TeamGrumman-Archive.digest.vol-az
April 29, 2010 - June 17, 2010
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
========================
===========
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
========================
===========
ttp://forums.matronics.com
========================
===========
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kevin Lancaster" <jkevinl(at)bellsouth.net> |
I'm eager to see some numbers too! We (True Flight) are set up to
distribute and install these and will be offering them on the new Tigers
too. As they say the proof is in the puddin' so how's the puddin' Ned?
Kevin
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
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: | "923te" <923te(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: TeamGrumman-List Digest: 5 Msgs - 04/28/10 |
Constant speed it is
Pitch is from 11 - 35 deg
Scimitar shaped design
Weight with spinner 54.7 pounds
Difference between MT and other 2 fixed pitch is that it provides more
thrust on less fuel.
Numbers will come after the turbulance and wind dies down and a good
flight test can be conducted.
A thorough flight test comparison was done on the earlier MT STC that
had the -17 blades and is available here:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0Ad6U0DSgjX1QZGRwd3IybjZfMGhwMnJzbWQ4&
hl=enest Regards,
All for now.....
Well I did fly 1240 miles to return home yesterday from the prop shop in
California. I flew at 11,500msl burning 7.9gph. First part of trip here:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N923TE/history/20100427/2233Z/KPMD/KSJ
N/tracklog
Your Fellow Grumman Enthusiast,
Ned
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: TeamGrumman-List Digest: 5 Msgs - 04/28/10 |
| From: | teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM |
Yes, the MT prop is a constant speed prop.
-----Original Message-----
From: Davesbox1(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Thu, Apr 29, 2010 6:08 am
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: TeamGrumman-List Digest: 5 Msgs - 04/28/10
what's the difference exactly between the MT prop and the sensenich? weig
ht? 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, teamgrumm
an-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 formatte
d
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 edi
tor
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 10-04-28&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 compar
ed 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 si
de-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 longes
t 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 proto
ty
pe cowlings=2C 3 different kinds of exit ramps=2C and 2 different ve
rsions
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 di
sta
nces to the spinner=2C thanks) on each of the top mounts and the dista
nce t
o the spinner is just a shade under 40 inches. It's got to be differenc
es
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 yo
ur
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 wa
s
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 compar
ed
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 sid
e-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 longes
t 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 proto
ty
pe cowlings=2C 3 different kinds of exit ramps=2C and 2 different ve
rsions
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 di
sta
nces to the spinner=2C thanks) on each of the top mounts and the dista
nce t
o the spinner is just a shade under 40 inches. It's got to be differenc
es
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 yo
ur
inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID2=====
========================
==================== Use utilitie
s Day ======================
========================
== - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ==========
========================
============== - List Contribution
Web Site sp; ===========
========================
===============
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM |
Kevin,
For what-it's-worth, Ken Tunnell (LyCon Engine Rebuilders) and I have a 10
:1 fuel injected engine in the works that is rated at 180 hp at 2550 rpm.
With the MT prop, it should climb like a homesick angel and get awesome
fuel mileage. The MT prop will take advantage of the extra torque and st
ill improve cruise speeds.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Lancaster <jkevinl(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Thu, Apr 29, 2010 3:05 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
I'm eager to see some numbers too! We (True Flight) are set up to distrib
ute and install these and will be offering them on the new Tigers too. As
they say the proof is in the puddin' so how's the puddin' Ned?
Kevin
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
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
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: | "Kevin Lancaster" <jkevinl(at)bellsouth.net> |
Hi Gary,
I like fast! Wonder how much power it would make
at........say......let's pull a random number out of the air
here.........2700 rpm?
COOOL! (note the BIG smile) ;-)
And while Ned was making great time flying East with fantastic tail
winds I flew almost 1400 miles in a 150hp AA1A in the opposite direction
into the wind - often at only 80-90 knots. Long trip - still fun! Some
guys have all the luck.
Kevin
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 12:13 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
For what-it's-worth, Ken Tunnell (LyCon Engine Rebuilders) and I have
a 10:1 fuel injected engine in the works that is rated at 180 hp at 2550
rpm. With the MT prop, it should climb like a homesick angel and get
awesome fuel mileage. The MT prop will take advantage of the extra
torque and still improve cruise speeds.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Lancaster <jkevinl(at)bellsouth.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thu, Apr 29, 2010 3:05 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
I'm eager to see some numbers too! We (True Flight) are set up to
distribute and install these and will be offering them on the new Tigers
too. As they say the proof is in the puddin' so how's the puddin' Ned?
Kevin
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
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
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: | teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM |
Kevin,
The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1 compression in a cer
tified engine is that the FAA would never approve it. Ken Tunnell is havi
ng a tough time with 10:1 approval at a reduced rpm in the Continental eng
ines for which he's in the process of getting an STC. He'll begin the Lyc
s as soon as either I come up with money or he gets the STC for the Conts.
On-the-other-hand, let's say, for example, a Tiger was made available as
a kit build experimental. Then,
(1) there is a WhirlWind prop that is much better than the MT prop.
(2) a tail wheel Tiger could be made easier
(3) no limits on engines
(4) construction techniques and problems with building could be sorted out
in the field instead of on the assembly line
All the development that you don't have money to do could be done by every
one else. Look at my "Dumb Design Decisions" on my web site. None of tho
se bad choices were addressed in the Tiger LLC version. I would venture
to guess a hundred hours in assembly time could be saved if more thought
were put into the process. "The janitor knows which broom is best." Joh
n Z DeLorean. I would venture to guess that a hundred pounds could be sha
ved off the plane too. "Adding horsepower makes you faster in the straigh
ts. Subtracting weight makes you faster everywhere." Colin Chapman, foun
der of Lotus cars and Team Lotus Racing. and "Every car (plane) has a lo
t of speed in it. The trick is getting speed out of it." A.J. Foyt
One step at a time. I can only afford to do so much. I have about $150,0
00 and 10 years invested in my cowling. Yes, it's true, I could make is
simpler and cheaper. But, the cooling would go out the window too. I pa
tterned my cooling inlets after the Mooney Ovation inlets. I see that the
y have changed to a simpler and cheaper inlet. It probably works. But,
who out there is willing to give up 15 degrees of CHT for a cheaper inlet
?
Project X: As soon as Brian's plane is gone and then Joe's plane and then
3 or so annuals, work begins on the Project X plane. It's an AG5B.
=A2 The first step is to fix (i.e., correct) the poorly designed car
b air inlet using as much hardware as is already there. The idea is to pro
vide something that is simple to install and regains the lost inch of pres
sure.
Lots of plans for Project X.
Stay tuned.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Lancaster <jkevinl(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Thu, Apr 29, 2010 10:00 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Hi Gary,
I like fast! Wonder how much power it would make at........say......let's
pull a random number out of the air here.........2700 rpm?
COOOL! (note the BIG smile) ;-)
And while Ned was making great time flying East with fantastic tail winds
I flew almost 1400 miles in a 150hp AA1A in the opposite direction into
the wind - often at only 80-90 knots. Long trip - still fun! Some guys
have all the luck.
Kevin
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 12:13 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
For what-it's-worth, Ken Tunnell (LyCon Engine Rebuilders) and I have a
10:1 fuel injected engine in the works that is rated at 180 hp at 2550
rpm. With the MT prop, it should climb like a homesick angel and get
awesome fuel mileage. The MT prop will take advantage of the extra tor
que and still improve cruise speeds.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Lancaster <jkevinl(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Thu, Apr 29, 2010 3:05 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
I'm eager to see some numbers too! We (True Flight) are set up to distr
ibute and install these and will be offering them on the new Tigers too.
As they say the proof is in the puddin' so how's the puddin' Ned?
Kevin
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
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 bes
t climb rate;)
More info (numbers) soon as I finish flight testing.
Regards,
Ned
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: | "923te" <923te(at)att.net> |
Two FAA certified examples of 10:1 pistons
1) The helicopter engine HIO-360-D1A which is rated at 190HP at 3200RPM
on 100/100LL with compression ratio of 10.00:1
2) Firewall Forward has STC'd 10:1 pistons in the Mooney and Cardinal
without RPM restrictions according to their representative spoke with.
http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf
Admittedly, these are not paraleel valve but are angle valve engines but
they do show that the FAA has approved 10:1 pistons at or above 2700rpm
----- Original Message ---
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1 compression in a
certified engine is that the FAA would never approve it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | teamgrumman(at)aol.com |
True. It can be done. You can put 10:1 pistons into an -A4K. But. You
would have to re-certify first, the engine, then the airframe for the add
itional horsepower, change the POH, come up with all new performance data,
reliability data, cooling data, . . . . . Is it worth it? You tell me.
I'll use your money to find out.
What I meant was, "the FAA would never approve putting 10:1 into an A4K ru
nning at 2700 rpm without lots of money." Keeping the -A4K at 180 hp make
s all the difference in the world.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 8:04 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Two FAA certified examples of 10:1 pistons
1) The helicopter engine HIO-360-D1A which is rated at 190HP at 3200RPM on
100/100LL with compression ratio of 10.00:1
2) Firewall Forward has STC'd 10:1 pistons in the Mooney and Cardinal wit
hout RPM restrictions according to their representative spoke with.
http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf
Admittedly, these are not paraleel valve but are angle valve engines but
they do show that the FAA has approved 10:1 pistons at or above 2700rpm
----- Original Message ---
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1 compression in a
certified engine is that the FAA would never approve it.
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
The Sparrow Hawk conversion of the O-235-L2C uses 9.7:1 CR as I recall
and 100LL fuel. And it is a parallel valve engine.
Maybe the more important question is how much longer are we going to
have 100LL fuel. Their is a stronger and stronger effort to get rid of
it. There are alternatives but I haven't heard of anyone talking about
10:1 CR engines running on it, only the HP big bore Continentals and
Lycomings with 8.5 and 8.7:1 and turbocharged engines. 10:1 might run
on something less than 100 octane but it would probably take knock
sensors and variable ignition timing to do it. Why pursue this as a
goal with so much stacked against you cost wise and maybe technology
wise?
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 9:14 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
True. It can be done. You can put 10:1 pistons into an -A4K. But.
You would have to re-certify first, the engine, then the airframe for
the additional horsepower, change the POH, come up with all new
performance data, reliability data, cooling data, . . . . . Is it worth
it? You tell me. I'll use your money to find out.
What I meant was, "the FAA would never approve putting 10:1 into an
A4K running at 2700 rpm without lots of money." Keeping the -A4K at 180
hp makes all the difference in the world.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 8:04 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Two FAA certified examples of 10:1 pistons
1) The helicopter engine HIO-360-D1A which is rated at 190HP at
3200RPM on 100/100LL with compression ratio of 10.00:1
2) Firewall Forward has STC'd 10:1 pistons in the Mooney and Cardinal
without RPM restrictions according to their representative spoke with.
http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf
Admittedly, these are not paraleel valve but are angle valve engines
but they do show that the FAA has approved 10:1 pistons at or above
2700rpm
----- Original Message ---
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1 compression in
a certified engine is that the FAA would never approve it.
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Davesbox1(at)AOL.COM |
my dad is an aerospace engineer retired......(physically but not mentally
lol) anyway when i bought the tiger 7 years ago....he of course read all
that he could on the aircraft and made about a dozen suggestions.....i talked
with a few A&P's and mentioned a couple to Dave Fletcher who is always a
fundamental source of good ideas and info....and almost all were prohibited-
required STC"s even down to simple things like re-routing the air
intake....its depressing......i understand the concept of safety safety
safety....AND establishing a system that respects and adheres to the engineers
plans (
and money) who developed the tiger in the first place....but damn....IF
we could take the name off the airplane and modify the hell out of it
legally.....it could be so much more efficient no? but i guess then we would
have a RV aircraft with incredible numbers on performance and almost no
restrictions on smart mods like electronic ignitions, un-obstructed air intakes,
custom exhausts........no?
dave
In a message dated 4/30/2010 11:23:31 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
teamgrumman(at)aol.com writes:
True. It can be done. You can put 10:1 pistons into an -A4K. But. You
would have to re-certify first, the engine, then the airframe for the
additional horsepower, change the POH, come up with all new performance data,
reliability data, cooling data, . . . . . Is it worth it? You tell me.
I'll use your money to find out.
What I meant was, "the FAA would never approve putting 10:1 into an A4K
running at 2700 rpm without lots of money." Keeping the -A4K at 180 hp makes
all the difference in the world.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 8:04 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Two FAA certified examples of 10:1 pistons
1) The helicopter engine HIO-360-D1A which is rated at 190HP at 3200RPM on
100/100LL with compression ratio of 10.00:1
2) Firewall Forward has STC'd 10:1 pistons in the Mooney and Cardinal
without RPM restrictions according to their representative spoke with.
_http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf_
(http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf)
Admittedly, these are not paraleel valve but are angle valve engines but
they do show that the FAA has approved 10:1 pistons at or above 2700rpm
----- Original Message ---
From: _teamgrumman(at)aol.com_ (mailto:teamgrumman(at)aol.com)
(mailto:teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com)
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1 compression in a
certified engine is that the FAA would never approve it.
===================================
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
==================================== ttp://forums.matronics.com
==================================== ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
====================================
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "923te" <923te(at)att.net> |
You just have to know the tricks of working with the FAA.
In this case the trick is in how to word the certification. That is
certify the 10:1 pistons in the Tiger by limiting the maximum continuous
horsepower to 180 by reducing manifold pressure and limiting maximum
continuous r.p.m. to 2700.
The 8.5:1 STC for the O-320 that Bill Scott has does it this way.
Then you would have to do similar proof tests just as Firewall Forward
did:
"The airframe and power plant certification testing involved engine dyno
runs to verify and document both H.P. and torque increases; engine
detonation testing performed at sea level conditions by authorized FAA
testing facilities; engine oil cooling tests performed by the FAA at
gross weight, max rate of climb and an ambient temperature of 100F,
engine propeller vibration and increase torque compatibility testing
performed by McCauley Engineers in Dayton, Ohio; effects of torque
increases on both spin entry and recovery in all flight regimes, and
engine out and airstart procedures evaluated for P.O.H. compliance."
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 11:14 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
True. It can be done. You can put 10:1 pistons into an -A4K. But.
You would have to re-certify first, the engine, then the airframe for
the additional horsepower, change the POH, come up with all new
performance data, reliability data, cooling data, . . . . . Is it worth
it? You tell me. I'll use your money to find out.
What I meant was, "the FAA would never approve putting 10:1 into an
A4K running at 2700 rpm without lots of money." Keeping the -A4K at 180
hp makes all the difference in the world.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 8:04 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Two FAA certified examples of 10:1 pistons
1) The helicopter engine HIO-360-D1A which is rated at 190HP at
3200RPM on 100/100LL with compression ratio of 10.00:1
2) Firewall Forward has STC'd 10:1 pistons in the Mooney and Cardinal
without RPM restrictions according to their representative spoke with.
http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf
Admittedly, these are not paraleel valve but are angle valve engines
but they do show that the FAA has approved 10:1 pistons at or above
2700rpm
----- Original Message ---
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1 compression in
a certified engine is that the FAA would never approve it.
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | teamgrumman(at)aol.com |
Bill Scott's STC limits rpm to 2650 rpm. Same as limiting manifold pressu
re at sea level.
Ned, I talked to Ken yesterday about making a 10:1 -A4K. A 10:1 -A4K woul
d be limited to about 2550 rpm at sea level to make 180 hp. Limit with rp
m or MAP, it's the same result. A none ported and polished 10:1 -A4K will
make about 210 hp at 2700 rpm.
Ken would be interested in doing the development work if you're interested
. One of my customers is selling his plane, a 76 TIger with a mid-time en
gine, for $58,000. If you buy the plane and get the engine modded by LyCo
n, I can get Bob on board for the flight tests. Since you know what needs
to be done, you could work with Bob and Ken and perhaps duplicate the tes
ting done by Firewall Forward. I'll take care of the paperwork that I can
do and do the flight testing with Bob as the FAA rep. Sounds like a grea
t idea.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sat, May 1, 2010 6:57 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
You just have to know the tricks of working with the FAA.
In this case the trick is in how to word the certification. That is certif
y the 10:1 pistons in the Tiger by limiting the maximum continuous horsepo
wer to 180 by reducing manifold pressure and limiting maximum continuous
r.p.m. to 2700.
The 8.5:1 STC for the O-320 that Bill Scott has does it this way.
Then you would have to do similar proof tests just as Firewall Forward did
:
"The airframe and power plant certification testing involved engine dyno
runs to verify and document both H.P. and torque increases; engine detona
tion testing performed at sea level conditions by authorized FAA testing
facilities; engine oil cooling tests performed by the FAA at gross weight
, max rate of climb and an ambient temperature of 100F, engine propeller
vibration and increase torque compatibility testing performed by McCauley
Engineers in Dayton, Ohio; effects of torque increases on both spin entry
and recovery in all flight regimes, and engine out and airstart procedure
s evaluated for P.O.H. compliance."
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 11:14 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
True. It can be done. You can put 10:1 pistons into an -A4K. But.
You would have to re-certify first, the engine, then the airframe for
the additional horsepower, change the POH, come up with all new perform
ance data, reliability data, cooling data, . . . . . Is it worth it?
You tell me. I'll use your money to find out.
What I meant was, "the FAA would never approve putting 10:1 into an A4K
running at 2700 rpm without lots of money." Keeping the -A4K at 180 hp
makes all the difference in the world.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 8:04 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Two FAA certified examples of 10:1 pistons
1) The helicopter engine HIO-360-D1A which is rated at 190HP at 3200RPM
on 100/100LL with compression ratio of 10.00:1
2) Firewall Forward has STC'd 10:1 pistons in the Mooney and Cardinal
without RPM restrictions according to their representative spoke with.
http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf
Admittedly, these are not paraleel valve but are angle valve engines but
they do show that the FAA has approved 10:1 pistons at or above 2700rpm
----- Original Message ---
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1 compression in a
certified engine is that the FAA would never approve it.
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
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | For sale 1976 AA5B |
| From: | Keith Wannamaker <keith(at)wannamaker.org> |
2660TT 780SFRM
17-gal aux tank
Maintained by Gary Vogt
PDF of previous 3 annuals available
pics at http://jbarm.com/fly/
650.210.6574
$55k with fresh May annual
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "923te" <923te(at)att.net> |
"Same as limiting manifold pressure" is true only for a fixed pitch
prop. We are talking about using a constant speed prop right?
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Bill Scott's STC limits rpm to 2650 rpm. Same as limiting manifold
pressure at sea level.
Ned, I talked to Ken yesterday about making a 10:1 -A4K. A 10:1 -A4K
would be limited to about 2550 rpm at sea level to make 180 hp. Limit
with rpm or MAP, it's the same result. A none ported and polished 10:1
-A4K will make about 210 hp at 2700 rpm.
Ken would be interested in doing the development work if you're
interested. One of my customers is selling his plane, a 76 TIger with a
mid-time engine, for $58,000. If you buy the plane and get the engine
modded by LyCon, I can get Bob on board for the flight tests. Since you
know what needs to be done, you could work with Bob and Ken and perhaps
duplicate the testing done by Firewall Forward. I'll take care of the
paperwork that I can do and do the flight testing with Bob as the FAA
rep. Sounds like a great idea.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sat, May 1, 2010 6:57 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
You just have to know the tricks of working with the FAA.
In this case the trick is in how to word the certification. That is
certify the 10:1 pistons in the Tiger by limiting the maximum continuous
horsepower to 180 by reducing manifold pressure and limiting maximum
continuous r.p.m. to 2700.
The 8.5:1 STC for the O-320 that Bill Scott has does it this way.
Then you would have to do similar proof tests just as Firewall Forward
did:
"The airframe and power plant certification testing involved engine
dyno runs to verify and document both H.P. and torque increases; engine
detonation testing performed at sea level conditions by authorized FAA
testing facilities; engine oil cooling tests performed by the FAA at
gross weight, max rate of climb and an ambient temperature of 100F,
engine propeller vibration and increase torque compatibility testing
performed by McCauley Engineers in Dayton, Ohio; effects of torque
increases on both spin entry and recovery in all flight regimes, and
engine out and airstart procedures evaluated for P.O.H. compliance."
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 11:14 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
True. It can be done. You can put 10:1 pistons into an -A4K.
But. You would have to re-certify first, the engine, then the airframe
for the additional horsepower, change the POH, come up with all new
performance data, reliability data, cooling data, . . . . . Is it worth
it? You tell me. I'll use your money to find out.
What I meant was, "the FAA would never approve putting 10:1 into an
A4K running at 2700 rpm without lots of money." Keeping the -A4K at 180
hp makes all the difference in the world.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 8:04 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Two FAA certified examples of 10:1 pistons
1) The helicopter engine HIO-360-D1A which is rated at 190HP at
3200RPM on 100/100LL with compression ratio of 10.00:1
2) Firewall Forward has STC'd 10:1 pistons in the Mooney and
Cardinal without RPM restrictions according to their representative
spoke with.
http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf
Admittedly, these are not paraleel valve but are angle valve engines
but they do show that the FAA has approved 10:1 pistons at or above
2700rpm
----- Original Message ---
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1 compression
in a certified engine is that the FAA would never approve it.
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: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
Why? Reducing either will decrease horsepower. A manifold pressure
limitation would be better since you would be able to have full power at
altitude after the MP drops to the limit. So at altitude it would act
as a larger more powerful engine. Limiting RPM would limit you all the
way from the ground up. But limiting RPM with the governor setting is
easier to control and less likely for the pilot to CHEAT during takeoff
and climb with a CS prop.
Bill Scott limited RPM to 26r0 since that was the rpm that resulted in a
5% increase in HP. For the 180 hp that would amount to whatever
resulted in 189 hp.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 4:46 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
"Same as limiting manifold pressure" is true only for a fixed pitch
prop. We are talking about using a constant speed prop right?
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Bill Scott's STC limits rpm to 2650 rpm. Same as limiting manifold
pressure at sea level.
Ned, I talked to Ken yesterday about making a 10:1 -A4K. A 10:1
-A4K would be limited to about 2550 rpm at sea level to make 180 hp.
Limit with rpm or MAP, it's the same result. A none ported and polished
10:1 -A4K will make about 210 hp at 2700 rpm.
Ken would be interested in doing the development work if you're
interested. One of my customers is selling his plane, a 76 TIger with a
mid-time engine, for $58,000. If you buy the plane and get the engine
modded by LyCon, I can get Bob on board for the flight tests. Since you
know what needs to be done, you could work with Bob and Ken and perhaps
duplicate the testing done by Firewall Forward. I'll take care of the
paperwork that I can do and do the flight testing with Bob as the FAA
rep. Sounds like a great idea.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sat, May 1, 2010 6:57 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
You just have to know the tricks of working with the FAA.
In this case the trick is in how to word the certification. That is
certify the 10:1 pistons in the Tiger by limiting the maximum continuous
horsepower to 180 by reducing manifold pressure and limiting maximum
continuous r.p.m. to 2700.
The 8.5:1 STC for the O-320 that Bill Scott has does it this way.
Then you would have to do similar proof tests just as Firewall
Forward did:
"The airframe and power plant certification testing involved engine
dyno runs to verify and document both H.P. and torque increases; engine
detonation testing performed at sea level conditions by authorized FAA
testing facilities; engine oil cooling tests performed by the FAA at
gross weight, max rate of climb and an ambient temperature of 100F,
engine propeller vibration and increase torque compatibility testing
performed by McCauley Engineers in Dayton, Ohio; effects of torque
increases on both spin entry and recovery in all flight regimes, and
engine out and airstart procedures evaluated for P.O.H. compliance."
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 11:14 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
True. It can be done. You can put 10:1 pistons into an -A4K.
But. You would have to re-certify first, the engine, then the airframe
for the additional horsepower, change the POH, come up with all new
performance data, reliability data, cooling data, . . . . . Is it worth
it? You tell me. I'll use your money to find out.
What I meant was, "the FAA would never approve putting 10:1 into
an A4K running at 2700 rpm without lots of money." Keeping the -A4K at
180 hp makes all the difference in the world.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 8:04 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Two FAA certified examples of 10:1 pistons
1) The helicopter engine HIO-360-D1A which is rated at 190HP at
3200RPM on 100/100LL with compression ratio of 10.00:1
2) Firewall Forward has STC'd 10:1 pistons in the Mooney and
Cardinal without RPM restrictions according to their representative
spoke with.
http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf
Admittedly, these are not paraleel valve but are angle valve
engines but they do show that the FAA has approved 10:1 pistons at or
above 2700rpm
----- Original Message ---
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1
compression in a certified engine is that the FAA would never approve
it.
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
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ned Thomas <923te(at)att.net> |
The idea is to show the FAA that you are not exceeding the HP
certification of the engine. So put in 10:1 pistons and limit to
manifold psi that equals the previously FAA approved HP limit for the
engine. This is the route Firewall Forward took and were succesful
with in achieving FAA approval.
LAike you say Cliff if you limit by RPM you will get less Thrust.
Limit by MP pressure and you can still crank out the RPM up high.
This assumes a controllable pitch prop. AND most controllable pitch
props are most efficient at less than 2700 RPM more like 2400 - 2500
As I understand it. So the idea is to get rated HP at the most
efficient prop RPM
Sent from my iPhone
On May 2, 2010, at 7:33 PM, "flyv35b" wrote:
> Why? Reducing either will decrease horsepower. A manifold pressure
> limitation would be better since you would be able to have full
> power at altitude after the MP drops to the limit. So at altitude
> it would act as a larger more powerful engine. Limiting RPM would
> limit you all the way from the ground up. But limiting RPM with the
> governor setting is easier to control and less likely for the pilot
> to CHEAT during takeoff and climb with a CS prop.
>
> Bill Scott limited RPM to 26r0 since that was the rpm that resulted
> in a 5% increase in HP. For the 180 hp that would amount to
> whatever resulted in 189 hp.
