Yak-Archive.digest.vol-ba
May 27, 2002 - June 05, 2002
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Payne <cpayne(at)mc.net> |
Yes, I love this list! An open forum for Friends to Flame each other.
Way back when, (early '95) I went through the trauma of figuring out my
aircraft CG after ripping out the Chinese ADF, cables and whatnot.
It's just like any other airplane folks; just takes some careful reading
and measuring to confirm what is in the Chinese manuals. I started with
a bone-dry airplane: no fuel or oil, and used electronic Aircraft
Scales. Once leveled and basic data gathered, I put put weighed a buddy
and then put him in the F&R seats and weighed again. Repeated this
procedure after adding oil, then fuel.
End result: a good set of data that came in handy when I did the M-14P
conversion. Since everyone's aircraft is just a little different than
the next guys, do your own W&B and never leave home without it!
Craig Payne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Yak list <yaklist(at)comcast.net> |
Mark,
Could you do us all a favor and put a list of the major lifed items and the
life time on your web site. Here there is not such a list available and I am
sure everyone would like to see one. I had a look through the documents on
the CD which you blokes provide but found no reference.
Just a thought.
Gus.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Jefferies , YAK UK Ltd" <yakuk(at)compuserve.com>
Subject: Yak-List: fire
>
> sorry to here about the fire Paul had but it does illustrate how
> important it is to recognise manufactures life limits on hoses.
>
> Best regards, Mark
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walt Lannon" <lannon(at)look.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: CG information for the CJ6A |
The manual is Chujiao-6 Technical Specification for Service and Maintenance.
Weight & Balance is on pg. 5 and 6. The bulk of this info. is in Fig.1.3 and
notes.
The manual is available from Doug Sapp. come on guys, how can you know your
aircraft without the BOOK?
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CG information for the CJ6A
>
> At 11:24 PM 5/25/2002, you wrote:
> > > (All inch measurements are aft of the standard datum plane.)
> >Brian - I was not aware there was a "standard datum". Where did you find
> >that?
>
> The standard datum can be anywhere you want it to be. Someone just
> happened to pick 24" ahead of the prop. I like having a datum that is
> outside the airplane so that I am never faced with a zero-length arm.
>
> I was recently helping Walt Fricke with a W&B problem and his information
> happened to place the standard datum at the firewall. It doesn't matter
> where you put it, just so long as you keep using the same one for your
> calculations. Hence my point about there being no standardization of
> "standard" datum planes. Would you prefer I rework the info using a
> different datum? Easy enough to do.
>
> >The MAC length is 1747 mm = 68.78"
>
> OK, I'll bite. I will grant you that, for the sake of argument, your
> information is correct and mine in error. Mine was provided by Yakity
Yaks
> with the aircraft. I assumed (uh oh!) that it was correct given that, 1)
> Yakity Yaks knows what they are doing, 2) it was so complete and neatly
> presented as part of the paperwork package. If you have a pointer to the
> Nanchang documents would you please forward them to me so that I can look
> them up and translate the numbers (not the writing!) for myself.
>
> >The lateral location of the MAC is immaterial for the purpose we are
> >concerned with here.
>
> Unless you are using the chord at a particular location on the wing to be
> the MAC. Then the lateral distance tells you where the MAC is. But I
will
> defer.
>
> >I expect you have determined the length (65") and
> >location of the MGC or mean geometric chord which is not exactly the same
> >but probably close enough for government work.
>
> It probably is. As I said, I didn't do the work myself. It was part of
my
> aircraft documentation package. Serves me right to assume that
information
> given to me is correct without verifying it for myself. That is why I am
> asking for the information from the Nanchang documents so I can verify it.
>
> > > Max forward CG on ground: 11% of MAC, 121.15"
> > > Max forward CG in flight: 12.5% of MAC, 122.13"
> > > Max rear CG in flight: 24.1% of MAC, 129.67"
> >
> >Max. forward cg with the landing gear down is 17% not 11%.
>
> Probably a typo on my doc then. I could have read it wrong.
>
> >What you are
> >referencing here is the VERTICAL location of the CG ABOVE the MAC for an
> >empty aircraft.
>
> OK, I will buy that. That certainly isn't stated in my documentation. It
> certainly doesn't make sense for the forward CG limit on the ground to be
> aft of the forward CG limit in the air.
>
> >The 12.5% you refer to as the in flight forward cg limit is in fact the
> >VERTICAL (y axis) location of the cg for the fully loaded aircraft.
> >
> >These are of no concern for our purposes in locating the longitudinal (x
> >axis) CG.
>
> I agree but what really concerns me is that the documentation provided by
> Yakity Yaks could be so wrong. This means that I have been promulgating
> incorrect information, something that bothers me greatly.
>
> >Max. rearward cg limit is correct at 24.1%. with the gear retracted. A
> >normal landing gear retraction moment is not given in the specifications
> >since no standard datum point is specified. You can't have a moment
without
> >a starting point.
>
> And it doesn't matter where the datum is since all the moments will be
> relative to that datum plane. Once you translate MAC and percent of MAC
to
> the datum of your choice, you can figure out where the CG is.
