with me after major work...
(Stephen Keen)
14. Re: Prop balancing (Joshua Amborski)
VOL 7, 106 (Feb 21)
1. lunch (James Candeletti)
2. Re: Annual @ True Flight (Linn Walters)
3. RE: Fuel tank leaks (Frank "Ginzo" Fella)
4. RE: Aircraft prices was Tiger Selling prices (Al Griffin)
5. AYA Website: Communication perspective (Peter Langlois)
6. Re: Fuel tank leaks (Richard McDowell)
7. RE: Fuel tank leaks (Collin Leon)
8. AA-1B prop (Dawson Mail)
9. Re: Annual @ True Flight (Dennis)
10. Re: Annual @ True Flight (Linn Walters)
11. Re: AA-1B prop (Bob Steward)
VOL 7, 105 (Feb 21)
1. RE: AYA and Grumman Gang (Graham Smith)
2. Re: Weak Com Radio on AA1-C (Harvey Madison)
3. AYA (Steve Peach)
4. RE: Lake city S.C. (Bob Taylor)
5. Re: Annual @ True Flight (Dennis)
6. Re: Weak Com Radio on AA1-C (Walt Beaulieu)
7. Re: Annual @ True Flight (Michael Wei)
8. Re: NYC Class B Routing (Michael Wei)
9. Re: AYA (Linn Walters)
10. RE: SB 388C checks of the valve wobble (Ron Levy)
11. Re: Fuel tank leaks (Collin Leon)
VOL 7, 104 (Feb 20)
1. RE: Tiger Selling prices, AA vs. AG (Michael Hester)
2. Re: New Side Glass -- owner maintenance (flyv35b)
3. Lake city S.C. (Richard McDowell)
4. Re: Weak Com Radio on AA1-C (Gil Alexander)
5. New 1979 IFR /auto pilot Tigers where sell for 25K.
(Gene / Dma / pdq.net)
6. Aircraft prices was Tiger Selling prices (David Fletcher)
7. Fuel tank leaks (s w)
8. RE: AYA G-G Facebook (John Hohensee)
9. RE: AYA G-G Facebook (Michael Hester)
10. Re: AYA Facebook (John Wrenn)
11. RE: NYC Class B Routing (Graham Smith)
12. True Flight Love Fest (Graham Smith)
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 23, 2010
Bill,
Can I get a copy of your performance chart (card)?
I've also taken off from the Grand Canyon at over 1600 lb weight and
climbed out very well. I took off once on a grass strip at 5000 ft msl
(Johnson Creek, ID) at around 40F and 1684+ lb weight and had no
problem. Got off the ground in about 2000 ft. as I recall. My prop
pitch is 63".
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: WILLIAM KELLY
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Instrument panel
Good question. Because there is no official POH performace reference
for an O320 AA1X, I created my own charts. Our plane has a 62 inch pitch
prop. I don't remember what the stock Cheetah prop pitch is, but the
closest I could get (and I figured it would be close enough) was to scab
the % power data out of my old Cheetah manual which I converted to an
easy to read card I carry in the cockpit. That's what I use, plus the
old standard of full rich to 5000' DA (conveniently displayed on my EI
Super Clock), and thereafter lean for all full throttle operations.
Under 5000' DA I refer to the scabbed Cheetah data for leaning below 75%
RPM settings. I think it works.
As for the rest of the data, like takeoff distances, cruise speeds and
fuel flows, and rates of climb, being an obsessive former flight test
engineer I undertood a mini program using a combination of many flights
and accepted formulas to create what has been a reliable reference card
which presents all this information. Takeoff distance for weights from
1450# to 1684# and DA's from sea level to 8000' are in a table. Cruise
speeds and fuel flows are listed for DA's from 4000' to 15000' and rates
of climb for the entire weight range are listed from DA's of sea level
to 15000'. I have added a safety buffer to the calculations where it
seemed prudent and have had not had any surprises. Last year my wife
and I departed the Grand Canyon airport early in the morning. For the
reported conditions we lifted off and climbed out very close to the
performance predicted on the card. It was the first time we had the
airplane in a truly high DA situation at max weight and, at least on
that day, it did a good job..
Bill K.
No POH for an O320 in an AA1x: OK Bill, tell us, what do you do for
percent power in your O320 powered 2-seater? If you had a JPI 800, it
would display percent power for you. In fact, if you let my put in a
JPI 830, you will have, at all times, in one unit:
RPM, Manifold Pressure, EGT/CHT, Oil Temp, Oil Pressure, OAT, Volts,
Carb Temp, % power, EGT delta, Fuel Flow, Gallons used, Gallons
remaining, AND miles per gallon. And it takes up a lot less space than
you are currently occupying.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 23, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Cliff and Bill, What are your True Air Speeds at, say, 4500 feet and 2700
rpm? I'm curious if the 1 inch makes much difference.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Sent: Tue, Feb 23, 2010 6:26 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Instrument panel
Bill,
Can I get a copy of your performance chart (card)?
I've also taken off from the Grand Canyon at over 1600 lb weight and climb
ed out very well. I took off once on a grass strip at 5000 ft msl (Johnso
n Creek, ID) at around 40F and 1684+ lb weight and had no problem. Got of
f the ground in about 2000 ft. as I recall. My prop pitch is 63".
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: WILLIAM KELLY
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Instrument panel
Good question. Because there is no official POH performace reference for
an O320 AA1X, I created my own charts. Our plane has a 62 inch pitch pr
op. I don't remember what the stock Cheetah prop pitch is, but the clos
est I could get (and I figured it would be close enough) was to scab the
% power data out of my old Cheetah manual which I converted to an easy
to read card I carry in the cockpit. That's what I use, plus the old
standard of full rich to 5000' DA (conveniently displayed on my EI Supe
r Clock), and thereafter lean for all full throttle operations. Under
5000' DA I refer to the scabbed Cheetah data for leaning below 75% RPM
settings. I think it works.
As for the rest of the data, like takeoff distances, cruise speeds and
fuel flows, and rates of climb, being an obsessive former flight test
engineer I undertood a mini program using a combination of many flights
and accepted formulas to create what has been a reliable reference card
which presents all this information. Takeoff distance for weights from
1450# to 1684# and DA's from sea level to 8000' are in a table. Cruise
speeds and fuel flows are listed for DA's from 4000' to 15000' and rate
s of climb for the entire weight range are listed from DA's of sea level
to 15000'. I have added a safety buffer to the calculations where it se
emed prudent and have had not had any surprises. Last year my wife and
I departed the Grand Canyon airport early in the morning. For the repo
rted conditions we lifted off and climbed out very close to the performa
nce predicted on the card. It was the first time we had the airplane in
a truly high DA situation at max weight and, at least on that day, it
did a good job..
Bill K.
No POH for an O320 in an AA1x: OK Bill, tell us, what do you do for
percent power in your O320 powered 2-seater? If you had a JPI 800,
it would display percent power for you. In fact, if you let my put
in a JPI 830, you will have, at all times, in one unit:
RPM, Manifold Pressure, EGT/CHT, Oil Temp, Oil Pressure, OAT, Volts,
Carb Temp, % power, EGT delta, Fuel Flow, Gallons used, Gallons remaining
, AND miles per gallon. And it takes up a lot less space than you are
currently occupying.
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Fwd: My plane is slower than my prop
Date:
Feb 23, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
A customer sent me this from GG.
I have two customers with late AG5Bs. The 2004 will not turn 2700 rpm at
5,000 feet with a 63 inch pitch prop. The 2005 will turn 2800 rpm. The
planes are very similarly equipped. The 2004 has two 430s, the other a
430 and a 530. The 2004 weighs 1550, the 2005 weighs 1574. They both ha
ve 63 inch pitch props.
I have been all over the 2004 to find out where the difference is. My fir
st thought was that the carb was not set up right. I removed the carb, se
nt it to LyCon, had it checked, then reinstalled it so that I was sure the
throttle opened all the way. No change. Then I removed the air filter.
A little change, maybe 25 rpm, but not significant. I then completely re
-rigged the plane, put my 65-63-61 prop on it and I could just barely get
to 2700 straight and level.
I've got a lot of hours in both of them. One is significantly faster. I
can't figure out why.
On a similar note, I have a customer with a 76 that's been wrecked a coupl
e of times, patched back together, and is not straight at all. It will ru
n way over red line with a 65 inch prop and trues all day at 144 knots and
2650 rpm. He's getting the Jaguar cowling in a couple of months. We'll
see then.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Sent: Tue, Feb 23, 2010 6:03 am
Subject: Re: My plane is slower than my prop
> The 143KTAS on the AG5B is probably achieved on a 65 inch prop in
> ideal flight test conditions.
>
> Hodo>> 65" at 2700 rpm = 144.42kn Getting 143TAS from that is still
> impressive.
I'd question whether a stock AG-5B (with a 65" pitch prop) will turn 2700
rpm in level flight, full throttle at 8000 msl. If not, it won't do 143
kts cruise speed.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: Instrument panel
Date:
Feb 23, 2010
I don't know without doing some more flying. I suspect it would be
close to 140 kts. The weather is to crapy to check it out today!
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Instrument panel
Cliff and Bill, What are your True Air Speeds at, say, 4500 feet and
2700 rpm? I'm curious if the 1 inch makes much difference.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tue, Feb 23, 2010 6:26 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Instrument panel
Bill,
Can I get a copy of your performance chart (card)?
I've also taken off from the Grand Canyon at over 1600 lb weight and
climbed out very well. I took off once on a grass strip at 5000 ft msl
(Johnson Creek, ID) at around 40F and 1684+ lb weight and had no
problem. Got off the ground in about 2000 ft. as I recall. My prop
pitch is 63".
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: WILLIAM KELLY
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Instrument panel
Good question. Because there is no official POH performace reference
for an O320 AA1X, I created my own charts. Our plane has a 62 inch pitch
prop. I don't remember what the stock Cheetah prop pitch is, but the
closest I could get (and I figured it would be close enough) was to scab
the % power data out of my old Cheetah manual which I converted to an
easy to read card I carry in the cockpit. That's what I use, plus the
old standard of full rich to 5000' DA (conveniently displayed on my EI
Super Clock), and thereafter lean for all full throttle operations.
Under 5000' DA I refer to the scabbed Cheetah data for leaning below 75%
RPM settings. I think it works.
As for the rest of the data, like takeoff distances, cruise speeds
and fuel flows, and rates of climb, being an obsessive former flight
test engineer I undertood a mini program using a combination of many
flights and accepted formulas to create what has been a reliable
reference card which presents all this information. Takeoff distance
for weights from 1450# to 1684# and DA's from sea level to 8000' are in
a table. Cruise speeds and fuel flows are listed for DA's from 4000' to
15000' and rates of climb for the entire weight range are listed from
DA's of sea level to 15000'. I have added a safety buffer to the
calculations where it seemed prudent and have had not had any surprises.
Last year my wife and I departed the Grand Canyon airport early in the
morning. For the reported conditions we lifted off and climbed out very
close to the performance predicted on the card. It was the first time
we had the airplane in a truly high DA situation at max weight and, at
least on that day, it did a good job..
Bill K.
No POH for an O320 in an AA1x: OK Bill, tell us, what do you do
for percent power in your O320 powered 2-seater? If you had a JPI 800,
it would display percent power for you. In fact, if you let my put in a
JPI 830, you will have, at all times, in one unit:
RPM, Manifold Pressure, EGT/CHT, Oil Temp, Oil Pressure, OAT,
Volts, Carb Temp, % power, EGT delta, Fuel Flow, Gallons used, Gallons
remaining, AND miles per gallon. And it takes up a lot less space than
you are currently occupying.
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Bruce Smith <haveblue1(at)mac.com>
Subject:
Annuals
Date:
Feb 25, 2010
Gary,
Any interesting annuals to regale us with? It's windy/snowing here in PA, so no
going to the airport and flying.
Bruce Smith
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Feb 26, 2010
Subject:
GPS ANTENNAS
From:
FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com>
Hey Team:
I work with all sorts of GPS & GSM Antennas. At time we up-grade or
decommissioned GPS units we have in the field. Some of these antennas are
in LIKE NEW condition others only require a bit of Soap & Water, maybe
Mineral Spirits to clean them up into very acceptable condition.
SOooooo, here is the deal:
For about $8 to $12 dollars ea. I will ship one of these antennas to you.
This includes Shipping. That is why I say $8 to $12 ... I do not know what
shipping will be.
What do they look like?
The size ranges from about 2" x 2" Square or 5" in Diameter, or 5" x 6"
Rectangle.
All have an ACTIVE GAIN amplifier of 20 to 25 dB.
Some were made by or for Trimble.
The have a RG-174 Coax and different types of connectors ... SMA, MUX and
such.
SOME have GSM Antennas built in also. What is GSM? CELL PHONE Antennas
with GAIN.
I will send pictures once I take them.
So, if you are interested and want a BETTER antenna for your Hand Held, or
want to leave one in the plane permanently, or want to Experiment? let me
know.
I made this offer to the GG but it never got posted. If you have friends on
the GG let them know.
Any questions? Contact me.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
732-207-6929
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Ronald Millman CPA" <ronmillmancpa(at)msn.com>
Subject:
Re: GPS ANTENNAS
Date:
Feb 26, 2010
Thanks for the offer Barry, but our Tiger is just fine, today.
Ron.
----- Original Message -----
From: FLYaDIVE<mailto:flyadive(at)gmail.com>
To:
teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 9:02 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: GPS ANTENNAS
Hey Team:
I work with all sorts of GPS & GSM Antennas. At time we up-grade or
decommissioned GPS units we have in the field. Some of these antennas
are in LIKE NEW condition others only require a bit of Soap & Water,
maybe Mineral Spirits to clean them up into very acceptable condition.
SOooooo, here is the deal:
For about $8 to $12 dollars ea. I will ship one of these antennas to
you. This includes Shipping. That is why I say $8 to $12 ... I do not
know what shipping will be.
What do they look like?
The size ranges from about 2" x 2" Square or 5" in Diameter, or 5" x
6" Rectangle.
All have an ACTIVE GAIN amplifier of 20 to 25 dB.
Some were made by or for Trimble.
The have a RG-174 Coax and different types of connectors ... SMA, MUX
and such.
SOME have GSM Antennas built in also. What is GSM? CELL PHONE
Antennas with GAIN.
I will send pictures once I take them.
So, if you are interested and want a BETTER antenna for your Hand
Held, or want to leave one in the plane permanently, or want to
Experiment? let me know.
I made this offer to the GG but it never got posted. If you have
friends on the GG let them know.
Any questions? Contact me.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
732-207-6929
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
on>
________________________________________________________________________________
We had a little wind storm last night, and the airplane next to mine
got away. It totaled the plane behind me, but only did some (hopefully)
minor damage to my plane (1975 AA1B).
The left elevator plastic tip has a crack and small piece taken out of
the aft, left edge.
The trim tab on the rudder was hit and bent over, and a couple of
shallow dents are in the right side of the rudder.
The tail tie down ring is bent as well as some of the area around it.
The right wing tie down ring is slightly bent.
I have pictures on my website at
<http://deej.net/yankee/damage/>
At a minimum I'll have to replace the left elevator tip and the trim
tab on the rudder. I may possibly have to replace the rudder and parts
near the tail tie down area. We haven't opened it up yet to get a good
look inside.
Would any of you be willing to share your expertise on what other
possible damage that we should be looking for?
Thanks,
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/
Grumman Yankee Driver N9870L - http://deej.net/yankee/
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: 1975 AA1B damage
Date:
Feb 27, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
That looks like a pretty nasty wind.
If it were mine, I'd buy the AA1 that Fletcher is selling and replace all
the damaged parts; including the delaminating elevator.
Cliff knows a lot about the 2-seater. He might even have some good leads
on parts. Try Ken Blackman as well; he does a lot of 2-seaters.
Where are you that you had so much wind? Lancaster (Sandblaster) was very
windy. I landed a tail-wheel plane in a 60 knot wind there one day. I
landed on the numbers and my roll out was about 10 feet. Tail never came
down.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2010 3:16 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 1975 AA1B damage
We had a little wind storm last night, and the airplane next to mine
got away. It totaled the plane behind me, but only did some (hopefully)
minor damage to my plane (1975 AA1B).
The left elevator plastic tip has a crack and small piece taken out of
the aft, left edge.
The trim tab on the rudder was hit and bent over, and a couple of
shallow dents are in the right side of the rudder.
The tail tie down ring is bent as well as some of the area around it.
The right wing tie down ring is slightly bent.
I have pictures on my website at
<http://deej.net/yankee/damage/>
At a minimum I'll have to replace the left elevator tip and the trim
tab on the rudder. I may possibly have to replace the rudder and parts
near the tail tie down area. We haven't opened it up yet to get a good
look inside.
Would any of you be willing to share your expertise on what other
possible damage that we should be looking for?
Thanks,
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/
Grumman Yankee Driver N9870L - http://deej.net/yankee/
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Feb 27, 2010
Subject:
Re: 1975 AA1B damage
From:
Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
On 2/27/2010 11:46 AM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
> If it were mine, I'd buy the AA1 that Fletcher is selling and replace
> all the damaged parts; including the delaminating elevator.
Hi Gary,
I don't think there is that much damage. On the surface it looks like
I just need to replace the plastic elevator tip, and the rudder trim
tab, or at worst the whole rudder, and possibly some of the
reinforcement around the tail tie down ring. All of the damage should
be covered by insurance, but unless there is significant hidden damage I
can't see why it would be necessary to buy another whole plane for parts.
>
> Cliff knows a lot about the 2-seater. He might even have some good
> leads on parts. Try Ken Blackman as well; he does a lot of 2-seaters.
Thanks!
>
> Where are you that you had so much wind?
KIWI (Wiscasset, Maine). Off shore sensors hit 90mph that night (I'm
told), and KIWI is right off the ocean. I'm guessing we had at least 60
- 70 mph winds at the airport.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/
Grumman Yankee Driver N9870L - http://deej.net/yankee/
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: 1975 AA1B damage
Date:
Feb 27, 2010
Since Insurance is paying the bill I'd replace the rudder as you won't be
able to fix the dent in it without showing most likely. You may need a
doubler inside the tail cone, depending on how badly the metal is torn and
bent from the eye. Take the wingtips off and see what damage there is to
the wing tie down eye attachments. They are attached with a small bracket
and nutplate that can be replaced. Also the points David made about the
ailerons is important. The plane was obviously pulling against the ropes
very hard.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dj Merrill" <deej(at)deej.net>
Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2010 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 1975 AA1B damage
>
> On 2/27/2010 11:46 AM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
>> If it were mine, I'd buy the AA1 that Fletcher is selling and replace
>> all the damaged parts; including the delaminating elevator.
>
>
> Hi Gary,
> I don't think there is that much damage. On the surface it looks like
> I just need to replace the plastic elevator tip, and the rudder trim
> tab, or at worst the whole rudder, and possibly some of the
> reinforcement around the tail tie down ring. All of the damage should
> be covered by insurance, but unless there is significant hidden damage I
> can't see why it would be necessary to buy another whole plane for parts.
>
>>
>> Cliff knows a lot about the 2-seater. He might even have some good
>> leads on parts. Try Ken Blackman as well; he does a lot of 2-seaters.