>
> Cliff
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: 923te
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 4:46 PM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
>
> "Same as limiting manifold pressure" is true only for a fixed pitch
> prop. We are talking about using a constant speed prop right?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 4:03 PM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
>
> Bill Scott's STC limits rpm to 2650 rpm. Same as limiting manifold
> pressure at sea level.
>
> Ned, I talked to Ken yesterday about making a 10:1 -A4K. A 10:1 -
> A4K would be limited to about 2550 rpm at sea level to make 180 hp.
> Limit with rpm or MAP, it's the same result. A none ported and
> polished 10:1 -A4K will make about 210 hp at 2700 rpm.
>
> Ken would be interested in doing the development work if you're
> interested. One of my customers is selling his plane, a 76 TIger
> with a mid-time engine, for $58,000. If you buy the plane and get
> the engine modded by LyCon, I can get Bob on board for the flight
> tests. Since you know what needs to be done, you could work with
> Bob and Ken and perhaps duplicate the testing done by Firewall
> Forward. I'll take care of the paperwork that I can do and do the
> flight testing with Bob as the FAA rep. Sounds like a great idea.
>
> Gary
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sat, May 1, 2010 6:57 am
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
>
> You just have to know the tricks of working with the FAA.
> In this case the trick is in how to word the certification. That is
> certify the 10:1 pistons in the Tiger by limiting the maximum
> continuous horsepower to 180 by reducing manifold pressure and
> limiting maximum continuous r.p.m. to 2700.
>
> The 8.5:1 STC for the O-320 that Bill Scott has does it this way.
>
> Then you would have to do similar proof tests just as Firewall
> Forward did:
> "The airframe and power plant certification testing involved engine
> dyno runs to verify and document both H.P. and torque increases;
> engine detonation testing performed at sea level conditions by
> authorized FAA testing facilities; engine oil cooling tests
> performed by the FAA at gross weight, max rate of climb and an
> ambient temperature of 100F, engine propeller vibration and increase
> torque compatibility testing performed by McCauley Engineers in
> Dayton, Ohio; effects of torque increases on both spin entry and
> recovery in all flight regimes, and engine out and airstart
> procedures evaluated for P.O.H. compliance."
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 11:14 PM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
>
> True. It can be done. You can put 10:1 pistons into an -A4K.
> But. You would have to re-certify first, the engine, then the
> airframe for the additional horsepower, change the POH, come up with
> all new performance data, reliability data, cooling data, . . . . .
> Is it worth it? You tell me. I'll use your money to find out.
>
> What I meant was, "the FAA would never approve putting 10:1 into an
> A4K running at 2700 rpm without lots of money." Keeping the -A4K at
> 180 hp makes all the difference in the world.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 8:04 pm
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
>
> Two FAA certified examples of 10:1 pistons
> 1) The helicopter engine HIO-360-D1A which is rated at 190HP at
> 3200RPM on 100/100LL with compression ratio of 10.00:1
> 2) Firewall Forward has STC'd 10:1 pistons in the Mooney and
> Cardinal without RPM restrictions according to their representative
> spoke with.
> http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf
> Admittedly, these are not paraleel valve but are angle valve engines
> but they do show that the FAA has approved 10:1 pistons at or above
> 2700rpm
>
>
> ----- Original Message ---
> From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:33 PM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
>
> Kevin,
>
> The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1 compression in
> a certified engine is that the FAA would never approve it.
>
>
> 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
>
>
> 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: | teamgrumman(at)aol.com |
no, I wasn't. lots of folks out there with -A4K and no CS prop.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 4:46 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
"Same as limiting manifold pressure" is true only for a fixed pitch prop.
We are talking about using a constant speed prop right?
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Bill Scott's STC limits rpm to 2650 rpm. Same as limiting manifold pres
sure at sea level.
Ned, I talked to Ken yesterday about making a 10:1 -A4K. A 10:1 -A4K wo
uld be limited to about 2550 rpm at sea level to make 180 hp. Limit wit
h rpm or MAP, it's the same result. A none ported and polished 10:1 -A4
K will make about 210 hp at 2700 rpm.
Ken would be interested in doing the development work if you're interest
ed. One of my customers is selling his plane, a 76 TIger with a mid-tim
e engine, for $58,000. If you buy the plane and get the engine modded
by LyCon, I can get Bob on board for the flight tests. Since you know
what needs to be done, you could work with Bob and Ken and perhaps dupl
icate the testing done by Firewall Forward. I'll take care of the paper
work that I can do and do the flight testing with Bob as the FAA rep.
Sounds like a great idea.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sat, May 1, 2010 6:57 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
You just have to know the tricks of working with the FAA.
In this case the trick is in how to word the certification. That is cert
ify the 10:1 pistons in the Tiger by limiting the maximum continuous hor
sepower to 180 by reducing manifold pressure and limiting maximum contin
uous r.p.m. to 2700.
The 8.5:1 STC for the O-320 that Bill Scott has does it this way.
Then you would have to do similar proof tests just as Firewall Forward
did:
"The airframe and power plant certification testing involved engine dyno
runs to verify and document both H.P. and torque increases; engine deto
nation testing performed at sea level conditions by authorized FAA testi
ng facilities; engine oil cooling tests performed by the FAA at gross we
ight, max rate of climb and an ambient temperature of 100F, engine prope
ller vibration and increase torque compatibility testing performed by Mc
Cauley Engineers in Dayton, Ohio; effects of torque increases on both sp
in entry and recovery in all flight regimes, and engine out and airstart
procedures evaluated for P.O.H. compliance."
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 11:14 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
True. It can be done. You can put 10:1 pistons into an -A4K. But.
You would have to re-certify first, the engine, then the airframe fo
r the additional horsepower, change the POH, come up with all new perf
ormance data, reliability data, cooling data, . . . . . Is it worth
it? You tell me. I'll use your money to find out.
What I meant was, "the FAA would never approve putting 10:1 into an A4K
running at 2700 rpm without lots of money." Keeping the -A4K at 180
hp makes all the difference in the world.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 8:04 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Two FAA certified examples of 10:1 pistons
1) The helicopter engine HIO-360-D1A which is rated at 190HP at 3200RP
M on 100/100LL with compression ratio of 10.00:1
2) Firewall Forward has STC'd 10:1 pistons in the Mooney and Cardinal
without RPM restrictions according to their representative spoke with
.
http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf
Admittedly, these are not paraleel valve but are angle valve engines
but they do show that the FAA has approved 10:1 pistons at or above
2700rpm
----- Original Message ---
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1 compression in
a certified engine is that the FAA would never approve it.
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: | teamgrumman(at)AOL.com |
The Mooney has a CS prop. There are a lot of things you can do with a CS
prop that you can't with a fixed pitch. Unless you are going to limit th
e 10:1 to planes that also purchase a $15,000 prop, the conversation makes
no sense. People out there just don't have that kind of money. I can pu
t a 10:1 engine together at top overhaul for $6,000. That makes a hell of
a lot more sense than trying to sell an MT prop at the same time.
Kevin opened the conversation when I talked about a derated 10:1 -A4K for
Tigers. How the conversation assumed a CS prop was included is beyond me
.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ned Thomas <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 6:59 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
The idea is to show the FAA that you are not exceeding the HP certificatio
n of the engine. So put in 10:1 pistons and limit to manifold psi that equ
als the previously FAA approved HP limit for the engine. This is the route
Firewall Forward took and were succesful with in achieving FAA approval.
LAike you say Cliff if you limit by RPM you will get less Thrust. Limit
by MP pressure and you can still crank out the RPM up high.
This assumes a controllable pitch prop. AND most controllable pitch props
are most efficient at less than 2700 RPM more like 2400 - 2500 As I under
stand it. So the idea is to get rated HP at the most efficient prop RPM
Sent from my iPhone
On May 2, 2010, at 7:33 PM, "flyv35b" wrote:
Why? Reducing either will decrease horsepower. A manifold pressure limit
ation would be better since you would be able to have full power at altitu
de after the MP drops to the limit. So at altitude it would act as a larg
er more powerful engine. Limiting RPM would limit you all the way from th
e ground up. But limiting RPM with the governor setting is easier to cont
rol and less likely for the pilot to CHEAT during takeoff and climb with
a CS prop.
Bill Scott limited RPM to 26r0 since that was the rpm that resulted in a
5% increase in HP. For the 180 hp that would amount to whatever resulted
in 189 hp.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 4:46 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
"Same as limiting manifold pressure" is true only for a fixed pitch prop
. We are talking about using a constant speed prop right?
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Bill Scott's STC limits rpm to 2650 rpm. Same as limiting manifold pr
essure at sea level.
Ned, I talked to Ken yesterday about making a 10:1 -A4K. A 10:1 -A4K
would be limited to about 2550 rpm at sea level to make 180 hp. Limi
t with rpm or MAP, it's the same result. A none ported and polished
10:1 -A4K will make about 210 hp at 2700 rpm.
Ken would be interested in doing the development work if you're intere
sted. One of my customers is selling his plane, a 76 TIger with a mid
-time engine, for $58,000. If you buy the plane and get the engine mo
dded by LyCon, I can get Bob on board for the flight tests. Since you
know what needs to be done, you could work with Bob and Ken and perha
ps duplicate the testing done by Firewall Forward. I'll take care of
the paperwork that I can do and do the flight testing with Bob as the
FAA rep. Sounds like a great idea.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sat, May 1, 2010 6:57 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
You just have to know the tricks of working with the FAA.
In this case the trick is in how to word the certification. That is ce
rtify the 10:1 pistons in the Tiger by limiting the maximum continuous
horsepower to 180 by reducing manifold pressure and limiting maximum
continuous r.p.m. to 2700.
The 8.5:1 STC for the O-320 that Bill Scott has does it this way.
Then you would have to do similar proof tests just as Firewall Forward
did:
"The airframe and power plant certification testing involved engine dy
no runs to verify and document both H.P. and torque increases; engine
detonation testing performed at sea level conditions by authorized FA
A testing facilities; engine oil cooling tests performed by the FAA at
gross weight, max rate of climb and an ambient temperature of 100F,
engine propeller vibration and increase torque compatibility testing
performed by McCauley Engineers in Dayton, Ohio; effects of torque in
creases on both spin entry and recovery in all flight regimes, and eng
ine out and airstart procedures evaluated for P.O.H. compliance."
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 11:14 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
True. It can be done. You can put 10:1 pistons into an -A4K. But
. You would have to re-certify first, the engine, then the airframe
for the additional horsepower, change the POH, come up with all new
performance data, reliability data, cooling data, . . . . . Is it
worth it? You tell me. I'll use your money to find out.
What I meant was, "the FAA would never approve putting 10:1 into an
A4K running at 2700 rpm without lots of money." Keeping the -A4K at
180 hp makes all the difference in the world.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 8:04 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Two FAA certified examples of 10:1 pistons
1) The helicopter engine HIO-360-D1A which is rated at 190HP at 3200
RPM on 100/100LL with compression ratio of 10.00:1
2) Firewall Forward has STC'd 10:1 pistons in the Mooney and Cardin
al without RPM restrictions according to their representative spoke
with.
http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf
Admittedly, these are not paraleel valve but are angle valve engines
but they do show that the FAA has approved 10:1 pistons at or above
2700rpm
----- Original Message ---
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1 compression
in a certified engine is that the FAA would never approve it.
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
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: | "923te" <923te(at)att.net> |
So why was it that you thought it was a great idea?
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 10:55 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
The Mooney has a CS prop. There are a lot of things you can do with a
CS prop that you can't with a fixed pitch. Unless you are going to
limit the 10:1 to planes that also purchase a $15,000 prop, the
conversation makes no sense. People out there just don't have that kind
of money. I can put a 10:1 engine together at top overhaul for $6,000.
That makes a hell of a lot more sense than trying to sell an MT prop at
the same time.
Kevin opened the conversation when I talked about a derated 10:1 -A4K
for Tigers. How the conversation assumed a CS prop was included is
beyond me.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ned Thomas <923te(at)att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 6:59 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
The idea is to show the FAA that you are not exceeding the HP
certification of the engine. So put in 10:1 pistons and limit to
manifold psi that equals the previously FAA approved HP limit for the
engine. This is the route Firewall Forward took and were succesful with
in achieving FAA approval.
LAike you say Cliff if you limit by RPM you will get less Thrust.
Limit by MP pressure and you can still crank out the RPM up high.
This assumes a controllable pitch prop. AND most controllable pitch
props are most efficient at less than 2700 RPM more like 2400 - 2500 As
I understand it. So the idea is to get rated HP at the most efficient
prop RPM
Sent from my iPhone
On May 2, 2010, at 7:33 PM, "flyv35b" wrote:
Why? Reducing either will decrease horsepower. A manifold pressure
limitation would be better since you would be able to have full power at
altitude after the MP drops to the limit. So at altitude it would act
as a larger more powerful engine. Limiting RPM would limit you all the
way from the ground up. But limiting RPM with the governor setting is
easier to control and less likely for the pilot to CHEAT during takeoff
and climb with a CS prop.
Bill Scott limited RPM to 26r0 since that was the rpm that resulted
in a 5% increase in HP. For the 180 hp that would amount to whatever
resulted in 189 hp.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 4:46 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
"Same as limiting manifold pressure" is true only for a fixed
pitch prop. We are talking about using a constant speed prop right?
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Bill Scott's STC limits rpm to 2650 rpm. Same as limiting
manifold pressure at sea level.
Ned, I talked to Ken yesterday about making a 10:1 -A4K. A 10:1
-A4K would be limited to about 2550 rpm at sea level to make 180 hp.
Limit with rpm or MAP, it's the same result. A none ported and polished
10:1 -A4K will make about 210 hp at 2700 rpm.
Ken would be interested in doing the development work if you're
interested. One of my customers is selling his plane, a 76 TIger with a
mid-time engine, for $58,000. If you buy the plane and get the engine
modded by LyCon, I can get Bob on board for the flight tests. Since you
know what needs to be done, you could work with Bob and Ken and perhaps
duplicate the testing done by Firewall Forward. I'll take care of the
paperwork that I can do and do the flight testing with Bob as the FAA
rep. Sounds like a great idea.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sat, May 1, 2010 6:57 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
You just have to know the tricks of working with the FAA.
In this case the trick is in how to word the certification. That
is certify the 10:1 pistons in the Tiger by limiting the maximum
continuous horsepower to 180 by reducing manifold pressure and limiting
maximum continuous r.p.m. to 2700.
The 8.5:1 STC for the O-320 that Bill Scott has does it this
way.
Then you would have to do similar proof tests just as Firewall
Forward did:
"The airframe and power plant certification testing involved
engine dyno runs to verify and document both H.P. and torque increases;
engine detonation testing performed at sea level conditions by
authorized FAA testing facilities; engine oil cooling tests performed by
the FAA at gross weight, max rate of climb and an ambient temperature of
100F, engine propeller vibration and increase torque compatibility
testing performed by McCauley Engineers in Dayton, Ohio; effects of
torque increases on both spin entry and recovery in all flight regimes,
and engine out and airstart procedures evaluated for P.O.H. compliance."
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 11:14 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
True. It can be done. You can put 10:1 pistons into an
-A4K. But. You would have to re-certify first, the engine, then the
airframe for the additional horsepower, change the POH, come up with all
new performance data, reliability data, cooling data, . . . . . Is it
worth it? You tell me. I'll use your money to find out.
What I meant was, "the FAA would never approve putting 10:1
into an A4K running at 2700 rpm without lots of money." Keeping the
-A4K at 180 hp makes all the difference in the world.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 8:04 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Two FAA certified examples of 10:1 pistons
1) The helicopter engine HIO-360-D1A which is rated at 190HP
at 3200RPM on 100/100LL with compression ratio of 10.00:1
2) Firewall Forward has STC'd 10:1 pistons in the Mooney and
Cardinal without RPM restrictions according to their representative
spoke with.
http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf
Admittedly, these are not paraleel valve but are angle valve
engines but they do show that the FAA has approved 10:1 pistons at or
above 2700rpm
----- Original Message ---
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1
compression in a certified engine is that the FAA would never approve
it.
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
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: | "923te" <923te(at)att.net> |
Gary,
In all your testing for the Jaguar Cowling did you happen to get before
and after manifold pressure data? If so, for the same conditions, is the
manifold pressure lower with the Jaguar cowl than with the factory
cowl? Seems apparent that you have slowed the airflow over the cylinders
ie dropped the pressure on top of the cylinders.....
Ned
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | teamgrumman(at)aol.com |
I have slowed the airflow down, Ned. And, thanks to a fellow named Bernou
lli, pressure goes up. I got 1.5 to 2.5 inches more pressure drop across
the cylinders than stock using half the inlet area. All those years in
fluid dynamics weren't wasted.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 9:23 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Gary,
In all your testing for the Jaguar Cowling did you happen to get before an
d after manifold pressure data? If so, for the same conditions, is the man
ifold pressure lower with the Jaguar cowl than with the factory cowl? See
ms apparent that you have slowed the airflow over the cylinders ie dropped
the pressure on top of the cylinders.....
Ned
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Compression test |
| From: | teamgrumman(at)aol.com |
Cliff,
Remember when we talked about doing cranking pressure tests? I started do
ing cranking pressure tests as a side-by-side comparison test to the leak
down test.
Yesterday, I was doing the tests on a Tiger as
(1) leak-down/cranking
(3) cranking/leak-down
(2) leak-down/cranking
(4) cranking/leak-down.
I compared the previous years tests as I went. When I got to the #4, the
cranking pressure was about 6 psi lower. Not a big deal. I regularly se
e variations of plus or minus 4 or 5 lbs. This one, however, seemed like
it took 6 revolutions of the engine to build pressure. (it normally take
s about 4 passes to reach peak).
When I checked leak-down, it was 55/80. The odd thing was, no sound of le
aking air at the oil filler neck or exhaust pipe. That much would show up
somewhere. As I was looking for a leak, I noticed a lot of air coming ou
t of the #1 top plug hole. A leak at the #4 intake was the only explanati
on. I've never encountered a leak at the intake valve.
I removed the rocker cover and intake rocker arm thinking it might be a st
uck lifter. Same result. With pressure on it, I gave the intake valve a
quick 'pop' with a small rubber mallet. Compression went right to 77/80.
I took it apart and put it back together after cleaning the lifter and mea
suring the dry tappet clearance (0.048 inches). Ran the engine, checked
again, and 77/80.
Have you (or anyone else) seen such a thing?
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Compression test |
Well Gary ..... sort of. I've had engines over the years where the
pressures were normally close on all 4 cylinders, and all of a sudden
there's a big change in one ....... never for the better. However, I
could detect hissing in the exhaust. Pulling the prop through with air
pressure on the cylinder might change the reading when we got back to
firing position. Sometimes it would take rapping the valve stem with a
rubber mallet. I remove the rocker arm when I do that ...... just to
keep from an 'oops'. Usually one of the above works. I think some crap
gets on the valve seat causing it to leak. Don't know why it takes that
opportunity to get in the way, but it seems to. A last resort (to fix
it) was to go run the engine again, leaning the dickens out of it.
Borescoping the valve face was the final determinant.
Never had a fix for leaking rings though!!!
The rubber mallet thingy was told to me by an A&P/IA that mentored me
years ago. He was full of knowledge gained over the long years he was
involved in aviation ..... and he never led me astray. I miss him terribly.
Linn
teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
> Cliff,
>
> Remember when we talked about doing cranking pressure tests? I started
> doing cranking pressure tests as a side-by-side comparison test to the
> leak down test.
>
> Yesterday, I was doing the tests on a Tiger as
> (1) leak-down/cranking
> (3) cranking/leak-down
> (2) leak-down/cranking
> (4) cranking/leak-down.
>
> I compared the previous years tests as I went. When I got to the #4,
> the cranking pressure was about 6 psi lower. Not a big deal. I
> regularly see variations of plus or minus 4 or 5 lbs. This one,
> however, seemed like it took 6 revolutions of the engine to build
> pressure. (it normally takes about 4 passes to reach peak).
>
> When I checked leak-down, it was 55/80. The odd thing was, no sound of
> leaking air at the oil filler neck or exhaust pipe. That much would
> show up somewhere. As I was looking for a leak, I noticed a lot of air
> coming out of the #1 top plug hole. A leak at the #4 intake was the
> only explanation. I've never encountered a leak at the intake valve.
>
> I removed the rocker cover and intake rocker arm thinking it might be a
> stuck lifter. Same result. With pressure on it, I gave the intake
> valve a quick 'pop' with a small rubber mallet. Compression went right
> to 77/80.
>
> I took it apart and put it back together after cleaning the lifter and
> measuring the dry tappet clearance (0.048 inches). Ran the engine,
> checked again, and 77/80.
>
> Have you (or anyone else) seen such a thing?
>
> Gary
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | teamgrumman(at)aol.com |
I'd be using your money.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 9:16 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
So why was it that you thought it was a great idea?
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 10:55 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
The Mooney has a CS prop. There are a lot of things you can do with a
CS prop that you can't with a fixed pitch. Unless you are going to lim
it the 10:1 to planes that also purchase a $15,000 prop, the conversatio
n makes no sense. People out there just don't have that kind of money.
I can put a 10:1 engine together at top overhaul for $6,000. That mak
es a hell of a lot more sense than trying to sell an MT prop at the same
time.
Kevin opened the conversation when I talked about a derated 10:1 -A4K for
Tigers. How the conversation assumed a CS prop was included is beyond
me.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ned Thomas <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 6:59 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
The idea is to show the FAA that you are not exceeding the HP certificat
ion of the engine. So put in 10:1 pistons and limit to manifold psi that
equals the previously FAA approved HP limit for the engine. This is the
route Firewall Forward took and were succesful with in achieving FAA
approval.
LAike you say Cliff if you limit by RPM you will get less Thrust. Limit
by MP pressure and you can still crank out the RPM up high.
This assumes a controllable pitch prop. AND most controllable pitch props
are most efficient at less than 2700 RPM more like 2400 - 2500 As I und
erstand it. So the idea is to get rated HP at the most efficient prop
RPM
Sent from my iPhone
On May 2, 2010, at 7:33 PM, "flyv35b" wrote:
Why? Reducing either will decrease horsepower. A manifold pressure
limitation would be better since you would be able to have full power
at altitude after the MP drops to the limit. So at altitude it would
act as a larger more powerful engine. Limiting RPM would limit you
all the way from the ground up. But limiting RPM with the governor
setting is easier to control and less likely for the pilot to CHEAT
during takeoff and climb with a CS prop.
Bill Scott limited RPM to 26r0 since that was the rpm that resulted in
a 5% increase in HP. For the 180 hp that would amount to whatever re
sulted in 189 hp.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 4:46 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
"Same as limiting manifold pressure" is true only for a fixed pitch
prop. We are talking about using a constant speed prop right?
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Bill Scott's STC limits rpm to 2650 rpm. Same as limiting manifol
d pressure at sea level.
Ned, I talked to Ken yesterday about making a 10:1 -A4K. A 10:1
-A4K would be limited to about 2550 rpm at sea level to make 180
hp. Limit with rpm or MAP, it's the same result. A none ported
and polished 10:1 -A4K will make about 210 hp at 2700 rpm.
Ken would be interested in doing the development work if you're in
terested. One of my customers is selling his plane, a 76 TIger wi
th a mid-time engine, for $58,000. If you buy the plane and get
the engine modded by LyCon, I can get Bob on board for the flight tests.
Since you know what needs to be done, you could work with Bob an
d Ken and perhaps duplicate the testing done by Firewall Forward.
I'll take care of the paperwork that I can do and do the flight
testing with Bob as the FAA rep. Sounds like a great idea.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sat, May 1, 2010 6:57 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
You just have to know the tricks of working with the FAA.
In this case the trick is in how to word the certification. That
is certify the 10:1 pistons in the Tiger by limiting the maximum
continuous horsepower to 180 by reducing manifold pressure and li
miting maximum continuous r.p.m. to 2700.
The 8.5:1 STC for the O-320 that Bill Scott has does it this way.
Then you would have to do similar proof tests just as Firewall For
ward did:
"The airframe and power plant certification testing involved engin
e dyno runs to verify and document both H.P. and torque increases;
engine detonation testing performed at sea level conditions by au
thorized FAA testing facilities; engine oil cooling tests performe
d by the FAA at gross weight, max rate of climb and an ambient tem
perature of 100F, engine propeller vibration and increase torque
compatibility testing performed by McCauley Engineers in Dayton,
Ohio; effects of torque increases on both spin entry and recovery
in all flight regimes, and engine out and airstart procedures eva
luated for P.O.H. compliance."
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 11:14 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
True. It can be done. You can put 10:1 pistons into an -A4K.
But. You would have to re-certify first, the engine, then the
airframe for the additional horsepower, change the POH, come up
with all new performance data, reliability data, cooling data,
. . . . . Is it worth it? You tell me. I'll use your money
to find out.
What I meant was, "the FAA would never approve putting 10:1 into
an A4K running at 2700 rpm without lots of money." Keeping the
-A4K at 180 hp makes all the difference in the world.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 8:04 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Two FAA certified examples of 10:1 pistons
1) The helicopter engine HIO-360-D1A which is rated at 190HP at
3200RPM on 100/100LL with compression ratio of 10.00:
1
2) Firewall Forward has STC'd 10:1 pistons in the Mooney and Ca
rdinal without RPM restrictions according to their representativ
e spoke with.
http://firewallforward.com/horsepowerplusstc.pdf
Admittedly, these are not paraleel valve but are angle valve eng
ines but they do show that the FAA has approved 10:1 pistons at
or above 2700rpm
----- Original Message ---
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Kevin,
The problem with running 2700 rpm, legally, with 10:1 compress
ion in a certified engine is that the FAA would never approve
it.
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
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: | Ned Thomas <923te(at)att.net> |
Without starting an argument about the oversimplification of trying to
apply Bernoulili's principle to the airfow in your cowl, let me simply
ask again,
Do you have before and after manifold pressure data comparing manifold
pressure in the cylinder head with the factory cowl and your cowl?