>
> >What they have done instead is tell us that the cg moves
> >aft by the amount of 0.7% MAC (0.48 inches) when the gear is retracted.
This
> >is fine, once you have selected a datum point you can determine the
moment
> >if you wish to show it in the W&B report.
>
> That works and it doesn't matter what datum plane you chose then.
>
> >The allowable C of G range is 124 mm or 4.9".
>
> Ahhhh, that is a fair bit different. Seems anyone who has W&B data from
> Yakity Yaks needs to check their paperwork. Now I really need to find the
> Chinese data and adjust my paperwork.
>
>
> > Stations:
> > >
> > > Station name: Position:
> > >
> > > prop 24"
> > > engine 45"
> > > nosewheel (ground contact) 57"
> > > engine accessory section 60"
> > > oil tank 69"
> > > front seat 123"
> > > wing jack point 129"
> > > front spar 131.5"
> > > main gear (ground contact) 146.5"
> > > fuel 149"
> > > rear seat 174"
> > > avionics bay behind rear seat 188"
> > > battery box 199"
> > > ADF electronics tray 214"
> > > tail skid 338"
> > >
> > > To weigh the airplane and calculate empty weight and CG:
> > >
> > > 1. Put a scale under each of the wheels.
> > >
> > > 2. Level the aircraft by adding or removing air from the tires with a
> > > level on the canopy rails.
> >
> >You might get the aircraft level by this method though you may have to
> >remove nitrogen from the nose gear shock strut as well. But due to the
nose
> >gear caster angle you will change the dimension between the NG and MG
> >centers and introduce an incorrect moment.
>
> yup. You may need to put a block under the main gear tires.
>
> >The correct procedure (if you are using scales under the wheels) is to
jack
> >the aircraft and fit appropriate blocking under the main wheels to level
the
> >aircraft. If you are using load cells at the jack points then blocking is
> >not required. The blocks are tare weight which is deducted from the main
> >wheel measured weights.
> >
> > > 3. Multiply the weight at each wheel by its station to get the moment
at
> > > each wheel.
> > >
> > > 4. Sum the moments and sum the weights. The sum of the weights is
the
> > > empty weight of the airplane.
> >
> >Yes, assuming it was weighed with no oil or fuel.
>
> You have to leave unusable fuel in the aircraft. For that matter, you can
> weigh it with known fuel and oil then subtract their weights and moments
to
> figure empty weight, moment, and CG.
>
> >If not the weights and
> >moments of those items must be deducted to determine the empty weight and
> >CG. Standard practice is zero fuel. Oil is generally acceptable as the
> >quantity is small and readily identified for calculation purposes.
>
> Insofar as 3.5 gallons of oil is a small quantity.
>
> I guess this is yet another lesson to me to be rigidly accurate in all
> things. I will indulge in self-flagellation with a CD-ROM in penance.
>
> "Forgive me father for I have sinned ..."
>
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
The french plane was a Fouga Magister
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: <cjpilot710(at)aol.com>
; ; ;
; ; ;
; ; ;
; ; ;
; ; ;
; ;
; ; ;
cox.net.Sevendips@aol.com>; ;
; ; ;
; ; ;
; ; ;
; ; ;
; ; ;
; ;
;
Subject: Yak-List: Week-end
>
> Just returned from TMB (Tamiami airport south of Miami) Kermit Weeks use
to
> have a museum there. Some local enthusiast took over the fascility after
> Weeks left and have started a flying museum called "Wings Over Miami." At
> this point most all of Weeks stuff has been move up to Poke City and the
> Fantasy Of Flight.
>
> The new museum is struggling at this point, but the crowd I saw there this
> weekend is hearting. The folks there set up a little flying schedule for
the
> whole day. Each flying group was assigned a :25 minute fly by window
which
> we did twice each day. One one point each day, all aircraft were launch
for
> a big fly-by. The weather (as always in Florida) was perfect, and the
> control tower folk very accommodating. It went very well,
> We had:
> 6 CJ-6As,
> 2 Yak-52s,
> 6 T-6s,
> a BT-13,
> PBY5A Catolinia,
> Mig-15 utb,
> L-29,
> 2 T-28s,
> and a French Volga jet, all flying.
> Also there was a Yak-18T (beautifully done),
> an O-2, and this and that of other nonmilitary stuff.
>
> Being the nice guy that I am. And wanting to do something for museum
(since
> they paid for my gas, room, car, and lunches), I found myself volunteering
to
> recover the flight controls for their Yak-11. She was a little doggy but
> straight and whole before hurricane Andrew drop some of the hangar on top
of
> her (10 years ago now folks). She is completely rebuildable and will make
a
> great flying exhibit for the museum. Anyway it should take up some of my
> free time. BTW I just finished rebuilding the pilot/copilot seat for a
CAF
> SNB-5 based in Deland, Fl. LOTS of work needed there.
>
> One of the events were commentaries of experiences by WW2 vets to the
crowds
> there. Folks listened. Like all the stories I hear around the B-17 &
B-24,
> they were heart wrenching at times.