>
> Thanks!
>
>>
>> Where are you that you had so much wind?
>
> KIWI (Wiscasset, Maine). Off shore sensors hit 90mph that night (I'm
> told), and KIWI is right off the ocean. I'm guessing we had at least 60
> - 70 mph winds at the airport.
>
> -Dj
>
> --
> Dj Merrill - N1JOV
> Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/
> Grumman Yankee Driver N9870L - http://deej.net/yankee/
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Deems Herring <dsleepy47(at)hotmail.com>
Subject:
1975 AA1B damage
Date:
Feb 27, 2010
The aft fuselage bulkhead is primary structure so make sure the tail tie do
wn repair is performed with that in mind=2C see: http://www.bondline.org/wi
ki/Tail_Tiedown_Repair
Deems
AA1B N1491R
> From: flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 1975 AA1B damage
> Date: Sat=2C 27 Feb 2010 16:59:48 -0800
>
>
>
> Since Insurance is paying the bill I'd replace the rudder as you won't be
> able to fix the dent in it without showing most likely. You may need a
> doubler inside the tail cone=2C depending on how badly the metal is torn
and
> bent from the eye. Take the wingtips off and see what damage there is to
> the wing tie down eye attachments. They are attached with a small bracke
t
> and nutplate that can be replaced. Also the points David made about the
> ailerons is important. The plane was obviously pulling against the ropes
> very hard.
>
> Cliff
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dj Merrill" <deej(at)deej.net>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday=2C February 27=2C 2010 3:13 PM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 1975 AA1B damage
>
>
> >
> > On 2/27/2010 11:46 AM=2C teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
> >> If it were mine=2C I'd buy the AA1 that Fletcher is selling and replac
e
> >> all the damaged parts=3B including the delaminating elevator.
> >
> >
> > Hi Gary=2C
> > I don't think there is that much damage. On the surface it looks like
> > I just need to replace the plastic elevator tip=2C and the rudder trim
> > tab=2C or at worst the whole rudder=2C and possibly some of the
> > reinforcement around the tail tie down ring. All of the damage should
> > be covered by insurance=2C but unless there is significant hidden damag
e I
> > can't see why it would be necessary to buy another whole plane for part
s.
> >
> >>
> >> Cliff knows a lot about the 2-seater. He might even have some good
> >> leads on parts. Try Ken Blackman as well=3B he does a lot of 2-seater
s.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >>
> >> Where are you that you had so much wind?
> >
> > KIWI (Wiscasset=2C Maine). Off shore sensors hit 90mph that night (I'm
> > told)=2C and KIWI is right off the ocean. I'm guessing we had at least
60
> > - 70 mph winds at the airport.
> >
> > -Dj
> >
> > --
> > Dj Merrill - N1JOV
> > Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/
> > Grumman Yankee Driver N9870L - http://deej.net/yankee/
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Free=2C trusted and rich email service.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Feb 27, 2010
Subject:
Re: 1975 AA1B damage
From:
Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
On 2/27/2010 9:36 PM, Deems Herring wrote:
> The aft fuselage bulkhead is primary structure so make sure the tail tie
> down repair is performed with that in mind, see:
> http://www.bondline.org/wiki/Tail_Tiedown_Repair
Thanks! That is an excellent reference.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/
Grumman Yankee Driver N9870L - http://deej.net/yankee/
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: 1975 AA1B damage
Date:
Feb 28, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Maine is one of only 4 sates I haven't visited. Maybe this year after the
convention.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net>
Sent: Sat, Feb 27, 2010 3:13 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 1975 AA1B damage
On 2/27/2010 11:46 AM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
> If it were mine, I'd buy the AA1 that Fletcher is selling and replace
> all the damaged parts; including the delaminating elevator.
Hi Gary,
I don't think there is that much damage. On the surface it looks like
I just need to replace the plastic elevator tip, and the rudder trim
tab, or at worst the whole rudder, and possibly some of the
reinforcement around the tail tie down ring. All of the damage should
be covered by insurance, but unless there is significant hidden damage I
can't see why it would be necessary to buy another whole plane for parts.
>
> Cliff knows a lot about the 2-seater. He might even have some good
> leads on parts. Try Ken Blackman as well; he does a lot of 2-seaters.
Thanks!
>
> Where are you that you had so much wind?
KIWI (Wiscasset, Maine). Off shore sensors hit 90mph that night (I'm
told), and KIWI is right off the ocean. I'm guessing we had at least 60
- 70 mph winds at the airport.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ - http://deej.net/sportsman/
Grumman Yankee Driver N9870L - http://deej.net/yankee/
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
The Baffle saga continues . . . . . damn it
Date:
Mar 01, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Remember a few weeks ago when I said I picked up $4500 worth of baffles?
There are 16 different baffles altogether. I had 10 pieces made of each
one. When I picked them up, there were 13 sets of 10. I figured I'd mis
counted and left it at that. I was excited just to get the baffles.
Turns out, the baffles for cylinders #2 and #4 and the baffle that holds
the oil cooler were missing. I called, had them look up the baffles, and
had them made. Another $1000.00.
Wouldn't you know. . . The CAD files baffles for cylinders #2 and #4 were
some earlier files I created (well, I hired a CAD person to make the draw
ings for me) at the beginning of the drawing process. These drawings, som
ehow, got saved on a disk and handed off to another CAD person for the FAA
redline corrections. So, for most of the time I was getting the drawings
approved, I was holding drawings I thought were being approved and the se
cond CAD guy was making changes to a different set of drawings. Something
similar happened to the oil cooler baffle. Not quite as bad, but, still.
Then, more drama. The #3 baffle was made from a Van's RV6 baffle. My dra
wings were exact copies. In fact, I made a paper copy and glued it to the
Van's and it fit. Turns out, the angle (on the bottom that displaces the
upper portion away from the engine) on the Van's part is off by about 3
degrees. This is OK on the Van's install because his right rear baffle
is kind of crudely bent into shape; final fit and trim is made by the ins
taller. Unfortunately, the parts I'm having made are exactly how they are
drawn. The #3 cylinder baffle won't nest into the right rear light it sh
ould. So, bottom line, the 10 #3 baffles and 10 right rear baffles I had
made, are wrong.
For the last week I've been driving to the Bay Area to work with the CAD
guy at the fabricators and driving to Folsom to work with the CAD guy tha
t made the baffles in the first place. All the drawings were finalized ye
sterday, Sunday.
Good news is, the cowling is mounted on the plane and it's waiting for baf
fles.
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Bruce Smith <haveblue1(at)mac.com>
Subject:
Re: The Baffle saga continues . . . . . damn it
Date:
Mar 01, 2010
Gary,
So, another visit from Mr. Murphy, of Murphy's law.
Awesome looking cowl!
Bruce
On Mar 1, 2010, at 2:30 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
> Remember a few weeks ago when I said I picked up $4500 worth of baffles? There
are 16 different baffles altogether. I had 10 pieces made of each one. When
I picked them up, there were 13 sets of 10. I figured I'd miscounted and left
it at that. I was excited just to get the baffles.
>
> Turns out, the baffles for cylinders #2 and #4 and the baffle that holds the
oil cooler were missing. I called, had them look up the baffles, and had them
made. Another $1000.00.
>
> Wouldn't you know. . . The CAD files baffles for cylinders #2 and #4 were some
earlier files I created (well, I hired a CAD person to make the drawings for
me) at the beginning of the drawing process. These drawings, somehow, got saved
on a disk and handed off to another CAD person for the FAA redline corrections.
So, for most of the time I was getting the drawings approved, I was holding
drawings I thought were being approved and the second CAD guy was making
changes to a different set of drawings. Something similar happened to the oil
cooler baffle. Not quite as bad, but, still.
>
> Then, more drama. The #3 baffle was made from a Van's RV6 baffle. My drawings
were exact copies. In fact, I made a paper copy and glued it to the Van's
and it fit. Turns out, the angle (on the bottom that displaces the upper portion
away from the engine) on the Van's part is off by about 3 degrees. This is
OK on the Van's install because his right rear baffle is kind of crudely bent
into shape; final fit and trim is made by the installer. Unfortunately, the
parts I'm having made are exactly how they are drawn. The #3 cylinder baffle
won't nest into the right rear light it should. So, bottom line, the 10 #3 baffles
and 10 right rear baffles I had made, are wrong.
>
> For the last week I've been driving to the Bay Area to work with the CAD guy
at the fabricators and driving to Folsom to work with the CAD guy that made the
baffles in the first place. All the drawings were finalized yesterday, Sunday.
>
>
> Good news is, the cowling is mounted on the plane and it's waiting for baffles.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"James Courtney" <jamey(at)jamescourtney.net>
Subject:
The Baffle saga continues . . . . . damn it
Date:
Mar 01, 2010
Damn sexy!
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 11:30 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: The Baffle saga continues . . . . . damn it
Remember a few weeks ago when I said I picked up $4500 worth of baffles?
There are 16 different baffles altogether. I had 10 pieces made of each
one. When I picked them up, there were 13 sets of 10. I figured I'd
miscounted and left it at that. I was excited just to get the baffles.
Turns out, the baffles for cylinders #2 and #4 and the baffle that holds the
oil cooler were missing. I called, had them look up the baffles, and had
them made. Another $1000.00.
Wouldn't you know. . . The CAD files baffles for cylinders #2 and #4 were
some earlier files I created (well, I hired a CAD person to make the
drawings for me) at the beginning of the drawing process. These drawings,
somehow, got saved on a disk and handed off to another CAD person for the
FAA redline corrections. So, for most of the time I was getting the
drawings approved, I was holding drawings I thought were being approved and
the second CAD guy was making changes to a different set of drawings.
Something similar happened to the oil cooler baffle. Not quite as bad, but,
still.
Then, more drama. The #3 baffle was made from a Van's RV6 baffle. My
drawings were exact copies. In fact, I made a paper copy and glued it to
the Van's and it fit. Turns out, the angle (on the bottom that displaces
the upper portion away from the engine) on the Van's part is off by about 3
degrees. This is OK on the Van's install because his right rear baffle is
kind of crudely bent into shape; final fit and trim is made by the
installer. Unfortunately, the parts I'm having made are exactly how they
are drawn. The #3 cylinder baffle won't nest into the right rear light it
should. So, bottom line, the 10 #3 baffles and 10 right rear baffles I had
made, are wrong.
For the last week I've been driving to the Bay Area to work with the CAD guy
at the fabricators and driving to Folsom to work with the CAD guy that made
the baffles in the first place. All the drawings were finalized yesterday,
Sunday.
Good news is, the cowling is mounted on the plane and it's waiting for
baffles.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
23:34:00
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"923te" <923te(at)att.net>
Subject:
Fw: Looking for eyes and or info in Northern california
Date:
Mar 02, 2010
----- Original Message -----
From: Daniel Villeneuve (GG)
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 4:04 PM
Subject: Looking for eyes and or info in Northern california
Hello,
I am looking for info about a Tiger for sale in North Central
California. Looks good on paper/web
I don't wish to start a shopping discussion on the list so I figure it's
best to e-mail me privately about at daniel(at)dvdp.ca .
So anyone from around there or elsewhere let me know. Also perhaps
eventually lining up a pre-buy with Grumman savy A&P oin the area
Daniel Villeneuve, c.s.c.
Directeur-Photo / Director of Photography
Montrial, Canada
demos: www.dvdp.ca
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Fwd: Cowling
Date:
Mar 03, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
This is the guy who gets Jaguar Cowling Serial Number 2. He's on a ship
somewhere.
-----Original Message-----
From: LCDR Sandberg, B.J <sandbebj(at)lhd6.navy.mil>
Sent: Tue, Mar 2, 2010 8:03 pm
Subject: RE: Cowling
I=99ll look and see if I can find the paintcode, but it=99s th
e one they=99ve used for over 50 years and everyone knows it as
=9CChevy=9Dor =9CCorvette=9D white. Sounds like you
=99ve got it. The brand you squirt shouldn=99tmatter, I would
n=99t want you to have to experiment with a new product anyway.
Great, I=99ll pencil in an annual for thesummer and cross that bridg
e when we get there. I don=99t even know what state I=99llbe
living in by then, I=99ve been told I have to move by October.
You asked about cool shipboard stories,most seem pretty dull to me when we
=99re in the thick of it, but attached is apicture of me with Sigour
ney Weaver who came out with James Cameron to show usAvatar.
-Brian
From:teamgrumman(at)aol.com [mailto:teamgrumman(at)aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 20101:15 AM
Subject: Re: Cowling
Hi Brian
I'm pretty sure I can paint the cowlingthe same color. The color I use is
a Dupont Chevy white color. Ifyou give me the number of the color you us
ed, I'll look for it. I don'treally know of any PPG Urethane paints. I
use Imron.
We can put off the annual if you want. Not a big deal.
Gary
-----OriginalMessage-----
From: LCDR Sandberg, B.J <sandbebj(at)lhd6.navy.mil>
Sent: Mon, Mar 1, 2010 9:07 pm
Subject: RE: Cowling
Still a month and a half to go, and Ihaven=99t set foot ashore, had
a beer, or seen a real woman in 120 days. Hopefully that will change soon
.
Women on subs- yeah, it was inevitable butwill be crazy expensive to imple
ment which has been the only holdup. There isn=99t room to install
another bathroom or berthing space, so it=99ll be atrick. I alread
y share a head with female officers on this ship, so it=99snot all
that strange.
I=99m surprised mine is the first withshocks. I know they are a mod
ification to my =9976, done sometime after oneof its prop strikes.
You hadn=99t mentioned turning in the cowllike a core. I was figuri
ng it was worth a few bucks, at least the splitnose bowl. Luckily I don
=99t have the means to bring it home and store itto sell right now.
As long as I fly away with a complete nose then I=99llconsider the
deal amicable. Please do whatever you can to match the whiteso I don
=99t have to repaint the base when I put the blue back on some years fr
omnow. It is PPG Aerospace and supposed to match =9CChevy White
=9D for which Iforget the code right now.
We had talked about resetting the annual,but I=99m thinking I can wa
it until the end of July when it is due. We=99reflying to Florida
and Maryland for May and June so that will add hours on thecurrent inspec
tion cycle plus, frankly, I can=99t afford an annual in addition tot
he cowl right now. Somehow living like a monk out here didn=99t sav
e anymoney. Must be the kid. I plan to pick up the plane on Monday 19Apr
il and am expecting to bring a $5k check.
I=99m not getting the TeamGrumman orGrummanGang lists out here, but
I am posting daily vignettes on Facebook.
-Brian
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com [mailto:teamgrumman(at)aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 201012:04 AM
Subject: Cowling
Hi Brian,
Are you getting anxious to get off theship? I hear the Navy is going to
put women in submarines. Thatshould be interesting. I think they should
have an all female crew. Imagine what it would be like when all of their
menstrual cyclescoincide. I'd love to be a fly on those walls . . .
Anyway, during the current installation, itbecame clear that the shocks ju
st barely fit on the cowling strut fairing. I had the shape changed to pro
vide an additional 1/8 inch clearance. You'll be getting a cowling that is
currently being made. It has arevised shape on the fairing where the nos
e strut comes out. It willprovide a little better clearance for the shock
s. Ned Thomas will begetting the cowling currently on my shelf.
Something else came up during the currentinstallation. I thought I told
Martin that the turnkey $10,000 deal withpaint and baffles was on conditi
on of me getting his cowling in exchange. If I did, he doesn't remember.
The reason for the exchange is tooffset some of the hours involved (inve
sted) in fitting and painting thecowling and baffles. There is about 40
hours involved in fitting thecowling to the plane. Add to that about 40
hours in sanding priming andpainting. Add to that the cost of materials
for painting at $140 a quartfor paint and $120 for activator plus $120 a
qt for primer and catalyst. Trust me, selling the PMAd kits for $8500, in
cluding $600, for baffleswill be a lot more profitable.
So, now you've got written documentation.
You need to post some stories onTeamGrumman-List about life on board a shi
p. I'm sure you have some goodones.
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Mar 06, 2010
From:
Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
brake parts
I'm in need of the back plate for a Cleveland 5.00-5 brake. This part
has the lining attached and is on the tire side, not the puck side.
Aircraft Spruce wants $69.95 for a new one. I'm hoping someone has one
in the junk box I can buy!!!
Linn
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: brake parts
Date:
Mar 07, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Did you try Garner? I needed the other side and he had one. It was rough
, but it worked.
-----Original Message-----
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Sat, Mar 6, 2010 7:23 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: brake parts
h.net>
I'm in need of the back plate for a Cleveland 5.00-5 brake. This part
has the lining attached and is on the tire side, not the puck side.
Aircraft Spruce wants $69.95 for a new one. I'm hoping someone has one
in the junk box I can buy!!!
Linn
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Mar 07, 2010
From:
Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
Re: brake parts
Thanks. No, I didn't. I'll try that. It's a long shot .... all the
Grummans are 6.00-6's, I think.
This is for my Pitts, but I thought I'd ask.
Linn
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM wrote:
> Did you try Garner? I needed the other side and he had one. It was
> rough, but it worked.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
> To: grumman2
> Sent: Sat, Mar 6, 2010 7:23 pm
> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: brake parts
>
> >
>
> I'm in need of the back plate for a Cleveland 5.00-5 brake. This part
> has the lining attached and is on the tire side, not the puck side.
> Aircraft Spruce wants $69.95 for a new one. I'm hoping someone has one
> in the junk box I can buy!!!
> Linn
>
> ====================================
> ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> ====================================
> ttp://forums.matronics.com
> ====================================
> "_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ====================================
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: brake parts
Date:
Mar 07, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Oh, you're right. I didn't read what you wrote. Good luck.
-----Original Message-----
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Sun, Mar 7, 2010 11:08 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: brake parts
Thanks. No, I didn't. I'll try that. It's a long shot .... all theGrumm
ans are 6.00-6's, I think.
This is for my Pitts, but I thought I'd ask.
Linn
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM wrote:
Did you tryGarner? I needed the other side and he had one. It was rough,
but itworked.
-----OriginalMessage-----
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Sat, Mar 6, 2010 7:23 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: brake parts
h.net>
I'm in need of the back plate for a Cleveland 5.00-5 brake. This part
has the lining attached and is on the tire side, not the puck side.
Aircraft Spruce wants $69.95 for a new one. I'm hoping someone has one
in the junk box I can buy!!!
Linn
========================
============
ist"target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
========================
============
ttp://forums.matronics.com
========================
============
"_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
========================
============
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Dear All,
Ive been given the teamgrumman info in the hope that you/somoene might
be able to help me.
I have a Grumman Cougar 1979 serial number GA7-0105 in the UK.
It went for its annual and someone has stolen the rpm guage along with a
few other items.
I have replaced everything but the rpm guage.
I cant get the annual finished till i have one !!!
I will pay for your services along with the part and mailing
Can anyone help in any way at all.
Kind regards
Shaun Wilkinson
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Andy Thomas" <andy747(at)charter.net>
Subject:
Re: RPM Indicator for Grumman GA7 Urgently needed
Date:
Mar 08, 2010
Shaun,
Is there an electronic indicator STC'd for the Cougar....