As you know Pressure drop across the cylinders is not even close to
answering this question
Ned
Sent from my iPhone
On May 3, 2010, at 2:08 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
> I have slowed the airflow down, Ned. And, thanks to a fellow named
> Bernoulli, pressure goes up. I got 1.5 to 2.5 inches more pressure
> drop across the cylinders than stock using half the inlet area. All
> those years in fluid dynamics weren't wasted.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 9:23 pm
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
>
> Gary,
> In all your testing for the Jaguar Cowling did you happen to get
> before and after manifold pressure data? If so, for the same
> conditions, is the manifold pressure lower with the Jaguar cowl than
> with the factory cowl? Seems apparent that you have slowed the
> airflow over the cylinders ie dropped the pressure on top of the
> cylinders.....
>
> Ned
>
>
> ===================================
> ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> ===================================
> ttp://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
> ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "923te" <923te(at)att.net> |
Gary,
What is the paint used on the inside of the cowl?
I need some more paint.
It will need to be touched up after the roughness and 'catches' have
been smoothed out.
Thanks,
Ned
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Compression test |
I've only done a couple of cranking/leak-down comparison tests. But I
have had valves that did not seat due to carbon or some contamination.
But that has typically been the exhaust valve as I recall. What you
described doing is called "staking" the valve and has been used for
years to try and get a leaking valve to seat. Doing it with pressure in
the cylinder hopefully lets the escaping air to blow out the
contaminant. There almost always is some leakage past the rings and you
will always hear some air leak into the case (heard at the dipstick fill
tube with the stick out or loose). My Lynx has 2 cylinders that test
80/80 and the other 2 at 79/80. On the 80/80 ones you don't hear any
air leak. As you know the orifice in the compression tester is very
small and even a small leak will cause a drop on the gauge reading. I
don't know how well this correlates with a cranking test where you are
moving a lot of air and how well that same small leak will affect the
cranking pressure. Obviously it does some.
Intake valves can also have problems with the guides and possibly not
seat squarely on the seat, resulting in a leak. I had a cylinder not
long ago that had a loose intake guide in the head. It was moving up
and down with the valve. But almost all the time the problems are with
the exhaust valve and guide.
I've also seen an engine that tested several cylinders at 20/80 or even
less after sitting around for 8 months that came back up to normal after
running the engine and flying it for a few hours. Continental says that
compression test numbers that are as low as about 46/80 are acceptable
provided the valves are sealing and boroscope inspection shows no
exhaust valve burning, etc. That also assume that oil consumption is
reasonable and not excessive. And I've heard of an engine being run
without the piston rings installed and it supposedly developed normal
power! But this is just hearsay evidence. So I wonder how important
the static compression test is relative to leakage past the rings and
what happens when the engine is running.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 12:42 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Compression test
Cliff,
Remember when we talked about doing cranking pressure tests? I
started doing cranking pressure tests as a side-by-side comparison test
to the leak down test.
Yesterday, I was doing the tests on a Tiger as
(1) leak-down/cranking
(3) cranking/leak-down
(2) leak-down/cranking
(4) cranking/leak-down.
I compared the previous years tests as I went. When I got to the #4,
the cranking pressure was about 6 psi lower. Not a big deal. I
regularly see variations of plus or minus 4 or 5 lbs. This one,
however, seemed like it took 6 revolutions of the engine to build
pressure. (it normally takes about 4 passes to reach peak).
When I checked leak-down, it was 55/80. The odd thing was, no sound
of leaking air at the oil filler neck or exhaust pipe. That much would
show up somewhere. As I was looking for a leak, I noticed a lot of air
coming out of the #1 top plug hole. A leak at the #4 intake was the
only explanation. I've never encountered a leak at the intake valve.
I removed the rocker cover and intake rocker arm thinking it might be
a stuck lifter. Same result. With pressure on it, I gave the intake
valve a quick 'pop' with a small rubber mallet. Compression went right
to 77/80.
I took it apart and put it back together after cleaning the lifter and
measuring the dry tappet clearance (0.048 inches). Ran the engine,
checked again, and 77/80.
Have you (or anyone else) seen such a thing?
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
Are you talking about the AA-5B, Ned?
Gary's cowl (on his plane) uses the stock AA5B induction system and I
doubt that his cowling had any measurable effect on the induction system
manifold pressure. If you get only 1" hg. MP drop at full throttle on
takeoff vs. atmospheric with the engine not running that is about the
best you can hope for and I think the Tiger system is pretty close to
this. Increasing the pressure above the cylinders by 1" or 2" of H2O
would be unnoticeable on a MP gauge.
Gary's real complaint has been with the efficiency, or lack thereof, of
the AG-5B induction system. See his recent comment below.
. The first step is to fix (i.e., correct) the poorly designed carb air
inlet using as much hardware as is already there. The idea is to provide
something that is simple to install and regains the lost inch of
pressure.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: Ned Thomas
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 5:33 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Without starting an argument about the oversimplification of trying to
apply Bernoulili's principle to the airfow in your cowl, let me simply
ask again,
Do you have before and after manifold pressure data comparing manifold
pressure in the cylinder head with the factory cowl and your cowl?
As you know Pressure drop across the cylinders is not even close to
answering this question
Ned
Sent from my iPhone
On May 3, 2010, at 2:08 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
I have slowed the airflow down, Ned. And, thanks to a fellow named
Bernoulli, pressure goes up. I got 1.5 to 2.5 inches more pressure drop
across the cylinders than stock using half the inlet area. All those
years in fluid dynamics weren't wasted.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 9:23 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Gary,
In all your testing for the Jaguar Cowling did you happen to get
before and after manifold pressure data? If so, for the same conditions,
is the manifold pressure lower with the Jaguar cowl than with the
factory cowl? Seems apparent that you have slowed the airflow over the
cylinders ie dropped the pressure on top of the cylinders.....
Ned
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
ontribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "923te" <923te(at)att.net> |
Cliff,
Yes I am asking what the manifold pressure on the AA5B cowl is compared
to the manifold pressure on the Jaguar cowl.
I'm not asking about the over cylinder pressure, under cylinder pressure
or the differential just the manifold pressure. Either Gary has the data
or he doesn't. I just want to know if he has it and what it was. I'm not
looking for an extrapolation just if the manifold pressure was directly
measured on both cowls.
I need to eliminate all the variables so I can determine why my plane is
slower and hotter after the cowl installation than it was before the
cowl installation.
Ned
----- Original Message -----
From: flyv35b
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Are you talking about the AA-5B, Ned?
Gary's cowl (on his plane) uses the stock AA5B induction system and I
doubt that his cowling had any measurable effect on the induction system
manifold pressure. If you get only 1" hg. MP drop at full throttle on
takeoff vs. atmospheric with the engine not running that is about the
best you can hope for and I think the Tiger system is pretty close to
this. Increasing the pressure above the cylinders by 1" or 2" of H2O
would be unnoticeable on a MP gauge.
Gary's real complaint has been with the efficiency, or lack thereof,
of the AG-5B induction system. See his recent comment below.
. The first step is to fix (i.e., correct) the poorly designed carb
air inlet using as much hardware as is already there. The idea is to
provide something that is simple to install and regains the lost inch of
pressure.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: Ned Thomas
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 5:33 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Without starting an argument about the oversimplification of trying
to apply Bernoulili's principle to the airfow in your cowl, let me
simply ask again,
Do you have before and after manifold pressure data comparing
manifold pressure in the cylinder head with the factory cowl and your
cowl?
As you know Pressure drop across the cylinders is not even close to
answering this question
Ned
Sent from my iPhone
On May 3, 2010, at 2:08 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
I have slowed the airflow down, Ned. And, thanks to a fellow
named Bernoulli, pressure goes up. I got 1.5 to 2.5 inches more
pressure drop across the cylinders than stock using half the inlet area.
All those years in fluid dynamics weren't wasted.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 9:23 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Gary,
In all your testing for the Jaguar Cowling did you happen to get
before and after manifold pressure data? If so, for the same conditions,
is the manifold pressure lower with the Jaguar cowl than with the
factory cowl? Seems apparent that you have slowed the airflow over the
cylinders ie dropped the pressure on top of the cylinders.....
Ned
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/c
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
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
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
I guess Gary will have to answer that. I can't imagine that MP would
vary much at all.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: 923te
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 7:37 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Cliff,
Yes I am asking what the manifold pressure on the AA5B cowl is
compared to the manifold pressure on the Jaguar cowl.
I'm not asking about the over cylinder pressure, under cylinder
pressure or the differential just the manifold pressure. Either Gary has
the data or he doesn't. I just want to know if he has it and what it
was. I'm not looking for an extrapolation just if the manifold pressure
was directly measured on both cowls.
I need to eliminate all the variables so I can determine why my plane
is slower and hotter after the cowl installation than it was before the
cowl installation.
Ned
----- Original Message -----
From: flyv35b
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Are you talking about the AA-5B, Ned?
Gary's cowl (on his plane) uses the stock AA5B induction system and
I doubt that his cowling had any measurable effect on the induction
system manifold pressure. If you get only 1" hg. MP drop at full
throttle on takeoff vs. atmospheric with the engine not running that is
about the best you can hope for and I think the Tiger system is pretty
close to this. Increasing the pressure above the cylinders by 1" or 2"
of H2O would be unnoticeable on a MP gauge.
Gary's real complaint has been with the efficiency, or lack thereof,
of the AG-5B induction system. See his recent comment below.
. The first step is to fix (i.e., correct) the poorly designed carb
air inlet using as much hardware as is already there. The idea is to
provide something that is simple to install and regains the lost inch of
pressure.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: Ned Thomas
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 5:33 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Without starting an argument about the oversimplification of
trying to apply Bernoulili's principle to the airfow in your cowl, let
me simply ask again,
Do you have before and after manifold pressure data comparing
manifold pressure in the cylinder head with the factory cowl and your
cowl?
As you know Pressure drop across the cylinders is not even close
to answering this question
Ned
Sent from my iPhone
On May 3, 2010, at 2:08 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
I have slowed the airflow down, Ned. And, thanks to a fellow
named Bernoulli, pressure goes up. I got 1.5 to 2.5 inches more
pressure drop across the cylinders than stock using half the inlet area.
All those years in fluid dynamics weren't wasted.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 9:23 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Gary,
In all your testing for the Jaguar Cowling did you happen to get
before and after manifold pressure data? If so, for the same conditions,
is the manifold pressure lower with the Jaguar cowl than with the
factory cowl? Seems apparent that you have slowed the airflow over the
cylinders ie dropped the pressure on top of the cylinders.....
Ned
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Lis
t
ttp://forums.matronics.com
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/c
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
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
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
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | teamgrumman(at)aol.com |
Imron N0006
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Tue, May 4, 2010 6:23 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Gary,
What is the paint used on the inside of the cowl?
I need some more paint.
It will need to be touched up after the roughness and 'catches' have been
smoothed out.
Thanks,
Ned
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | teamgrumman(at)aol.com |
I didn't notice any appreciable difference in MAP between cowlings.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ned Thomas <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Tue, May 4, 2010 5:33 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Without starting an argument about the oversimplification of trying to app
ly Bernoulili's principle to the airfow in your cowl, let me simply ask ag
ain,
Do you have before and after manifold pressure data comparing manifold pre
ssure in the cylinder head with the factory cowl and your cowl?
As you know Pressure drop across the cylinders is not even close to answer
ing this question
Ned
Sent from my iPhone
On May 3, 2010, at 2:08 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
I have slowed the airflow down, Ned. And, thanks to a fellow named Bernou
lli, pressure goes up. I got 1.5 to 2.5 inches more pressure drop across
the cylinders than stock using half the inlet area. All those years in
fluid dynamics weren't wasted.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 9:23 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Gary,
In all your testing for the Jaguar Cowling did you happen to get before an
d after manifold pressure data? If so, for the same conditions, is the man
ifold pressure lower with the Jaguar cowl than with the factory cowl? See
ms apparent that you have slowed the airflow over the cylinders ie dropped
the pressure on top of the cylinders.....
Ned
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/co
ntribution
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Compression test |
| From: | teamgrumman(at)aol.com |
I thought I said, maybe not, but there was no leakage at the oil filler or
the exhaust pipe. With 55/80, I expected to hear something at one or the
other. I, too, have never experienced an intake leak.
It was while searching for the hissing sound that I notice a lot of air co
ming out of #1 top plug (hole). Since that would be the cylinder that sho
uld be in the filling cycle, that pointed me to the #4 intake.
I talked to Ken and he said he sees a lot of blue/black residue in the int
akes. He said it was possible there was some residue holding the valve ju
st off the seat. I explained what I did and he said there really wasn't
anything else I can do. These are new cylinders with 400 hours on them.
Hard hours, but, just 400 hours.
I'll repeat the tests after the test flight.
-----Original Message-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Sent: Tue, May 4, 2010 6:29 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Compression test
I've only done a couple of cranking/leak-down comparison tests. But I hav
e had valves that did not seat due to carbon or some contamination. But
that has typically been the exhaust valve as I recall. What you describe
d doing is called "staking" the valve and has been used for years to try
and get a leaking valve to seat. Doing it with pressure in the cylinder
hopefully lets the escaping air to blow out the contaminant. There almos
t always is some leakage past the rings and you will always hear some air
leak into the case (heard at the dipstick fill tube with the stick out or
loose). My Lynx has 2 cylinders that test 80/80 and the other 2 at 79/80
. On the 80/80 ones you don't hear any air leak. As you know the orifice
in the compression tester is very small and even a small leak will cause
a drop on the gauge reading. I don't know how well this correlates with
a cranking test where you are moving a lot of air and how well that same
small leak will affect the cranking pressure. Obviously it does some.
Intake valves can also have problems with the guides and possibly not seat
squarely on the seat, resulting in a leak. I had a cylinder not long ago
that had a loose intake guide in the head. It was moving up and down wit
h the valve. But almost all the time the problems are with the exhaust va
lve and guide.
I've also seen an engine that tested several cylinders at 20/80 or even le
ss after sitting around for 8 months that came back up to normal after run
ning the engine and flying it for a few hours. Continental says that comp
ression test numbers that are as low as about 46/80 are acceptable provide
d the valves are sealing and boroscope inspection shows no exhaust valve
burning, etc. That also assume that oil consumption is reasonable and no
t excessive. And I've heard of an engine being run without the piston rin
gs installed and it supposedly developed normal power! But this is just
hearsay evidence. So I wonder how important the static compression test
is relative to leakage past the rings and what happens when the engine is
running.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 12:42 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Compression test
Cliff,
Remember when we talked about doing cranking pressure tests? I started
doing cranking pressure tests as a side-by-side comparison test to the
leak down test.
Yesterday, I was doing the tests on a Tiger as
(1) leak-down/cranking
(3) cranking/leak-down
(2) leak-down/cranking
(4) cranking/leak-down.
I compared the previous years tests as I went. When I got to the #4, th
e cranking pressure was about 6 psi lower. Not a big deal. I regularly
see variations of plus or minus 4 or 5 lbs. This one, however, seemed
like it took 6 revolutions of the engine to build pressure. (it normal
ly takes about 4 passes to reach peak).
When I checked leak-down, it was 55/80. The odd thing was, no sound of
leaking air at the oil filler neck or exhaust pipe. That much would sh
ow up somewhere. As I was looking for a leak, I noticed a lot of air co
ming out of the #1 top plug hole. A leak at the #4 intake was the only
explanation. I've never encountered a leak at the intake valve.
I removed the rocker cover and intake rocker arm thinking it might be a
stuck lifter. Same result. With pressure on it, I gave the intake va
lve a quick 'pop' with a small rubber mallet. Compression went right to
77/80.
I took it apart and put it back together after cleaning the lifter and
measuring the dry tappet clearance (0.048 inches). Ran the engine, che
cked again, and 77/80.
Have you (or anyone else) seen such a thing?
Gary
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: | teamgrumman(at)aol.com |
Ned, take out the closeout you fabricated on the bottom of your cowling.
All of the flight tests were done with that open. You'll notice a big
difference in CHT.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Tue, May 4, 2010 7:37 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Cliff,
Yes I am asking what the manifold pressure on the AA5B cowl is compared to
the manifold pressure on the Jaguar cowl.
I'm not asking about the over cylinder pressure, under cylinder pressure
or the differential just the manifold pressure. Either Gary has the data
or he doesn't. I just want to know if he has it and what it was. I'm not
looking for an extrapolation just if the manifold pressure was directly
measured on both cowls.
I need to eliminate all the variables so I can determine why my plane is
slower and hotter after the cowl installation than it was before the cowl
installation.
Ned
----- Original Message -----
From: flyv35b
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Are you talking about the AA-5B, Ned?
Gary's cowl (on his plane) uses the stock AA5B induction system and I do
ubt that his cowling had any measurable effect on the induction system
manifold pressure. If you get only 1" hg. MP drop at full throttle on
takeoff vs. atmospheric with the engine not running that is about the
best you can hope for and I think the Tiger system is pretty close to
this. Increasing the pressure above the cylinders by 1" or 2" of H2O
would be unnoticeable on a MP gauge.
Gary's real complaint has been with the efficiency, or lack thereof, of
the AG-5B induction system. See his recent comment below.
=A2 The first step is to fix (i.e., correct) the poorly designed car
b air inlet using as much hardware as is already there. The idea is to
provide something that is simple to install and regains the lost inch
of pressure.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: Ned Thomas
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 5:33 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Without starting an argument about the oversimplification of trying to
apply Bernoulili's principle to the airfow in your cowl, let me simply
ask again,
Do you have before and after manifold pressure data comparing manifold
pressure in the cylinder head with the factory cowl and your cowl?
As you know Pressure drop across the cylinders is not even close to an
swering this question
Ned
Sent from my iPhone
On May 3, 2010, at 2:08 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
I have slowed the airflow down, Ned. And, thanks to a fellow named
Bernoulli, pressure goes up. I got 1.5 to 2.5 inches more pressure
drop across the cylinders than stock using half the inlet area. Al
l those years in fluid dynamics weren't wasted.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 9:23 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Gary,
In all your testing for the Jaguar Cowling did you happen to get bef
ore and after manifold pressure data? If so, for the same conditions
, is the manifold pressure lower with the Jaguar cowl than with the
factory cowl? Seems apparent that you have slowed the airflow over
the cylinders ie dropped the pressure on top of the cylinders.....
Ned
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/co
ntribution
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/c
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | teamgrumman(at)aol.com |
Ned,
You changed the prop and the cowling at the same time. And you're saying
the cowling made the plane slower? Are you serious? I flew the plane,
remember? I also flew along side of you. At 152 TAS, you're at least 12
knots faster than a stock AG5B.
Ned, you got a hell-of-a-deal on that cowling. $9000 installed. It shoul
dn't cost more than $500 to get the outside painted to match. I painted
the inside for you to protect the fiberglass from getting oil soaked. I
exchange, you kept your old cowling and baffles which I usually keep to
recover some of the 50 hours in labor I put into baffles, fitting, painti
ng and installing the cowling. I could sell cowlings all day long at $900
0 installed if I wanted to go out of business. As it is, I lost $4,500 on
your installation alone.
Ned, I'm sorry you're not happy with the cowling. You haven't been happy
with the whole deal since we started. I've gone out-of-my-way to accommo
date you and the installation on your AG5B, including pissing-off my DER
and DAR. Nothing I've done seems to be good enough for you.
If you're not happy with the cowling, sell it to your buddy there in OK fo
r $10,000. Make a clean $1000 for your effort. All the hard work in fitt
ing and trimming is done. You still have your original cowling, reinstall
it. His plane would only need (at the most) to have the engine mount shi
ms adjusted to align the spinner. I'm fairly certain he'd be happy with
the cowling.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Tue, May 4, 2010 7:37 am
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Cliff,
Yes I am asking what the manifold pressure on the AA5B cowl is compared to
the manifold pressure on the Jaguar cowl.
I'm not asking about the over cylinder pressure, under cylinder pressure
or the differential just the manifold pressure. Either Gary has the data
or he doesn't. I just want to know if he has it and what it was. I'm not
looking for an extrapolation just if the manifold pressure was directly
measured on both cowls.
I need to eliminate all the variables so I can determine why my plane is
slower and hotter after the cowl installation than it was before the cowl
installation.
Ned
----- Original Message -----
From: flyv35b
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Are you talking about the AA-5B, Ned?
Gary's cowl (on his plane) uses the stock AA5B induction system and I do
ubt that his cowling had any measurable effect on the induction system
manifold pressure. If you get only 1" hg. MP drop at full throttle on
takeoff vs. atmospheric with the engine not running that is about the
best you can hope for and I think the Tiger system is pretty close to
this. Increasing the pressure above the cylinders by 1" or 2" of H2O
would be unnoticeable on a MP gauge.
Gary's real complaint has been with the efficiency, or lack thereof, of
the AG-5B induction system. See his recent comment below.
=A2 The first step is to fix (i.e., correct) the poorly designed car
b air inlet using as much hardware as is already there. The idea is to
provide something that is simple to install and regains the lost inch
of pressure.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: Ned Thomas
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 5:33 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Without starting an argument about the oversimplification of trying to
apply Bernoulili's principle to the airfow in your cowl, let me simply
ask again,
Do you have before and after manifold pressure data comparing manifold
pressure in the cylinder head with the factory cowl and your cowl?
As you know Pressure drop across the cylinders is not even close to an
swering this question
Ned
Sent from my iPhone
On May 3, 2010, at 2:08 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
I have slowed the airflow down, Ned. And, thanks to a fellow named
Bernoulli, pressure goes up. I got 1.5 to 2.5 inches more pressure
drop across the cylinders than stock using half the inlet area. Al
l those years in fluid dynamics weren't wasted.
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Sun, May 2, 2010 9:23 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Gary,
In all your testing for the Jaguar Cowling did you happen to get bef
ore and after manifold pressure data? If so, for the same conditions
, is the manifold pressure lower with the Jaguar cowl than with the
factory cowl? Seems apparent that you have slowed the airflow over
the cylinders ie dropped the pressure on top of the cylinders.....
Ned
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/co
ntribution
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/c
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "923te" <923te(at)att.net> |
Gary,
I don't know where your coming from at all. I really like your cowl. I
liked following the journey you took to get the cowl to where it is
today. I appreciate your willingness to take on the challenge of getting
it installed on my Tiger.
I don't understand why you are unhappy. I don't understand your math.
You know full well that I paid you $13,665.31 why state otherwise?
Don't you recall flying with me at 152 ktas before the cowl was
installed when I flew a couple hours to help you deliver Martin's plane?
Do you realize that you charged me for the fuel burned in my plane on
that trip? And for the two flights you made with Krytie in my plane. Do
you remember, on your first flight test in my plane, how the engine
burbled after take off over a gorge? And how you left me with a plane
that ran rough? And after I picked the plane up and made that 300nm trip
to Oxnard I found #2 AND #4 top spark plug wires only inserted in the
plugs and the hold downs were not screwed in not even one thread. Guess
what, no more rough engine no more noisy radios after I finished the
plug wire install. Do you remember how you kept changing the deal you
made with me on the cowl? How you ask me how the alternator was wired
because you forgot how you took it apart? Do you remember how you ask
me to get MT propeller to write a letter saying your cowl was okay with
their prop? And how you said you would not be able to sign off on the
337 and I would have to have someone else sign off on it. How you spoke
with my mechanic in Oklahoma about this? Have you forgotten how you
needed $5000 last January in order to have a new cowl built for me but
you ended up using the money on baffles? Gee Gary I could go on but this
should be enough for you to get why I might be a little dissappointed in
you.
Again I'm happy with the cowl. I suppose I just expected a different
Gary. I'm just going to consider that you were not at your best thru
this.
As for the speed increase we expected I will continue working to get it.
It has to be there. So I've cleaned the bugs off the plane and double
waxed it and been tweaking on it since I returned from California last
Thursday. Soon as I can I'll do more flight testing and I'm sure we'll
evently see the results from the cowl that we expected.
ned
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Ned,
You changed the prop and the cowling at the same time. And you're
saying the cowling made the plane slower? Are you serious? I flew the
plane, remember? I also flew along side of you. At 152 TAS, you're at
least 12 knots faster than a stock AG5B.
Ned, you got a hell-of-a-deal on that cowling. $9000 installed. It
shouldn't cost more than $500 to get the outside painted to match. I
painted the inside for you to protect the fiberglass from getting oil
soaked. I exchange, you kept your old cowling and baffles which I
usually keep to recover some of the 50 hours in labor I put into
baffles, fitting, painting and installing the cowling. I could sell
cowlings all day long at $9000 installed if I wanted to go out of
business. As it is, I lost $4,500 on your installation alone.
Ned, I'm sorry you're not happy with the cowling. You haven't been
happy with the whole deal since we started. I've gone out-of-my-way to
accommodate you and the installation on your AG5B, including pissing-off
my DER and DAR. Nothing I've done seems to be good enough for you.
If you're not happy with the cowling, sell it to your buddy there in
OK for $10,000. Make a clean $1000 for your effort. All the hard work
in fitting and trimming is done. You still have your original cowling,
reinstall it. His plane would only need (at the most) to have the
engine mount shims adjusted to align the spinner. I'm fairly certain
he'd be happy with the cowling.
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | teamgrumman(at)aol.com |
OK, Ned, Let's clarify.
You paid
$8,500 for the cowling.
I also charged you for the things that do not come with the cowling.
$210 for oil cooler hoses because yours were too short to fit the new
baffles.
$38 for a carb inlet duct to convert to the AA5B airbox.
$365 for the hinge assembly for the upper cowling. Not included.
$38 for a stainless steel fuel line to convert to the AA5B airbox.
$36 for SCAT tubing because yours was too short to fit the AA5B airbox
and a reroute for the cowling exit ramps.