----- Original Message -----
From: Shaun Wilkinson
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 9:13 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: RPM Indicator for Grumman GA7 Urgently
needed
Dear All,
Ive been given the teamgrumman info in the hope that you/somoene might
be able to help me.
I have a Grumman Cougar 1979 serial number GA7-0105 in the UK.
It went for its annual and someone has stolen the rpm guage along with
a few other items.
I have replaced everything but the rpm guage.
I cant get the annual finished till i have one !!!
I will pay for your services along with the part and mailing
Can anyone help in any way at all.
Kind regards
Shaun Wilkinson
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"Andy Thomas" <andy747(at)charter.net>
Subject:
Re: RPM Indicator for Grumman GA7 Urgently needed
Date:
Mar 08, 2010
Shaun,
Is there an electronic indicator STC'd for the Cougar....
----- Original Message -----
From: Shaun Wilkinson
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 9:13 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: RPM Indicator for Grumman GA7 Urgently
needed
Dear All,
Ive been given the teamgrumman info in the hope that you/somoene might
be able to help me.
I have a Grumman Cougar 1979 serial number GA7-0105 in the UK.
It went for its annual and someone has stolen the rpm guage along with
a few other items.
I have replaced everything but the rpm guage.
I cant get the annual finished till i have one !!!
I will pay for your services along with the part and mailing
Can anyone help in any way at all.
Kind regards
Shaun Wilkinson
________________________________________________________________________________
Dear All,
Ive been given the teamgrumman info in the hope that you/somoene might
be able to help me.
I have a Grumman Cougar 1979 serial number GA7-0105 in the UK.
It went for its annual and someone has stolen the rpm guage along with a
few other items.
I have replaced everything but the rpm guage.
I cant get the annual finished till i have one !!!
I will pay for your services along with the part and mailing
Can anyone help in any way at all.
Kind regards
Shaun Wilkinson
Shaun Wilkinson
Owner
Cloud 9 Aviation (UK)
Cloud 9 Aviation (CZ)
Leeds Flying School
Yorkshire Flight Training
Cloud 9 Air Taxi
Cloud 9 Travel
Offices in: UK and Czech
Private and Commercial Pilot Training
UK and European Air Taxi and Charter
Full Turn-key service providers bespoke to clients needs
Head Office:
Leeds Flying School, Coney Park Estate, Leeds & Bradford Airport, Leeds
S19 7XS, England, UK
Visit: http://www.cloud9aviation.net
Visit: http://www.leedsflyingschool.com
CONFIDENTIALITY
This e-mail is intended only for the use of the addressees named above
and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not an
addressee you must not read it and must not use any information
contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Cloud 9
Aviation Limited or the addressees of its existence or contents. If you
have received this email and are not a named addressee, please delete it
and notify admin(at)cloud9aviation.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Bruce Smith <haveblue1(at)mac.com>
Subject:
Inertial nav
Date:
Mar 08, 2010
Gary,
Did the F-16s you worked with back in the day use any form of inertial navigation?
Reason I ask is, why hasn't someone married the accelerometers from an iPhone
and developed a GPS initialized moving map package based upon inertial nav?
I know that F-111s used it. OK, OK, probably hasn't been done because of money,
but is it technologically feasible?
Grumman Tigers and Cheetahs with moving map inertial nav........... hmm, that's
the ticket!
Bruce Smith
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Inertial nav
Date:
Mar 08, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Hi Bruce,
I was worked F-16 propulsion systems. The Pratt & Whitney 220/229 series
engines in particular. I worked radar nav systems in B-52, KC-135s, C-14
1s, C-5As and HC-130s about 100 years ago when they still used tubes and
magnatrons.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Smith <haveblue1(at)mac.com>
Sent: Mon, Mar 8, 2010 9:34 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Inertial nav
Gary,
Did the F-16s you worked with back in the day use any form of inertial nav
igation? Reason I ask is, why hasn't someone married the accelerometers fr
om an iPhone and developed a GPS initialized moving map package based upon
inertial nav? I know that F-111s used it. OK, OK, probably hasn't been do
ne because of money, but is it technologically feasible?
Grumman Tigers and Cheetahs with moving map inertial nav........... hmm,
that's the ticket!
Bruce Smith
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Engine mount shims. Need help.
Date:
Mar 09, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Some of you may remember I asked what the distance was on your Tiger/Cheet
ah from the firewall to the back of the spinner (you know, the edge you'd
be measuring to if you laid a measuring tape across the top of the engine
from the firewall to the aft edge of the spinner. Don't make this harder
than it has to be).
NOTE: The original tooling was made on N28840. This plane had one shim on
the top of each mount. A splash made from that original tooling was fitt
ed on about a half dozen planes. I have pictures of it on John Bunker's
plane and Vi Bui's plane. They all fit fine. So, I finalized the toolin
g. From that tooling, a cowling was made and installed on N119ST. All of
my initial flights were with that plane.
My original question was a result of, during the fitting of Jaguar cowling
Serial Number: 0 on N1976T, I found that distance to be 39 3/4 inches.
Whereas, mine was 40 inches (mine has 2 shims on each top bushing). Thi
s made the 'trim-to-fit' lines on the cowling about useless. I added shim
s to the top engine mount bushings and that moved the engine down somewhat
. Still shy of 40 inches, but, not much. Fitting the cowling was still
a pain in the ass.
OK, so, then comes Serial Number 1: N3752W was 39 3/4 inches with one shi
m on each top. I added one shim each and that moved it to 40 inches. Sti
ll, fitting the cowling was odd because the trim line on the left side of
the cowling was right, but, the right side was 1/4 inches shy (meaning I
had to trim 1/4 inch more than indicated by the trim line). Along the bo
ttom, the trim goes from trim line to 1/4 inches forward.
I have a spare fuselage with an engine hanging on it. With one shim on ea
ch top mount, it was a little over 39 3/4, say 39 13/16. I added one shim
to each and got about 40 inches. Great. Or so I thought. I began fitti
ng a cowling for another plane using that configuration. Still, it was of
f about 1/4 inches on the right side.
Solution: I installed the cowling from my plane onto the spare fuselage.
The result was, in order to get the engine to align with the my cowling,
I had to add an additional 1/2 shim to the right and remove 1 shim from
the left. Both bottom mounts have 1 shim each.
I have N119ST in my hangar. It has no shims on the top left, one on the
top right and one each on the bottom mounts. That engine is 40 1/16 from
the firewall to the spinner.
So, please do my a favor, a big favor, and look at your spinner to nose bo
wl alignment. Then give me the following information.
Alignment: (e.g., aligned, spinner is to the right and down, etc.)
Distance from firewall to spinner: (i.e., measure from the firewall adjac
ent to where the hinge mounts and the aft edge of the spinner)
Then engine mount shim configuration:
Top Left: (e.g., 1 shim, 2 shims, etc)
Top right: ( same )
Bottom left: (same )
Bottom right ( same).
Bob S, you're a font of knowledge on lots of things. Do you know if there
are differences between the installed heights of any of the engine mount
vibration isolators? I know there a a couple of different part numbers
out there for Tiger/Cheetahs, do they have different installed heights?
You all (Y'all, Garner) might want to know why it makes a difference. As
installed, my prop spinner to cowling gap is about .100 to .120 inches.
Trust me, it makes a difference. Please, I need to know how much variat
ion there is in the installed distances.
Thanks in advance.
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
MikeBabin(at)AOL.COM
Date:
Mar 09, 2010
Subject:
Re: Inertial nav
In a message dated 3/8/2010 10:50:05 P.M. Central Standard Time,
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM writes:
Gary,
Did the F-16s you worked with back in the day use any form of inertial
navigation? Reason I ask is, why hasn't someone married the accelerometers
from an iPhone and developed a GPS initialized moving map package based upon
inertial nav? I know that F-111s used it. OK, OK, probably hasn't been done
because of money, but is it technologically feasible?
Grumman Tigers and Cheetahs with moving map inertial nav........... hmm,
that's the ticket!
Bruce Smith
Bruce,
An inertial nav system requires a platform stabilized in space, plus
accelerometers in the x,y,and z axis, then a computer to integrate the
velocities. The iPhone could probably handle the computing, but what it lacks is
the
gyro-stable platform (and a third accelerometer). In a coordinated turn,
the iPhone's accelerometers won't sense the turn.
It's really a moot point, because at the speeds we're talking about, WAAS
GPS positional integration works about as well as an INS, both for moving
maps and as a jury-rig instrument panel, (Garmin 2-3-496 et. al). No
accelerometers required. The only real advantage of an INS is that it still works
when the satellites die.
There are several iPhone aps that use gps to drive moving aviation
charts... One of the better ones is SkyCharts.
Regards,
-Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Mar 09, 2010
From:
Bob Steward <n76lima(at)mindspring.com>
Subject:
Re: Cowling dimensions
>Bob S, you're a font of knowledge on lots of things. Do you know if there
> are differences between the installed heights of any of the engine mount
> vibration isolators? I know there a a couple of different part numbers
> out there for Tiger/Cheetahs, do they have different installed heights?
I don't have any data on differences in height between the Lord and Barry
mounts. I have shimmed (and in many cased UNshimmed) the engine to mount
configuration to get the spinner centered in the stock nose bowl. IMHO,
the purpose of the shims is to make up for manufacturing tolerances in the
cowling, the mount, and the firewall. Only the bottom shim washers are
required to have the engine clear the steel mount, due to the diameter of
the pressed steel cups that Grumman used. Other brands (C, P, B) have
different designs of steel mount pads, and don't require any lower shims to
be standard.
It is interesting that the experimental crowd just bolts the engine to the
mount, and then fits the cowl with the spinner in the position that it
falls. Could be some pretty large plane to plane variations as the exact
position of the firewall varies, the mount varies, and if you listen to
PowerFlow, even the Lycoming engine varies from unit to unit! And this
could affect the thrust line, which in turn changes the flight characteristics.
Given the problems I've had swapping cowl parts to repair crack damaged
planes, I'd say there probably is AT LEAST 1/4" manufacturing tolerance in
the area you speak of -- distance from firewall to crank flange.
My suggestion is to center the spinner in the stock cowl, and then install
the Jaguar cowl and trim the trailing edge as needed to achieve a good fit.
Alternatively, you might have to construct some sort of jig/fixture that
will confirm the crank flange position relative to the firewall for a
"standard" installation, and then compare that to each plane before the
gross trim of the cowl.
Best wishes, we are all pulling for you!
Bob Steward
Birmingham, AL
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: Engine mount shims. Need help.
Date:
Mar 09, 2010
"Bob S, you're a font of knowledge on lots of things. Do you know if
there are differences between the installed heights of any of the engine
mount vibration isolators? I know there a a couple of different part
numbers out there for Tiger/Cheetahs, do they have different installed
heights?"
There are three different mounts for Tigers, 2 Lord and 1 Barry. The
early Tigers used a J-9613-49, which was changed to an improved
J-9613-59 mount in 1977 as I recall. The Barry mount is a cross for the
-49 Lord mount and no cross for the -59 is available. Many of the
planes that came with the -59 mount have been replaced with the Barry
mount because it is CHEAPER (but not as good). From a stack height
standpoint, all three mounts should be the same I would think but the
-59 mounts have a considerably higher spring rate in compression and
lower spring rate in shear. In effect they will sag less and absorb
torsional vibration better.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
Bob, both this and the one you sent to TeamGrumman(at)aol.com come to the sam
e mailbox.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Steward <n76lima(at)mindspring.com>
Sent: Tue, Mar 9, 2010 3:18 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Cowling dimensions
m>
>Bob S, you're a font of knowledge on lots of things. Do you know if ther
e
> are differences between the installed heights of any of the engine moun
t
> vibration isolators? I know there a a couple of different part numbers
> out there for Tiger/Cheetahs, do they have different installed heights?
I don't have any data on differences in height between the Lord and Barry
mounts. I have shimmed (and in many cased UNshimmed) the engine to mount
configuration to get the spinner centered in the stock nose bowl. IMHO,
the purpose of the shims is to make up for manufacturing tolerances in th
e cowling, the mount, and the firewall. Only the bottom shim washers are
required to have the engine clear the steel mount, due to the diameter of
the pressed steel cups that Grumman used. Other brands (C, P, B) have di
fferent designs of steel mount pads, and don't require any lower shims to
be standard.
It is interesting that the experimental crowd just bolts the engine to the
mount, and then fits the cowl with the spinner in the position that it fa
lls. Could be some pretty large plane to plane variations as the exact po
sition of the firewall varies, the mount varies, and if you listen to Powe
rFlow, even the Lycoming engine varies from unit to unit! And this could
affect the thrust line, which in turn changes the flight characteristics.
Given the problems I've had swapping cowl parts to repair crack damaged pl
anes, I'd say there probably is AT LEAST 1/4" manufacturing tolerance in
the area you speak of -- distance from firewall to crank flange.
My suggestion is to center the spinner in the stock cowl, and then install
the Jaguar cowl and trim the trailing edge as needed to achieve a good fi
t.
Alternatively, you might have to construct some sort of jig/fixture that
will confirm the crank flange position relative to the firewall for a "st
andard" installation, and then compare that to each plane before the gross
trim of the cowl.
Best wishes, we are all pulling for you!
Bob Steward
Birmingham, AL
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Cowling dimensions
Date:
Mar 09, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Bob, could you do me a favor and post this request on GG? The more data
the better.
Thanks
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Steward <n76lima(at)mindspring.com>
Sent: Tue, Mar 9, 2010 3:18 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Cowling dimensions
m>
>Bob S, you're a font of knowledge on lots of things. Do you know if ther
e
> are differences between the installed heights of any of the engine moun
t
> vibration isolators? I know there a a couple of different part numbers
> out there for Tiger/Cheetahs, do they have different installed heights?
I don't have any data on differences in height between the Lord and Barry
mounts. I have shimmed (and in many cased UNshimmed) the engine to mount
configuration to get the spinner centered in the stock nose bowl. IMHO,
the purpose of the shims is to make up for manufacturing tolerances in th
e cowling, the mount, and the firewall. Only the bottom shim washers are
required to have the engine clear the steel mount, due to the diameter of
the pressed steel cups that Grumman used. Other brands (C, P, B) have di
fferent designs of steel mount pads, and don't require any lower shims to
be standard.
It is interesting that the experimental crowd just bolts the engine to the
mount, and then fits the cowl with the spinner in the position that it fa
lls. Could be some pretty large plane to plane variations as the exact po
sition of the firewall varies, the mount varies, and if you listen to Powe
rFlow, even the Lycoming engine varies from unit to unit! And this could
affect the thrust line, which in turn changes the flight characteristics.
Given the problems I've had swapping cowl parts to repair crack damaged pl
anes, I'd say there probably is AT LEAST 1/4" manufacturing tolerance in
the area you speak of -- distance from firewall to crank flange.
My suggestion is to center the spinner in the stock cowl, and then install
the Jaguar cowl and trim the trailing edge as needed to achieve a good fi
t.
Alternatively, you might have to construct some sort of jig/fixture that
will confirm the crank flange position relative to the firewall for a "st
andard" installation, and then compare that to each plane before the gross
trim of the cowl.
Best wishes, we are all pulling for you!
Bob Steward
Birmingham, AL
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Engine mount shims. Need help.
Date:
Mar 10, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
You really should have 1 shim on each of the bottom mounts. The engine ca
se actually contacts the mount if you don't.
The spinner down 1/8 is good. In flight, the engine/spinner comes up. I
bet you wonder how I know this. A little smily face on my cowling told
me. (alternator drive pulley.)
-----Original Message-----
From: phil(at)ReliantAir.com
Sent: Tue, Mar 9, 2010 6:46 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Engine mount shims. Need help.
79 Tiger S/N 0942, 2 washers top right, 1 bottom left, none on rest. 39
3/4" FW to spinner. Spinner droops 1/8 " down and to the right. No sag
in Barry mounts that were installed in 2000.
Phil
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:13:10 -0500
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Engine mount shims. Need help.
Some of you may remember= I asked what the distance was on your Tiger/Ch
eetah from the firewall to= the back of the spinner (you know, the edge
you'd be measuring to if you= laid a measuring tape across the top of
the engine from the firewall to= the aft edge of the spinner. Don't ma
ke this harder than it has to= be).
NOTE: The original tooling was made on N28840. This plane had= one shim
on the top of each mount. A splash made from that original= tooling wa
s fitted on about a half dozen planes. I have pictures of= it on John
Bunker's plane and Vi Bui's plane. They all fit fine. &n=bsp;So, I fin
alized the tooling. From that tooling, a cowling was ma=de and installe
d on N119ST. All of my initial flights were with that= plane.
My original question was a result of, during the fitting of Jaguar co=wl
ing Serial Number: 0 on N1976T, I found that distance to be 39 3/4= inc
hes. Whereas, mine was 40 inches (mine has 2 shims on each top= bushing
). This made the 'trim-to-fit' lines on the cowling about us=eless. I
added shims to the top engine mount bushings and that moved= the engine
down somewhat. Still shy of 40 inches, but, not much. &n=bsp;Fitting
the cowling was still a pain in the ass.
OK, so, then comes Serial Number 1: N3752W was 39 3/4 inches wi=th one
shim on each top. I added one shim each and that moved it to= 40 inche
s. Still, fitting the cowling was odd because the trim line= on the lef
t side of the cowling was right, but, the right side was 1/4 in=ches shy
(meaning I had to trim 1/4 inch more than indicated by the trim= line).
Along the bottom, the trim goes from trim line to 1/4 inches= forward.
I have a spare fuselage with an engine hanging on it. With one= shim on
each top mount, it was a little over 39 3/4, say 39 13/16. =I added on
e shim to each and got about 40 inches. Great. Or so= I thought. I be
gan fitting a cowling for another plane using that= configuration. Stil
l, it was off about 1/4 inches on the right side=.
Solution: I installed the cowling from my plane onto the spare= fuselag
e. The result was, in order to get the engine to align with= the my cow
ling, I had to add an additional 1/2 shim to the right and remo=ve 1 shi
m from the left. Both bottom mounts have 1 shim each.
I have N119ST in my hangar. It has no shims on the top left, on=e on th
e top right and one each on the bottom mounts. That engine is= 40 1/16
from the firewall to the spinner.
So, please do my a favor, a big favor, and look at your spinner to no=se
bowl alignment. Then give me the following information.
Alignment: (e.g., aligned, spinner is to the right and down, et=c.)
Distance from firewall to spinner: (i.e., measure from the fire=wall ad
jacent to where the hinge mounts and the aft edge of the spinner)
Then engine mount shim configuration:
Top Left: (e.g., 1 shim, 2 shims, etc)
Top right: ( same )
Bottom left: (same )
Bottom right ( same).
Bob S, you're a font of knowledge on lots of things. Do you kno=w if th
ere are differences between the installed heights of any of the eng=ine
mount vibration isolators? I know there a a couple of different= part
numbers out there for Tiger/Cheetahs, do they have different install=ed
heights?
You all (Y'all, Garner) might want to know why it makes a difference.=
As installed, my prop spinner to cowling gap is about .100 to .120= in
ches. Trust me, it makes a difference. Please, I need to kn=ow how muc
h variation there is in the installed distances.
Thanks in advance.