------- parts total was $9188.81
$1440 to do the conversion to the AA5B airbox and reroute wires and pressu
re hoses away from the carb inlet duct.
$500 for labor to install the cowling.
$450 for paperwork.
----- total labor was $2390
$540 for engineering approval paperwork.
$400 for DER and DAR. Actual cost was $650.
$179 for fuel since your plane was out of gas.
-------outsourced total was $1119.07 which I kept $0 dollars.
$770 in taxes (which I don't keep, I pass along.)
$197 in misc freight, hardware, grease, cleaners, etc. All at cost. None
of which I make money on.
As for the deposit: Who gives a shit what I do with it as long as you get
your cowling? I had the cowling when you got here. I had it mostly fitt
ed when you got here. The only thing I waited on was hinges (on order whe
n you arrived), baffles, hoses, and the fuel line. Oh, yea, and approval
of the installation. I forced that through because you were in a hurry.
As for the plug wires not being tight, OOPs.
As for the two flights with Clytie, yea, two flights. One was 7 miles to
Georgetown and the other was 8 miles to Lincoln. We flew to Georgetown
for gas, they had none. We flew to Lincoln to show the DER the installat
ion. During each flight, we did some speed runs to see that everything wa
s OK. Mag drop at each run-up was about 75 to 100 rpm. That isn't cause
for alarm. Otherwise, I'd have looked closer to see why. Funny. If I
hadn't flown the plane you'd be pissed that I hadn't done some test fligh
ts. Who pays for fuel for test flights anyway?
As for the wires on the alternator, I've worked on maybe 3 AG5Bs. I'm use
d to wires that only fit one way and seeing numbers on the wires. Apparen
tly, that wasn't a requirement when they made the AG5B. I have the AG5B
service manuals but they are useless. I'm glad you had the wiring diagra
m.
As for the MT prop approval, you have no idea what I went through to get
that approved.
As for flying with you before the Jaguar cowling, yea, I was pretty surpri
sed that a stock Tiger with my cowling was faster than your AG5B. I don't
recall checking TAS. All I remember was throttling back so you could cat
ch up.
As for flying after the install of the Jaguar cowling, we were both about
152 TAS under those conditions.
Ned, I expected differently too.
I sent the baffles and the camloc.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Tue, May 4, 2010 9:39 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Gary,
I don't know where your coming from at all. I really like your cowl. I lik
ed following the journey you took to get the cowl to where it is today. I
appreciate your willingness to take on the challenge of getting it instal
led on my Tiger.
I don't understand why you are unhappy. I don't understand your math.
You know full well that I paid you $13,665.31 why state otherwise?
Don't you recall flying with me at 152 ktas before the cowl was installed
when I flew a couple hours to help you deliver Martin's plane? Do you rea
lize that you charged me for the fuel burned in my plane on that trip? And
for the two flights you made with Krytie in my plane. Do you remember, on
your first flight test in my plane, how the engine burbled after take off
over a gorge? And how you left me with a plane that ran rough? And after
I picked the plane up and made that 300nm trip to Oxnard I found #2 AND
#4 top spark plug wires only inserted in the plugs and the hold downs wer
e not screwed in not even one thread. Guess what, no more rough engine no
more noisy radios after I finished the plug wire install. Do you remember
how you kept changing the deal you made with me on the cowl? How you ask
me how the alternator was wired because you forgot how you took it apart?
Do you remember how you ask me to get MT propeller to write a letter say
ing your cowl was okay with their prop? And how you said you would not be
able to sign off on the 337 and I would have to have someone else sign of
f on it. How you spoke with my mechanic in Oklahoma about this? Have you
forgotten how you needed $5000 last January in order to have a new cowl
built for me but you ended up using the money on baffles? Gee Gary I coul
d go on but this should be enough for you to get why I might be a little
dissappointed in you.
Again I'm happy with the cowl. I suppose I just expected a different Gary.
I'm just going to consider that you were not at your best thru this.
As for the speed increase we expected I will continue working to get it.
It has to be there. So I've cleaned the bugs off the plane and double wax
ed it and been tweaking on it since I returned from California last Thursd
ay. Soon as I can I'll do more flight testing and I'm sure we'll evently
see the results from the cowl that we expected.
ned
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Ned,
You changed the prop and the cowling at the same time. And you're sayin
g the cowling made the plane slower? Are you serious? I flew the plane
, remember? I also flew along side of you. At 152 TAS, you're at least
12 knots faster than a stock AG5B.
Ned, you got a hell-of-a-deal on that cowling. $9000 installed. It sho
uldn't cost more than $500 to get the outside painted to match. I paint
ed the inside for you to protect the fiberglass from getting oil soaked.
I exchange, you kept your old cowling and baffles which I usually keep
to recover some of the 50 hours in labor I put into baffles, fitting,
painting and installing the cowling. I could sell cowlings all day lon
g at $9000 installed if I wanted to go out of business. As it is, I los
t $4,500 on your installation alone.
Ned, I'm sorry you're not happy with the cowling. You haven't been happ
y with the whole deal since we started. I've gone out-of-my-way to acco
mmodate you and the installation on your AG5B, including pissing-off my
DER and DAR. Nothing I've done seems to be good enough for you.
If you're not happy with the cowling, sell it to your buddy there in OK
for $10,000. Make a clean $1000 for your effort. All the hard work
in fitting and trimming is done. You still have your original cowling,
reinstall it. His plane would only need (at the most) to have the engi
ne mount shims adjusted to align the spinner. I'm fairly certain he'd
be happy with the cowling.
Gary
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Courtney" <jamey(at)jamescourtney.net> |
Okay guys, with all due respect this is probably best worked out between you
two in private.
Best regards,
Jamey
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 11:35 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
OK, Ned, Let's clarify.
You paid
$8,500 for the cowling.
I also charged you for the things that do not come with the cowling.
$210 for oil cooler hoses because yours were too short to fit the new
baffles.
$38 for a carb inlet duct to convert to the AA5B airbox.
$365 for the hinge assembly for the upper cowling. Not included.
$38 for a stainless steel fuel line to convert to the AA5B airbox.
$36 for SCAT tubing because yours was too short to fit the AA5B airbox
and a reroute for the cowling exit ramps.
------- parts total was $9188.81
$1440 to do the conversion to the AA5B airbox and reroute wires and pressure
hoses away from the carb inlet duct.
$500 for labor to install the cowling.
$450 for paperwork.
----- total labor was $2390
$540 for engineering approval paperwork.
$400 for DER and DAR. Actual cost was $650.
$179 for fuel since your plane was out of gas.
-------outsourced total was $1119.07 which I kept $0 dollars.
$770 in taxes (which I don't keep, I pass along.)
$197 in misc freight, hardware, grease, cleaners, etc. All at cost. None
of which I make money on.
As for the deposit: Who gives a shit what I do with it as long as you get
your cowling? I had the cowling when you got here. I had it mostly fitted
when you got here. The only thing I waited on was hinges (on order when you
arrived), baffles, hoses, and the fuel line. Oh, yea, and approval of the
installation. I forced that through because you were in a hurry.
As for the plug wires not being tight, OOPs.
As for the two flights with Clytie, yea, two flights. One was 7 miles to
Georgetown and the other was 8 miles to Lincoln. We flew to Georgetown for
gas, they had none. We flew to Lincoln to show the DER the installation.
During each flight, we did some speed runs to see that everything was OK.
Mag drop at each run-up was about 75 to 100 rpm. That isn't cause for
alarm. Otherwise, I'd have looked closer to see why. Funny. If I hadn't
flown the plane you'd be pissed that I hadn't done some test flights. Who
pays for fuel for test flights anyway?
As for the wires on the alternator, I've worked on maybe 3 AG5Bs. I'm used
to wires that only fit one way and seeing numbers on the wires. Apparently,
that wasn't a requirement when they made the AG5B. I have the AG5B service
manuals but they are useless. I'm glad you had the wiring diagram.
As for the MT prop approval, you have no idea what I went through to get
that approved.
As for flying with you before the Jaguar cowling, yea, I was pretty
surprised that a stock Tiger with my cowling was faster than your AG5B. I
don't recall checking TAS. All I remember was throttling back so you could
catch up.
As for flying after the install of the Jaguar cowling, we were both about
152 TAS under those conditions.
Ned, I expected differently too.
I sent the baffles and the camloc.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: 923te <923te(at)att.net>
Sent: Tue, May 4, 2010 9:39 pm
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Gary,
I don't know where your coming from at all. I really like your cowl. I liked
following the journey you took to get the cowl to where it is today. I
appreciate your willingness to take on the challenge of getting it installed
on my Tiger.
I don't understand why you are unhappy. I don't understand your math.
You know full well that I paid you $13,665.31 why state otherwise?
Don't you recall flying with me at 152 ktas before the cowl was installed
when I flew a couple hours to help you deliver Martin's plane? Do you
realize that you charged me for the fuel burned in my plane on that trip?
And for the two flights you made with Krytie in my plane. Do you remember,
on your first flight test in my plane, how the engine burbled after take off
over a gorge? And how you left me with a plane that ran rough? And after I
picked the plane up and made that 300nm trip to Oxnard I found #2 AND #4 top
spark plug wires only inserted in the plugs and the hold downs were not
screwed in not even one thread. Guess what, no more rough engine no more
noisy radios after I finished the plug wire install. Do you remember how you
kept changing the deal you made with me on the cowl? How you ask me how the
alternator was wired because you forgot how you took it apart? Do you
remember how you ask me to get MT propeller to write a letter saying your
cowl was okay with their prop? And how you said you would not be able to
sign off on the 337 and I would have to have someone else sign off on it.
How you spoke with my mechanic in Oklahoma about this? Have you forgotten
how you needed $5000 last January in order to have a new cowl built for me
but you ended up using the money on baffles? Gee Gary I could go on but this
should be enough for you to get why I might be a little dissappointed in
you.
Again I'm happy with the cowl. I suppose I just expected a different Gary.
I'm just going to consider that you were not at your best thru this.
As for the speed increase we expected I will continue working to get it. It
has to be there. So I've cleaned the bugs off the plane and double waxed it
and been tweaking on it since I returned from California last Thursday. Soon
as I can I'll do more flight testing and I'm sure we'll evently see the
results from the cowl that we expected.
ned
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AG5B Jaguar
Ned,
You changed the prop and the cowling at the same time. And you're saying
the cowling made the plane slower? Are you serious? I flew the plane,
remember? I also flew along side of you. At 152 TAS, you're at least 12
knots faster than a stock AG5B.
Ned, you got a hell-of-a-deal on that cowling. $9000 installed. It
shouldn't cost more than $500 to get the outside painted to match. I
painted the inside for you to protect the fiberglass from getting oil
soaked. I exchange, you kept your old cowling and baffles which I usually
keep to recover some of the 50 hours in labor I put into baffles, fitting,
painting and installing the cowling. I could sell cowlings all day long at
$9000 installed if I wanted to go out of business. As it is, I lost $4,500
on your installation alone.
Ned, I'm sorry you're not happy with the cowling. You haven't been happy
with the whole deal since we started. I've gone out-of-my-way to
accommodate you and the installation on your AG5B, including pissing-off my
DER and DAR. Nothing I've done seems to be good enough for you.
If you're not happy with the cowling, sell it to your buddy there in OK for
$10,000. Make a clean $1000 for your effort. All the hard work in fitting
and trimming is done. You still have your original cowling, reinstall it.
His plane would only need (at the most) to have the engine mount shims
adjusted to align the spinner. I'm fairly certain he'd be happy with the
cowling.
Gary
===================================
ator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
===================================
ttp://forums.matronics.com
===================================
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
11:27:00
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net> |
C'mon Jamey ..... I like a good boxing match once in a while ......
they're just trading facts ..... with a little punch behind it.
I learned something, though. I can't afford that cowl!
Linn
James Courtney wrote:
> Okay guys, with all due respect this is probably best worked out between
> you two in private.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Jamey
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Davesbox1(at)aol.com |
i agree....tough as it may be both guys gave honest responses and i
certainly learned both some numbers , costs and the importance of a contract even
among friends- D
In a message dated 5/5/2010 10:08:14 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net writes:
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Linn Walters
C'mon Jamey ..... I like a good boxing match once in a while ......
they're just trading facts ..... with a little punch behind it.
I learned something, though. I can't afford that cowl!
Linn
James Courtney wrote:
> Okay guys, with all due respect this is probably best worked out between
> you two in private.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Jamey
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "923te" <923te(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: If Royal Dutch Airlines can do it then so can Gary |
Vogt. I need this STC Gary
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=6NPF0A_vGC4
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Tiger cowling for sale |
| From: | teamgrumman(at)aol.com |
I have a Tiger cowling, removed for Jaguar install. It's pretty, nice pai
nt, but it has some repairs. Will sell for $500 plus shipping.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Starkey <jstarkey(at)nimbusdb.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tiger cowling for sale |
teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
> I have a Tiger cowling, removed for Jaguar install. It's pretty, nice
> paint, but it has some repairs. Will sell for $500 plus shipping.
Please tell me more -- jstarkey(at)nimbusdb.com
> **
> *
>
>
> *
--
Jim Starkey
Founder, NimbusDB, Inc.
978 526-1376
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Tiger cowling for sale |
| From: | "Hosler, John" <JHOSLER(at)epri.com> |
Have you some pictures showing condition and repairs? Is this from an
AA-5B?
John
704-252-0780
________________________________
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 4:58 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Tiger cowling for sale
I have a Tiger cowling, removed for Jaguar install. It's pretty, nice
paint, but it has some repairs. Will sell for $500 plus shipping.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Trejo <md11strejo(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Tiger cowling for sale |
I really need a cowling for my 77 AA5B, Give me a call.
Scott
254-718-6655
md11strejo(at)yahoo.com
On May 11, 2010, at 3:57 PM, teamgrumman(at)aol.com wrote:
> I have a Tiger cowling, removed for Jaguar install. It's pretty, nice
paint, but it has some repairs. Will sell for $500 plus shipping.
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tiger cowling for sale |
| From: | teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM |
Scott has bought the cowling.
Thanks for your interest.
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Hosler, John <JHOSLER(at)epri.com>
Sent: Wed, May 12, 2010 5:16 am
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: Tiger cowling for sale
Have you some pictures showing conditionand repairs? Is this from an AA-5
B?
John
704-252-0780
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com[mailto:owner-teamgrumman
-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of teamgrumman(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 4:58PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Tigercowling for sale
I havea Tiger cowling, removed for Jaguar install. It's pretty, nice pain
t, butit has some repairs. Will sell for $500 plus shipping.
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Jaguar cowling installation |
| From: | teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM |
I was telling a friend of mine about the final fitting and installation of
nutplates and the number of holes drilled surprised even me. So, I decid
ed to compile a list.
First, the 17 holes that attach the two cowling halves together.
For each hole:
(1) drill #40 holes to prelocate all of the holes
(2) drill 1/8 inch holes for clecos
Total number of operations: 34
Second, the 28 holes that attach the cowling to the firewall.
For each hole:
(1) drill with #40 drill from the back to locate each hole.
(2) drill with #30 to center the hole on the nutplate
(3) drill with 3/16 for the attaching screws
(4) countersink all holes (after the final fitting of the upper cowling.
)
Total number of operations: 84
Third, the 10 holes for the upper cowling to locate it on the lower cowlin
g after fitting the upper cowling
For each hole:
(1) drill with 1/8 drill to locate for clecos.
Total number of operations: 10
Fourth, the 38 holes for rivets that attach the upper cowling halves to th
e centerline hinge.
For each hole:
(1) drill with 1/8 inch for cleco
(2) drill with #30 for rivet
(3) countersink each hole
Total number of operations: 114
Fifth, 17 nutplates for the split cowling.
(1) drill with 3/16
(2) drill the holes for each nutplate rivet (2 holes)
(3) countersink all rivet holes
Total number of operations: 85
plus 4 nutplates for the attaching the upper cowling hinge to the lower co
wling.
(1) drill with 3/16
(2) drill the holes for each nutplate rivet (2 holes)
(3) countersink all rivet holes
Total number of operations: 12
Sixth, the 10 holes for the cam locks,
(1) drill to 7/16, check alignment
(2) drill upper cowling to cam lock size (I think it's .461, but I forget
right now)
(3) countersink the 10 holes on the upper cowling.
Total number of operations: 30
Plus 10 holes for the cam lock receptacles
(1) drill to 7/16
(2) drill rivet holes for cam lock receptacles (2 each) at #40.
(3) drill rivet holes to #30 (2 each).
(4) countersink all rivet holes.
(5) drill out opening for receptacles to 9/16 inches.
Total number of operations: 80
Last, (I think) countersink all of the holes for attaching the cowling hal
ves together together.
Total number of operations: 17
That is off the top of my head. There are at least 466 ( if I counted cor
rectly ) drill/countersink operations for the cowling.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark T. Mueller" <mark.t.mueller(at)comcast.net> |
I still have my old AA-5B cowling with the "split nosebowl". Paint
isn't great but in good condition overall, just missing a couple
screws on the split hardware.
I have been saving it to build a nice little wall decoration for my
office and/or garage, but the Household Commander vetoed that idea....
It was removed a few years back for my LoPresti nose install (long
before Gary was working on his...)
LMK if anyone is interested. I can snap digi photos if needed. Best
offer + shipping.
Mark
Tiger N1533R
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Scott has bought the cowling.
Thanks for your interest.
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hosler, John" <JHOSLER(at)epri.com> |
Mark:
Are you talking full cowling or just the nose bowl?
Cowlings are in high demand. You have one in good condition (top and bottom)?
John
704-252-0780
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark T. Mueller
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 9:30 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
I still have my old AA-5B cowling with the "split nosebowl". Paint
isn't great but in good condition overall, just missing a couple
screws on the split hardware.
I have been saving it to build a nice little wall decoration for my
office and/or garage, but the Household Commander vetoed that idea....
It was removed a few years back for my LoPresti nose install (long
before Gary was working on his...)
LMK if anyone is interested. I can snap digi photos if needed. Best
offer + shipping.
Mark
Tiger N1533R
From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
Scott has bought the cowling.
Thanks for your interest.
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Andy Thomas" <andy747(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AA-5B Cowling |
Mark,
put me on the list as interested and I would like a picture when available.
Where are you located (thinking of shipping cost). Thanks...
Andy Thomas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark T. Mueller" <mark.t.mueller(at)comcast.net>
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 8:29 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
>
>
> I still have my old AA-5B cowling with the "split nosebowl". Paint
> isn't great but in good condition overall, just missing a couple
> screws on the split hardware.
>
> I have been saving it to build a nice little wall decoration for my
> office and/or garage, but the Household Commander vetoed that idea....
>
> It was removed a few years back for my LoPresti nose install (long
> before Gary was working on his...)
>
> LMK if anyone is interested. I can snap digi photos if needed. Best
> offer + shipping.
>
> Mark
> Tiger N1533R
>
>
> From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
>
> Scott has bought the cowling.
>
>
> Thanks for your interest.
>
>
> Gary
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | G Vogt <teamgrumman(at)aol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AA-5B Cowling |
I've offered cowlings for sale before and no one responded. I just
sold 3 to Fletcher for real cheap so, if there is a demand, call
Fletcher. They have some at bargain basement prices.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 13, 2010, at 6:46 AM, "Andy Thomas" wrote:
> >
>
> Mark,
>
> put me on the list as interested and I would like a picture when
> available. Where are you located (thinking of shipping cost).
> Thanks...
>
> Andy Thomas
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark T. Mueller" <mark.t.mueller(at)comcast.net>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 8:29 AM
> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
>
>
>> >
>>
>> I still have my old AA-5B cowling with the "split nosebowl". Paint
>> isn't great but in good condition overall, just missing a couple
>> screws on the split hardware.
>>
>> I have been saving it to build a nice little wall decoration for my
>> office and/or garage, but the Household Commander vetoed that
>> idea....
>>
>> It was removed a few years back for my LoPresti nose install (long
>> before Gary was working on his...)
>>
>> LMK if anyone is interested. I can snap digi photos if needed. Best
>> offer + shipping.
>>
>> Mark
>> Tiger N1533R
>>
>>
>>
>> From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
>>
>> Scott has bought the cowling.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for your interest.
>>
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hosler, John" <JHOSLER(at)epri.com> |
Full cowlings are in extremely high demand for AA-5b and on. Fatigue
has done bad things over the last 30 years.
The fact that you are developing a replacement cowling is seen as a god
send even if there is no performance improvement.
John
704-252-0780
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of G Vogt
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 5:53 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
I've offered cowlings for sale before and no one responded. I just
sold 3 to Fletcher for real cheap so, if there is a demand, call
Fletcher. They have some at bargain basement prices.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 13, 2010, at 6:46 AM, "Andy Thomas" wrote:
>
>
> Mark,
>
> put me on the list as interested and I would like a picture when
> available. Where are you located (thinking of shipping cost).
> Thanks...
>
> Andy Thomas
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark T. Mueller" <mark.t.mueller(at)comcast.net>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 8:29 AM
> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
>
>
> >
>>
>> I still have my old AA-5B cowling with the "split nosebowl". Paint
>> isn't great but in good condition overall, just missing a couple
>> screws on the split hardware.
>>
>> I have been saving it to build a nice little wall decoration for my
>> office and/or garage, but the Household Commander vetoed that
>> idea....
>>
>> It was removed a few years back for my LoPresti nose install (long
>> before Gary was working on his...)
>>
>> LMK if anyone is interested. I can snap digi photos if needed. Best
>> offer + shipping.
>>
>> Mark
>> Tiger N1533R
>>
>>
>>
>> From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
>>
>> Scott has bought the cowling.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for your interest.
>>
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "923te" <923te(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AA-5B Cowling |
Hey John,
Gary is not developing a replacement cowling. He has already produced an
FAA approved STC for a complete cowling. How do I know? I have one on my
Tiger. AND it is much improved over the stock cowl even a new stock
cowl. Much less drag design and easier to remove for maintenance.
Spread the news John.
Regards,
Ned
----- Original Message -----
From: Hosler, John
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 7:16 PM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
Full cowlings are in extremely high demand for AA-5b and on. Fatigue
has done bad things over the last 30 years.
The fact that you are developing a replacement cowling is seen as a
god
send even if there is no performance improvement.
John
704-252-0780
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of G
Vogt
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 5:53 PM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
I've offered cowlings for sale before and no one responded. I just
sold 3 to Fletcher for real cheap so, if there is a demand, call
Fletcher. They have some at bargain basement prices.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 13, 2010, at 6:46 AM, "Andy Thomas"
wrote:
>
>
> Mark,
>
> put me on the list as interested and I would like a picture when
> available. Where are you located (thinking of shipping cost).
> Thanks...
>
> Andy Thomas
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark T. Mueller" <mark.t.mueller(at)comcast.net>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 8:29 AM
> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
>
>
> >
>>
>> I still have my old AA-5B cowling with the "split nosebowl". Paint
>> isn't great but in good condition overall, just missing a couple
>> screws on the split hardware.
>>
>> I have been saving it to build a nice little wall decoration for my
>> office and/or garage, but the Household Commander vetoed that
>> idea....
>>
>> It was removed a few years back for my LoPresti nose install (long
>> before Gary was working on his...)
>>
>> LMK if anyone is interested. I can snap digi photos if needed. Best
>> offer + shipping.
>>
>> Mark
>> Tiger N1533R
>>
>>
>>
>> From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
>>
>> Scott has bought the cowling.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for your interest.
>>
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hosler, John" <JHOSLER(at)epri.com> |
Ned:
I have been following Gary's progress closely over the past few years.
Hope to get a Jaguar for my tiger someday.
How's the cooling? A lot has been said about the AG5B carbon fiber
cowling not dissipating heat well.
John
________________________________
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of 923te
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
Hey John,
Gary is not developing a replacement cowling. He has already produced an
FAA approved STC for a complete cowling. How do I know? I have one on my
Tiger. AND it is much improved over the stock cowl even a new stock
cowl. Much less drag design and easier to remove for maintenance.
Spread the news John.
Regards,
Ned
----- Original Message -----
From: Hosler, John <mailto:JHOSLER(at)epri.com>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 7:16 PM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
Full cowlings are in extremely high demand for AA-5b and on.
Fatigue
has done bad things over the last 30 years.
The fact that you are developing a replacement cowling is seen
as a god
send even if there is no performance improvement.
John
704-252-0780
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf
Of G Vogt
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 5:53 PM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
I've offered cowlings for sale before and no one responded. I
just
sold 3 to Fletcher for real cheap so, if there is a demand, call
Fletcher. They have some at bargain basement prices.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 13, 2010, at 6:46 AM, "Andy Thomas"
wrote:
>
>
> Mark,
>
> put me on the list as interested and I would like a picture
when
> available. Where are you located (thinking of shipping cost).
> Thanks...
>
> Andy Thomas
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark T. Mueller" <mark.t.mueller(at)comcast.net>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 8:29 AM
> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
>
>
> >
>>
>> I still have my old AA-5B cowling with the "split nosebowl".
Paint
>> isn't great but in good condition overall, just missing a
couple
>> screws on the split hardware.
>>
>> I have been saving it to build a nice little wall decoration
for my
>> office and/or garage, but the Household Commander vetoed that
>> idea....
>>
>> It was removed a few years back for my LoPresti nose install
(long
>> before Gary was working on his...)
>>
>> LMK if anyone is interested. I can snap digi photos if
needed. Best
>> offer + shipping.
>>
>> Mark
>> Tiger N1533R
>>
>>
>>
>> From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
>>
>> Scott has bought the cowling.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for your interest.
>>
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
&Features Chat, http://www.mnbsp; via the Web
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List>
_p; generous bsp;
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
===============
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AA-5B Cowling |
How's the cooling? A lot has been said about the AG5B carbon fiber
cowling not dissipating heat well.