Gary
=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=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=3
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=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=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=3
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=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D
________________________________________________________________________________
Stall speed is lower without the weight of an engine or empennage.
40-knot gust was enough to induce a backflip.
http://newlangsyne.com/etc/mo0084.jpg
But the fuel truck came, right on time.
http://newlangsyne.com/etc/mo0073.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: How good are your tiedowns?
Date:
Mar 13, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
where was this? was this due to wind alone?
-----Original Message-----
From: David Feinstein <david(at)newlangsyne.com>
@matronics.com>
Sent: Sat, Mar 13, 2010 4:34 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: How good are your tiedowns?
ne.com>
Stall speed is lower without the weight of an engine or empennage.
40-knot gust was enough to induce a backflip.
http://newlangsyne.com/etc/mo0084.jpg
But the fuel truck came, right on time.
http://newlangsyne.com/etc/mo0073.jpg
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"David Feinstein" <david(at)newlangsyne.com>
Subject:
Re: How good are your tiedowns?
Date:
Mar 14, 2010
# where was this? was this due to wind alone?
Bridgeport, Conn. Wind alone. That, plus I think the guy used kite string
for tie-down lines. It happened about 4PM (2100Z). There is a gap in the
weather reporting at BDR for a few hours because of a power outage, but it
was fairly similar to White Plains (HPN), 27 NM away.
KBDR 140320Z 05025G34KT 2 1/2SM +RA 08/ A2958
RMK AO2 PK WND 04037/0303 VIS 1 1/2 R29 SE RAB02 P0009 CHINO R29 SE
----- 21Z -----
KBDR 132052Z 07/06 A2972
RMK AO2 RAEMM SLP065 P0007 60017 T00720061 58038 CHINO R29 SE
KBDR 132042Z 07033G44KT 1 3/4SM RA BR 07/06 A2973
RMK AO2 PK WND 07044/2042 P0007
KHPN 132156Z 08022G44KT 2 1/2SM -RA BR OVC008 08/06 A2962
RMK AO2 PK WND 06050/2124 SLP034 P0001 T00830061
KHPN 132056Z 08025G45KT 2 1/2SM -RA BR OVC008 08/06 A2964
RMK AO2 PK WND 09049/2045 CIG 006V011 SLP039 P0003 60011 T00780056 58043
KHPN 131956Z 08025G46KT 2 1/2SM RA BR OVC006 07/05 A2968
RMK AO2 PK WND 09046/1950 CIG 005V011 SLP056 P0008 T00720050
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Rick Pollack <rdp123(at)verizon.net>
Subject:
How busy are you?
Date:
Mar 17, 2010
Hey Gary, I was wondering how busy you are these days? I figured your new cowl
installations might be taking a lot of your time?
I have some work needed on my plane - Digital tach and engine analyzer installed
(finally) and maybe a new panel face etc. depending on your time schedule?
Rick
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: How busy are you?
Date:
Mar 18, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Rick, give me a call.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Pollack <rdp123(at)verizon.net>
Sent: Wed, Mar 17, 2010 5:02 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: How busy are you?
Hey Gary, I was wondering how busy you are these days? I figured your new
cowl
installations might be taking a lot of your time?
I have some work needed on my plane - Digital tach and engine analyzer ins
talled
(finally) and maybe a new panel face etc. depending on your time schedule?
Rick
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
AG5B getting made into a Jaguar.
Date:
Mar 18, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Here is a pic of a 1978 airbox installed in a 03 AG5B. Adapting the suppo
rt for the throttle wasn't a cake-walk, but, it isn't that much work. The
fuel line fitting (coming out of the fuselage) had to be changed for a 90
degree to clear the airbox. The stainless steel line from the top 'almos
t fit' the bottom (see in photo). The fuel line from the primer to the me
ch fuel pump had to be installed backwards; now the fuel flows from the en
gine to the tanks. The next item to fix is the carb heat. I'll need to
cut the cable. This particular plane has a lot of junk in the area behin
d cyl #3. So, I need to find a way around it for the carb intake duct.
More to come.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Converting an AG5B to a Jaguar
Date:
Mar 18, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Here is a pic of a 1978 airbox installed in a 03 AG5B. Adapting the suppo
rt for the throttle wasn't a cake-walk, but, it isn't that much work. The
fuel line fitting (coming out of the fuselage) had to be changed for a 90
degree to clear the airbox. The stainless steel line from the top 'almos
t fit' the bottom (see in photo). The fuel line from the primer to the me
ch fuel pump had to be installed backwards; now the fuel flows from the en
gine to the tanks. The next item to fix is the carb heat. I'll need to
cut the cable. This particular plane has a lot of junk in the area behin
d cyl #3. So, I need to find a way around it for the carb intake duct.
More to come.
PS, I tried sending the pic through TeamGrumman-List but I guess it didn't
go through. SOOOOO.
If you want a pic, ask
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Mar 19, 2010
From:
Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
Re: Converting an AG5B to a Jaguar
The picture came through fine on team grumman! I just didn't know what
I was looking at!!!!!
Linn
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM wrote:
>
> Here is a pic of a 1978 airbox installed in a 03 AG5B. Adapting the
> support for the throttle wasn't a cake-walk, but, it isn't that much
> work. The fuel line fitting (coming out of the fuselage) had to be
> changed for a 90 degree to clear the airbox. The stainless steel line
> from the top 'almost fit' the bottom (see in photo). The fuel line
> from the primer to the mech fuel pump had to be installed backwards;
> now the fuel flows from the engine to the tanks. The next item to fix
> is the carb heat. I'll need to cut the cable. This particular plane
> has a lot of junk in the area behind cyl #3. So, I need to find a way
> around it for the carb intake duct. More to come.
>
> PS, I tried sending the pic through TeamGrumman-List but I guess it
> didn't go through. SOOOOO.
>
> If you want a pic, ask
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Rick Pollack <rdp123(at)verizon.net>
Subject:
Re: Converting an AG5B to a Jaguar
Date:
Mar 19, 2010
Gary, the picture came through big and beautiful in yesterdays email -
On Mar 18, 2010, at 11:35 AM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Here is a pic of a 1978 airbox installed in a 03 AG5B. Adapting the
support for the throttle wasn't a cake-walk, but, it isn't that much
work. The fuel line fitting (coming out of the fuselage) had to be
changed for a 90 degree to clear the airbox. The stainless steel line
from the top 'almost fit' the bottom (see in photo). The fuel line from
the primer to the mech fuel pump had to be installed backwards; now the
fuel flows from the engine to the tanks. The next item to fix is the
carb heat. I'll need to cut the cable. This particular plane has a lot
of junk in the area behind cyl #3. So, I need to find a way around it
for the carb intake duct. More to come.
>
> PS, I tried sending the pic through TeamGrumman-List but I guess it
didn't go through. SOOOOO.
>
> If you want a pic, ask
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
GOLDPILOT(at)AOL.COM
Date:
Mar 19, 2010
Subject:
Are you going to the convention???
Hi: I'd like to go to this years convention. My wife can't get the time
off so I'd like to either take another pilot in my Tiger or go with another
pilot.
Email me off-line if you're interested in sharing the flight.
I am based in Watsonville, Ca (WVI). Could start/pick-up at your airport
or mine, anywhere from the Left Coast eastward.
David
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
GOLDPILOT(at)AOL.COM
Date:
Mar 19, 2010
Subject:
Re: TeamGrumman-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 03/18/10
No pic attached.
PS....I like the idea of filling the tanks from the engine!
David
In a message dated 3/19/2010 12:05:49 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com writes:
Here is a pic of a 1978 airbox installed in a 03 AG5B
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Mar 25, 2010
From:
Martin Ringvold <mringvold(at)YAHOO.COM>
Subject:
Jaguar cowling pirep
Well, I took the leap and ordered the first production AuCountry Jaguar-c
owling.-I've flown the plane about 10 hours since I received it from Gary
about two weeks ago.
-
I use the-79 Tiger-primarily for 150-450 NM cross country trips from-
Norcal to-the Bay Area and Los-Angles for work and pleasure. Besides-
the urge for a fancy upgrade I've-always been bothered by the high EGT an
d oil temperatures in climb and cruise on these frequent trips. I've got th
e EDM-700-and I'm aware of the past discussions whether EDM indicates hig
her temperatures than their EI engine monitor counterpart. Although I disli
ke the "EDM-temps" creeping up well-beyond 400 CHTs under most circumst
ances except cold weather-(mid 30s-40 here in CA)-Gary has always maint
ained that I don't have a CHT heating issue. Still, with the powerflow alre
ady in place (required for the STC) I went for the upgrade.
-
I don't have well documented before-data but I know my plane pretty well af
ter ~350 hours flown, mostly XC. Under conditions seen in the last two week
s with temperatures a bit over standard temperatures I would normally cruis
e between 8-10K at 2600 leaned out with myself, full fuel-and 30 lbs of b
ags. In the past (with standard temperature days)-I would see #3 creep up
to ~425 in climb and hoover around/over 400 in cruise (worse in the summer
time). Now, I see #1 as the hottest cylinder in climb-at ~410- but tak
e into consideration that I've leaned more aggressively these past jaguar-h
ours in-climb due to the better cooling.-At cruising altitude (10K)-2
600 RPM-#1 remains the hottest around 375 while the-2,3 and-4 stays i
n the-high 360s. At full throttle at-10K leaned out (100-75 ROP) I did
not see CHTs-over 400.-The oil temperature on my recent 3 hour-flight
lied-flat-on 180 degrees. I've had problems keeping it below 200-in
the past
but I must admit I pay closer attention to the oil temperatures in the sum
mer months so I can't cough up a good standard-day comparison for oil temps
before we're in the summer days.-
-
I think its too early for me to cement the actual cooling improvement numbe
rs but so far I'm very satisfied too see the EDM CHTs well below 400 and I'
m looking forward to see the numbers once it gets into the 100s here in CA.
-
With the same-few recent data points, I've seen 143-144 TAS at 10K full t
hrottle performance on these recent trips. In the past, with my removed ste
ps, tail strobe mod, Lycon 400 SMOH engine-and 63 prop pitch-I've obser
ved time and again that my plane came out to the original FT "tiger speed"
at 138-139 TAS, all measured with the Garmin 430W TAS computer.
-
The oil check involves cowling pop-screws so the pre-flight takes a bit mor
e time on the ground. Other than that, my wife things the "plane looks new"
and she suggested a new paint job since the cowling came out with white pa
int...I'll try to talk her out of it...
-
Martin
N3752W=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
BILL9725(at)AOL.COM
Date:
Mar 25, 2010
Subject:
Re: Jaguar cowling pirep
Hi Martin
Thanks so much for the report on Gary`s great creation. I have been in
sic with you on the same issues on my 75 tiger, also located in Northern
Calif. My number 4 cylinder will always hover around 425 on normal cruise
2600 same altitude. I am looking to do the same but do not already have the
power flow already on. The fun part is to think it will be great because
the engine is similar to yours but a Millie um motor with only 150 hours on
it. Very strong though as it will easily climb to over 13,000 and more and
I have yet to see a altitude where I did not have to pull back to keep it
under 2700, same 63 inch prop. So I am looking to go with Gary`s mod and a
65 inch prop. What kind of fuel flows are you seeing? I have the EDM
with fuel flows and am sure you mod also saves here too!
I am going to the meet at Willow on Saturday and hope you can attend also
so we can go over the mod in detail.
Bill
N1540R
In a message dated 3/25/2010 3:11:27 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
mringvold(at)YAHOO.COM writes:
Well, I took the leap and ordered the first production AuCountry Jaguar
cowling. I've flown the plane about 10 hours since I received it from Gary
about two weeks ago.
I use the 79 Tiger primarily for 150-450 NM cross country trips from
Norcal to the Bay Area and Los Angles for work and pleasure. Besides the urge
for a fancy upgrade I've always been bothered by the high EGT and oil
temperatures in climb and cruise on these frequent trips. I've got the EDM-700
and
I'm aware of the past discussions whether EDM indicates higher
temperatures than their EI engine monitor counterpart. Although I dislike the
"EDM
temps" creeping up well beyond 400 CHTs under most circumstances except cold
weather (mid 30s-40 here in CA) Gary has always maintained that I don't
have a CHT heating issue. Still, with the powerflow already in place (required
for the STC) I went for the upgrade.
I don't have well documented before-data but I know my plane pretty well
after ~350 hours flown, mostly XC. Under conditions seen in the last two
weeks with temperatures a bit over standard temperatures I would normally
cruise between 8-10K at 2600 leaned out with myself, full fuel and 30 lbs of
bags. In the past (with standard temperature days) I would see #3 creep up to
~425 in climb and hoover around/over 400 in cruise (worse in the summer
time). Now, I see #1 as the hottest cylinder in climb at ~410 but take into
consideration that I've leaned more aggressively these past jaguar-hours
in climb due to the better cooling. At cruising altitude (10K) 2600 RPM #1
remains the hottest around 375 while the 2,3 and 4 stays in the high 360s.
At full throttle at 10K leaned out (100-75 ROP) I did not see CHTs over
400. The oil temperature on my recent 3 hour flight lied flat on 180 degrees.
I've had problems keeping it below 200 in the past but I must admit I pay
closer attention to the oil temperatures in the summer months so I can't
cough up a good standard-day comparison for oil temps before we're in the
summer days.
I think its too early for me to cement the actual cooling improvement
numbers but so far I'm very satisfied too see the EDM CHTs well below 400 and
I'm looking forward to see the numbers once it gets into the 100s here in
CA.
With the same few recent data points, I've seen 143-144 TAS at 10K full
throttle performance on these recent trips. In the past, with my removed
steps, tail strobe mod, Lycon 400 SMOH engine and 63 prop pitch I've observed
time and again that my plane came out to the original FT "tiger speed" at
138-139 TAS, all measured with the Garmin 430W TAS computer.
The oil check involves cowling pop-screws so the pre-flight takes a bit
more time on the ground. Other than that, my wife things the "plane looks
new" and she suggested a new paint job since the cowling came out with white
paint...I'll try to talk her out of it...
Martin
N3752W
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List)
.com/contribution)
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
A couple of things
Date:
Mar 27, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Tiger LLC Tiger: One of my customers has a 2005 Tiger. He also has a fue
l leak on the right wing, outboard rib, bottom. I removed the wing and th
e sealant and couldn't find anything that would indicate a potential leak.
What I did notice is the ribs and attachments are different than earlier
Tigers. From the looks of it, there is NO place to leak without sealant.
It appears to be bonded all the way under the spar. The sealant in the
tank was also just a very thin coat that appeared to be brushed over the
bond joints. I resealed just like I would on an early wing. It still le
aks. So, I can tell you the leak is not coming from the entire lower bond
joint on the outboard rib. Any ideas? What do you know about the bondin
g on the newer Tigers?
Cheetah Lopresti Nose bowl: I have worked on a few Tigers with the LoPres
ti nose bowl but this was my first Cheetah with one. This Cheetah also ha
d a donkey dick Power Flow. The combination of the two makes removing the
cowling a real pain in the ass. The large exit ramp (LoPresti) and the
rod sticking through the other exit ramp makes it impossible to remove th
e cowling without bending it in the middle. The doubler on the cowling wa
s cracked about half way through. PLUS, the Power Flow airbox had been in
stalled wrong and didn't fit either the cowling or the nose bowl worth a
damn. The airbox was held in with just the screws for the air filter acc
ess cover. PLUS, the LoPresti nose bowl didn't fit all that well to the
baffles in the front. Something is definitely wrong with the entire comb
ination.
That was my week.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
fuel tank leak
Date:
Mar 28, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
doesn't anyone have a suggestion regarding the fuel leak?
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"923te" <923te(at)att.net>
Subject:
Re: fuel tank leak
Date:
Mar 28, 2010
I guess you could check the tank like we did on the Pulsar I built.
Put a balloon on the vent and and blow on the fuel line to pressurize
the tank by filling the balloon. Then apply soapy water every where
until you see bubbles.....
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
GOLDPILOT(at)AOL.COM
Date:
Mar 29, 2010
Subject:
That was my week
Well, there was a very nice fly-in to Willows and good food and good
company.
David
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Fwd: leak
Date:
Mar 29, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
On Mar 27, 2010, at 8:39 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
Joe, do you mean to tell me the leak only shows after flying???????
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Allen <joeallencontact(at)comcast.net>
Sent: Sun, Mar 28, 2010 5:26 pm
Subject: Re: leak
Yes!!! It appears that is the case. Originally it never showed a leak sitt
ing on the ground only after flying. The only time I saw a leak on the gr
ound was the time the tank had been dry for a while at your shop, and I
filled it back up at Auburn to take the plane home. That is when I saw
one little drop come out as the line guy was filling the tank. That was
not the case the other day as he filled it. That is why I crawled under
and videoed the filling. I expected to see a leak but there was not one
evident. I will clean it off tonight and check it again tomorrow and th
e next day, and the next ... since it is supposed to be raining the whole
week. Might as well see if it leaks sitting still.
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Allen <joeallencontact(at)comcast.net>
Sent: Sat, Mar 27, 2010 7:23 pm
Subject: leak
Hi Gary.
I can't get the videos to download, but when the tank was filled there was
not the little drip that I saw originally when we filled the dry tank a
couple of months ago, and there was also no sign of leakage aft of the or
iginal area.
Hope this helps.
Joe
The following shots were taken this afternoon, but it is what it looked li
ke after I landed yeaterday. There was not a lot of bumps on the way home
at 4500 ft.
The access panels are clean with no leaking.
IMG_0307
The halo area is where the original leak was. The front of the wing is to
the left.
IMG_0309
Looking from the front of the wing. There is evidence of stain forward of
where it was originally, but as you can see the bulk is still coming from
the original area and now maybe from the aft section also, but that could
also be seepage from the front.
IMG_0310
IMG_0311
Again the access panels are clean.
IMG_0312
IMG_0313
Closeup of the aft area
IMG_0314
Original leak area.
IMG_0315
IMG_0316
IMG_0317
Interestingly I looked at the cap after the line guy filled it up and I di
d not see any of this residual blue stuff, but it was there after I landed
.
The following photos are after I cleaned off the stains as best I could an
d then went flying for 45 minutes on the Bay Tour this afternoon at 1200
ft in calm air.
IMG_0320
IMG_0321
IMG_0322
This is what it looks like after the Bay Tour.
IMG_0338
You can now see staining anterior of the original area.
IMG_0339
IMG_0340
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: fuel tank leak
Date:
Mar 29, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
I thought about that or something similar. The tank needs to be empty .
. . . again. Leaks are such a pain in the ass.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sun, Mar 28, 2010 3:07 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: fuel tank leak
I guess you could check the tank like we did on the Pulsar I built.
Put a balloon on the vent and and blow on the fuel line to pressurize the
tank by filling the balloon. Then apply soapy water every where until you
see bubbles.....
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Fwd: Last night
Date:
Mar 29, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Allen <joeallendds(at)comcast.net>
Sent: Mon, Mar 29, 2010 8:42 am
Subject: Last night
This is what it looked like last night. So unless this is residual fuel
that was hidden under the strap and leaked out after I cleaned it off yes
terday. If not residual, then I would have to say that it appears that it
is now leaking while sitting on the ground. I never had this before the
repair. I will go out today and look again and take new photos.
The stain was not dry as it would come off on my finger and smudge around.
I sent you the videos separately.
What's the next step?
IMG_0342
IMG_0343
IMG_0344
IMG_0345
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Mar 29, 2010
From:
Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
Re: A couple of things
OK, found the email ..... see below.
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM wrote:
> *Tiger LLC Tiger: * One of my customers has a 2005 Tiger. He also has
> a fuel leak on the right wing, outboard rib, bottom.
I guess there are blue stains??? So you know where the exit is?
> I removed the wing and the sealant and couldn't find anything that
> would indicate a potential leak. What I did notice is the ribs and
> attachments are different than earlier Tigers. From the looks of it,
> there is NO place to leak without sealant. It appears to be bonded
> all the way under the spar. The sealant in the tank was also just a
> very thin coat that appeared to be brushed over the bond joints. I
> resealed just like I would on an early wing. It still leaks. So, I
> can tell you the leak is not coming from the entire lower bond joint
> on the outboard rib.
I'm confused. Above you say "He also has a fuel leak on the right wing,
outboard rib, bottom." but now you say the leak isn't there.
> Any ideas?
yes. Actually two.
#1 ...... set up your (clean real good!) shop-vac to blow. Seal off the
vents. Put the hose in the filler and turn on the shop-vac. Spray the
outer rib with soapy water and look for the leak. You may have to put a
rag around the nozzle, but be careful not to overpressure.
#2 .... put a little 100 LL in the tank and stand it on end. Pressurize
as in #1 and look for the leak. #1 should work better because air is
thinner than the 100LL.
Now, a fix from the RV crowd. Once you find the leak, draw a small
vacuum on the tank and paint the leak exit spot with green Loctite. The
green Loctite will expand due to the air (or maybe moisture in the air,
I don't know) and plug a small leak.
I've also used #1 with the hose stuck into the intake to find intake
leaks, and into the oil filler to find crankcase, front seal, and
pinholes in pushrod tubes. Just make sure the shop-vac is clean.
Linn
> What do you know about the bonding on the newer Tigers?
>
>
> *Cheetah Lopresti Nose bowl: *I have worked on a few Tigers with the
> LoPresti nose bowl but this was my first Cheetah with one. This
> Cheetah also had a donkey dick Power Flow. The combination of the two
> makes removing the cowling a real pain in the ass. The large exit
> ramp (LoPresti) and the rod sticking through the other exit ramp makes
> it impossible to remove the cowling without bending it in the middle.
> The doubler on the cowling was cracked about half way through.
> *PLUS,* the Power Flow airbox had been installed wrong and didn't fit
> either the cowling or the nose bowl worth a damn. The airbox was held
> in with just the screws for the air filter access cover. *PLUS,* the
> LoPresti nose bowl didn't fit all that well to the baffles in the
> front. Something is definitely wrong with the entire combination.
>
> That was my week.
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Mar 29, 2010
From:
Martin Ringvold <mringvold(at)YAHOO.COM>
Subject:
Re: Jaguar cowling pirep
I apologize if this is a duplicate post, I can't see my original post come through.
Hi Bill,
I have to wait for the summer to see how high the CHT gets but I would normally
power down when I see CHTs in the 420 in cruise. 2600 ended up as a good power
setting for speed/fuel flow/EGT/CHTs when leaned out in cruise at altitude.
To your question regarding fuel flow: I'll be able to lean more aggressively than
in the past in terms of keeping CHT in check, but I have to ask others to educate
me on other potential fuel flow benefits from this STC. From memory, I
think I burned around 9.5 GPH @ 10K/2600 leaned out on my last XC trip.
If you are interested, come up to KCIC one weekend and I'll show you the plane
and take you for a ride if you would like to.
Cheers,
Martin
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Mar 29, 2010
From:
Martin Ringvold <mringvold(at)YAHOO.COM>
Subject:
Re: Jaguar cowling pirep
Hi Bill,
I have to wait for the summer to see how high the CHT gets but I would normally
power down when I see CHTs in the 420 in cruise. 2600 ended up as a good power
setting for speed/fuel flow/EGTs/CHTs when leaned out in cruise at altitude.
To your question regarding fuel flow: I'll be able to lean more aggressively than
in the past in terms of keeping CHT in check, but I have to ask others to educate
me on other potential fuel flow benefits from this STC. From memory, I
think I burned around 9.5 GPH @ 10K/2600 leaned out on my last XC trip.
If you are interested, come up to KCIC one weekend and I'll show you the plane
and take you for a ride if you would like to.
Cheers,
Martin
Hi Martin
Thanks so much for the report on Gary`s great creation. I have been in
sic with you on the same issues on my 75 tiger, also located in Northern
Calif. My number 4 cylinder will always hover around 425 on normal cruise
2600 same altitude. I am looking to do the same but do not already have
the
power flow already on. The fun part is to think it will be great because
the engine is similar to yours but a Millie um motor with only 150 hours
on
it. Very strong though as it will easily climb to over 13,000 and more
and
I have yet to see a altitude where I did not have to pull back to keep it
under 2700, same 63 inch prop. So I am looking to go with Gary`s mod and
a
65 inch prop. What kind of fuel flows are you seeing? I have the EDM
with fuel flows and am sure you mod also saves here too!
I am going to the meet at Willow on Saturday and hope you can attend also
so we can go over the mod in detail.
Bill
N1540R
In a message dated 3/25/2010 3:11:27 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
mringvold(at)YAHOO.COM writes:
Well, I took the leap and ordered the first production AuCountry Jaguar
cowling. I've flown the plane about 10 hours since I received it from Gary
about two weeks ago.
I use the 79 Tiger primarily for 150-450 NM cross country trips from
Norcal to the Bay Area and Los Angles for work and pleasure. Besides the
urge
for a fancy upgrade I've always been bothered by the high EGT and oil
temperatures in climb and cruise on these frequent trips. I've got the EDM-700
and
I'm aware of the past discussions whether EDM indicates higher
temperatures than their EI engine monitor counterpart. Although I dislike
the
"EDM
temps" creeping up well beyond 400 CHTs under most circumstances except
cold
weather (mid 30s-40 here in CA) Gary has always maintained that I don't
have a CHT heating issue. Still, with the powerflow already in place (required
for the STC) I went for the upgrade.
I don't have well documented before-data but I know my plane pretty well
after ~350 hours flown, mostly XC. Under conditions seen in the last two
weeks with temperatures a bit over standard temperatures I would normally
cruise between 8-10K at 2600 leaned out with myself, full fuel and 30 lbs
of
bags. In the past (with standard temperature days) I would see #3 creep
up to
~425 in climb and hoover around/over 400 in cruise (worse in the summer
time). Now, I see #1 as the hottest cylinder in climb at ~410 but take
into
consideration that I've leaned more aggressively these past jaguar-hours
in climb due to the better cooling. At cruising altitude (10K) 2600 RPM
#1
remains the hottest around 375 while the 2,3 and 4 stays in the high 360s.
At full throttle at 10K leaned out (100-75 ROP) I did not see CHTs over
400. The oil temperature on my recent 3 hour flight lied flat on 180 degrees.
I've had problems keeping it below 200 in the past but I must admit I pay
closer attention to the oil temperatures in the summer months so I can't
cough up a good standard-day comparison for oil temps before we're in the
summer days.
I think its too early for me to cement the actual cooling improvement
numbers but so far I'm very satisfied too see the EDM CHTs well below 400
and
I'm looking forward to see the numbers once it gets into the 100s here in
CA.
With the same few recent data points, I've seen 143-144 TAS at 10K full
throttle performance on these recent trips. In the past, with my removed
steps, tail strobe mod, Lycon 400 SMOH engine and 63 prop pitch I've observed
time and again that my plane came out to the original FT "tiger speed" at
138-139 TAS, all measured with the Garmin 430W TAS computer.
The oil check involves cowling pop-screws so the pre-flight takes a bit
more time on the ground. Other than that, my wife things the "plane looks
new" and she suggested a new paint job since the cowling came out with white
paint...I'll try to talk her out of it...
Martin
N3752W
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List)
.com/contribution)
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: A couple of things
Date:
Apr 01, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Hi Linn,
The leak is on the outboard rib of the right wing. Before I removed the
wing and opened the access covers, I looked for any tell-tale signs of a
leak between the two adjacent ribs (tank panel and center panel). There
weren't any. Just some fuel stains. I thought the usual culprit, the sp
ar area, was the source. Nope. Can't be. It looks like it's further for
ward in an area where there is just a bond joint.
I will most likely remove the strap between the panels and try the shop va
c trick. That sounds like the best place to start.
I talked to Kevin Lancaster and he told me how the wing was made. From wh
at he said, I can't see how it would ever leak.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Mon, Mar 29, 2010 12:29 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: A couple of things
OK, found the email ..... see below.
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM wrote:
Tiger LLCTiger: One of my customers has a 2005 Tiger. He also has a fuel
leak on the right wing, outboard rib, bottom.
I guess there are blue stains??? So you know where the exit is?
I removed thewing and the sealant and couldn't find anything that would
indicate apotential leak. What I did notice is the ribs and attachments
aredifferent than earlier Tigers. From the looks of it, there is NO plac
eto leak without sealant. It appears to be bonded all the way under thesp
ar. The sealant in the tank was also just a very thin coat thatappeared
to be brushed over the bond joints. I resealed just like Iwould on an ea
rly wing. It still leaks. So, I can tell you the leakis not coming from
the entire lower bond joint on the outboard rib.
I'm confused. Above you say "Healso has a fuel leak on the right wing, ou
tboard rib, bottom." but nowyou say the leak isn't there.
Any ideas?
yes. Actually two.
#1 ...... set up your (clean real good!) shop-vac to blow. Seal offthe ve
nts. Put the hose in the filler and turn on the shop-vac. Spraythe outer
rib with soapy water and look for the leak. You may have toput a rag aro
und the nozzle, but be careful not to overpressure.
#2 .... put a little 100 LL in the tank and stand it on end. Pressurize as
in #1 and look for the leak. #1 should work betterbecause air is thinner
than the 100LL.
Now, a fix from the RV crowd. Once you find the leak, draw a smallvacuum
on the tank and paint the leak exit spot with green Loctite. The green Lo
ctite will expand due to the air (or maybe moisture in theair, I don't kno
w) and plug a small leak.
I've also used #1 with the hose stuck into the intake to find intakeleaks,
and into the oil filler to find crankcase, front seal, andpinholes in pus
hrod tubes. Just make sure the shop-vac is clean.
Linn
What do youknow about the bonding on the newer Tigers?
Cheetah Lopresti Nose bowl: I have worked on a fewTigers with the LoPrest
i nose bowl but this was my first Cheetah withone. This Cheetah also had
a donkey dick Power Flow. The combinationof the two makes removing the
cowling a real pain in the ass. Thelarge exit ramp (LoPresti) and the ro
d sticking through the other exitramp makes it impossible to remove the co
wling without bending it inthe middle. The doubler on the cowling was cra
cked about half waythrough. PLUS, the Power Flow airbox had been installe
d wrongand didn't fit either the cowling or the nose bowl worth a damn.
Theairbox was held in with just the screws for the air filter accesscover
. PLUS, the LoPresti nose bowl didn't fit all that well tothe baffles in
the front. Something is definitely wrong with theentire combination.
That was my week.
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Fwd: P-51 MUSTANG FILM YOU WON'T FORGET..(Chris Wood's
"Gathering of Eagles").
Date:
Apr 02, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
I'm pretty sure most of you will like this one.
-----Original Message-----
From: Kerry Vogt <Diveboss145(at)aol.com>
Sent: Mon, Mar 29, 2010 4:41 pm
Subject: FW: P-51 MUSTANG FILM YOU WON'T FORGET..(Chris Wood's "Gathering
of Eagles").
Bro,
Ithought you might enjoy this. It=99s long but was wort
h watching.
Love,
Your Bro.
Subject: P-51 MUSTANG YOU WON'T FORGET.........
FANTASTIC VIDEO AND STORY.
I promise that you will not regret the time spent watching this
video.
Please share it with your friends.
http://www.asb.tv/videos/view.php?v=1bf99434&br=500
The video has great resolution and should be watched in Full Screen
. To do so click on the box with the arrow coming out of it in
the lower right corner of the video presentation.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Date:
Apr 05, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Here is something I ran into last night. The bottom cowling attach holes
on the late model (Tiger LLC) Tigers do not have the same spacing as real
Tigers. For some reason, the spacing is changed by 1/8 inch on the outbo
ard holes (the bottom corners and the holes near the strut) and as much as
1/2 inch for the holes between them. What a waste of engineering.
Not only that, but, that means the cowlings are not interchangeable with
AA5Bs. But, then, with the funky inlet, who'd want to? Right?
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Apr 06, 2010
From:
Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
AYA dinner at SNF
I'll have room for one in my truck.
Linn
cell 321 794-3989
> Hal B. has said that he will be at Buddy Freddy's at 6:30 pm on Friday
> evening. Buddy Freddy's is located just south of Interstate 4 at the
> Thonotosassa Road exit. Hal said that he will get together there with
> whoever shows up.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Date:
Apr 06, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
So, I talked to the DER about the AG5B and my cowling. All was going pret
ty well until he asked what else, besides the air box, was changed in the
AG5B. I told him, "They made it 24 volts." So, the FAA may want a climb
cooling test to see if the alternator on an AG5B runs hotter than an AA5B
.
What a pain in the ass.
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Mon, Apr 5, 2010 12:41 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Here is something I ran into last night. The bottom cowling attach holes
on the late model (Tiger LLC) Tigers do not have the same spacing as real
Tigers. For some reason, the spacing is changed by 1/8 inch on the outbo
ard holes (the bottom corners and the holes near the strut) and as much as
1/2 inch for the holes between them. What a waste of engineering.
Not only that, but, that means the cowlings are not interchangeable with
AA5Bs. But, then, with the funky inlet, who'd want to? Right?
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: AYA dinner at SNF
Date:
Apr 06, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
sounds like fun. if the creek don't rise, we'll be there.
-----Original Message-----
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 5:38 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AYA dinner at SNF
I'll have room for one in my truck.
Linn
cell 321 794-3989
HalB. has said that he will be at BuddyFreddy=99s at 6:30 pm on Frid
ay evening. Buddy Freddy=99s islocated just south of Interstate 4
at the Thonotosassa Road exit. Halsaid that he will get together there
with whoever shows up.
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: AYA dinner at SNF
Date:
Apr 06, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Oh, wait. This is for SNF. We won't be going to that one.
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 10:17 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AYA dinner at SNF
sounds like fun. if the creek don't rise, we'll be there.
-----Original Message-----
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 5:38 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AYA dinner at SNF
I'll have room for one in my truck.
Linn
cell 321 794-3989
HalB. has said that he will be at BuddyFreddy=99s at 6:30 pm on Frid
ay evening. Buddy Freddy=99s islocated just south of Interstate 4
at the Thonotosassa Road exit. Halsaid that he will get together there
with whoever shows up.
========================
===========
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
========================
===========
ttp://forums.matronics.com
========================
===========
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Apr 06, 2010
From:
Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
Re: AYA dinner at SNF
Spoil Sport!!! I don't like eating by myself!!!
Just so everyone knows ..... I'm still planning on dinner there ..... is
anyone else going to show up???
If dinner at Buddy Freddies looks like a bust, then I'll probably bail
out too.
Linn
teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
> Oh, wait. This is for SNF. We won't be going to that one.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 10:17 am
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AYA dinner at SNF
>
> sounds like fun. if the creek don't rise, we'll be there.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net
> >
> To: undisclosed-recipients: ;
> Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 5:38 am
> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AYA dinner at SNF
>
>
> I'll have room for one in my truck.
> Linn
> cell 321 794-3989
>
>> Hal B. has said that he will be at Buddy Freddys at 6:30 pm on
>> Friday evening. Buddy Freddys is located just south of Interstate 4
>> at the Thonotosassa Road exit. Hal said that he will get together
>> there with whoever shows up.
>
>
> *
>
> ===================================
> ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> ===================================
> ttp://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
> *
> *
>
> ===================================
> ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> ===================================
> ttp://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
> *
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Date:
Apr 06, 2010
What makes them think it would run hotter just because it's 24 volts?
Also, It's on the cold side of the baffle and shouldn't see much engine
or exhaust heat. No real difference from an AA-5B is there?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
So, I talked to the DER about the AG5B and my cowling. All was going
pretty well until he asked what else, besides the air box, was changed
in the AG5B. I told him, "They made it 24 volts." So, the FAA may want
a climb cooling test to see if the alternator on an AG5B runs hotter
than an AA5B.
What a pain in the ass.
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Mon, Apr 5, 2010 12:41 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Here is something I ran into last night. The bottom cowling attach
holes on the late model (Tiger LLC) Tigers do not have the same spacing
as real Tigers. For some reason, the spacing is changed by 1/8 inch on
the outboard holes (the bottom corners and the holes near the strut) and
as much as 1/2 inch for the holes between them. What a waste of
engineering.
Not only that, but, that means the cowlings are not interchangeable
with AA5Bs. But, then, with the funky inlet, who'd want to? Right?
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Ned Thomas <923te(at)att.net>
Subject:
Re: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Date:
Apr 06, 2010
http://www.plane-power.com/Tech_bits_Comparing_Temps24.htm
Would the data above help?
Shows how much less temp the plane power alternator puts out than the
factory supplied alternator on the AG5B
My AG5B has this change
Also, the argument that the alternator cooling airflow betwen the
factory 12volt planes and the factory 24 volt planes is identical
should satisfy both the DER and the FAA
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 6, 2010, at 4:24 PM, "flyv35b" wrote:
>
> What makes them think it would run hotter just because it's 24
> volts? Also, It's on the cold side of the baffle and shouldn't see
> much engine or exhaust heat. No real difference from an AA-5B is
> there?
>
> Cliff
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:08 AM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>
> So, I talked to the DER about the AG5B and my cowling. All was
> going pretty well until he asked what else, besides the air box, was
> changed in the AG5B. I told him, "They made it 24 volts." So, the
> FAA may want a climb cooling test to see if the alternator on an
> AG5B runs hotter than an AA5B.
>
> What a pain in the ass.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Mon, Apr 5, 2010 12:41 pm
> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>
> Here is something I ran into last night. The bottom cowling attach
> holes on the late model (Tiger LLC) Tigers do not have the same
> spacing as real Tigers. For some reason, the spacing is changed by
> 1/8 inch on the outboard holes (the bottom corners and the holes
> near the strut) and as much as 1/2 inch for the holes between them.
> What a waste of engineering.
>
> Not only that, but, that means the cowlings are not interchangeable
> with AA5Bs. But, then, with the funky inlet, who'd want to? Right?
>
>
> ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> ttp://forums.matronics.com
> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://
> www.matronics.com/c
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Date:
Apr 07, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
The alternator on a Jaguar is open like it was on a Traveler. I have hole
s in the cabin heat duct that vent directly on the alternator. During tes
ts, the alternator was a little warmer, but not by enough to make a differ
ence.