John
That's the first I have heard about that. Do you really think that the
heat transfer through an aluminum cowling versus a carbon fiber or
fiberglass one makes a difference, even a minor one, on the overall
cooling? There are other more significant differences between the AA-5B
and AG-5B that could contribute to any cooling differences.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | 923te <923te(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AA-5B Cowling |
John
Having owned Tigers with aluminum, carbon fiber and fiberglass
cowlings I can say that the "much has been said" is simply that. There
is no appreciable difference in heat dissipation between the three
cowls. The major player is how the heat is moved quickly out the air
exits and NOT how well the heat moves across the material of the cowl.
That's just plain physics
Comparing the Jag cowl to the AG5B cowl in my particular instance is
still on going with more flight tests forth coming to accurately make
the comparisons. I would not be surprised to find the Jag cowl to have
a little higher temps than the AG cowl but still adequate cooling.
Your Fellow Grumman Enthusiast
Ned
Sent from my iPhone
On May 14, 2010, at 5:46 AM, "Hosler, John" wrote:
> Ned:
>
> I have been following Gary=99s progress closely over the past
few year
> s. Hope to get a Jaguar for my tiger someday.
>
> How=99s the cooling? A lot has been said about the AG5B carbon
fiber
> cowling not dissipating heat well.
>
> John
>
> From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-
> teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of 923te
> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 10:18 PM
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
>
> Hey John,
>
> Gary is not developing a replacement cowling. He has already
> produced an FAA approved STC for a complete cowling. How do I know?
> I have one on my Tiger. AND it is much improved over the stock cowl
> even a new stock cowl. Much less drag design and easier to remove
> for maintenance.
>
> Spread the news John.
>
> Regards,
> Ned
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Hosler, John
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 7:16 PM
> Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
>
>
>
> Full cowlings are in extremely high demand for AA-5b and on. Fatigue
> has done bad things over the last 30 years.
>
> The fact that you are developing a replacement cowling is seen as a
> god
> send even if there is no performance improvement.
>
> John
> 704-252-0780
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of G
> Vogt
> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 5:53 PM
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
>
>
> I've offered cowlings for sale before and no one responded. I just
> sold 3 to Fletcher for real cheap so, if there is a demand, call
> Fletcher. They have some at bargain basement prices.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 13, 2010, at 6:46 AM, "Andy Thomas"
> wrote:
>
> > >
> >
> > Mark,
> >
> > put me on the list as interested and I would like a picture when
> > available. Where are you located (thinking of shipping cost).
> > Thanks...
> >
> > Andy Thomas
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mark T. Mueller" <mark.t.mueller(at)comcast.net>
> > To:
> > Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 8:29 AM
> > Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
> >
> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> I still have my old AA-5B cowling with the "split nosebowl". Paint
> >> isn't great but in good condition overall, just missing a couple
> >> screws on the split hardware.
> >>
> >> I have been saving it to build a nice little wall decoration for my
> >> office and/or garage, but the Household Commander vetoed that
> >> idea....
> >>
> >> It was removed a few years back for my LoPresti nose install (long
> >> before Gary was working on his...)
> >>
> >> LMK if anyone is interested. I can snap digi photos if needed. Best
> >> offer + shipping.
> >>
> >> Mark
> >> Tiger N1533R
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
> >>
> >> Scott has bought the cowling.
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks for your interest.
> >>
> >>
> >> Gary
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> &Features Chat, http://www.mnbsp; via the Web
href="http://forums.matronics.com
> ">http://forums.matronics.com
> _p; generous bsp;
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ">http://www.matronics.com/c===============
=
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hosler, John" <JHOSLER(at)epri.com> |
The question was more related to cool down after landing or heat up
while taxiing. That's what cowl flaps are for on larger aircraft.
________________________________
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
flyv35b
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 9:31 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
How's the cooling? A lot has been said about the AG5B carbon fiber
cowling not dissipating heat well.
John
That's the first I have heard about that. Do you really think that the
heat transfer through an aluminum cowling versus a carbon fiber or
fiberglass one makes a difference, even a minor one, on the overall
cooling? There are other more significant differences between the AA-5B
and AG-5B that could contribute to any cooling differences.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "923te" <923te(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AA-5B Cowling |
One thing I don't care for is how emails that appear to be from and
replied to an individual go straight to this list. It is especially hard
to tell on my iPhone that this occurs.
I've never heard of cowl flaps having been designed primarily for "after
landing cool down and heat up during taxiing." I don't think so. In the
planes I've owned that had cowl flaps the primary purpose was to reduce
the FAA required cooling design for climb to a more effiecient cooling
design for cruise. Less air required in cruise so the idea is to reduce
drag in cruise with the cowl flaps.
Can you tell me of a particular plane that has cowl flaps specifically
designed for cool down and taxiing?
----- Original Message -----
From: Hosler, John
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 8:48 AM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
The question was more related to cool down after landing or heat up
while taxiing. That's what cowl flaps are for on larger aircraft.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
flyv35b
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 9:31 AM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
How's the cooling? A lot has been said about the AG5B carbon fiber
cowling not dissipating heat well.
John
That's the first I have heard about that. Do you really think that
the heat transfer through an aluminum cowling versus a carbon fiber or
fiberglass one makes a difference, even a minor one, on the overall
cooling? There are other more significant differences between the AA-5B
and AG-5B that could contribute to any cooling differences.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AA-5B Cowling |
I've never heard of cowl flaps having been designed primarily for "after
landing cool down and heat up during taxiing." I don't think so. In the
planes I've owned that had cowl flaps the primary purpose was to reduce
the FAA required cooling design for climb to a more effiecient cooling
design for cruise. Less air required in cruise so the idea is to reduce
drag in cruise with the cowl flaps.
Absolutely, as I pointed out in my email.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AA-5B Cowling |
Under cowl temps will invariably increase immediately after landing
before they start to decrease, no matter what the cowling is made of. I
see this on my Bonanza and watch the oil temp increase whether or not my
cowl flaps are open or closed. Most of the time I open both cowl doors
after shutting down to allow the heat out, especially if it's a short
turn around and I'm going to take off right away. Cowl flaps are not
for this but for controlling temperatures (mainly cylinder head temp)
during slow speed climb out when there is much lower air flow than
during cruise. With a fast plane that cruises at a much higher speed
than it climbs you will add a lot of drag at cruise speed because there
will be a lot more airflow than needed for this flight condition.
Having cockpit adjustable cowl flaps is very beneficial in managing this
airflow and reducing cooling drag and increasing cruise speed. On my
Bonanza I can see about 4 kts of speed increase by closing the cowl
flaps at cruise speed condition.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: Hosler, John
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 6:48 AM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
The question was more related to cool down after landing or heat up
while taxiing. That's what cowl flaps are for on larger aircraft.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
flyv35b
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 9:31 AM
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
How's the cooling? A lot has been said about the AG5B carbon fiber
cowling not dissipating heat well.
John
That's the first I have heard about that. Do you really think that
the heat transfer through an aluminum cowling versus a carbon fiber or
fiberglass one makes a difference, even a minor one, on the overall
cooling? There are other more significant differences between the AA-5B
and AG-5B that could contribute to any cooling differences.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | G Vogt <teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: AA-5B Cowling |
For the third day in a row, I've been unable to read my mail on AOL.
This happened last year for a couple of days and it pissed me off
then. This is the fourth time this year that they've fucked with the
email. I've run out of patience. I've had the same email addresses on
AOL since 1995. But, I need access to email for business.
Please change my email to teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com
Thanks
Sent from my iPhone
On May 13, 2010, at 2:53 PM, G Vogt wrote:
>
> I've offered cowlings for sale before and no one responded. I just
> sold 3 to Fletcher for real cheap so, if there is a demand, call
> Fletcher. They have some at bargain basement prices.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 13, 2010, at 6:46 AM, "Andy Thomas"
> wrote:
>
>> >
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> put me on the list as interested and I would like a picture when
>> available. Where are you located (thinking of shipping cost).
>> Thanks...
>>
>> Andy Thomas
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Mark T. Mueller" <mark.t.mueller(at)comcast.net>
>> To:
>> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 8:29 AM
>> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: AA-5B Cowling
>>
>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> I still have my old AA-5B cowling with the "split nosebowl". Paint
>>> isn't great but in good condition overall, just missing a couple
>>> screws on the split hardware.
>>>
>>> I have been saving it to build a nice little wall decoration for my
>>> office and/or garage, but the Household Commander vetoed that
>>> idea....
>>>
>>> It was removed a few years back for my LoPresti nose install (long
>>> before Gary was working on his...)
>>>
>>> LMK if anyone is interested. I can snap digi photos if needed. Best
>>> offer + shipping.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>> Tiger N1533R
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM
>>>
>>> Scott has bought the cowling.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for your interest.
>>>
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | G Vogt <teamgrumman(at)AOL.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: AA-5B Cowling |
I first heard this myth 10 years ago on a visit to Fletchair.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 14, 2010, at 6:31 AM, "flyv35b" wrote:
> How=99s the cooling? A lot has been said about the AG5B carbon
fiber
> cowling not dissipating heat well.
>
> John
>
> That's the first I have heard about that. Do you really think that
> the heat transfer through an aluminum cowling versus a carbon fiber
> or fiberglass one makes a difference, even a minor one, on the
> overall cooling? There are other more significant differences
> between the AA-5B and AG-5B that could contribute to any cooling
> differences.
>
> Cliff
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
What are the baffles worth? I removed all of the baffles on a Tiger to install
my cowling. I'll sell all of them as a set. The cylinder baffles are in pretty
good shape. All good baffle seals. I'd rate them in good condition. Not
great.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | GOLDPILOT(at)AOL.COM |
____________________________________
From: teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com
Sent: 5/22/2010 12:14:47 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time
Subj: Re: FWD
I'm in the process of having more overlays made. I will announce
availability of the overlays on TeamGrumman-List.
____________________________________
From: "GOLDPILOT(at)aol.com" <GOLDPILOT(at)aol.com>
Sent: Wed, May 19, 2010 8:55:48 PM
Subject: FWD
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:14:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Richard McDowell <buckeye196899(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Panel overlay
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Trying to get a hold of Gary Voigt . Is the number on the website still
good? need a panel overlay
Rick McDowell
AA5 1321
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
I got the sample back from the shop that will be making the overlays. They look
good.
Would having the panels alodined be of any interest? I can have them alodined
for about $5-$10 per set.
I would suspect that I'll have them ready for delivery in short order.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
I got my PMA today. I can start shipping cowling and baffle kits as soon as someone
buys them.
Also, I'll be getting a PMA for the instrument panel overlays and eyebrows as well.
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
Is there anyone in the Los Angeles area, especially in the Hollywood area, that
knows of a place where my girlfriends son could live for the next year while
he finishes school? He's going to school near downtown Los Angeles on Grand avenue.
Forgive me for not knowing the area better. He would need a place within
commute distance. How far that is, I don't know. Figure an hour from school
to be the maximum. He's a good kid. He's been putting himself through school
on the order of $25,000 a year. He has one year to go. He has a job. He
just needs a place to live that is quiet so he can study while he's finishing
school.
Please let me know.
Thanks
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Courtney" <jamey(at)jamescourtney.net> |
Congrats Gary, I hope you're flooded with orders!
Jamey
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 10:04 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: PMA
I got my PMA today. I can start shipping cowling and baffle kits as soon as
someone buys them.
Also, I'll be getting a PMA for the instrument panel overlays and eyebrows
as well.
Gary
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
11:30:00
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Hjermstad <scott(at)hjermstad.com> |
I see value in having the overlays alodined.
On May 27, 2010, at 9:58 PM, Gary Vogt wrote:
> I got the sample back from the shop that will be making the
> overlays. They look good.
>
> Would having the panels alodined be of any interest? I can have
> them alodined for about $5-$10 per set.
>
> I would suspect that I'll have them ready for delivery in short order.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
That would be good if you are going to paint it. I don't know about
powder coating - possibly not. It's quite easy to alodine it yourself
anyhow.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 7:58 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Overlays
I got the sample back from the shop that will be making the overlays.
They look good.
Would having the panels alodined be of any interest? I can have them
alodined for about $5-$10 per set.
I would suspect that I'll have them ready for delivery in short order.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
Me TOO, Jamie. I need to sell a minimum of 16 more to recover my investmen
t. =0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: James Courtney <ja
mey(at)jamescourtney.net>=0ATo: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Thu, Ma
y 27, 2010 11:22:18 PM=0ASubject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: PMA=0A=0A =0ACongra
ts Gary, I hope you=99re flooded with orders!=0A =0AJamey=0A =0A =0AF
rom:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com=0A[mailto:owner-teamgrumman
-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary=0AVogt=0ASent: Thursday, May
27, 2010 10:04 PM=0ATo: Teamgrumman List=0ASubject: TeamGrumman-List: PMA
=0A =0AI got my PMA today. I can start shipping cowling and=0Abaffle kits
as soon as someone buys them.=0A =0AAlso, I'll be getting a PMA for the ins
trument panel overlays=0Aand eyebrows as well.=0A =0AGary =0A =0A =0A =0A
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List=0Ahttp://forums.matroni
cs.com=0Ahttp://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A =0ANo virus=0Afound in t
===================0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
Hey Cliff,
The guy I use for powder coating prefers alodined for aluminum before it's powder
coated. It certainly isn't as critical as when you're painting though.
Cliff, a heat gun helps to remove the plastic film under the foam on the headliner.
My helper held his hand on the outside as a temperature sensor. It really
didn't take much heat to remove the plastic. The surface was a lot cooler
than sitting in the sun.
________________________________
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
Sent: Fri, May 28, 2010 6:02:57 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Overlays
That would be good if you are going to paint it.
I don't know about powder coating - possibly not. It's quite easy to
alodine it yourself anyhow.
----- Original Message -----
>From: Gary
> Vogt
>To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 7:58
>PM
>Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Overlays
>
>
>I got the sample back from the shop that will be making the overlays.
> They look good.
>
>
>Would having the panels alodined be of any interest? I can have
> them alodined for about $5-$10 per set.
>
>
>I would suspect that I'll have them ready for delivery in short
> order.
>
>
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hosler, John" <JHOSLER(at)epri.com> |
Gary;
Have you a price for both the power flow exhaust (short stack) and the
new cowling (parts only)?
John Hosler
704-252-0780
________________________________
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary
Vogt
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: PMA
Me TOO, Jamie. I need to sell a minimum of 16 more to recover my
investment.
________________________________
From: James Courtney <jamey(at)jamescourtney.net>
Sent: Thu, May 27, 2010 11:22:18 PM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: PMA
Congrats Gary, I hope you're flooded with orders!
Jamey
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary
Vogt
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 10:04 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: PMA
I got my PMA today. I can start shipping cowling and baffle kits as
soon as someone buys them.
Also, I'll be getting a PMA for the instrument panel overlays and
eyebrows as well.
Gary
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
11:30:00
http://www=====================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Fw: B-17 WATCH THIS WEEKEND OLD 666 Can a B-17 take |
on 17 Japaneese fighters?
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Ronald Millman CPA <ronmillmancpa(at)msn.com>
Sent: Fri, May 28, 2010 8:02:05 AM
Subject: Fw: B-17 WATCH THIS WEEKEND OLD 666 Can a B-17 take on 17 Japaneese fighters?
All right you guys, get ready for a real good mission. click at
the bottom of this page.
Ron.
----- Original Message -----
From: CHARLES DUCAT
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 6:39 AM
Subject: B-17 WATCH THIS WEEKEND OLD 666 Can a B-17 take on 17
Japaneese fighters?
Real B17 Video story
Have a GREAT Holiday this weekend
Your Humble Pres.
Blue Skies, Charlie
>
>Subject:
> OLD 666 Can a B-17 take on 17 Japaneese fighters?
>To:
>
>
>:55
> am
>Subject: FW: OLD 666 Can a B-17 take on 17 Japaneese
> fighters?
>
>
> >
>
>
>From:666 Can a B-17 take
> on 17 Japanese fighters?
>
> 666 Can
> a B-17 take on 17 Japanese fighters?
>
>....speaker
> volume up & enjoy! ....kr
>
>-----
> Original Message -----
>From:> LTCPJAyres
>
>Click here: YouTube - OLD "
>> 666"
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
Not surprising, as heat helps to remove lots of different adhesives by
softening the glue and allowing them to be peeled off.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 9:56 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Overlays
Hey Cliff,
The guy I use for powder coating prefers alodined for aluminum before
it's powder coated. It certainly isn't as critical as when you're
painting though.
Cliff, a heat gun helps to remove the plastic film under the foam on
the headliner. My helper held his hand on the outside as a temperature
sensor. It really didn't take much heat to remove the plastic. The
surface was a lot cooler than sitting in the sun.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: flyv35b <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Fri, May 28, 2010 6:02:57 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Overlays
That would be good if you are going to paint it. I don't know about
powder coating - possibly not. It's quite easy to alodine it yourself
anyhow.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 7:58 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Overlays
I got the sample back from the shop that will be making the
overlays. They look good.
Would having the panels alodined be of any interest? I can have
them alodined for about $5-$10 per set.
I would suspect that I'll have them ready for delivery in short
order.
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.co
m">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Trejo <md11strejo(at)YAHOO.COM> |
Gary, Do you have any photos of the overlays and eyebrows. The cost?
Scott T
PS. Did you get my check?
On May 27, 2010, at 10:58 PM, Gary Vogt wrote:
> I got the sample back from the shop that will be making the overlays.
They look good.
>
> Would having the panels alodined be of any interest? I can have them
alodined for about $5-$10 per set.
>
> I would suspect that I'll have them ready for delivery in short order.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | 77 Cheetah for sale |
Here ya go, a sweet Cheetah for sale.
1750 TTSN
75 SMOH
75 SnewProp
75 S new everything.
This plane was completely rebuilt by me over a period of a year.
Dual 430's
340 audio panel
327 transponder
Mitchell gauges
Real parking brakes
New paint
New leather interior
new tires
new brake system
stripped and painted firewall
powder coated everything.
The owner has over $100,000 invested in this plane.
If you want a clean 2 owner plane, yes, you read correctly, only 2 owners, give
me a call. The plane has only been based at 3 airports.
What do you think the plane is worth???????
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shaun Wilkinson" <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 77 Cheetah for sale |
Hi Gary,
Nice aeroplane !!
What you looking for?
Where is she based.
I live in the UK but am coming back over en July for about 3 months,
then to Canada for a couple months.
I visit the States quiet a bit and usually hire a 4 seater to get round
in.
Might be worth having one over there for when i come
Regards
Shaun
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: Teamgrumman List
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 1:26 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Here ya go, a sweet Cheetah for sale.
1750 TTSN
75 SMOH
75 SnewProp
75 S new everything.
This plane was completely rebuilt by me over a period of a year.
Dual 430's
340 audio panel
327 transponder
Mitchell gauges
Real parking brakes
New paint
New leather interior
new tires
new brake system
stripped and painted firewall
powder coated everything.
The owner has over $100,000 invested in this plane.
If you want a clean 2 owner plane, yes, you read correctly, only 2
owners, give me a call. The plane has only been based at 3 airports.
What do you think the plane is worth???????
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: 77 Cheetah for sale |
I don't think he'd be interested in renting it.
________________________________
From: Shaun Wilkinson <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net>
Sent: Sat, May 29, 2010 4:26:10 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Hi Gary,
Nice aeroplane !!
What you looking for?
Where is she based.
I live in the UK but am coming back over
en July for about 3 months, then to Canada for a couple months.
I visit the States quiet a bit and usually
hire a 4 seater to get round in.
Might be worth having one over there for
when i come
Regards
Shaun
----- Original Message -----
>From: Gary
> Vogt
>To: Teamgrumman List
>Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 1:26
>AM
>Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for
> sale
>
>
>Here ya go, a sweet Cheetah for sale.
>
>
>1750 TTSN
>75 SMOH
>75 SnewProp
>75 S new everything.
>
>
>This plane was completely rebuilt by me over a period of a year.
>
>
>
>Dual 430's
>340 audio panel
>327 transponder
>Mitchell gauges
>Real parking brakes
>
>
>New paint
>New leather interior
>new tires
>new brake system
>stripped and painted firewall
>powder coated everything.
>
>
>The owner has over $100,000 invested in this plane.
>
>
>If you want a clean 2 owner plane, yes, you read correctly, only 2
> owners, give me a call. The plane has only been based at 3
> airports.
>
>
>What do you think the plane is worth???????
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
http://gallery.me.com/corl#100122
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | 79 Tiger 1890 TT everything |
One of my customers is selling his Tiger. It's pretty decent. High time engine.
He's asking $40,000. It's worth every cent of that.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | 2004 AG5B for sale Less than 350 TTSN |
Here's another one.
This is a very sweet Tiger. Power Flow, 530, 430. JPI 830. S-Tec 30. Very nice
and one of the fastest AGs I've flown.
Asking $160,000 (But he'll take $150,000)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | brian sandberg <sandbag23(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Initial AuCountry "Jaguar" cowl report |
Tiger N119ST now has a few flights with the STC/PMA Gary Vogt cowl (which i
ncludes previously installed Powerflow short stack). Keep in mind this '76
airframe with significant damage history was=2C oddly=2C considered "fast"
before the install. It carried 8 months of ramp grime during these flight
s=2C and the prop is due for an overhaul. It doesn't have a tail beacon or
steps=2C is well rigged=2C and has the K&N air filter STC. These initial
tests are by no means scientific=2C but you might be interested in some num
bers:
1950lbs GW=2C forward CG
2500ft PA
15degC OAT
Full throttle=2C moderate lean
2700+ RPM (mechanical tach clocked accurate=2C 63" Sensenich)
143 KIAS
149 KTAS
This was the first flight for plane and pilot in 8 months in rough air. Th
e prop wanted to overspeed with every bump. First impressions were that th
ere was more speed and better cooling=2C but I couldn't quantify in the sho
rt time spent renewing landing currency.
2000lbs GW=2C fwd CG
11=2C500ft PA
12=2C090ft DA
0degC OAT
Full throttle=2C max lean (by sound)=2C 9.4gph
2615 RPM
120 KIAS
144 KTAS
Max EGT #1 1460degF
Max CHT #4 385degF
Oil Temp 178degF
1950lbs GW=2C fwd CG
13=2C500ft PA
15=2C100ft DA
-5degC OAT
Full throttle=2C max lean (by sound)=2C 8.2gph
2600 RPM
114 KIAS
144 KTAS
Max EGT #1 1420degF
Max CHT #3&4 381degF
Oil Temp 178degF
These flight were in smooth air. The impressive numbers may be misleading
because of the low OAT=3B in similar conditions I used to run my hottest CH
T around 400deg F.
On a short family hop=2C max gross with an aft CG (but still not washed)=2C
it was pushing 150 KTAS at 3500ft before my wife asked the benefit of red-
lining on our first flight=2C overwater=2C in 9 months.
So overall I think it's safe to say that I've gained more than 5 kts in my
normal mode of mid altitude=2C throttled back=2C aggressively leaned econom
y cruise=3B from roughly 135KTAS to 140KTAS. Cylinders temps are more clos
ely matched=2C with #1&2 running maybe slightly hotter and #3&4 cooler than
they used to in all phases. During one full rich=2C 100KIAS climb on a 70
deg F day #1 went over 440degF where usually #3 or #4 would have been there
first. Oil temps appear the same as with the original cowl and Powerflow
(which increased oil temps by around 15degF).
My original cowl was significantly damaged=2C patched=2C debonded and Bondo
'd=2C so the main goal of this purchase was a hardware replacement. The ap
pearance (still needs paint to match=3B I've already witnessed 2 lookie-loo
s inspecting the conspicuous nose)=2C speed and cooling benefits are gravy.
When I download the EDM-700 we'll have some quantifiable before and after
temperature results.
-Brian
N119ST @ KSDM
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search=2C chat and e-mail from your inb
ox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:O
N:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shaun Wilkinson" <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 77 Cheetah for sale |
Wasnt interested in renting !!!
Am looking to buy, then when I come over i have an aircraft to use
instead of visiting schools and hiring like i always do.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 11:06 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
I don't think he'd be interested in renting it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: Shaun Wilkinson <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sat, May 29, 2010 4:26:10 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Hi Gary,
Nice aeroplane !!
What you looking for?
Where is she based.
I live in the UK but am coming back over en July for about 3 months,
then to Canada for a couple months.
I visit the States quiet a bit and usually hire a 4 seater to get
round in.
Might be worth having one over there for when i come
Regards
Shaun
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: Teamgrumman List
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 1:26 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Here ya go, a sweet Cheetah for sale.
1750 TTSN
75 SMOH
75 SnewProp
75 S new everything.
This plane was completely rebuilt by me over a period of a year.
Dual 430's
340 audio panel
327 transponder
Mitchell gauges
Real parking brakes
New paint
New leather interior
new tires
new brake system
stripped and painted firewall
powder coated everything.
The owner has over $100,000 invested in this plane.
If you want a clean 2 owner plane, yes, you read correctly, only 2
owners, give me a call. The plane has only been based at 3 airports.
What do you think the plane is worth???????
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | 77 Cheetah for sale |
| From: | "Dwork, Robert" <Robert.Dwork(at)arbella.com> |
Shaun, would you be interested in buying my Traveler?
TTSN: 2525 SMOH: 425: 0-320 E2G w/ HC STC NDH; Complete logs to Day One.
KX-165 Nav/Comm MX 11 Comm Narco AT 150 Xponder PS Eng 1000 4-place
intercom w/ music fade DG0 HSI: overhauled 2007 Century 1 A/P JPI 450
Fuel Flow Computer Lowrance 2000c True Flight Cheetah w/ XM WX. Dual
avionic master switches. Portable transceiver antenna jack. Custom Blue
Sky sun visors. Vertical compass card. Custom Cunningham canopy cover.
Wings/tail covers Exterior: 4 Interior: 8: new panel overlay; new
off-white leather seats and side panels, new carpeting; the plastic is
original.
$33,300 US.
You can contact me at this email address if interested. It's a solid
airplane.