Cliff, it's the FAA. Logic does not come into the picture.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 2:24 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
What makes them think it would run hotter just because it's 24 volts? Als
o, It's on the cold side of the baffle and shouldn't see much engine or ex
haust heat. No real difference from an AA-5B is there?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
So, I talked to the DER about the AG5B and my cowling. All was going pr
etty well until he asked what else, besides the air box, was changed in
the AG5B. I told him, "They made it 24 volts." So, the FAA may want
a climb cooling test to see if the alternator on an AG5B runs hotter th
an an AA5B.
What a pain in the ass.
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Mon, Apr 5, 2010 12:41 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Here is something I ran into last night. The bottom cowling attach hole
s on the late model (Tiger LLC) Tigers do not have the same spacing as
real Tigers. For some reason, the spacing is changed by 1/8 inch on th
e outboard holes (the bottom corners and the holes near the strut) and
as much as 1/2 inch for the holes between them. What a waste of engine
ering.
Not only that, but, that means the cowlings are not interchangeable with
AA5Bs. But, then, with the funky inlet, who'd want to? Right?
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Date:
Apr 07, 2010
Gary, I didn't realize that was the case with your baffling. That
sounds like a welcome improvement for accessibility to the alternator.
I realize that logic does not play an important role in their decision
making many times but it sounds like it is your DER that is making the
decision as to whether another cooling test should be run or not.
Doesn't he have the authority to make such a decision based on the facts
and info available?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 9:42 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
The alternator on a Jaguar is open like it was on a Traveler. I have
holes in the cabin heat duct that vent directly on the alternator.
During tests, the alternator was a little warmer, but not by enough to
make a difference.
Cliff, it's the FAA. Logic does not come into the picture.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 2:24 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
What makes them think it would run hotter just because it's 24 volts?
Also, It's on the cold side of the baffle and shouldn't see much engine
or exhaust heat. No real difference from an AA-5B is there?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
So, I talked to the DER about the AG5B and my cowling. All was
going pretty well until he asked what else, besides the air box, was
changed in the AG5B. I told him, "They made it 24 volts." So, the FAA
may want a climb cooling test to see if the alternator on an AG5B runs
hotter than an AA5B.
What a pain in the ass.
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Mon, Apr 5, 2010 12:41 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Here is something I ran into last night. The bottom cowling attach
holes on the late model (Tiger LLC) Tigers do not have the same spacing
as real Tigers. For some reason, the spacing is changed by 1/8 inch on
the outboard holes (the bottom corners and the holes near the strut) and
as much as 1/2 inch for the holes between them. What a waste of
engineering.
Not only that, but, that means the cowlings are not interchangeable
with AA5Bs. But, then, with the funky inlet, who'd want to? Right?
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Date:
Apr 08, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
We're 'negotiating' right now. He has done a lot of modified alternators
and thinks he can by-pass any testing based on his data and the previous
flight test data. Keep your fingers crossed.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 7, 2010 6:29 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Gary, I didn't realize that was the case with your baffling. That sounds
like a welcome improvement for accessibility to the alternator.
I realize that logic does not play an important role in their decision mak
ing many times but it sounds like it is your DER that is making the decisi
on as to whether another cooling test should be run or not. Doesn't he ha
ve the authority to make such a decision based on the facts and info avail
able?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 9:42 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
The alternator on a Jaguar is open like it was on a Traveler. I have ho
les in the cabin heat duct that vent directly on the alternator. During
tests, the alternator was a little warmer, but not by enough to make a
difference.
Cliff, it's the FAA. Logic does not come into the picture.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 2:24 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
What makes them think it would run hotter just because it's 24 volts?
Also, It's on the cold side of the baffle and shouldn't see much engine
or exhaust heat. No real difference from an AA-5B is there?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
So, I talked to the DER about the AG5B and my cowling. All was going
pretty well until he asked what else, besides the air box, was change
d in the AG5B. I told him, "They made it 24 volts." So, the FAA may
want a climb cooling test to see if the alternator on an AG5B runs ho
tter than an AA5B.
What a pain in the ass.
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Mon, Apr 5, 2010 12:41 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Here is something I ran into last night. The bottom cowling attach ho
les on the late model (Tiger LLC) Tigers do not have the same spacing
as real Tigers. For some reason, the spacing is changed by 1/8 inch
on the outboard holes (the bottom corners and the holes near the stru
t) and as much as 1/2 inch for the holes between them. What a waste
of engineering.
Not only that, but, that means the cowlings are not interchangeable wi
th AA5Bs. But, then, with the funky inlet, who'd want to? Right?
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
G Vogt <teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM>
Subject:
Plane Power alternator
Date:
Apr 11, 2010
Remember a few months ago when I asked what other's experience was
with PP alternators? At the time, I had installed a new PP alternator
that was very noisy. A couple of other PP owners also wrote to say
theirs was noisy also. My customer sent his alternator to PP to have
them check it. It came back saying it was in specs. It was still very
noisy. He installed an overhauled Kelly alternator that was quiet.
PP needs to tighten up their specs.
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 8, 2010, at 12:59 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
> We're 'negotiating' right now. He has done a lot of modified
> alternators and thinks he can by-pass any testing based on his data
> and the previous flight test data. Keep your fingers crossed.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Wed, Apr 7, 2010 6:29 am
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>
> Gary, I didn't realize that was the case with your baffling. That
> sounds like a welcome improvement for accessibility to the alternator.
>
> I realize that logic does not play an important role in their
> decision making many times but it sounds like it is your DER that is
> making the decision as to whether another cooling test should be run
> or not. Doesn't he have the authority to make such a decision based
> on the facts and info available?
>
> Cliff
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 9:42 PM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>
> The alternator on a Jaguar is open like it was on a Traveler. I
> have holes in the cabin heat duct that vent directly on the
> alternator. During tests, the alternator was a little warmer, but
> not by enough to make a difference.
>
> Cliff, it's the FAA. Logic does not come into the picture.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 2:24 pm
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>
>
> What makes them think it would run hotter just because it's 24
> volts? Also, It's on the cold side of the baffle and shouldn't see
> much engine or exhaust heat. No real difference from an AA-5B is
> there?
>
> Cliff
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:08 AM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>
> So, I talked to the DER about the AG5B and my cowling. All was
> going pretty well until he asked what else, besides the air box, was
> changed in the AG5B. I told him, "They made it 24 volts." So, the
> FAA may want a climb cooling test to see if the alternator on an
> AG5B runs hotter than an AA5B.
>
> What a pain in the ass.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Mon, Apr 5, 2010 12:41 pm
> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>
> Here is something I ran into last night. The bottom cowling attach
> holes on the late model (Tiger LLC) Tigers do not have the same
> spacing as real Tigers. For some reason, the spacing is changed by
> 1/8 inch on the outboard holes (the bottom corners and the holes
> near the strut) and as much as 1/2 inch for the holes between them.
> What a waste of engineering.
>
> Not only that, but, that means the cowlings are not interchangeable
> with AA5Bs. But, then, with the funky inlet, who'd want to? Right?
>
>
> ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> ttp://forums.matronics.com
> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://
> www.matronics.com/c
>
>
> ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> ttp://forums.matronics.com
> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://
> www.matronics.com/c
>
>
> ===================================
> ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> ===================================
> ttp://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
tiger N28229
Date:
Apr 11, 2010
From:
n32romeo(at)aol.com
Geary, do you know a Gordon Harrison of Lancaster, CA? Seams I wound up
through an E-Bay purchase a few years ago of the Supplemental Flight Manu
al for his airplane. I did not notice the pages referencing his plane til
l today. The FAA registry shows he has owned this plane since 1978.
Rich Harrison
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"WILLIAM KELLY" <v1rotate(at)verizon.net>
Subject:
Re: Plane Power alternator
Date:
Apr 12, 2010
Gary,
Don't know if you were able to see my post today on the GG responding to
Les Staples minimizing the PP alternator noise issue. They appear to be
in denial about this. The noise really bothers Allisen when she flys
with me. One reason, beyond my own personal preferences, that I try to
keep the plane so nice is so that Allisen has confidence in the
machinery and is comfortable on our trips. It irks me when something
like this noise deal intrudes on that objective. My GG post stated that
there is no way you could have a problem with an alernator installation
unless the unit istelf had issues. Incidentally, we still want to fly
up to Auburn. The weather just hasn't settled down yet from winter
leftovers.
Bill
Remember a few months ago when I asked what other's experience was
with PP alternators? At the time, I had installed a new PP alternator
that was very noisy. A couple of other PP owners also wrote to say
theirs was noisy also. My customer sent his alternator to PP to have
them check it. It came back saying it was in specs. It was still very
noisy. He installed an overhauled Kelly alternator that was quiet.
PP needs to tighten up their specs.
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 8, 2010, at 12:59 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
We're 'negotiating' right now. He has done a lot of modified
alternators and thinks he can by-pass any testing based on his data and
the previous flight test data. Keep your fingers crossed.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wed, Apr 7, 2010 6:29 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Gary, I didn't realize that was the case with your baffling. That
sounds like a welcome improvement for accessibility to the alternator.
I realize that logic does not play an important role in their
decision making many times but it sounds like it is your DER that is
making the decision as to whether another cooling test should be run or
not. Doesn't he have the authority to make such a decision based on the
facts and info available?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 9:42 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
The alternator on a Jaguar is open like it was on a Traveler. I
have holes in the cabin heat duct that vent directly on the alternator.
During tests, the alternator was a little warmer, but not by enough to
make a difference.
Cliff, it's the FAA. Logic does not come into the picture.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 2:24 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
What makes them think it would run hotter just because it's 24
volts? Also, It's on the cold side of the baffle and shouldn't see much
engine or exhaust heat. No real difference from an AA-5B is there?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
So, I talked to the DER about the AG5B and my cowling. All was
going pretty well until he asked what else, besides the air box, was
changed in the AG5B. I told him, "They made it 24 volts." So, the FAA
may want a climb cooling test to see if the alternator on an AG5B runs
hotter than an AA5B.
What a pain in the ass.
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Mon, Apr 5, 2010 12:41 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Here is something I ran into last night. The bottom cowling
attach holes on the late model (Tiger LLC) Tigers do not have the same
spacing as real Tigers. For some reason, the spacing is changed by 1/8
inch on the outboard holes (the bottom corners and the holes near the
strut) and as much as 1/2 inch for the holes between them. What a waste
of engineering.
Not only that, but, that means the cowlings are not
interchangeable with AA5Bs. But, then, with the funky inlet, who'd want
to? Right?
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
G Vogt <teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM>
Subject:
Re: Plane Power alternator
Date:
Apr 13, 2010
Bill,
During your annual, we'll take your alternator to a place I use and
have them check it. If needed, we'll have them replace diodes. I
agree, PP needs to make, not only a lighter mousetrap, but a better
mousetrap. Otherwise what's the point? I have a new PP alternator on
my shelf for my plane. If it isn't a better alternative to a Kelly
rebuild, then I'm going to stop recommending them.
Gary
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 12, 2010, at 12:27 PM, "WILLIAM KELLY"
wrote:
> Gary,
>
> Don't know if you were able to see my post today on the GG
> responding to Les Staples minimizing the PP alternator noise issue.
> They appear to be in denial about this. The noise really bothers
> Allisen when she flys with me. One reason, beyond my own personal
> preferences, that I try to keep the plane so nice is so that Allisen
> has confidence in the machinery and is comfortable on our trips. It
> irks me when something like this noise deal intrudes on that
> objective. My GG post stated that there is no way you could have a
> problem with an alernator installation unless the unit istelf had
> issues. Incidentally, we still want to fly up to Auburn. The
> weather just hasn't settled down yet from winter leftovers.
>
> Bill
>
> Remember a few months ago when I asked what other's experience was
> with PP alternators? At the time, I had installed a new PP
> alternator that was very noisy. A couple of other PP owners also
> wrote to say theirs was noisy also. My customer sent his alternator
> to PP to have them check it. It came back saying it was in specs. It
> was still very noisy. He installed an overhauled Kelly alternator
> that was quiet.
>
> PP needs to tighten up their specs.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 8, 2010, at 12:59 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>> We're 'negotiating' right now. He has done a lot of modified
>> alternators and thinks he can by-pass any testing based on his data
>> and the previous flight test data. Keep your fingers crossed.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>> Sent: Wed, Apr 7, 2010 6:29 am
>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>
>> Gary, I didn't realize that was the case with your baffling. That
>> sounds like a welcome improvement for accessibility to the
>> alternator.
>>
>> I realize that logic does not play an important role in their
>> decision making many times but it sounds like it is your DER that
>> is making the decision as to whether another cooling test should be
>> run or not. Doesn't he have the authority to make such a decision
>> based on the facts and info available?
>>
>> Cliff
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 9:42 PM
>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>
>> The alternator on a Jaguar is open like it was on a Traveler. I
>> have holes in the cabin heat duct that vent directly on the
>> alternator. During tests, the alternator was a little warmer, but
>> not by enough to make a difference.
>>
>> Cliff, it's the FAA. Logic does not come into the picture.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>> Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 2:24 pm
>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>
>>
>> What makes them think it would run hotter just because it's 24
>> volts? Also, It's on the cold side of the baffle and shouldn't see
>> much engine or exhaust heat. No real difference from an AA-5B is
>> there?
>>
>> Cliff
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:08 AM
>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>
>> So, I talked to the DER about the AG5B and my cowling. All was
>> going pretty well until he asked what else, besides the air box,
>> was changed in the AG5B. I told him, "They made it 24 volts." So,
>> the FAA may want a climb cooling test to see if the alternator on
>> an AG5B runs hotter than an AA5B.
>>
>> What a pain in the ass.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>> Sent: Mon, Apr 5, 2010 12:41 pm
>> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>
>> Here is something I ran into last night. The bottom cowling attach
>> holes on the late model (Tiger LLC) Tigers do not have the same
>> spacing as real Tigers. For some reason, the spacing is changed by
>> 1/8 inch on the outboard holes (the bottom corners and the holes
>> near the strut) and as much as 1/2 inch for the holes between
>> them. What a waste of engineering.
>>
>> Not only that, but, that means the cowlings are not interchangeable
>> with AA5Bs. But, then, with the funky inlet, who'd want to? Right?
>>
>>
>>
>> ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>> ttp://forums.matronics.com
>> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>
>>
>> ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>> ttp://forums.matronics.com
>> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>
>>
>> ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>> ttp://forums.matronics.com
>> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://
> www.matronics.com/c
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Scott Trejo <md11strejo(at)YAHOO.COM>
Subject:
Re: Plane Power alternator
Date:
Apr 13, 2010
I've had a PP alternator on my AA5B for about 3yrs now. It has never
given me any problems at all. No noise or any other problems.
Scott Trejo
N499GT
On Apr 13, 2010, at 12:18 PM, G Vogt wrote:
> Bill,
>
> During your annual, we'll take your alternator to a place I use and
have them check it. If needed, we'll have them replace diodes. I agree,
PP needs to make, not only a lighter mousetrap, but a better mousetrap.
Otherwise what's the point? I have a new PP alternator on my shelf for
my plane. If it isn't a better alternative to a Kelly rebuild, then I'm
going to stop recommending them.
>
> Gary
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 12, 2010, at 12:27 PM, "WILLIAM KELLY"
wrote:
>
>> Gary,
>>
>> Don't know if you were able to see my post today on the GG responding
to Les Staples minimizing the PP alternator noise issue. They appear to
be in denial about this. The noise really bothers Allisen when she flys
with me. One reason, beyond my own personal preferences, that I try to
keep the plane so nice is so that Allisen has confidence in the
machinery and is comfortable on our trips. It irks me when something
like this noise deal intrudes on that objective. My GG post stated that
there is no way you could have a problem with an alernator installation
unless the unit istelf had issues. Incidentally, we still want to fly
up to Auburn. The weather just hasn't settled down yet from winter
leftovers.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> Remember a few months ago when I asked what other's experience was
with PP alternators? At the time, I had installed a new PP alternator
that was very noisy. A couple of other PP owners also wrote to say
theirs was noisy also. My customer sent his alternator to PP to have
them check it. It came back saying it was in specs. It was still very
noisy. He installed an overhauled Kelly alternator that was quiet.
>>
>> PP needs to tighten up their specs.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Apr 8, 2010, at 12:59 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
>>
>>> We're 'negotiating' right now. He has done a lot of modified
alternators and thinks he can by-pass any testing based on his data and
the previous flight test data. Keep your fingers crossed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
>>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Sent: Wed, Apr 7, 2010 6:29 am
>>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>>
>>> Gary, I didn't realize that was the case with your baffling. That
sounds like a welcome improvement for accessibility to the alternator.
>>>
>>> I realize that logic does not play an important role in their
decision making many times but it sounds like it is your DER that is
making the decision as to whether another cooling test should be run or
not. Doesn't he have the authority to make such a decision based on the
facts and info available?
>>>
>>> Cliff
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
>>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 9:42 PM
>>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>>
>>> The alternator on a Jaguar is open like it was on a Traveler. I
have holes in the cabin heat duct that vent directly on the alternator.
During tests, the alternator was a little warmer, but not by enough to
make a difference.
>>>
>>> Cliff, it's the FAA. Logic does not come into the picture.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
>>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 2:24 pm
>>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>>
>>>
>>> What makes them think it would run hotter just because it's 24
volts? Also, It's on the cold side of the baffle and shouldn't see much
engine or exhaust heat. No real difference from an AA-5B is there?
>>>
>>> Cliff
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
>>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:08 AM
>>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>>
>>> So, I talked to the DER about the AG5B and my cowling. All was
going pretty well until he asked what else, besides the air box, was
changed in the AG5B. I told him, "They made it 24 volts." So, the FAA
may want a climb cooling test to see if the alternator on an AG5B runs
hotter than an AA5B.
>>>
>>> What a pain in the ass.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
>>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Sent: Mon, Apr 5, 2010 12:41 pm
>>> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>>
>>> Here is something I ran into last night. The bottom cowling attach
holes on the late model (Tiger LLC) Tigers do not have the same spacing
as real Tigers. For some reason, the spacing is changed by 1/8 inch on
the outboard holes (the bottom corners and the holes near the strut) and
as much as 1/2 inch for the holes between them. What a waste of
engineering.
>>>
>>> Not only that, but, that means the cowlings are not interchangeable
with AA5Bs. But, then, with the funky inlet, who'd want to? Right?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>>> ttp://forums.matronics.com
>>> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>>
>>>
>>>
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>>> ttp://forums.matronics.com
>>> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>>
>>>
>>>
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>>> ttp://forums.matronics.com
>>> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Ned Thomas <923te(at)att.net>
Subject:
Re: Plane Power alternator
Date:
Apr 13, 2010
I've had a 24volt PP alternator on my Tiger for 4 years without any
whining until last flight when Grumman Gary was sitting in the copilot
seat. No the whining was not Gary but the alternator. The street lamps
would light up when Gary drove under them too. I think that Gary has
too much energy and his brain waves are interferring with the magnetic
fields. This theory may also explain why Gary's JPI grounded probes
read higher than the EI nongrounded probes.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_light_interference?wasRedirected=true
Some guys just have it....
Sent from my iPhone
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"WILLIAM KELLY" <v1rotate(at)verizon.net>
Subject:
Re: Plane Power alternator
Date:
Apr 14, 2010
Gary,
Okay. Also, it will have been five years since Fletcher replaced the
flexible fluid lines in the engine compartment, so I think it will be
time for new ones again this year. I recall it as a five year interval.
If you need to take measurements ahead of time for ordering the correct
lengths, maybe we could do that on a side trip to Auburn.
Bill
Bill,
During your annual, we'll take your alternator to a place I use and
have them check it. If needed, we'll have them replace diodes. I agree,
PP needs to make, not only a lighter mousetrap, but a better mousetrap.
Otherwise what's the point? I have a new PP alternator on my shelf for
my plane. If it isn't a better alternative to a Kelly rebuild, then I'm
going to stop recommending them.
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Plane Power alternator
Date:
Apr 14, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Hi Scott,
I've received several reports of good PP alternators. BUT, if there IS a
problem and PPs answer to it is, "That's just the way it is." and doesn'
t replace it or tighten up their specs to where SOME are not noisy, then
it's hard for me to recommend the alternator.
Let's put it this way: if I were the President of the company, I would be
making damn sure the product I was selling had zero defects.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Trejo <md11strejo(at)YAHOO.COM>
Sent: Tue, Apr 13, 2010 1:17 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Plane Power alternator
I've had a PP alternator on my AA5B for about 3yrs now. It has never give
n me any problems at all. No noise or any other problems.
Scott Trejo
N499GT
On Apr 13, 2010, at 12:18 PM, G Vogt wrote:
Bill,
During your annual, we'll take your alternator to a place I use and have
them check it. If needed, we'll have them replace diodes. I agree, PP nee
ds to make, not only a lighter mousetrap, but a better mousetrap. Otherwis
e what's the point? I have a new PP alternator on my shelf for my plane.
If it isn't a better alternative to a Kelly rebuild, then I'm going to st
op recommending them.
Gary
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 12, 2010, at 12:27 PM, "WILLIAM KELLY" wrote
:
Gary,
Don't know if you were able to see my post today on the GG responding to
Les Staples minimizing the PP alternator noise issue. They appear to be
in denial about this. The noise really bothers Allisen when she flys wit
h me. One reason, beyond my own personal preferences, that I try to keep
the plane so nice is so that Allisen has confidence in the machinery and
is comfortable on our trips. It irks me when something like this noise
deal intrudes on that objective. My GG post stated that there is no way
you could have a problem with an alernator installation unless the unit
istelf had issues. Incidentally, we still want to fly up to Auburn. The
weather just hasn't settled down yet from winter leftovers.
Bill
Remember a few months ago when I asked what other's experience was with
PP alternators? At the time, I had installed a new PP alternator that
was very noisy. A couple of other PP owners also wrote to say theirs wa
s noisy also. My customer sent his alternator to PP to have them check
it. It came back saying it was in specs. It was still very noisy. He in
stalled an overhauled Kelly alternator that was quiet.
PP needs to tighten up their specs.
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 8, 2010, at 12:59 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
We're 'negotiating' right now. He has done a lot of modified alternat
ors and thinks he can by-pass any testing based on his data and the pr
evious flight test data. Keep your fingers crossed.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 7, 2010 6:29 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Gary, I didn't realize that was the case with your baffling. That sou
nds like a welcome improvement for accessibility to the alternator.
I realize that logic does not play an important role in their decision
making many times but it sounds like it is your DER that is making th
e decision as to whether another cooling test should be run or not.
Doesn't he have the authority to make such a decision based on the fa
cts and info available?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 9:42 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
The alternator on a Jaguar is open like it was on a Traveler. I hav
e holes in the cabin heat duct that vent directly on the alternator.
During tests, the alternator was a little warmer, but not by enoug
h to make a difference.
Cliff, it's the FAA. Logic does not come into the picture.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 2:24 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
What makes them think it would run hotter just because it's 24 volts
? Also, It's on the cold side of the baffle and shouldn't see much
engine or exhaust heat. No real difference from an AA-5B is there?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
So, I talked to the DER about the AG5B and my cowling. All was go
ing pretty well until he asked what else, besides the air box, was
changed in the AG5B. I told him, "They made it 24 volts." So,
the FAA may want a climb cooling test to see if the alternator on
an AG5B runs hotter than an AA5B.
What a pain in the ass.
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Mon, Apr 5, 2010 12:41 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
Here is something I ran into last night. The bottom cowling attac
h holes on the late model (Tiger LLC) Tigers do not have the same
spacing as real Tigers. For some reason, the spacing is changed
by 1/8 inch on the outboard holes (the bottom corners and the hol
es near the strut) and as much as 1/2 inch for the holes between
them. What a waste of engineering.
Not only that, but, that means the cowlings are not interchangeable
with AA5Bs. But, then, with the funky inlet, who'd want to?
Right?
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/c
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/co
ntribution
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Plane Power alternator
Date:
Apr 14, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Bill,
I don't have any measurements for the AA1x. So, that would be helpful.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: WILLIAM KELLY <v1rotate(at)verizon.net>
Sent: Wed, Apr 14, 2010 1:52 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Plane Power alternator
Gary,
Okay. Also, it will have been five years since Fletcher replaced the flexi
ble fluid lines in the engine compartment, so I think it will be time for
new ones again this year. I recall it as a five year interval. If you ne
ed to take measurements ahead of time for ordering the correct lengths, ma
ybe we could do that on a side trip to Auburn.
Bill
Bill,
During your annual, we'll take your alternator to a place I use and have
them check it. If needed, we'll have them replace diodes. I agree, PP
needs to make, not only a lighter mousetrap, but a better mousetrap. Ot
herwise what's the point? I have a new PP alternator on my shelf for my
plane. If it isn't a better alternative to a Kelly rebuild, then I'm go
ing to stop recommending them.
Gary
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Scott Trejo <md11strejo(at)YAHOO.COM>
Subject:
Re: Plane Power alternator
Date:
Apr 14, 2010
Gary,
I agree with you 100%. PP should at the very least test the
alternator and replace it if noise is present.
Scott Trejo
On Apr 14, 2010, at 12:57 PM, teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> I've received several reports of good PP alternators. BUT, if there
IS a problem and PPs answer to it is, "That's just the way it is." and
doesn't replace it or tighten up their specs to where SOME are not
noisy, then it's hard for me to recommend the alternator.
>
> Let's put it this way: if I were the President of the company, I
would be making damn sure the product I was selling had zero defects.
>
> Gary
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Trejo <md11strejo(at)YAHOO.COM>
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Tue, Apr 13, 2010 1:17 pm
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Plane Power alternator
>
> I've had a PP alternator on my AA5B for about 3yrs now. It has never
given me any problems at all. No noise or any other problems.
>
> Scott Trejo
> N499GT
> On Apr 13, 2010, at 12:18 PM, G Vogt wrote:
>
>> Bill,
>>
>> During your annual, we'll take your alternator to a place I use and
have them check it. If needed, we'll have them replace diodes. I agree,
PP needs to make, not only a lighter mousetrap, but a better mousetrap.
Otherwise what's the point? I have a new PP alternator on my shelf for
my plane. If it isn't a better alternative to a Kelly rebuild, then I'm
going to stop recommending them.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Apr 12, 2010, at 12:27 PM, "WILLIAM KELLY"
wrote:
>>
>>> Gary,
>>>
>>> Don't know if you were able to see my post today on the GG
responding to Les Staples minimizing the PP alternator noise issue.
They appear to be in denial about this. The noise really bothers
Allisen when she flys with me. One reason, beyond my own personal
preferences, that I try to keep the plane so nice is so that Allisen has
confidence in the machinery and is comfortable on our trips. It irks me
when something like this noise deal intrudes on that objective. My GG
post stated that there is no way you could have a problem with an
alernator installation unless the unit istelf had issues. Incidentally,
we still want to fly up to Auburn. The weather just hasn't settled down
yet from winter leftovers.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>> Remember a few months ago when I asked what other's experience was
with PP alternators? At the time, I had installed a new PP alternator
that was very noisy. A couple of other PP owners also wrote to say
theirs was noisy also. My customer sent his alternator to PP to have
them check it. It came back saying it was in specs. It was still very
noisy. He installed an overhauled Kelly alternator that was quiet.
>>>
>>> PP needs to tighten up their specs.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Apr 8, 2010, at 12:59 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> We're 'negotiating' right now. He has done a lot of modified
alternators and thinks he can by-pass any testing based on his data and
the previous flight test data. Keep your fingers crossed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
>>>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>>>> Sent: Wed, Apr 7, 2010 6:29 am
>>>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>>>
>>>> Gary, I didn't realize that was the case with your baffling. That
sounds like a welcome improvement for accessibility to the alternator.
>>>>
>>>> I realize that logic does not play an important role in their
decision making many times but it sounds like it is your DER that is
making the decision as to whether another cooling test should be run or
not. Doesn't he have the authority to make such a decision based on the
facts and info available?
>>>>
>>>> Cliff
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
>>>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 9:42 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>>>
>>>> The alternator on a Jaguar is open like it was on a Traveler. I
have holes in the cabin heat duct that vent directly on the alternator.
During tests, the alternator was a little warmer, but not by enough to
make a difference.
>>>>
>>>> Cliff, it's the FAA. Logic does not come into the picture.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
>>>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>>>> Sent: Tue, Apr 6, 2010 2:24 pm
>>>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What makes them think it would run hotter just because it's 24
volts? Also, It's on the cold side of the baffle and shouldn't see much
engine or exhaust heat. No real difference from an AA-5B is there?
>>>>
>>>> Cliff
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
>>>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 10:08 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>>>
>>>> So, I talked to the DER about the AG5B and my cowling. All was
going pretty well until he asked what else, besides the air box, was
changed in the AG5B. I told him, "They made it 24 volts." So, the FAA
may want a climb cooling test to see if the alternator on an AG5B runs
hotter than an AA5B.
>>>>
>>>> What a pain in the ass.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
>>>> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>>>> Sent: Mon, Apr 5, 2010 12:41 pm
>>>> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B and the Jaguar cowling
>>>>
>>>> Here is something I ran into last night. The bottom cowling attach
holes on the late model (Tiger LLC) Tigers do not have the same spacing
as real Tigers. For some reason, the spacing is changed by 1/8 inch on
the outboard holes (the bottom corners and the holes near the strut) and
as much as 1/2 inch for the holes between them. What a waste of
engineering.
>>>>
>>>> Not only that, but, that means the cowlings are not interchangeable
with AA5Bs. But, then, with the funky inlet, who'd want to? Right?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>>>> ttp://forums.matronics.com
>>>> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>>>> ttp://forums.matronics.com
>>>> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>>>> ttp://forums.matronics.com
>>>> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/co
ntribution
>>
>
>
>
> ========================
===========
>
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> ========================
===========
> ttp://forums.matronics.com
> ========================
===========
> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ========================
===========
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Apr 14, 2010
From:
Carlos Hernandez <carlosh(at)structuralaz.com>
Subject:
FS: Two RAE Flap actuators
Ladies and gents,
I acquired two RAE 12V flap actuators from a Grumman (can't remember
which model sorry) some time ago in hopes to use them in a project I had
going. Well things change and I've decided to go another route. So if
your interested or want some pictures email me directly at
carlosh@sec-engr.com.
Carlos in Arizona
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: tiger N28229
Date:
Apr 15, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Funny thing about names. Lots of Gordons in lancaster and lots of Daves
in Auburn.
Don't know that Gordon though. I'll ask some of the people I know there.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: n32romeo(at)aol.com
Sent: Sun, Apr 11, 2010 8:53 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: tiger N28229
Geary, do you know a Gordon Harrison of Lancaster, CA? Seams I wound up
through an E-Bay purchase a few years ago of the Supplemental Flight Manu
al for his airplane. I did not notice the pages referencing his plane til
l today. The FAA registry shows he has owned this plane since 1978.
Rich Harrison
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Plane Power Alternators
Date:
Apr 15, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Keith forwarded me his email to GG regarding his PP Alternator.
My only question is, why didn't PP just send him a new/different alternato
r to see if it was the alternator and not a wiring problem?
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
PP alternator etc.
Date:
Apr 15, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
As a side note, I have an extra PP alternator in my hangar that we were go
ing to try on Keith's plane. It had the same model and part numbers and
revision numbers but different pulleys and spacers. It didn't fit on Kei
th's plane.
This same situation came up a few years ago when a customer bought a PP al
t for his AG5B from Sac Sky Ranch. Apparently, during the time time betwe
en when SSR bought the alternator and when my customer bought it, PP had
changed the mounting hardware. The alternator i tried to install not onl
y would fit because the spacers were wrong, but, once I forced the spacer
into place, the pulley wouldn't line up either. A call to PP enlightened
us regarding revised spacers and pulley. We were charged for the parts
they revised.
Again, that left a bitter taste that was only beginning to go away when th
e current issue with Keith's plane came up.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
AG5B Jaguar
Date:
Apr 18, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
I flew the first AG5B Jaguar today. It has an MT Prop on it and LASAR ign
ition. Personally, I think the reason it feels rough is the LASAR but, th
en who knows. It was also hard to start.
Straight and level at 4000 feet, 147 TAS at 2720 rpm.
Straight and level at 3500 feet, 149 TAS at 2700 RPM and 147 TAS at 2550
rpm and 9.5 gph.
Now, If Ned will just put some wing walk back on . . . .
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
GOLDPILOT(at)aol.com
Date:
Apr 19, 2010
Subject:
RE: I flew the first AG5B Jaguar today.
Awesome......Hope I win the lottery soon. Then we'll attach a Tiger to a
turbojet! .
He's got a very nice airplane.
David
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
AG5B Jaguar
Date:
Apr 24, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Ned picked up his plane today. We flew for about 30 minutes side-by-side.
The CS MT PRop makes a big difference on cruise and fuel burn. I want
one.
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: AG5B Jaguar
Date:
Apr 25, 2010
From:
customacprop(at)aol.com
Hi Gary & all,
What a coincident. I just happened to have ordered two of the new MT Prop
ellers for the Grumman Tiger at the old price.
One for the AA-5B and one for the AG-5B. They ship from Germany mid-May.
Regards,
Jim Ayers
Less Drag Products, Inc.
MT Propeller distributor
FAA Certified Repair Station #LDSR535X
(805) 795-5377
jim(at)lessdrag.com
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Sat, Apr 24, 2010 8:56 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
Ned picked up his plane today. We flew for about 30 minutes side-by-side.
The CS MT PRop makes a big difference on cruise and fuel burn. I want
one.
Gary
========================
===========
-= - The TeamGrumman-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: AG5B Jaguar
Date:
Apr 25, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
I'd have to make no interest payments.
-----Original Message-----
From: customacprop(at)aol.com
Sent: Sun, Apr 25, 2010 7:41 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
Hi Gary & all,
What a coincident. I just happened to have ordered two of the new MT Prop
ellers for the Grumman Tiger at the old price.
One for the AA-5B and one for the AG-5B. They ship from Germany mid-May.
Regards,
Jim Ayers
Less Drag Products, Inc.
MT Propeller distributor
FAA Certified Repair Station #LDSR535X
(805) 795-5377
jim(at)lessdrag.com
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Sat, Apr 24, 2010 8:56 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
Ned picked up his plane today. We flew for about 30 minutes side-by-side.
The CS MT PRop makes a big difference on cruise and fuel burn. I want
one.
Gary
========================
===========
ist" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
========================
===========
tp://forums.matronics.com
========================
===========
_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: AG5B Jaguar
Date:
Apr 25, 2010
From:
customacprop(at)aol.com
OK. But I'll need 100% down. :-)
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Sun, Apr 25, 2010 10:11 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
I'd have to make no interest payments.
-----Original Message-----
From: customacprop(at)aol.com
Sent: Sun, Apr 25, 2010 7:41 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
Hi Gary & all,
What a coincident. I just happened to have ordered two of the new MT Prop
ellers for the Grumman Tiger at the old price.
One for the AA-5B and one for the AG-5B. They ship from Germany mid-May.
Regards,
Jim Ayers
Less Drag Products, Inc.
MT Propeller distributor
FAA Certified Repair Station #LDSR535X
(805) 795-5377
jim(at)lessdrag.com
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Sat, Apr 24, 2010 8:56 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
Ned picked up his plane today. We flew for about 30 minutes side-by-side.
The CS MT PRop makes a big difference on cruise and fuel burn. I want
one.
Gary
========================
===========
st" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
========================
p://forums.matronics.com
========================
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
========================
========================
===========
tor?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
========================
tp://forums.matronics.com
========================
bution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
========================
========================
===========
-= - The TeamGrumman-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Davesbox1(at)AOL.COM
Date:
Apr 26, 2010
Subject:
Re: AG5B Jaguar
guys i have a friend with a recently overhauled ( upper half) tiger for
sale in Texas_ 40k cash. ...let me know if you guys have any takers or
interested parties....254-291-0903 D
In a message dated 4/25/2010 10:43:45 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
customacprop(at)aol.com writes:
OK. But I'll need 100% down. :-)
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Sun, Apr 25, 2010 10:11 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
I'd have to make no interest payments.
-----Original Message-----
From: _customacprop(at)aol.com_ (mailto:customacprop(at)aol.com)
(mailto:teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)
Sent: Sun, Apr 25, 2010 7:41 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
Hi Gary & all,
What a coincident. I just happened to have ordered two of the new MT
Propellers for the Grumman Tiger at the old price.
One for the AA-5B and one for the AG-5B. They ship from Germany mid-May.
Regards,
Jim Ayers
Less Drag Products, Inc.
MT Propeller distributor
FAA Certified Repair Station #LDSR535X
(805) 795-5377
_jim(at)lessdrag.com_ (mailto:jim(at)lessdrag.com)
-----Original Message-----
From: _teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM_ (mailto:teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM)
(mailto:teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)
Sent: Sat, Apr 24, 2010 8:56 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
Ned picked up his plane today. We flew for about 30 minutes side-by-side.
The CS MT PRop makes a big difference on cruise and fuel burn. I want
one.
Gary
===================================
ist" target=_blank>_http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List_
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List)
===================================
tp://forums.matronics.com
===================================
_blank>_http://www.matronics.com/contribution_
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
===================================
===================================
ator?TeamGrumman-List">_http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List_ (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List)
==================================== ttp://forums.matronics.com
==================================== ibution">_http://www.matronics.com/contribution_
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ====================================
===================================
ist" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
==================================== tp://forums.matronics.com
==================================== _blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
====================================
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
________________________________________________________________________________
Has anyone had this issue:
From one flight to next, I seem to have issues with aileron trim. One
flight straight and level, next flight left wing heavy. Next flight not
so bad. Seems to be the model of inconsistency.
Should this be changing so much? Fuel levels, tank imbalances,
passenger loading all should have much of an effect right? Most of the
mass is near the longitudinal access of the airframe. The only thing I
can think of is that maybe the flaps in the retracted position are
sitting differently after each flight.
Any ideas?
________________________________________________________________________________
Date:
Apr 27, 2010
From:
Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject:
Re: Aileron Trim
Is it tied down outside??? Rain may be an issue.
Linn
Lawrence Massaro wrote:
> <lmassaro@tac-eng.com>
>
> Has anyone had this issue:
>
> From one flight to next, I seem to have issues with aileron trim. One
> flight straight and level, next flight left wing heavy. Next flight not
> so bad. Seems to be the model of inconsistency.