Bob
> ____________________________________
> Robert B. Dwork | Special Investigative Unit |
Arbella Insurance Group
> 1100 Crown Colony Drive | Quincy, MA 02169 | phone
(617) 328-2425| fax: (617) 328-2851 | robert.dwork(at)arbella.com
>
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Shaun
Wilkinson
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 11:07 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Wasnt interested in renting !!!
Am looking to buy, then when I come over i have an aircraft to use
instead of visiting schools and hiring like i always do.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 11:06 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
I don't think he'd be interested in renting it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
From: Shaun Wilkinson <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sat, May 29, 2010 4:26:10 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Hi Gary,
Nice aeroplane !!
What you looking for?
Where is she based.
I live in the UK but am coming back over en July for about 3 months,
then to Canada for a couple months.
I visit the States quiet a bit and usually hire a 4 seater to get
round in.
Might be worth having one over there for when i come
Regards
Shaun
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: Teamgrumman List
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 1:26 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Here ya go, a sweet Cheetah for sale.
1750 TTSN
75 SMOH
75 SnewProp
75 S new everything.
This plane was completely rebuilt by me over a period of a year.
Dual 430's
340 audio panel
327 transponder
Mitchell gauges
Real parking brakes
New paint
New leather interior
new tires
new brake system
stripped and painted firewall
powder coated everything.
The owner has over $100,000 invested in this plane.
If you want a clean 2 owner plane, yes, you read correctly, only 2
owners, give me a call. The plane has only been based at 3 airports.
What do you think the plane is worth???????
This email message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains information
that may be confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender by reply email and
immediately delete this message.
Use, disclosure or reproduction of this email by anyone other than the intended
recipient(s) is strictly prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: 77 Cheetah for sale |
The owner is asking $80K. He'd consider as low as $75K. Would you be exporting
this back to the UK?
________________________________
From: Shaun Wilkinson <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net>
Sent: Tue, June 1, 2010 8:06:33 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Wasnt interested in renting
!!!
Am looking to buy, then when I come over i
have an aircraft to use instead of visiting schools and hiring like i always
do.
----- Original Message -----
>From: Gary
> Vogt
>To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 11:06 PM
>Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah
> for sale
>
>
>I don't think he'd be interested in renting it.
>
>
________________________________
From: Shaun Wilkinson <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net>
>To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Sat, May 29, 2010 4:26:10
> AM
>Subject: Re:
> TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
>
> >
>Hi Gary,
>Nice aeroplane !!
>What you looking for?
>Where is she based.
>I live in the UK but am coming back over
> en July for about 3 months, then to Canada for a couple months.
>I visit the States quiet a bit and
> usually hire a 4 seater to get round in.
>Might be worth having one over there for
> when i come
>Regards
>Shaun
>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Gary Vogt
>>To: Teamgrumman List
>>Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 1:26
>> AM
>>Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah
>> for sale
>>
>>
>>Here ya go, a sweet Cheetah for sale.
>>
>>
>>1750 TTSN
>>75 SMOH
>>75 SnewProp
>>75 S new everything.
>>
>>
>>This plane was completely rebuilt by me over a period of a year.
>>
>>
>>
>>Dual 430's
>>340 audio panel
>>327 transponder
>>Mitchell gauges
>>Real parking brakes
>>
>>
>>New paint
>>New leather interior
>>new tires
>>new brake system
>>stripped and painted firewall
>>powder coated everything.
>>
>>
>>The owner has over $100,000 invested in this plane.
>>
>>
>>If you want a clean 2 owner plane, yes, you read correctly, only 2
>> owners, give me a call. The plane has only been based at 3
>> airports.
>>
>>
>>What do you think the plane is worth???????
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shaun Wilkinson" <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 77 Cheetah for sale |
No i wouldnt be exporting it here.
I'd just buy something and leave it in the US, use it when im over and
probably just get someone over there to look after it for me
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 6:02 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
The owner is asking $80K. He'd consider as low as $75K. Would you be
exporting this back to the UK?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: Shaun Wilkinson <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tue, June 1, 2010 8:06:33 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Wasnt interested in renting !!!
Am looking to buy, then when I come over i have an aircraft to use
instead of visiting schools and hiring like i always do.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 11:06 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
I don't think he'd be interested in renting it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: Shaun Wilkinson <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sat, May 29, 2010 4:26:10 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Hi Gary,
Nice aeroplane !!
What you looking for?
Where is she based.
I live in the UK but am coming back over en July for about 3 months,
then to Canada for a couple months.
I visit the States quiet a bit and usually hire a 4 seater to get
round in.
Might be worth having one over there for when i come
Regards
Shaun
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: Teamgrumman List
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 1:26 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Here ya go, a sweet Cheetah for sale.
1750 TTSN
75 SMOH
75 SnewProp
75 S new everything.
This plane was completely rebuilt by me over a period of a year.
Dual 430's
340 audio panel
327 transponder
Mitchell gauges
Real parking brakes
New paint
New leather interior
new tires
new brake system
stripped and painted firewall
powder coated everything.
The owner has over $100,000 invested in this plane.
If you want a clean 2 owner plane, yes, you read correctly, only 2
owners, give me a call. The plane has only been based at 3 airports.
What do you think the plane is worth???????
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.co
m">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shaun Wilkinson" <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 77 Cheetah for sale |
Robert,
Any pics?
Shaun
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dwork, Robert" <Robert.Dwork(at)arbella.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 4:14 PM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
>
>
> Shaun, would you be interested in buying my Traveler?
>
> TTSN: 2525 SMOH: 425: 0-320 E2G w/ HC STC NDH; Complete logs to Day One.
> KX-165 Nav/Comm MX 11 Comm Narco AT 150 Xponder PS Eng 1000 4-place
> intercom w/ music fade DG0 HSI: overhauled 2007 Century 1 A/P JPI 450
> Fuel Flow Computer Lowrance 2000c True Flight Cheetah w/ XM WX. Dual
> avionic master switches. Portable transceiver antenna jack. Custom Blue
> Sky sun visors. Vertical compass card. Custom Cunningham canopy cover.
> Wings/tail covers Exterior: 4 Interior: 8: new panel overlay; new
> off-white leather seats and side panels, new carpeting; the plastic is
> original.
>
> $33,300 US.
>
> You can contact me at this email address if interested. It's a solid
> airplane.
>
> Bob
>
>
>> ____________________________________
>> Robert B. Dwork | Special Investigative Unit |
> Arbella Insurance Group
>> 1100 Crown Colony Drive | Quincy, MA 02169 | phone
> (617) 328-2425| fax: (617) 328-2851 | robert.dwork(at)arbella.com
>>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Shaun
> Wilkinson
> Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 11:07 AM
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
>
> Wasnt interested in renting !!!
> Am looking to buy, then when I come over i have an aircraft to use
> instead of visiting schools and hiring like i always do.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gary Vogt
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 11:06 PM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
>
>
> I don't think he'd be interested in renting it.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> From: Shaun Wilkinson <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net>
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sat, May 29, 2010 4:26:10 AM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
>
>
> Hi Gary,
> Nice aeroplane !!
> What you looking for?
> Where is she based.
> I live in the UK but am coming back over en July for about 3 months,
> then to Canada for a couple months.
> I visit the States quiet a bit and usually hire a 4 seater to get
> round in.
> Might be worth having one over there for when i come
> Regards
> Shaun
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gary Vogt
> To: Teamgrumman List
> Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 1:26 AM
> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
>
>
> Here ya go, a sweet Cheetah for sale.
>
>
> 1750 TTSN
> 75 SMOH
> 75 SnewProp
> 75 S new everything.
>
>
> This plane was completely rebuilt by me over a period of a year.
>
>
> Dual 430's
> 340 audio panel
> 327 transponder
> Mitchell gauges
> Real parking brakes
>
>
> New paint
> New leather interior
> new tires
> new brake system
> stripped and painted firewall
> powder coated everything.
>
>
> The owner has over $100,000 invested in this plane.
>
>
> If you want a clean 2 owner plane, yes, you read correctly, only 2
> owners, give me a call. The plane has only been based at 3 airports.
>
>
> What do you think the plane is worth???????
>
>
> This email message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains
> information that may be confidential.
> If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender by reply
> email and immediately delete this message.
> Use, disclosure or reproduction of this email by anyone other than the
> intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Roberts <aa1bflyboy(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | 77 Cheetah for sale |
Where do you plan on keeping it? I'd be happy to keep an eye on it for you
if you want to keep it on the east coast. In exchange maybe you'd like to g
et some time in a two place for something different on occasion.
Steve Roberts
AA1B - 641HY @ ILG
AYA Region 2 Director/Forum Admin
We shall not cease from exploration.
And at the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive were we started
And know the place for the first time - T. S. Eliot
From: shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Date: Tue=2C 1 Jun 2010 18:14:19 +0100
No i wouldnt be exporting it here.
I'd just buy something and leave it in the US=2C use it when im over and pr
obably just get someone over there to look after it for me
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
Sent: Tuesday=2C June 01=2C 2010 6:02 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
The owner is asking $80K. He'd consider as low as $75K. Would you be expo
rting this back to the UK?
From: Shaun Wilkinson <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net>
Sent: Tue=2C June 1=2C 2010 8:06:33 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Wasnt interested in renting !!!
Am looking to buy=2C then when I come over i have an aircraft to use instea
d of visiting schools and hiring like i always do.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
Sent: Sunday=2C May 30=2C 2010 11:06 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
I don't think he'd be interested in renting it.
From: Shaun Wilkinson <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net>
Sent: Sat=2C May 29=2C 2010 4:26:10 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Hi Gary=2C
Nice aeroplane !!
What you looking for?
Where is she based.
I live in the UK but am coming back over en July for about 3 months=2C then
to Canada for a couple months.
I visit the States quiet a bit and usually hire a 4 seater to get round in.
Might be worth having one over there for when i come
Regards
Shaun
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
Sent: Saturday=2C May 29=2C 2010 1:26 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Here ya go=2C a sweet Cheetah for sale.
1750 TTSN
75 SMOH
75 SnewProp
75 S new everything.
This plane was completely rebuilt by me over a period of a year.
Dual 430's
340 audio panel
327 transponder
Mitchell gauges
Real parking brakes
New paint
New leather interior
new tires
new brake system
stripped and painted firewall
powder coated everything.
The owner has over $100=2C000 invested in this plane.
If you want a clean 2 owner plane=2C yes=2C you read correctly=2C only 2 ow
ners=2C give me a call. The plane has only been based at 3 airports.
What do you think the plane is worth???????
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.mat
ronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">h
ttp://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.mat
ronics.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: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
FOR SALE: 1973 GRUMMAN TR2
- 1270 hours Total Time on the airframe and engine.
- Top engine overhaul at 1226 hours;
- New cylinders are port and polished; compressions
79/79/79/79
- New powder
coated baffles
- Oil cooler
- 4 cylinder EI
Engine analyzer with OAT and oil temp
- Monroy ATD
200 Air Traffic Detector
- King/Bendix KX-125 flip-flop COM/NAV for COM 1
- Narco Escort II COM/NAV for COM 2
- PS Engineering PS1000 Intercom
- Electric Clock
This airplane is so much fun to fly and so cost effective. It gets between 6-8
GPH depending on
power settings. I used this as a
commuter to Southern California, but now need another aircraft for IFR flying.
ASKING PRICE: $19,900
Contact: David
White Home: (530) 273-2120 Cell: (530) 913-4300
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | 77 Cheetah for sale |
| From: | "Dwork, Robert" <Robert.Dwork(at)arbella.com> |
I'm in the process of setting up a web page for it's sale, but in the
meantime, here is what I have for now.
The panel shot doesn't accurate portray the radio stack as it is now;
the radios are as mentioned in the specs below (KX-165), I'll send you
an updated photo if you are interested.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Shaun
Wilkinson
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
-->
Robert,
Any pics?
Shaun
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dwork, Robert" <Robert.Dwork(at)arbella.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 4:14 PM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
>
>
> Shaun, would you be interested in buying my Traveler?
>
> TTSN: 2525 SMOH: 425: 0-320 E2G w/ HC STC NDH; Complete logs to Day
One.
> KX-165 Nav/Comm MX 11 Comm Narco AT 150 Xponder PS Eng 1000 4-place
> intercom w/ music fade DG0 HSI: overhauled 2007 Century 1 A/P JPI 450
> Fuel Flow Computer Lowrance 2000c True Flight Cheetah w/ XM WX. Dual
> avionic master switches. Portable transceiver antenna jack. Custom
Blue
> Sky sun visors. Vertical compass card. Custom Cunningham canopy cover.
> Wings/tail covers Exterior: 4 Interior: 8: new panel overlay; new
> off-white leather seats and side panels, new carpeting; the plastic is
> original.
>
> $33,300 US.
>
> You can contact me at this email address if interested. It's a solid
> airplane.
>
> Bob
>
>
>> ____________________________________
>> Robert B. Dwork | Special Investigative Unit |
> Arbella Insurance Group
>> 1100 Crown Colony Drive | Quincy, MA 02169 | phone
> (617) 328-2425| fax: (617) 328-2851 | robert.dwork(at)arbella.com
>>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Shaun
> Wilkinson
> Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 11:07 AM
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
>
> Wasnt interested in renting !!!
> Am looking to buy, then when I come over i have an aircraft to use
> instead of visiting schools and hiring like i always do.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gary Vogt
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 11:06 PM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
>
>
> I don't think he'd be interested in renting it.
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> From: Shaun Wilkinson <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net>
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sat, May 29, 2010 4:26:10 AM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
>
>
> Hi Gary,
> Nice aeroplane !!
> What you looking for?
> Where is she based.
> I live in the UK but am coming back over en July for about 3 months,
> then to Canada for a couple months.
> I visit the States quiet a bit and usually hire a 4 seater to get
> round in.
> Might be worth having one over there for when i come
> Regards
> Shaun
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gary Vogt
> To: Teamgrumman List
> Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 1:26 AM
> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
>
>
> Here ya go, a sweet Cheetah for sale.
>
>
> 1750 TTSN
> 75 SMOH
> 75 SnewProp
> 75 S new everything.
>
>
> This plane was completely rebuilt by me over a period of a year.
>
>
> Dual 430's
> 340 audio panel
> 327 transponder
> Mitchell gauges
> Real parking brakes
>
>
> New paint
> New leather interior
> new tires
> new brake system
> stripped and painted firewall
> powder coated everything.
>
>
> The owner has over $100,000 invested in this plane.
>
>
> If you want a clean 2 owner plane, yes, you read correctly, only 2
> owners, give me a call. The plane has only been based at 3 airports.
>
>
> What do you think the plane is worth???????
>
>
> This email message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains
> information that may be confidential.
> If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender by
reply
> email and immediately delete this message.
> Use, disclosure or reproduction of this email by anyone other than the
> intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Shaun Wilkinson" <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 77 Cheetah for sale |
Steve Where abouts?
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Roberts
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 6:24 PM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Where do you plan on keeping it? I'd be happy to keep an eye on it for
you if you want to keep it on the east coast. In exchange maybe you'd
like to get some time in a two place for something different on
occasion.
Steve Roberts
AA1B - 641HY @ ILG
AYA Region 2 Director/Forum Admin
We shall not cease from exploration.
And at the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive were we started
And know the place for the first time - T. S. Eliot
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 18:14:19 +0100
No i wouldnt be exporting it here.
I'd just buy something and leave it in the US, use it when im over and
probably just get someone over there to look after it for me
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 6:02 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
The owner is asking $80K. He'd consider as low as $75K. Would you
be exporting this back to the UK?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: Shaun Wilkinson <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tue, June 1, 2010 8:06:33 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Wasnt interested in renting !!!
Am looking to buy, then when I come over i have an aircraft to use
instead of visiting schools and hiring like i always do.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 11:06 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
I don't think he'd be interested in renting it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
From: Shaun Wilkinson <shaunwilkinson(at)cloud9aviation.net>
To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sat, May 29, 2010 4:26:10 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Hi Gary,
Nice aeroplane !!
What you looking for?
Where is she based.
I live in the UK but am coming back over en July for about 3
months, then to Canada for a couple months.
I visit the States quiet a bit and usually hire a 4 seater to get
round in.
Might be worth having one over there for when i come
Regards
Shaun
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
To: Teamgrumman List
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 1:26 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 77 Cheetah for sale
Here ya go, a sweet Cheetah for sale.
1750 TTSN
75 SMOH
75 SnewProp
75 S new everything.
This plane was completely rebuilt by me over a period of a year.
Dual 430's
340 audio panel
327 transponder
Mitchell gauges
Real parking brakes
New paint
New leather interior
new tires
new brake system
stripped and painted firewall
powder coated everything.
The owner has over $100,000 invested in this plane.
If you want a clean 2 owner plane, yes, you read correctly, only
2 owners, give me a call. The plane has only been based at 3 airports.
What do you think the plane is worth???????
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.co
m">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.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
List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
ronics.com
ww.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | GOLDPILOT(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Still looking............ |
........Looking for a ride or a rider. I will be heading to the
convention from
Watsonville, Ca. (90 mi south of San Francisco). Can meet anywhere along
the
route.
Looking to share ride in your plane or my Tiger. My flight schedule
out/back and
route is very flexible.
Email _goldpilot(at)aol.com_ (mailto:goldpilot(at)aol.com)
David
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Still looking............ |
We decided to go commercial. It's cheaper.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 2, 2010, at 1:36 PM, GOLDPILOT(at)aol.com wrote:
........Looking for a ride or a rider. I will be heading to the convention from
Watsonville, Ca. (90 mi south of San Francisco). Can meet anywhere along the
route.
Looking to share ride in your plane or my Tiger. My flight schedule out/back and
route is very flexible.
Email _goldpilot(at)aol.com_ (mailto:goldpilot(at)aol.com)
David
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Linn Walters <pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Still looking............ |
Gary wrote:
> We decided to go commercial. It's cheaper.
cheaper, faster, higher on the aggravation scale .... but not near as
much fun!!!
Linn
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 2, 2010, at 1:36 PM, GOLDPILOT(at)aol.com
> wrote:
>
>> ........Looking for a ride or a rider. I will be heading to the
>> convention from
>> Watsonville, Ca. (90 mi south of San Francisco). Can meet anywhere
>> along the
>> route.
>> Looking to share ride in your plane or my Tiger. My flight schedule
>> out/back and
>> route is very flexible.
>> Email _goldpilot(at)aol.com _
>> (mailto:goldpilot(at)aol.com)
>>
>> David
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
Hi John,=0A=0AI'm selling the kit, that includes the cowling pieces (left s
ide, right side, upper cowling (needs to be cut in half)) and the 15 baffle
pieces for $8500 plus shipping. =0A=0AAs for the Power Flow, they offer d
eals every once in a while. I think Fletcher even has deals they could do.
Depending on where you are, it wouldn't make sense for me to buy the PF s
ystem, have it shipped here, and then to your place. =0A=0AI've talked to
Darren at PFS about making a special deal for cowling buyers and was pretty
much told no. So, no special deals for me.=0A=0AGary=0A=0A=0A=0A_________
_______________________=0AFrom: "Hosler, John" <JHOSLER(at)epri.com>=0ATo: tea
mgrumman-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Fri, May 28, 2010 10:01:27 AM=0ASubject
: RE: TeamGrumman-List: PMA=0A=0A =0AGary;=0A =0AHave you a price for both
the power flow=0Aexhaust (short stack) and the new cowling (parts only)?=0A
=0AJohn Hosler=0A704-252-0780=0A =0A=0A________________________________=0A
=0AFrom:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com=0A[mailto:owner-teamgr
umman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt=0ASent: Friday, May
28, 2010 12:49=0APM=0ATo: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com=0ASubject: Re: Te
amGrumman-List: PMA=0A =0AMe TOO, Jamie. I need to sell a minimum of 16 mo
re to recover my investment.=0A =0A =0A=0A________________________________
=0A =0AFrom:James=0ACourtney =0ATo: teamgrumman-li
st(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Thu, May 27, 2010 11:22:18=0APM=0ASubject: RE: Tea
mGrumman-List: PMA=0ACongrats Gary , I hope you=99re=0Aflooded with o
rders!=0A =0AJamey=0A =0A =0AFrom:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.c
om=0A[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary
Vogt=0ASent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 10:04=0APM=0ATo: Teamgrumman List=0ASu
bject: TeamGrumman-List: PMA=0A =0AI got my PMA today. I can start shippin
g cowling and baffle kits=0Aas soon as someone buys them.=0A =0AAlso, I'll
be getting a PMA for the instrument panel overlays and=0Aeyebrows as well.
=0A =0AGary =0A =0A =0A =0Ahttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumma
n-List=0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com=0Ahttp://www.matronics.com/contributio
n=0A =0ANo=0Avirus found in this incoming message.=0AChecked by AVG - www.
avg.com=0A11:30:00=0Ahttp://www==============
=========================0A
========0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | oil check, alternator belt check, bird nest check |
| From: | Anthony Dymond <amdymond(at)gmail.com> |
Hi All,
It's the time of year when our feathered aviator buddies get interested in
nest building. This (
http://web.me.com/jophusdavid/Site/N111GG_Birds_Nest.html) developed in just
a few days in one of our club planes at Concord, CA.
(I don't have a Grumman, but after flying them in the 70's I always felt
the Cheetah and Tiger were the best all-around GA planes.)
Regards,
Tony
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phil Kelsey" <Phil(at)ReliantAir.com> |
Gary, What is your estimated delivery time after receiving order. Do you
have any close in photos of the cowl details? Also, how practical would
it be to eliminate the top hinge? Think we could get it done through 337?
P. J. Kelsey
Vice President/Co-owner
ReliantAir
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server=40matronics.com
=5Bmailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server=40matronics.com=5D On Behalf Of
Gary Vogt
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 0:19
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: PMA
Hi John,
I'm selling the kit, that includes the cowling pieces (left side, right
side, upper cowling (needs to be cut in half)) and the 15 baffle pieces
for =248500 plus shipping.
As for the Power Flow, they offer deals every once in a while. I think
Fletcher even has deals they could do. Depending on where you are, it
wouldn't make sense for me to buy the PF system, have it shipped here, and
then to your place.
I've talked to Darren at PFS about making a special deal for cowling
buyers and was pretty much told no. So, no special deals for me.
Gary
http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
<http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/>
E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (7.0.0.514)
Database version: 6.15140
http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: oil check, alternator belt check, bird nest check |
Birds can be a pain. The previous occupant of my hangar must have let birds and
cats occupy the vacant planes he stored. Did he think the cats would keep the
birds away? It took 3 years to get all of the cats to go away and not come
back. Birds, well, the birds are back in force every year. I make it a habit
of putting aluminum tape over the openings in the horizontal. Without it, it's
a natural for birds. I had finished an annual on one plane, pulled it out
of the hangar, the owner got in it and started the engine. In that length of
time, say, 5 minutes, with the engine running, birds were flying into the horizontal
openings. It was crazy.
I've tried all of the tricks to keep birds away from planes. The CD thing doesn't
work. I've even put fly paper on the VOR antennas and the birds just landed
on the fly paper. I tried hanging lots of things on the VOR antennas. Nothing
works.
________________________________
From: Anthony Dymond <amdymond(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Thu, June 3, 2010 12:40:47 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: oil check, alternator belt check, bird nest check
Hi All,
It's the time of year when our feathered aviator buddies get interested in nest building. This (http://web.me.com/jophusdavid/Site/N111GG_Birds_Nest.html) developed in just a few days in one of our club planes at Concord, CA.
(I don't have a Grumman, but after flying them in the 70's I always felt the Cheetah
and Tiger were the best all-around GA planes.)
Regards,
Tony
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
Phil,
I thought about not having the top hinged. It's totally doable. If that were
done, I would need an oil filler door. In the end, the ease of access with a
hinge was kept.
I talked to fabricator. He's in the process of restoring a Corvette for a customer.
He said he could get started on a cowling by the middle of June. It takes
about two weeks to get it delivered here. Usually, we each drive halfway
and I pick up the parts from him.
What part of the cowling would you like to see? How's this for close?
Gary
________________________________
From: Phil Kelsey <Phil(at)ReliantAir.com>
Sent: Thu, June 3, 2010 1:07:59 PM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: PMA
Gary, What is your estimated delivery time after receiving order.
Do you have any close in photos of the cowl details? Also, how practical would
it be to eliminate the top hinge? Think we could get it done through 337?
P. J.
Kelsey
Vice President/Co-owner
ReliantAir
From:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary
Vogt
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 0:19
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: PMA
Hi John,
I'm selling the kit, that includes the cowling pieces (left
side, right side, upper cowling (needs to be cut in half)) and the 15 baffle
pieces for $8500 plus shipping.
As for the Power Flow, they offer deals every once in a
while. I think Fletcher even has deals they could do. Depending on
where you are, it wouldn't make sense for me to buy the PF system, have it
shipped here, and then to your place.
I've talked to Darren at PFS about making a special deal for
cowling buyers and was pretty much told no. So, no special deals for me.
Gary
http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (7.0.0.514)
Database version: 6.15140
http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: brian sandberg <sandbag23(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Thu, June 3, 2010 4:58:05 PM
Subject: W&B
I got the new W&B today. Another pound toward useful load!
I washed it the other night and did a short high speed run at about 2000' DA and
topped 150 KTAS. I need a USB-to-serial adapter to download the EDM; I'll do
that this week.
-Brian
________________________________
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Learn
more.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phil Kelsey" <Phil(at)ReliantAir.com> |
Thanks Gary, I am at a Flight Safety recurrent course this week. I'll be
in touch next week to further explore putting in an order for the cowl.
Phil
P. J. Kelsey
Vice President/Co-owner
ReliantAir
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: PMA
Phil,
I thought about not having the top hinged. It's totally doable. If that
were done, I would need an oil filler door. In the end, the ease of access
with a hinge was kept.
I talked to fabricator. He's in the process of restoring a Corvette for a
customer. He said he could get started on a cowling by the middle of June.
It takes about two weeks to get it delivered here. Usually, we each drive
halfway and I pick up the parts from him.
What part of the cowling would you like to see? How's this for close?
Gary
_____
From: Phil Kelsey <Phil(at)ReliantAir.com>
Sent: Thu, June 3, 2010 1:07:59 PM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: PMA
Gary, What is your estimated delivery time after receiving order. Do you
have any close in photos of the cowl details? Also, how practical would it
be to eliminate the top hinge? Think we could get it done through 337?
P. J. Kelsey
Vice President/Co-owner
ReliantAir
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 0:19
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: PMA
Hi John,
I'm selling the kit, that includes the cowling pieces (left side, right
side, upper cowling (needs to be cut in half)) and the 15 baffle pieces for
$8500 plus shipping.
As for the Power Flow, they offer deals every once in a while. I think
Fletcher even has deals they could do. Depending on where you are, it
wouldn't make sense for me to buy the PF system, have it shipped here, and
then to your place.
I've talked to Darren at PFS about making a special deal for cowling buyers
and was pretty much told no. So, no special deals for me.
Gary
http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (7.0.0.514)
Database version: 6.15140
http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
<http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/>
E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (7.0.0.514)
Database version: 6.15150
http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
<http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/>
E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (7.0.0.514)
Database version: 6.15150
http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Courtney" <jamey(at)jamescourtney.net> |
| Subject: | oil check, alternator belt check, bird nest check |
You need(ed) a dog.
Jamey
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: oil check, alternator belt check, bird nest
check
Birds can be a pain. The previous occupant of my hangar must have let birds
and cats occupy the vacant planes he stored. Did he think the cats would
keep the birds away? It took 3 years to get all of the cats to go away and
not come back. Birds, well, the birds are back in force every year. I make
it a habit of putting aluminum tape over the openings in the horizontal.
Without it, it's a natural for birds. I had finished an annual on one
plane, pulled it out of the hangar, the owner got in it and started the
engine. In that length of time, say, 5 minutes, with the engine running,
birds were flying into the horizontal openings. It was crazy.
I've tried all of the tricks to keep birds away from planes. The CD thing
doesn't work. I've even put fly paper on the VOR antennas and the birds
just landed on the fly paper. I tried hanging lots of things on the VOR
antennas. Nothing works.
_____
From: Anthony Dymond <amdymond(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Thu, June 3, 2010 12:40:47 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: oil check, alternator belt check, bird nest check
Hi All,
It's the time of year when our feathered aviator buddies get interested in
nest building. This
(http://web.me.com/jophusdavid/Site/N111GG_Birds_Nest.html) developed in
just a few days in one of our club planes at Concord, CA.
(I don't have a Grumman, but after flying them in the 70's I always felt the
Cheetah and Tiger were the best all-around GA planes.)
Regards,
Tony
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
23:25:00
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Courtney" <jamey(at)jamescourtney.net> |
Brian should consider getting the JPI USB adapter as the USB to serial
adapters were pretty flaky in my experience. The JPI product is certainly
overpriced but it lets one bring just a USB key with them instead of a
notebook.
Jamey
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 12:29 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Fw: W&B
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: brian sandberg <sandbag23(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Thu, June 3, 2010 4:58:05 PM
Subject: W&B
I got the new W&B today. Another pound toward useful load!
I washed it the other night and did a short high speed run at about 2000' DA
and topped 150 KTAS. I need a USB-to-serial adapter to download the EDM;
I'll do that this week.
-Brian
_____
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
Learn more.
<http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:
WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1>
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
23:25:00
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | GOLDPILOT(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | How about a "Gaggle of Grummans" attending this airshow? |
_Click here: Golden West Regional Fly-In & Airshow_
(http://www.goldenwestflyin.org/)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: How about a "Gaggle of Grummans" attending this |
airshow?
Which day? What time?
________________________________
From: "GOLDPILOT(at)aol.com" <GOLDPILOT(at)aol.com>
Sent: Sat, June 5, 2010 3:49:17 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: How about a "Gaggle of Grummans" attending this airshow?
Click here: Golden West Regional
Fly-In & Airshow
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: How about a "Gaggle of Grummans" attending this |
airshow?
I think that's a great idea.
We'll shoot for it.
________________________________
From: "GOLDPILOT(at)aol.com" <GOLDPILOT(at)aol.com>
Sent: Sat, June 5, 2010 3:49:17 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: How about a "Gaggle of Grummans" attending this airshow?
Click here: Golden West Regional
Fly-In & Airshow
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: How about a "Gaggle of Grummans" attending this |
airshow?
I think that's a great idea.
We'll shoot for it.
________________________________
From: "GOLDPILOT(at)aol.com" <GOLDPILOT(at)aol.com>
Sent: Sat, June 5, 2010 3:49:17 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: How about a "Gaggle of Grummans" attending this airshow?
Click here: Golden West Regional
Fly-In & Airshow
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | 1973 AA1B for sale |
Roughly 1300 TTAF/E
New panel overlays.
New ported and polished Lycoming cylinders.
EI engine analyzer
New baffle seals, baffles powder coated.
King 125
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Andy" <andy747(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 1973 AA1B for sale |
I think I saw a blurb on this one somewhere else....do you have pictures
and other information. The other posting was incomplete. Thanks....
Andy Thomas
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Vogt
Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2010 4:30 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 1973 AA1B for sale
Roughly 1300 TTAF/E
New panel overlays.
New ported and polished Lycoming cylinders.
EI engine analyzer
New baffle seals, baffles powder coated.
King 125
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: 1973 AA1B for sale |
Send Dave an email and ask for pics: eghostrider(at)hotmail.com
here is the panel
________________________________
From: Andy <andy747(at)charter.net>
Sent: Sun, June 6, 2010 5:04:07 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 1973 AA1B for sale
I think I saw a blurb on this one somewhere
else....do you have pictures and other information. The other posting was
incomplete. Thanks....
Andy Thomas
----- Original Message -----
>From: Gary
> Vogt
>Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2010 4:30 PM
>Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 1973 AA1B for
> sale
>
>
>>
>Roughly 1300 TTAF/E
>
>
>New panel overlays.
>
>
>New ported and polished Lycoming cylinders.
>
>
>EI engine analyzer
>
>
>New baffle seals, baffles powder coated.
>
>
>King 125
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Oh, the sacrilege |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Courtney" <jamey(at)jamescourtney.net> |
| Subject: | Oh, the sacrilege |
Hey, it's one of those retractable Grummans like Cliff has.
Who sweet-talked you in to servicing that thing?
;-)
Jamey
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 9:22 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Oh, the sacrilege
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
11:35:00
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Oh, the sacrilege |
It wasn't me but he has been "picking my brain" with questions about working
on it. The owner of it also owns a Tiger I believe.
Not to take away from Gary for what he has accomplished with the Tiger
cowling (congratulations on that), etc, but I think I know of about 10
people who have sold Tigers and bought Bonanzas and I as far as I know they
are all pretty happy. For a 63 year old design it still is a viable and
competitive plane.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Courtney" <jamey(at)jamescourtney.net>
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 11:19 PM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: Oh, the sacrilege
>
>
> Hey, it's one of those retractable Grummans like Cliff has.
>
> Who sweet-talked you in to servicing that thing?
>
> ;-)
>
> Jamey
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary
> Vogt
> Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 9:22 PM
> To: Teamgrumman List
> Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Oh, the sacrilege
>
>
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> 11:35:00
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Tiger cowling for sale: $500 plus shipping. |
Scott is thinking about buying one of my new cowlings instead of the cowling from
Brian's plane. Scott purchased the cowling for $500. He also wanted some
of the larger fiberglass cooling exit ramps. Those cost $140. I have it all
in a box just slightly too big to ship UPS. If I can get the box down to 41x37x24,
if I recall correctly, the shipping cost would be in the neighborhood of
$120-$150 (to Houston).
Garner, do you want this one?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Trejo <md11strejo(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Tiger cowling for sale: $500 plus shipping. |
Gary,
I got a shipper to pick up the cowling. They will be by tomorrow
between 8am and 11am. I have gave them your phone # and the address you
sent me. Thanks.
Scott Trejo
On Jun 10, 2010, at 12:36 PM, Gary Vogt wrote:
> Scott is thinking about buying one of my new cowlings instead of the
cowling from Brian's plane. Scott purchased the cowling for $500. He
also wanted some of the larger fiberglass cooling exit ramps. Those
cost $140. I have it all in a box just slightly too big to ship UPS.
If I can get the box down to 41x37x24, if I recall correctly, the
shipping cost would be in the neighborhood of $120-$150 (to Houston).
>
> Garner, do you want this one?
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Installing a windshield. |
For years, I have preferred the C. Bailey windshield because they fit better.
But, I've had a few complaints about distortion in the windshield. My windshield
has a slight distortion in it if I look for it. It's been so long since I
installed an LP Aero windshield that I really don't know if they have any distortion.
Garner is always chiding me for using C. Bailey windshields. But, let's face it,
if LP Aero made a superior windshield, I'd use theirs.
SO . . . . I had a customer request an LP Aero windshield. Garner packed it up
and sent it.
I put it on the frame today for a trial fit.
For the best bond (using RTV 732) I need a bond of around .015 inches. On a C.
Bailey, I can get it to around .010 at the tightest edge on the trailing edge
of the windshield bow and still have it within .025 at the leading edge at the
tightest spots.
Just sitting on the bow, the LP Aero windshield has a gap greater than .125 in
the two upper corners. It sits flat across the middle. No mater how I do it,
it's going to look like shit.
C. Bailey windshields come trim-to-fit. That means, there is a trim line about
1/2 inch around the windshield; too much windshield. Trimming is a pain in the
ass.
LP Aero windshields come trimmed to the size. Let's hope it fits.
C. Bailey windshields can be shimmed along the front edge using a washer held in
place by a screw through the double bead seal holes. I can shim all around
the front edge without interfering with windshield mounting and keep my .015 inches
gap all around the bow.
There is no place to do the same on the LP Aero. So. . . . . I'm trying something
new to keep my spacing. We'll see. Keep your fingers crossed.
Someone needs to make new tooling that actually fits the windshield bow curve.
That would be nice.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Pollack <rdp123(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Installing a windshield. |
Gary, my fingers are crossed and I'm sure you can work out a good
installation with the LP. Let me know -
Rick
On Jun 12, 2010, at 9:19 PM, Gary Vogt wrote:
> For years, I have preferred the C. Bailey windshield because they fit
better. But, I've had a few complaints about distortion in the
windshield. My windshield has a slight distortion in it if I look for
it. It's been so long since I installed an LP Aero windshield that I
really don't know if they have any distortion.
>
> Garner is always chiding me for using C. Bailey windshields. But,
let's face it, if LP Aero made a superior windshield, I'd use theirs.
>
> SO . . . . I had a customer request an LP Aero windshield. Garner
packed it up and sent it.
>
> I put it on the frame today for a trial fit.
>
> For the best bond (using RTV 732) I need a bond of around .015 inches.
On a C. Bailey, I can get it to around .010 at the tightest edge on the
trailing edge of the windshield bow and still have it within .025 at the
leading edge at the tightest spots.
>
> Just sitting on the bow, the LP Aero windshield has a gap greater than
.125 in the two upper corners. It sits flat across the middle. No
mater how I do it, it's going to look like shit.
>
> C. Bailey windshields come trim-to-fit. That means, there is a trim
line about 1/2 inch around the windshield; too much windshield.
Trimming is a pain in the ass.
>
> LP Aero windshields come trimmed to the size. Let's hope it fits.
>
> C. Bailey windshields can be shimmed along the front edge using a
washer held in place by a screw through the double bead seal holes. I
can shim all around the front edge without interfering with windshield
mounting and keep my .015 inches gap all around the bow.
>
> There is no place to do the same on the LP Aero. So. . . . . I'm
trying something new to keep my spacing. We'll see. Keep your fingers
crossed.
>
> Someone needs to make new tooling that actually fits the windshield
bow curve. That would be nice.
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Installing a windshield. |
| From: | FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com> |
Hello Gary:
It has been quite a few years since did two sets of windows. And I
will probably be doing one
in the next year or so. AND you have millions of more maintenance
hours compared to myself.
I can give you my experience... Both windows were LP. They were
purchased through Fletcher.
And shipped directly from the LP factory to me or my customer. The
biggest problem I had was
removing the old sealant, especially from around the leading edge. I
used an air powered drill
and a STIFF wire wheel. The fit in both cases was perfect, no
trimming needed. I did dress
the edges of the front window with a file to remove and burrs which
could become a stress crack.
I did NOT use the 732. I did use the 832. The difference being 732
is only a sealant and
the 832 is an Adhesive/Sealant. A bit more bonding and hold. Around
the bow I used ONLY
a 1/8" thick foam tape.
The only other 'trick' I did was to mount the bow to the window BEFORE
I secured the bow
to the airframe. This way the bow has a uniform fit all around and
the foam filled the gap.
Actually I would have to say There Was No Gap. The foam was there to
weather seal the edge.
And I know you know this... Do not tighten the screws, only snug them up.
Hope this helps,
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Gary Vogt wrote:
> For years, I have preferred the C. Bailey windshield because they fit
> better. But, I've had a few complaints about distortion in the windshield.
> My windshield has a slight distortion in it if I look for it. It's been so
> long since I installed an LP Aero windshield that I really don't know if
> they have any distortion.
> Garner is always chiding me for using C. Bailey windshields. But, let's
> face it, if LP Aero made a superior windshield, I'd use theirs.
> SO . . . . I had a customer request an LP Aero windshield. Garner packed it
> up and sent it.
> I put it on the frame today for a trial fit.
> For the best bond (using RTV 732) I need a bond of around .015 inches. On a
> C. Bailey, I can get it to around .010 at the tightest edge on the trailing
> edge of the windshield bow and still have it within .025 at the leading edge
> at the tightest spots.
> Just sitting on the bow, the LP Aero windshield has a gap greater than .125
> in the two upper corners. It sits flat across the middle. No mater how I
> do it, it's going to look like shit.
> C. Bailey windshields come trim-to-fit. That means, there is a trim line
> about 1/2 inch around the windshield; too much windshield. Trimming is a
> pain in the ass.
> LP Aero windshields come trimmed to the size. Let's hope it fits.
> C. Bailey windshields can be shimmed along the front edge using a washer
> held in place by a screw through the double bead seal holes. I can shim all
> around the front edge without interfering with windshield mounting and keep
> my .015 inches gap all around the bow.
> There is no place to do the same on the LP Aero. So. . . . . I'm trying
> something new to keep my spacing. We'll see. Keep your fingers crossed.
> Someone needs to make new tooling that actually fits the windshield bow
> curve. That would be nice.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Installing a windshield. |
Barry,
Are you saying that you are NOT bonding the windshield to the bow at the
rear and just trying to bond it around the front edge? That seems opposite
of what has historically been the accepted practice. 732 is more than just
a sealant when spread over a large area. A bonded windshield/bow serves as
a pretty good roll over protection when combined with a latched canopy.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: "FLYaDIVE" <flyadive(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 2:32 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Installing a windshield.
>
> Hello Gary:
>
> It has been quite a few years since did two sets of windows. And I
> will probably be doing one
> in the next year or so. AND you have millions of more maintenance
> hours compared to myself.
> I can give you my experience... Both windows were LP. They were
> purchased through Fletcher.
> And shipped directly from the LP factory to me or my customer. The
> biggest problem I had was
> removing the old sealant, especially from around the leading edge. I
> used an air powered drill
> and a STIFF wire wheel. The fit in both cases was perfect, no
> trimming needed. I did dress
> the edges of the front window with a file to remove and burrs which
> could become a stress crack.
> I did NOT use the 732. I did use the 832. The difference being 732
> is only a sealant and
> the 832 is an Adhesive/Sealant. A bit more bonding and hold. Around
> the bow I used ONLY
> a 1/8" thick foam tape.
> The only other 'trick' I did was to mount the bow to the window BEFORE
> I secured the bow
> to the airframe. This way the bow has a uniform fit all around and
> the foam filled the gap.
> Actually I would have to say There Was No Gap. The foam was there to
> weather seal the edge.
> And I know you know this... Do not tighten the screws, only snug them up.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Barry
> "Chop'd Liver"
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Gary Vogt wrote:
>> For years, I have preferred the C. Bailey windshield because they fit
>> better. But, I've had a few complaints about distortion in the
>> windshield.
>> My windshield has a slight distortion in it if I look for it. It's been
>> so
>> long since I installed an LP Aero windshield that I really don't know if
>> they have any distortion.
>> Garner is always chiding me for using C. Bailey windshields. But, let's
>> face it, if LP Aero made a superior windshield, I'd use theirs.
>> SO . . . . I had a customer request an LP Aero windshield. Garner packed
>> it
>> up and sent it.
>> I put it on the frame today for a trial fit.
>> For the best bond (using RTV 732) I need a bond of around .015 inches. On
>> a
>> C. Bailey, I can get it to around .010 at the tightest edge on the
>> trailing
>> edge of the windshield bow and still have it within .025 at the leading
>> edge
>> at the tightest spots.
>> Just sitting on the bow, the LP Aero windshield has a gap greater than
>> .125
>> in the two upper corners. It sits flat across the middle. No mater how I
>> do it, it's going to look like shit.
>> C. Bailey windshields come trim-to-fit. That means, there is a trim line
>> about 1/2 inch around the windshield; too much windshield. Trimming is a
>> pain in the ass.
>> LP Aero windshields come trimmed to the size. Let's hope it fits.
>> C. Bailey windshields can be shimmed along the front edge using a washer
>> held in place by a screw through the double bead seal holes. I can shim
>> all
>> around the front edge without interfering with windshield mounting and
>> keep
>> my .015 inches gap all around the bow.
>> There is no place to do the same on the LP Aero. So. . . . . I'm trying
>> something new to keep my spacing. We'll see. Keep your fingers crossed.
>> Someone needs to make new tooling that actually fits the windshield bow
>> curve. That would be nice.
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Installing a windshield. |
First of all, never wire wheel the windshield bow.
(1) Steel and aluminum don't mix.
(2) it tears up the aluminum
(3) the bow is anodized. the anodize is only a few thousandths deep.
I use a flat exacto knife blade and DX 330. It takes of the old RTV732 pretty
easily.
I wasn't aware of RTV 832. I'll look into it.
I've tried foam. It doesn't work as well as canopy bow seal glued to the windshield.
The gap to which I was referring is the gap between the windshield and the windshield
bow. If the windshield is not formed correctly, there is no fix for that.
I can stack to AN970 washers in the leading edge gap in the corners with
the windshield tight against the aft edge bow (i.e., 0.0 inches gap) 1 inch away.
Six inches toward the center of the windshield, there is 0.0 inches gap at
both the forward and aft edge of the windshield bow. Short of heating and reforming
the windshield, there is no cure for that.
________________________________
From: FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Sun, June 13, 2010 2:32:45 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Installing a windshield.
Hello Gary:
It has been quite a few years since did two sets of windows. And I
will probably be doing one
in the next year or so. AND you have millions of more maintenance
hours compared to myself.
I can give you my experience... Both windows were LP. They were
purchased through Fletcher.
And shipped directly from the LP factory to me or my customer. The
biggest problem I had was
removing the old sealant, especially from around the leading edge. I
used an air powered drill
and a STIFF wire wheel. The fit in both cases was perfect, no
trimming needed. I did dress
the edges of the front window with a file to remove and burrs which
could become a stress crack.
I did NOT use the 732. I did use the 832. The difference being 732
is only a sealant and
the 832 is an Adhesive/Sealant. A bit more bonding and hold. Around
the bow I used ONLY
a 1/8" thick foam tape.
The only other 'trick' I did was to mount the bow to the window BEFORE
I secured the bow
to the airframe. This way the bow has a uniform fit all around and
the foam filled the gap.
Actually I would have to say There Was No Gap. The foam was there to
weather seal the edge.
And I know you know this... Do not tighten the screws, only snug them up.
Hope this helps,
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Gary Vogt wrote:
> For years, I have preferred the C. Bailey windshield because they fit
> better. But, I've had a few complaints about distortion in the windshield.
> My windshield has a slight distortion in it if I look for it. It's been so
> long since I installed an LP Aero windshield that I really don't know if
> they have any distortion.
> Garner is always chiding me for using C. Bailey windshields. But, let's
> face it, if LP Aero made a superior windshield, I'd use theirs.
> SO . . . . I had a customer request an LP Aero windshield. Garner packed it
> up and sent it.
> I put it on the frame today for a trial fit.
> For the best bond (using RTV 732) I need a bond of around .015 inches. On a
> C. Bailey, I can get it to around .010 at the tightest edge on the trailing
> edge of the windshield bow and still have it within .025 at the leading edge
> at the tightest spots.
> Just sitting on the bow, the LP Aero windshield has a gap greater than .125
> in the two upper corners. It sits flat across the middle. No mater how I
> do it, it's going to look like shit.
> C. Bailey windshields come trim-to-fit. That means, there is a trim line
> about 1/2 inch around the windshield; too much windshield. Trimming is a
> pain in the ass.
> LP Aero windshields come trimmed to the size. Let's hope it fits.
> C. Bailey windshields can be shimmed along the front edge using a washer
> held in place by a screw through the double bead seal holes. I can shim all
> around the front edge without interfering with windshield mounting and keep
> my .015 inches gap all around the bow.
> There is no place to do the same on the LP Aero. So. . . . . I'm trying
> something new to keep my spacing. We'll see. Keep your fingers crossed.
> Someone needs to make new tooling that actually fits the windshield bow
> curve. That would be nice.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Installing a windshield. |
| From: | FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com> |
Good morning Cliff:
Correct - I have bonded the lower edge of the windshield all
around.... From port to starboard. I did NOT use any bond on the bow.
ONLY the screws and the one-side'd sticky foam.
I remember doing a lot of reading and some may still exist in the GG
archives about the "Special" bonding supplied with the install kit.
The issue was: Difficult to work with and it did not bond well,
BUBBLES between the bow and the plastic.
I have heard and read about the bonding helping to make a ROLL BAR out
of the window and bow. I do not know if that is realistic or not. I
was also taught to OPEN the canopy in an emergency landing to
facilitate egress. I DON'T KNOW!
What about the expansion and contraction of dissimilar materials due
to temperature changes? I'm thinking that might be the cause of
bubbles between bow & window?
The good points I have experienced are:
Ease of install.
No bubbles.
Ease of clean up.
No gap between bow and window.
AND I PRAY I will never find out if I need a roll bar or not.
NOW - There is a job for an STC ... STEEL ROLL BAR.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver'
===============================
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 10:29 AM, flyv35b wrote:
>
> Barry,
>
> Are you saying that you are NOT bonding the windshield to the bow at the
> rear and just trying to bond it around the front edge? That seems opposite
> of what has historically been the accepted practice. 732 is more than just
> a sealant when spread over a large area. A bonded windshield/bow serves as
> a pretty good roll over protection when combined with a latched canopy.
>
> Cliff
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "FLYaDIVE" <flyadive(at)gmail.com>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 2:32 AM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Installing a windshield.
>
>
>>
>> Hello Gary:
>>
>> It has been quite a few years since did two sets of windows. And I
>> will probably be doing one
>> in the next year or so. AND you have millions of more maintenance
>> hours compared to myself.
>> I can give you my experience... Both windows were LP. They were
>> purchased through Fletcher.
>> And shipped directly from the LP factory to me or my customer. The
>> biggest problem I had was
>> removing the old sealant, especially from around the leading edge. I
>> used an air powered drill
>> and a STIFF wire wheel. The fit in both cases was perfect, no
>> trimming needed. I did dress
>> the edges of the front window with a file to remove and burrs which
>> could become a stress crack.
>> I did NOT use the 732. I did use the 832. The difference being 732
>> is only a sealant and
>> the 832 is an Adhesive/Sealant. A bit more bonding and hold. Around
>> the bow I used ONLY
>> a 1/8" thick foam tape.
>> The only other 'trick' I did was to mount the bow to the window BEFORE
>> I secured the bow
>> to the airframe. This way the bow has a uniform fit all around and
>> the foam filled the gap.
>> Actually I would have to say There Was No Gap. The foam was there to
>> weather seal the edge.
>> And I know you know this... Do not tighten the screws, only snug them up.
>>
>> Hope this helps,
>>
>> Barry
>> "Chop'd Liver"
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Gary Vogt wrote:
>>>
>>> For years, I have preferred the C. Bailey windshield because they fit
>>> better. But, I've had a few complaints about distortion in the
>>> windshield.
>>> My windshield has a slight distortion in it if I look for it. It's been
>>> so
>>> long since I installed an LP Aero windshield that I really don't know if
>>> they have any distortion.
>>> Garner is always chiding me for using C. Bailey windshields. But, let's
>>> face it, if LP Aero made a superior windshield, I'd use theirs.
>>> SO . . . . I had a customer request an LP Aero windshield. Garner packed
>>> it
>>> up and sent it.
>>> I put it on the frame today for a trial fit.
>>> For the best bond (using RTV 732) I need a bond of around .015 inches. On
>>> a
>>> C. Bailey, I can get it to around .010 at the tightest edge on the
>>> trailing
>>> edge of the windshield bow and still have it within .025 at the leading
>>> edge
>>> at the tightest spots.
>>> Just sitting on the bow, the LP Aero windshield has a gap greater than
>>> .125
>>> in the two upper corners. It sits flat across the middle. No mater how I
>>> do it, it's going to look like shit.
>>> C. Bailey windshields come trim-to-fit. That means, there is a trim line
>>> about 1/2 inch around the windshield; too much windshield. Trimming is a
>>> pain in the ass.
>>> LP Aero windshields come trimmed to the size. Let's hope it fits.
>>> C. Bailey windshields can be shimmed along the front edge using a washer
>>> held in place by a screw through the double bead seal holes. I can shim
>>> all
>>> around the front edge without interfering with windshield mounting and
>>> keep
>>> my .015 inches gap all around the bow.