> Should this be changing so much? Fuel levels, tank imbalances,
> passenger loading all should have much of an effect right? Most of the
> mass is near the longitudinal access of the airframe. The only thing I
> can think of is that maybe the flaps in the retracted position are
> sitting differently after each flight.
>
> Any ideas?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Aileron Trim
Date:
Apr 27, 2010
From:
"Hosler, John" <JHOSLER(at)epri.com>
I have had my Tiger for 29 years tied down and hangared and this has
always been the case. Seldom enough to ever require readjustment of the
trim tabs though.
Rain can affect aileron trim during flight though. Sometimes
significantly.
John Hosler
704-252-0780
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Linn
Walters
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 2:15 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Aileron Trim
Is it tied down outside??? Rain may be an issue.
Linn
Lawrence Massaro wrote:
> <lmassaro@tac-eng.com>
>
> Has anyone had this issue:
>
> From one flight to next, I seem to have issues with aileron trim.
One
> flight straight and level, next flight left wing heavy. Next flight
not
> so bad. Seems to be the model of inconsistency.
> Should this be changing so much? Fuel levels, tank imbalances,
> passenger loading all should have much of an effect right? Most of the
> mass is near the longitudinal access of the airframe. The only thing
I
> can think of is that maybe the flaps in the retracted position are
> sitting differently after each flight.
>
> Any ideas?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Larry,
I sometimes have the same issue! Coming home from E45 (Pine Mountain Lake)
last Sunday, even with heading auto-pilot, it wanted to fly left-wing low.
Other times aircraft flies perfectly level. I have fiddled with aileron trim
several times.
On another issue, anyone have any idea why one of my EGT temps is 150
degrees less that others (1145, 1300, 1310, 1280)??
Thanks
Ron Burgher
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Linn
Walters
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Aileron Trim
Is it tied down outside??? Rain may be an issue.
Linn
Lawrence Massaro wrote:
> <lmassaro@tac-eng.com>
>
> Has anyone had this issue:
>
> From one flight to next, I seem to have issues with aileron trim. One
> flight straight and level, next flight left wing heavy. Next flight not
> so bad. Seems to be the model of inconsistency.
> Should this be changing so much? Fuel levels, tank imbalances,
> passenger loading all should have much of an effect right? Most of the
> mass is near the longitudinal access of the airframe. The only thing I
> can think of is that maybe the flaps in the retracted position are
> sitting differently after each flight.
>
> Any ideas?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Subject:
Re: Aileron Trim
Date:
Apr 27, 2010
> On another issue, anyone have any idea why one of my EGT temps is 150
> degrees less that others (1145, 1300, 1310, 1280)??
> Thanks
It's probably running considerably richer than the others. Try leaning the
engine significantly more and see if the don't even out more. Do it at
3000-4000 ft and 2500 rpm and you can't hurt the engine no matter what you
do with the mixture. Lean until it starts to run rough and then enrich just
barely to smooth it out and see what your temps are.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: Aileron Trim
Date:
Apr 27, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Larry,
About 14 years ago, I flew an AG5B to Florida to deliver it to a new owner
. I had picked up the plane in the Bay Area and flew it to Lancaster. It
was 'out-of-trim.' So, when I landed, I gave the aileron tab a little tw
eek. After the annual, it was out the other way, I landed, did a smaller
correction and then reflew. It seemed ok. During the flight to Florida,
I fought aileron trim issues the entire flight. I tweeked it every time
I stopped for gas. I could not get the trim set right.
At that time, I hadn't thought much about the flap rigging on the plane.
On my plane, I have the flaps reflexed enough to cause a roll change based
on flap setting. Works kind of nice to correct for fuel imbalance. I'm
not sure it would work on all planes. Try tapping the flaps down a degre
e at a time to see if you notice any change.
It is true that passengers and loading will have an effect on roll; enough
to be annoying.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Lawrence Massaro <lmassaro@tac-eng.com>
Sent: Tue, Apr 27, 2010 10:48 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Aileron Trim
.com>
Has anyone had this issue:
From one flight to next, I seem to have issues with aileron trim. One fl
ight straight and level, next flight left wing heavy. Next flight not so
bad. Seems to be the model of inconsistency.
Should this be changing so much? Fuel levels, tank imbalances, passenger
loading all should have much of an effect right? Most of the mass is near
the longitudinal access of the airframe. The only thing I can think of
is that maybe the flaps in the retracted position are sitting differently
after each flight.
Any ideas?
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
________________________________________________________________________________
Thanks to all for the responses.
And re: rain, the plane is hangered.
The thing that gets me is that I dont recall it ever being a problem
until recently (over the last year maybe).
I am going to do a few test flights and apply Gary's check and move the
flaps small increments to see if that has an effect.
Larry Massaro
9186M
'92 AG-5B
KRNM
________________________________________________________________________________
So I gather from your response, the Project X plane will be using this prop?
What were you seeing (numbers please!) on cruise and fuel burn as compared to your
AA-5 rocket?
Larry Massaro
9186M
1992 AG-5B
KRNM
**
From:teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Sat, Apr 24, 2010 8:56 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
Ned picked up his plane today. We flew for about 30 minutes side-by-side.
The CS MT PRop makes a big difference on cruise and fuel burn. I want
one.
Gary
**
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
brian sandberg <sandbag23(at)msn.com>
Subject:
N119ST Jaguar
Date:
Apr 28, 2010
Sounds great. I'm reading through 7 months worth of teamgrumman digests an
d eagerly awaiting my first flight in more than 8 months=2C the longest str
etch I've gone since 1998.
-Brian
Subject: N119ST Jaguar
Date: Wed=2C 28 Apr 2010 15:04:25 -0400
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
I've been working on installing the Jaguar cowling on 119ST for a week now.
Other than the owner=2C no one else knows that 119ST was the plane I used
for all of my original company testing. 119ST has had 6 different prototy
pe cowlings=2C 3 different kinds of exit ramps=2C and 2 different versions
of air intakes tested on it. I used 119ST for a year way-back-when to test
a bunch of ideas. Check out pict 030.jpg.
I also had the cowling that is now on N1976T on 119ST about 3 years ago.
Maybe it's my familiarity with the plane or maybe that after installing 3 c
owlings in as many months=2C but=2C this one is going really smooth. The t
rim lines on this cowling are very close to the planes mounting flange. Th
is plane has one shim (I got two responses from you guys on shims and dista
nces to the spinner=2C thanks) on each of the top mounts and the distance t
o the spinner is just a shade under 40 inches. It's got to be differences
in bushings and mounts . . . . but=2C I digress.
The cowling should be all trimmed up by tomorrow. The missing baffles shou
ld be here this week also. Then=2C all the rest of the details.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your
inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:O
N:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: AG5B Jaguar
Date:
Apr 28, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
I guess that IS the question isn't it.
Straight and level at 4000 feet, we were truing out at 152 knots. He was
running 2700 rpm, I was running 2830.
I could climb with him, but just barely.
Project X plane is next. I have a torque tube I'm stripping and getting
ready for paint. It'll be Red.
I've also ordered a windshield for Project X plane. The one that is in it
is too bastardized to make fit right.
As soon as 119ST is finished, I'll get started on it.
-----Original Message-----
From: Lawrence Massaro <lmassaro@tac-eng.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 28, 2010 8:46 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
So I gather from your response, the Project X plane will be using this pro
p?
What were you seeing (numbers please!) on cruise and fuel burn as compared
to your AA-5 rocket?
Larry Massaro
9186M
1992 AG-5B
KRNM
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Sat, Apr 24, 2010 8:56 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
Ned picked up his plane today. We flew for about 30 minutes side-by
-side.
The CS MT PRop makes a big difference on cruise and fuel burn. I
want
one.
Gary
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
brian sandberg <sandbag23(at)msn.com>
Subject:
N119ST Jaguar
Date:
Apr 28, 2010
Sounds great. I'm reading through 7 months worth of teamgrumman digests an
d eagerly awaiting my first flight in more than 8 months=2C the longest str
etch I've gone since 1998.
-Brian
Subject: N119ST Jaguar
Date: Wed=2C 28 Apr 2010 15:04:25 -0400
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
I've been working on installing the Jaguar cowling on 119ST for a week now.
Other than the owner=2C no one else knows that 119ST was the plane I used
for all of my original company testing. 119ST has had 6 different prototy
pe cowlings=2C 3 different kinds of exit ramps=2C and 2 different versions
of air intakes tested on it. I used 119ST for a year way-back-when to test
a bunch of ideas. Check out pict 030.jpg.
I also had the cowling that is now on N1976T on 119ST about 3 years ago.
Maybe it's my familiarity with the plane or maybe that after installing 3 c
owlings in as many months=2C but=2C this one is going really smooth. The t
rim lines on this cowling are very close to the planes mounting flange. Th
is plane has one shim (I got two responses from you guys on shims and dista
nces to the spinner=2C thanks) on each of the top mounts and the distance t
o the spinner is just a shade under 40 inches. It's got to be differences
in bushings and mounts . . . . but=2C I digress.
The cowling should be all trimmed up by tomorrow. The missing baffles shou
ld be here this week also. Then=2C all the rest of the details.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your
inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:O
N:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
brian sandberg <sandbag23(at)msn.com>
Subject:
N119ST Jaguar
Date:
Apr 28, 2010
Sounds great. I'm reading through 7 months worth of teamgrumman digests an
d eagerly awaiting my first flight in more than 8 months=2C the longest str
etch I've gone since 1998.
-Brian
Subject: N119ST Jaguar
Date: Wed=2C 28 Apr 2010 15:04:25 -0400
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
I've been working on installing the Jaguar cowling on 119ST for a week now.
Other than the owner=2C no one else knows that 119ST was the plane I used
for all of my original company testing. 119ST has had 6 different prototy
pe cowlings=2C 3 different kinds of exit ramps=2C and 2 different versions
of air intakes tested on it. I used 119ST for a year way-back-when to test
a bunch of ideas. Check out pict 030.jpg.
I also had the cowling that is now on N1976T on 119ST about 3 years ago.
Maybe it's my familiarity with the plane or maybe that after installing 3 c
owlings in as many months=2C but=2C this one is going really smooth. The t
rim lines on this cowling are very close to the planes mounting flange. Th
is plane has one shim (I got two responses from you guys on shims and dista
nces to the spinner=2C thanks) on each of the top mounts and the distance t
o the spinner is just a shade under 40 inches. It's got to be differences
in bushings and mounts . . . . but=2C I digress.
The cowling should be all trimmed up by tomorrow. The missing baffles shou
ld be here this week also. Then=2C all the rest of the details.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your
inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:O
N:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: AG5B Jaguar
Date:
Apr 28, 2010
From:
"Hosler, John" <JHOSLER(at)epri.com>
You guys have any pictures with the Jaguar cowl and MT prop combo?
John
________________________________
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
I guess that IS the question isn't it.
Straight and level at 4000 feet, we were truing out at 152 knots. He
was running 2700 rpm, I was running 2830.
I could climb with him, but just barely.
Project X plane is next. I have a torque tube I'm stripping and getting
ready for paint. It'll be Red.
I've also ordered a windshield for Project X plane. The one that is in
it is too bastardized to make fit right.
As soon as 119ST is finished, I'll get started on it.
-----Original Message-----
From: Lawrence Massaro <lmassaro@tac-eng.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 28, 2010 8:46 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
So I gather from your response, the Project X plane will be using this
prop?
What were you seeing (numbers please!) on cruise and fuel burn as
compared to your AA-5 rocket?
Larry Massaro
9186M
1992 AG-5B
KRNM
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Sat, Apr 24, 2010 8:56 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
Ned picked up his plane today. We flew for about 30 minutes
side-by-side.
The CS MT PRop makes a big difference on cruise and fuel burn.
I want
one.
Gary
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Li
st
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
"923te" <923te(at)att.net>
Subject:
Re: AG5B Jaguar
Date:
Apr 28, 2010
Yeah,
Me too.
I could climb with Gary but just barely...
That is I had to put the nose way down and climb 20kts faster than best
climb rate;)
More info (numbers) soon as I finish flight testing.
Regards,
Ned
________________________________________________________________________________
From:
Davesbox1(at)AOL.COM
Date:
Apr 29, 2010
Subject:
Re: TeamGrumman-List Digest: 5 Msgs - 04/28/10
what's the difference exactly between the MT prop and the sensenich?
weight? twist? what's the pitch on this thing anyway...its not constant speed
is it?
dave N-74356
In a message dated 4/29/2010 2:07:45 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com writes:
*
=================================================
Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive
=================================================
Today's complete TeamGrumman-List Digest can also be found in either of
the
two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted
in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes
and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version
of the TeamGrumman-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text
editor
such as Notepad or with a web browser.
HTML Version:
http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter
10-04-28&Archive=TeamGrumman
Text Version:
http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter
2010-04-28&Archive=TeamGrumman
===============================================
EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
===============================================
----------------------------------------------------------
TeamGrumman-List Digest Archive
---
Total Messages Posted Wed 04/28/10: 5
----------------------------------------------------------
Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 08:44 AM - Re: Aileron Trim (Lawrence Massaro)
2. 08:46 AM - Re: AG5B Jaguar (Lawrence Massaro)
3. 03:25 PM - N119ST Jaguar (brian sandberg)
4. 03:45 PM - Re: Re: AG5B Jaguar (teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM)
5. 04:39 PM - N119ST Jaguar (brian sandberg)
________________________________ Message 1
_____________________________________
From: Lawrence Massaro <lmassaro@tac-eng.com>
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Aileron Trim
Thanks to all for the responses.
And re: rain, the plane is hangered.
The thing that gets me is that I dont recall it ever being a problem
until recently (over the last year maybe).
I am going to do a few test flights and apply Gary's check and move the
flaps small increments to see if that has an effect.
Larry Massaro
9186M
'92 AG-5B
KRNM
________________________________ Message 2
_____________________________________
From: Lawrence Massaro <lmassaro@tac-eng.com>
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
So I gather from your response, the Project X plane will be using this
prop?
What were you seeing (numbers please!) on cruise and fuel burn as compared
to your
AA-5 rocket?
Larry Massaro
9186M
1992 AG-5B
KRNM
**
From:teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Sat, Apr 24, 2010 8:56 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
Ned picked up his plane today. We flew for about 30 minutes side-by-side.
The CS MT PRop makes a big difference on cruise and fuel burn. I want
one.
Gary
**
________________________________ Message 3
_____________________________________
From: brian sandberg <sandbag23(at)msn.com>
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: N119ST Jaguar
Sounds great. I'm reading through 7 months worth of teamgrumman digests an
d eagerly awaiting my first flight in more than 8 months=2C the longest str
etch I've gone since 1998.
-Brian
Subject: N119ST Jaguar
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
I've been working on installing the Jaguar cowling on 119ST for a week now.
Other than the owner=2C no one else knows that 119ST was the plane I used
for all of my original company testing. 119ST has had 6 different prototy
pe cowlings=2C 3 different kinds of exit ramps=2C and 2 different versions
of air intakes tested on it. I used 119ST for a year way-back-when to test
a bunch of ideas. Check out pict 030.jpg.
I also had the cowling that is now on N1976T on 119ST about 3 years ago.
Maybe it's my familiarity with the plane or maybe that after installing 3 c
owlings in as many months=2C but=2C this one is going really smooth. The t
rim lines on this cowling are very close to the planes mounting flange.
Th
is plane has one shim (I got two responses from you guys on shims and dista
nces to the spinner=2C thanks) on each of the top mounts and the distance t
o the spinner is just a shade under 40 inches. It's got to be differences
in bushings and mounts . . . . but=2C I digress.
The cowling should be all trimmed up by tomorrow. The missing baffles shou
ld be here this week also. Then=2C all the rest of the details.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your
inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:O
N:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2
________________________________ Message 4
_____________________________________
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
I guess that IS the question isn't it.
Straight and level at 4000 feet, we were truing out at 152 knots. He was
running 2700 rpm, I was running 2830.
I could climb with him, but just barely.
Project X plane is next. I have a torque tube I'm stripping and getting
ready for paint. It'll be Red.
I've also ordered a windshield for Project X plane. The one that is in it
is too bastardized to make fit right.
As soon as 119ST is finished, I'll get started on it.
-----Original Message-----
From: Lawrence Massaro <lmassaro@tac-eng.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 28, 2010 8:46 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
So I gather from your response, the Project X plane will be using this pro
p?
What were you seeing (numbers please!) on cruise and fuel burn as compared
to your AA-5 rocket?
Larry Massaro
9186M
1992 AG-5B
KRNM
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Sat, Apr 24, 2010 8:56 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AG5B Jaguar
Ned picked up his plane today. We flew for about 30 minutes side-by
-side.
The CS MT PRop makes a big difference on cruise and fuel burn. I
want
one.
Gary
=======================
==========
=======================
==========
=======================
==========
=======================
==========
________________________________ Message 5
_____________________________________
From: brian sandberg <sandbag23(at)msn.com>
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: N119ST Jaguar
Sounds great. I'm reading through 7 months worth of teamgrumman digests an
d eagerly awaiting my first flight in more than 8 months=2C the longest str
etch I've gone since 1998.
-Brian
Subject: N119ST Jaguar
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
I've been working on installing the Jaguar cowling on 119ST for a week now.
Other than the owner=2C no one else knows that 119ST was the plane I used
for all of my original company testing. 119ST has had 6 different prototy
pe cowlings=2C 3 different kinds of exit ramps=2C and 2 different versions
of air intakes tested on it. I used 119ST for a year way-back-when to test
a bunch of ideas. Check out pict 030.jpg.
I also had the cowling that is now on N1976T on 119ST about 3 years ago.
Maybe it's my familiarity with the plane or maybe that after installing 3 c
owlings in as many months=2C but=2C this one is going really smooth. The t
rim lines on this cowling are very close to the planes mounting flange.
Th
is plane has one shim (I got two responses from you guys on shims and dista
nces to the spinner=2C thanks) on each of the top mounts and the distance t
o the spinner is just a shade under 40 inches. It's got to be differences
in bushings and mounts . . . . but=2C I digress.
The cowling should be all trimmed up by tomorrow. The missing baffles shou
ld be here this week also. Then=2C all the rest of the details.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your
inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:O
N:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
Re: AG5B Jaguar
Date:
Apr 29, 2010
From:
teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
-----Original Message-----
From: Hosler, John <JHOSLER(at)epri.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 28, 2010 7:03 pm
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
You guys have any pictures with the Jaguarcowl and MT prop combo?
John
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com[mailto:owner-teamgrumman
-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 20102:49 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re:AG5B Jaguar
I guess that IS the question isn't it.
Straight and level at 4000 feet, we weretruing out at 152 knots. He was
running 2700 rpm, I was running 2830.
I could climb with him, but just barely.
Project X plane is next. I have atorque tube I'm stripping and getting re
ady for paint. It'll be Red.
I've also ordered a windshield forProject X plane. The one that is in it
is too bastardized to make fitright.
As soonas 119ST is finished, I'll get started on it.
-----OriginalMessage-----
From: Lawrence Massaro <lmassaro@tac-eng.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 28, 2010 8:46 am