>>> There is no place to do the same on the LP Aero. So. . . . . I'm trying
>>> something new to keep my spacing. We'll see. Keep your fingers crossed.
>>> Someone needs to make new tooling that actually fits the windshield bow
>>> curve. That would be nice.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Installing a windshield. |
> Good morning Cliff:
>
> Correct - I have bonded the lower edge of the windshield all
> around.... From port to starboard. I did NOT use any bond on the bow.
> ONLY the screws and the one-side'd sticky foam.
I think this is backwards. The WS needs to be bonded to the bow and the one
sided sticky foam doesn't provide any bonding. What happens if you grab the
bow at the 45 degree spot and pull yourself up out of the seat. The bow
wants to pull away from the WS, twists and stress the glass at the screws,
possibly starting a crack.
> I remember doing a lot of reading and some may still exist in the GG
> archives about the "Special" bonding supplied with the install kit.
> The issue was: Difficult to work with and it did not bond well,
> BUBBLES between the bow and the plastic.
RTV732 was and still is the recommended adhesive and sealant. It is messy
to work with but there is no problem with bubbles or voids if you apply
enough of it - the excess will squeeze out. It bond well and over a large
surface area of the bow it is very strong. But the bow needs to be cleaned
very well and the plexiglass scuffed with Scotchbrite or sandpaper and Dow
Corning 1200 primer applied on both the WS and bow before applying the 732.
I know of a couple of WS installations where 3M very high bond tape (double
sided adhesive) was used very successfully for many years to bond the WS to
the bow. No messy installation, you just have to make sure the parts are
mated where you want when they are stuck togather as you won't get them
apart.
> I have heard and read about the bonding helping to make a ROLL BAR out
> of the window and bow. I do not know if that is realistic or not. I
> was also taught to OPEN the canopy in an emergency landing to
> facilitate egress. I DON'T KNOW!
> What about the expansion and contraction of dissimilar materials due
> to temperature changes? I'm thinking that might be the cause of
> bubbles between bow & window?
A roll over in a Grumman (or and RV) is always going to be a problem no
matter what you do with the canopy! If the baggage compartment is full then
getting out the baggage door will be impossible. Breaking out a back window
or canopy window may be the only way. With 4 different large exits out of
my Bonanza that's one thing I don't have to worry about!
Nope, bubbles are due to poor technique and not enough RTV applied to the
joint. The front of the WS is free to float so there is no
expansion/contraction problems. The 3 screw holes in the front edge should
be oversize so the glass does not bind on the screws and crack. Proseal can
be used externally to seal the leading edge as it is a good sealant and is
flexible enough to allow movement and not tear away. The factory used a
body seam sealer inside the lip of the coaming skin to seal the leading edge
of the WS and this can still be done this way.
Cliff
> The good points I have experienced are:
> Ease of install.
> No bubbles.
> Ease of clean up.
> No gap between bow and window.
> AND I PRAY I will never find out if I need a roll bar or not.
> NOW - There is a job for an STC ... STEEL ROLL BAR.
>
> Barry
> "Chop'd Liver'
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Installing a windshield. |
| From: | FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com> |
HI Gary:
What is the DX330 you speak of, is it the cleaning material by PPG?
The anodizing on sheet aluminum is way less Than a few thousandths...
It is in the range of 1 to 3 ten-thousands...0.0001 to 0.0003" . And
yes, the wire wheel will remove the that thin a coating in a second.
Are there steel particles left behind or embedded into the aluminum?
Well from my experience in the metal coating industry NO. BUT! that
is with a NON-Rusted wire wheel and ... This is where I think the
issue of not mixing Ferrous Steel and Aluminum came from: YOU NEVER
USE THE SAME (SAND OR BEAD) BLASTING BOOT FOR STEEL AND ALUMINUM. The
extremely small particles of of ferrous steel under high
pressure/velocity become embedded into the aluminum and that begins a
corrosion/pitting spot.
And not to be nit-picky... But steel is steel... The X-Acto knife is
made of steel. But, not an issue.
We are talking about the same issue... The gap between the window and
bow. But, are you referring to a specific area, like where the bow
come into contact with the fuselage sides?
Barry
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Gary Vogt wrote:
> First of all, never wire wheel the windshield bow.
> (1) Steel and aluminum don't mix.
> (2) it tears up the aluminum
> (3) the bow is anodized. the anodize is only a few thousandths deep.
> I use a flat exacto knife blade and DX 330. It takes of the old RTV732
> pretty easily.
> I wasn't aware of RTV 832. I'll look into it.
> I've tried foam. It doesn't work as well as canopy bow seal glued to the
> windshield.
> The gap to which I was referring is the gap between the windshield and the
> windshield bow. If the windshield is not formed correctly, there is no fix
> for that. I can stack to AN970 washers in the leading edge gap in the
> corners with the windshield tight against the aft edge bow (i.e., 0.0 inches
> gap) 1 inch away. Six inches toward the center of the windshield, there is
> 0.0 inches gap at both the forward and aft edge of the windshield bow.
> Short of heating and reforming the windshield, there is no cure for that.
> ________________________________
> From: FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com>
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sun, June 13, 2010 2:32:45 AM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Installing a windshield.
>
>
> Hello Gary:
>
> It has been quite a few years since did two sets of windows. And I
> will probably be doing one
> in the next year or so. AND you have millions of more maintenance
> hours compared to myself.
> I can give you my experience... Both windows were LP. They were
> purchased through Fletcher.
> And shipped directly from the LP factory to me or my customer. The
> biggest problem I had was
> removing the old sealant, especially from around the leading edge. I
> used an air powered drill
> and a STIFF wire wheel. The fit in both cases was perfect, no
> trimming needed. I did dress
> the edges of the front window with a file to remove and burrs which
> could become a stress crack.
> I did NOT use the 732. I did use the 832. The difference being 732
> is only a sealant and
> the 832 is an Adhesive/Sealant. A bit more bonding and hold. Around
> the bow I used ONLY
> a 1/8" thick foam tape.
> The only other 'trick' I did was to mount the bow to the window BEFORE
> I secured the bow
> to the airframe. This way the bow has a uniform fit all around and
> the foam filled the gap.
> Actually I would have to say There Was No Gap. The foam was there to
> weather seal the edge.
> And I know you know this... Do not tighten the screws, only snug them up.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Barry
> "Chop'd Liver"
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Gary Vogt wrote:
>> For years, I have preferred the C. Bailey windshield because they fit
>> better. But, I've had a few complaints about distortion in the
>> windshield.
>> My windshield has a slight distortion in it if I look for it. It's been
>> so
>> long since I installed an LP Aero windshield that I really don't know if
>> they have any distortion.
>> Garner is always chiding me for using C. Bailey windshields. But, let's
>> face it, if LP Aero made a superior windshield, I'd use theirs.
>> SO . . . . I had a customer request an LP Aero windshield. Garner packed
>> it
>> up and sent it.
>> I put it on the frame today for a trial fit.
>> For the best bond (using RTV 732) I need a bond of around .015 inches. On
>> a
>> C. Bailey, I can get it to around .010 at the tightest edge on the
>> trailing
>> edge of the windshield bow and still have it within .025 at the leading
>> edge
>> at the tightest spots.
>> Just sitting on the bow, the LP Aero windshield has a gap greater than
>> .125
>> in the two upper corners. It sits flat across the middle. No mater how I
>> do it, it's going to look like shit.
>> C. Bailey windshields come trim-to-fit. That means, there is a trim line
>> about 1/2 inch around the windshield; too much windshield. Trimming is a
>> pain in the ass.
>> LP Aero windshields come trimmed to the size. Let's hope it fits.
>> C. Bailey windshields can be shimmed along the front edge using a washer
>> held in place by a screw through the double bead seal holes. I can shim
>> all
>> around the front edge without interfering with windshield mounting and
>> keep
>> my .015 inches gap all around the bow.
>> There is no place to do the same on the LP Aero. So. . . . . I'm
>> trying
>> something new to keep my spacing. We'll see. Keep your fingers crossed.
>> Someone needs to make new tooling that actually fits the windshield bow
>> curve.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Installing a windshield. |
| From: | "grumpyparts" <i.r.m(at)btinternet.com> |
Back in the early days did not Grumman/Gulfstream supply replacement windshields
already bonded to the bows.
If so wouldn't it be nice to have True Flight use the jigs they have to supply
pre-bonded replacement windshields. Would no doubt be expensive, but probably
no more so than the labour in the filed trying to get this task done properly.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=301228#301228
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flyv35b" <flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Installing a windshield. |
I'll bet it would be cheaper! Sure would save a lot of labor and those
mechanics without specific experience would have chance to get it done
right.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: "grumpyparts" <i.r.m(at)btinternet.com>
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:04 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Installing a windshield.
>
>
> Back in the early days did not Grumman/Gulfstream supply replacement
> windshields already bonded to the bows.
>
> If so wouldn't it be nice to have True Flight use the jigs they have to
> supply pre-bonded replacement windshields. Would no doubt be expensive,
> but probably no more so than the labour in the filed trying to get this
> task done properly.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=301228#301228
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Courtney" <jamey(at)jamescourtney.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Installing a windshield. |
Could even send your old bow in for credit.
Jamey
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of flyv35b
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:50 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Installing a windshield.
I'll bet it would be cheaper! Sure would save a lot of labor and those
mechanics without specific experience would have chance to get it done
right.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: "grumpyparts" <i.r.m(at)btinternet.com>
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:04 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Installing a windshield.
>
>
> Back in the early days did not Grumman/Gulfstream supply replacement
> windshields already bonded to the bows.
>
> If so wouldn't it be nice to have True Flight use the jigs they have to
> supply pre-bonded replacement windshields. Would no doubt be expensive,
> but probably no more so than the labour in the filed trying to get this
> task done properly.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=301228#301228
>
>
>
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
23:35:00
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Installing a windshield. |
The flat blade I use on the Xacto knife never even scratches the aluminum. All
it does is slice off the majority of the RTV. DX330 and a 3M scrubbie removes
the rest. Quite easily too.
DX330 is a very high grade Naptha. It's used to clean surfaces prior to painting.
I also use it in the fuel tanks prior to resealing. It's quite expensive.
I doubt the average mechanic would be inclined to use it for that reason.
It removes all traces of wax and grease and it doesn't touch the plexiglass.
Unlike MEK or acetone, it leaves no residue and is not going to eat up gloves
or the windshield.
Years ago, I put a bead of RTV around the base of a windshield on a plane I knew
leaked. I did a quick and dirty job because it was going to rain and I had
no place to put the plane. Some 3 months later I scraped off the majority of
the RTV and then went to work on the windshield with DX330. It gets under the
RTV and releases it. It took about 30 minutes and it was all clean.
Funny how difficult it is to describe how fucked up this windshield is. I'll try
to simplify it.
(1) OK boys and girls, let's pretend we are sitting in the airplane, in the pilot's
seat, with the canopy open.
(2) Pretend to run your hand along the side of the cockpit, on the top of the canopy/fuselage
opening, where the window track is.
(3) Pretend to slide your hand to the windshield. Stop.
(4) You are now at the windshield. The windshield is attached to the windshield
bow.
(5) Let's further pretend there is no double bead windshield bow seal on the on
the face of the windshield bow.
(6) At this point, you can touch, go ahead, pretend to touch the flat face of the
windshield bow that is facing you, it's OK.
(7) This surface, the windshield bow, has another surface attached to it that is
90 degrees to the face you're touching. You won't be able to touch it because
the windshield is in the way.
(8) You can, however, lean over and look through the windshield and you will most
likely see cured RTV holding the windshield to the windshield bow.
(9) This windshield "bow" goes up from this corner and makes an arc as it curves
up and over toward the center of the windshield bow. (We'll only do one side,
the right side is the same.
(10) Just for the sake of argument, let's call the halfway point, the middle of
the arc, the UPPER CORNER.
(11) Now, run your fingers along the face of the bow so you get an idea that this
is a FLAT surface.
(12) Remember boys and girls, you won't be able to touch the surface of the windshield
bow that is "under" the windshield.
(13) Now, stand up and look out over the windshield. Notice how it is formed such
that it goes forward and DOWN to the fuselage (Boot cowl)
(14) Look along the edge of the windshield where the windshield is attached to
windshield bow. You can look through the windshield and see where it's bonded
to the windshield bow.
(15) OK, here is where it gets tricky. Remember the face of the windshield bow
you ran your fingers along in step 11? Let's go back to that.
(16) The surface of the windshield bow under the windshield doesn't stay perpendicular,
90 degrees, to the face of the bow as in step 7. It's close though.
Let's leave it at that.
(17) So, that means, that for at least an inch or so along the open side of the
windshield, that windshield needs to be 90 degrees to the face of the windshield
bow also.
(18) OK boys and girls, are we all on the same page? I hope so.
(19) The windshield I got from LP Aero only maintains 90 degrees to the face of
the bow at the SIDES and at the TOP, which is also the middle of the windshield
bow.
NOTE: this is not to be confused with the middle of the arc between the
side and the top.
(20) The worst portion of this LP Aero windshield is "IN THE UPPER CORNER" or middle
of the arc. In this area, the windshield has absolutely no flat portion.
It just falls away.
(21) In the ideal world, the windshield and the windshield bow have the same shape
and the bonding surface is uniform and provides a uniform thickness for the
bond.
(22) I don't know how ya'all do this bonding, particularly with the windshield
in the plane, but, I use a feeler gauge and shims to get as close to a uniform
.020 inch gap as I can for the entire bonding surface.
(23) On a C. Bailey windshield, the worse I've seen is .035 inches.
(24) I don't care how many clamps you use, I don't care how you tighten the clamps,
there is nothing that is going to close the .125 inch between the face of
the bow and keep the forward edge of the bow from digging into the windshield.
With a minimum of .010 inches gap at the tightest location along the forward
edge of the windshield bow, the gap at the face of the bow varies from .010
to .150.
I've included some pics, I hope they come through.
1316: This is the gap on the right side. The bottom of the windshield is tight
against the bow. I.e., no gap. The gap you see a result of the windshield
being misformed. The windshield is TIGHT against the forward edge. No amount
of clamping is going to fix this. Short of heating and reforming, there is just
going to be .130 inches of gap at the UPPER CORNER.
1317: This is the left side with clamps. The gap at the forward edge of the bow
is .010 inches. The gap at the face of the bow is .140 inches.
1324: This is a shot through the edge of the windshield. It will hidden by bonding
BUT, it's still a pretty bad distortion.
________________________________
From: FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Mon, June 14, 2010 2:57:35 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Installing a windshield.
HI Gary:
What is the DX330 you speak of, is it the cleaning material by PPG?
The anodizing on sheet aluminum is way less Than a few thousandths...
It is in the range of 1 to 3 ten-thousands...0.0001 to 0.0003" . And
yes, the wire wheel will remove the that thin a coating in a second.
Are there steel particles left behind or embedded into the aluminum?
Well from my experience in the metal coating industry NO. BUT! that
is with a NON-Rusted wire wheel and ... This is where I think the
issue of not mixing Ferrous Steel and Aluminum came from: YOU NEVER
USE THE SAME (SAND OR BEAD) BLASTING BOOT FOR STEEL AND ALUMINUM. The
extremely small particles of of ferrous steel under high
pressure/velocity become embedded into the aluminum and that begins a
corrosion/pitting spot.
And not to be nit-picky... But steel is steel... The X-Acto knife is
made of steel. But, not an issue.
We are talking about the same issue... The gap between the window and
bow. But, are you referring to a specific area, like where the bow
come into contact with the fuselage sides?
Barry
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Gary Vogt wrote:
> First of all, never wire wheel the windshield bow.
> (1) Steel and aluminum don't mix.
> (2) it tears up the aluminum
> (3) the bow is anodized. the anodize is only a few thousandths deep.
> I use a flat exacto knife blade and DX 330. It takes of the old RTV732
> pretty easily.
> I wasn't aware of RTV 832. I'll look into it.
> I've tried foam. It doesn't work as well as canopy bow seal glued to the
> windshield.
> The gap to which I was referring is the gap between the windshield and the
> windshield bow. If the windshield is not formed correctly, there is no fix
> for that. I can stack to AN970 washers in the leading edge gap in the
> corners with the windshield tight against the aft edge bow (i.e., 0.0 inches
> gap) 1 inch away. Six inches toward the center of the windshield, there is
> 0.0 inches gap at both the forward and aft edge of the windshield bow.
> Short of heating and reforming the windshield, there is no cure for that.
> ________________________________
> From: FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com>
> To: teamgrumman-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Sun, June 13, 2010 2:32:45 AM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Installing a windshield.
>
>
> Hello Gary:
>
> It has been quite a few years since did two sets of windows. And I
> will probably be doing one
> in the next year or so. AND you have millions of more maintenance
> hours compared to myself.
> I can give you my experience... Both windows were LP. They were
> purchased through Fletcher.
> And shipped directly from the LP factory to me or my customer. The
> biggest problem I had was
> removing the old sealant, especially from around the leading edge. I
> used an air powered drill
> and a STIFF wire wheel. The fit in both cases was perfect, no
> trimming needed. I did dress
> the edges of the front window with a file to remove and burrs which
> could become a stress crack.
> I did NOT use the 732. I did use the 832. The difference being 732
> is only a sealant and
> the 832 is an Adhesive/Sealant. A bit more bonding and hold. Around
> the bow I used ONLY
> a 1/8" thick foam tape.
> The only other 'trick' I did was to mount the bow to the window BEFORE
> I secured the bow
> to the airframe. This way the bow has a uniform fit all around and
> the foam filled the gap.
> Actually I would have to say There Was No Gap. The foam was there to
> weather seal the edge.
> And I know you know this... Do not tighten the screws, only snug them up.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Barry
> "Chop'd Liver"
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Gary Vogt wrote:
>> For years, I have preferred the C. Bailey windshield because they fit
>> better. But, I've had a few complaints about distortion in the
>> windshield.
>> My windshield has a slight distortion in it if I look for it. It's been
>> so
>> long since I installed an LP Aero windshield that I really don't know if
>> they have any distortion.
>> Garner is always chiding me for using C. Bailey windshields. But, let's
>> face it, if LP Aero made a superior windshield, I'd use theirs.
>> SO . . . . I had a customer request an LP Aero windshield. Garner packed
>> it
>> up and sent it.
>> I put it on the frame today for a trial fit.
>> For the best bond (using RTV 732) I need a bond of around .015 inches. On
>> a
>> C. Bailey, I can get it to around .010 at the tightest edge on the
>> trailing
>> edge of the windshield bow and still have it within .025 at the leading
>> edge
>> at the tightest spots.
>> Just sitting on the bow, the LP Aero windshield has a gap greater than
>> .125
>> in the two upper corners. It sits flat across the middle. No mater how I
>> do it, it's going to look like shit.
>> C. Bailey windshields come trim-to-fit. That means, there is a trim line
>> about 1/2 inch around the windshield; too much windshield. Trimming is a
>> pain in the ass.
>> LP Aero windshields come trimmed to the size. Let's hope it fits.
>> C. Bailey windshields can be shimmed along the front edge using a washer
>> held in place by a screw through the double bead seal holes. I can shim
>> all
>> around the front edge without interfering with windshield mounting and
>> keep
>> my .015 inches gap all around the bow.
>> There is no place to do the same on the LP Aero. So. . . . . I'm
>> trying
>> something new to keep my spacing. We'll see. Keep your fingers crossed.
>> Someone needs to make new tooling that actually fits the windshield bow
>> curve.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Installing a windshield. |
| From: | n32romeo(at)aol.com |
Back in the mid '80s I purchased a new canopy and windshield for my AA-1B
from Wag-Aero that came from the Gulfstream surplus auction. These came
bonded to the bow. I still have the old original bows, and found much la
ter they come in handy in helping to bond the next replacement windshield
and canopy to the bow, by clamping the old surplus bow on the outside.
Helps provide an even clamp.
Rich Harrison
-----Original Message-----
From: grumpyparts <i.r.m(at)btinternet.com>
Sent: Mon, Jun 14, 2010 3:04 pm
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Installing a windshield.
m>
Back in the early days did not Grumman/Gulfstream supply replacement winds
hields
lready bonded to the bows.
f so wouldn't it be nice to have True Flight use the jigs they have to sup
ply
re-bonded replacement windshields. Would no doubt be expensive, but probab
ly no
ore so than the labour in the filed trying to get this task done properly.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
| Subject: | leaking fuel tank |
it's been one of those days.
Remember that 2005 Tiger that I resealed the spar last March? Then, I stripped
and resealed the rest of the rib and bottom doubler. I flew the plane with a
full tank for 30 minutes and no leak. I then let it sit for 10 days and watched
the area of concern. No leaks.
I flew the plane again today for about 30 minutes. The leak is back.
The leak appears to be coming from about 6 inches ahead of the spar. It's hard
to tell where it's coming from. What I see is what is leaking past the strap
between the wing panels. Tomorrow I'll take off the strap between the wing sections
and try pressurizing the tank to a couple of psi. I can tell you where
it isn't leaking.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Vogt <teamgrumman(at)YAHOO.COM> |
Sorry I got so condescending about windshield. No excuse.
By my count, I've installed 43 windshields since 1984. I've made a lot of mistakes
and learned a lot of 'tricks' to getting the windshield square with the bow
and getting the correct thickness of RTV.
I built my jig in 1984 in an attempt to simulate the location and shape of the
windshield as installed. At the time, I was trying too imagine how they were
done at the factory. I figured they had some sort of jig to put the windshield
on the bow. The jig has gone through 2 revisions. mostly to provide better
access to the underside. The version I have now guarantees an absolutely flat
windshield bow to which the windshield is bonded. I have a set of blocks of
wood to put under the forward edge of the windshield. These blocks locate and
lock the forward edge such that when the windshield is set into position, it
always falls on the same position at the windshield bow edge. The jig has dowels
that locate the holes to be drilled at the lower corners. Before the holes
are drilled, I tape a strip of .020 aluminum to the bow to simulate the thickness
of the RTV when installed. The holes in the lower corners are drilled
with the windshield in its
final location. With those holes drilled, the windshield can be positioned and
the two holes on top drilled. It's at this point that I use a feeler gauge
the determine the gap between the windshield and bow. Where it's too tight (meaning:
places where the forward edge of the windshield bow would project into
the RTV making the RTV too thin, <.020, in that area), I mark the windshield
so that any clamps in that area are not over tightened. I use two types of shims
to space the windshield from the bow and maintain the spacing during assembly.
Shims I've tried:
(1) self sticking foam that compresses to approx .025 inches. I punched out dots
using a hole punch. It worked, but left the dots showing. I did one like
this.
(2) .020 safety wire clips at the forward edge of the bow. It worked, but left
little holes when I removed the clips. The holes couldn't be filled with RV.
I did two like this.
(3) I made a spacer, .050 thick, the shape of the windshield bow, attached to
the bow through the holes used to hold the double bow seal on, that stuck up .030
above the aft edge of the bow (same surface the seal uses).
The idea here was to hold the windshield .030 away from the bow uniformly
from one corner to the other. At first, this sounded like a great idea (it wouldn't
work with an LP Aero windshield because
there is no lip at the bow). The biggest problem was: the bows are not all
the same shape. I used this for 4 or 5 windshields before it became obvious
this was not practical. I kept filing and adjusting the shape to get them to
fit.
(4) Then, I made little "L" shaped shims that can be placed under the aft edge
of the windshield between the bow and windshield. The long side is flush with
the windshield bow face.
The long side is 1 inch long and is .063 inches thick. The short side is
.050 inches long and several thicknesses. I have 10 sets in sizes from .025
to .040 inches.
These work pretty well. At first, I clamped them into place. Then, screws
through the holes that hold the double bead seal to the windshield bow. Then
tape. All work pretty well.
The gap can be filled with RTV after the shim is removed.
(5) My favorite is just too simple to believe. Again, using the holes that attach
the double bead seal to the windshield bow, I use a #6 screw onto which I
put a wide area #10 washer plus a wide area 5/16 washer.
I'd use just the wide area 5/16 washer but the hole is too big; the #6
screw won't hold it by itself. With the windshield in place, I can adjust the
gap between the bow and windshield with the washers tightened against the bow.
When bonding, I tighten the clamps, located at the shims, until the washer
just shows through the RTV and just touches the windshield. (NA for LP Aero
windshields)
After the RTV is applied to the windshield bonding area, the windshield can then
be set into place and located over the dowels on the bottom corners, the holes
line up on top for the top two screws and special washers. Clamps are applied
until I get either the "L" shim showing on the edge of the windshield or the
washer showing through the windshield. At this point, I know the gap at the
forward edge of the bow is about .020 inches. The gap is kept as uniform as
possible. After it's all done being bonded, I let the windshield sit for a week
before moving it. The maintenance manual says 3 days but I've found the RTV
to not be totally cured at 3 days.
The windshield in the $80,000 Cheetah was done in 2003 when John Rodgers owned
the plane. It has always been parked outside. It's a C.Bailey windshield. The
bond is still like new.
I've attached two pics of the jig after bonding the windshield. In the background
you can see my work bench on wheels. I keep all the tools I regularly use
on this bench. I also have safety wire, nylon ties, gloves, lube, and rulers
on that table. In the upper left you can see a couple of wheel pants for testing.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FLYaDIVE <flyadive(at)gmail.com> |
Gary:
What's the apology for? You did not hurt my feelings.
I was once condescended, but now I am convince.
I have not had the time to read and digest your posts, but I will.
After all I have only done 2 windows and I do respect my elders ;-)
I am impressed with your jig - Working out the size is quite an
accomplishment. I would have like to have been there as you designed
and manufactured it.
Anyway, whos feeling did you think you hurt? Hell, let them grow some
April 29, 2010 - June 17, 2010
TeamGrumman-Archive.digest.vol-az