>
> Well, tomorrow, I'll clean up the Dragon and get the bird poop off her
> rudder. I seem to have come up with a dragging brake, so that'll will
have
> to be fixed.
>
> All in all I'd say I've had a great week end. Happy Memorial Day friends.
> And remember who those who gave their last and greatest gift.
>
> Jim Goolsby
> cjpilot710(at)aol.com
> 386-467-3313 voice
> 386-467-3193 fax
> 386-569-7060 cell "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain
> a little safety, deserve neither liberty
nor
> safety"
> Benjamin Franklin 1759
> "There is no "innocence" in war. All
> collateral damage
> is acceptable."
> unk.
> "With my shield, or on it"
> Trojan Warriors BC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CG information for the CJ6A |
Hey Mike,
After reading this last thread I decided to do a little research into my
mail boxes. The only time you have ever posted ANYTHING on this list, it has
been a negative slam against someone. I have yet to see you post anything of
any value to other Yak/GJ pilots. Lets see.... you called some guy cheap for
2 pages, you accused someone else of getting rich on manuals, you called me
foolish, and now you saying that Brian doesnt know what he's talking about.
You are either really grumpy, or you have very poor social skills. At least
every time I posted one of my foolish questions, Brian usually issued a
reply along with other fine folks on this list. We're all human here and we
make mistakes, but I doubt its on purpose, for the most part I find the
information here extremely helpful and Brian has been very forthcoming in
trying to help me, along with every one else on this list.
This weekend I met several guys from this list at the Miami fly in, and I am
pleased to say that they were all great guys, and I learned a lot about my
airplane and a host of other things. Fortunately most of the people on this
list are of this caliber.
Theres an old adage................"If you have nothing nice to
say................Then keep quiet!"
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike McCoy" <mike(at)aircraftsales.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CG information for the CJ6A
>
> Brian,
>
> All of this weight and balance information is on page 5 of the manual you
> were given by Yakity Yaks. Obviously, it is difficult to dispute the
> information that you claim you were given by Fred, but all the weight and
> balance info that Yakity Yaks gives out is accurate and is located on page
5
> of the manual.
>
> Instead of blaming someone else for your mistakes as usual, why not just
say
> that you got caught putting out more B.S. on the Yak List! I have asked
you
> time after time to not publish information when you don't know what you
are
> talking about.
>
> Mike McCoy
>
>
> >
> > At 11:24 PM 5/25/2002, you wrote:
> > > > (All inch measurements are aft of the standard datum plane.)
> > >Brian - I was not aware there was a "standard datum". Where did you
find
> > >that?
> >
> > The standard datum can be anywhere you want it to be. Someone just
> > happened to pick 24" ahead of the prop. I like having a datum that is
> > outside the airplane so that I am never faced with a zero-length arm.
> >
> > I was recently helping Walt Fricke with a W&B problem and his
information
> > happened to place the standard datum at the firewall. It doesn't matter
> > where you put it, just so long as you keep using the same one for your
> > calculations. Hence my point about there being no standardization of
> > "standard" datum planes. Would you prefer I rework the info using a
> > different datum? Easy enough to do.
> >
> > >The MAC length is 1747 mm = 68.78"
> >
> > OK, I'll bite. I will grant you that, for the sake of argument, your
> > information is correct and mine in error. Mine was provided by Yakity
> Yaks
> > with the aircraft. I assumed (uh oh!) that it was correct given that,
1)
> > Yakity Yaks knows what they are doing, 2) it was so complete and neatly
> > presented as part of the paperwork package. If you have a pointer to
the
> > Nanchang documents would you please forward them to me so that I can
look
> > them up and translate the numbers (not the writing!) for myself.
> >
> > >The lateral location of the MAC is immaterial for the purpose we are
> > >concerned with here.
> >
> > Unless you are using the chord at a particular location on the wing to
be
> > the MAC. Then the lateral distance tells you where the MAC is. But I
> will
> > defer.
> >
> > >I expect you have determined the length (65") and
> > >location of the MGC or mean geometric chord which is not exactly the
same
> > >but probably close enough for government work.
> >
> > It probably is. As I said, I didn't do the work myself. It was part of
> my
> > aircraft documentation package. Serves me right to assume that
> information
> > given to me is correct without verifying it for myself. That is why I
am
> > asking for the information from the Nanchang documents so I can verify
it.
> >
> > > > Max forward CG on ground: 11% of MAC, 121.15"
> > > > Max forward CG in flight: 12.5% of MAC, 122.13"
> > > > Max rear CG in flight: 24.1% of MAC, 129.67"
> > >
> > >Max. forward cg with the landing gear down is 17% not 11%.
> >
> > Probably a typo on my doc then. I could have read it wrong.
> >
> > >What you are
> > >referencing here is the VERTICAL location of the CG ABOVE the MAC for
an
> > >empty aircraft.
> >
> > OK, I will buy that. That certainly isn't stated in my documentation.
It
> > certainly doesn't make sense for the forward CG limit on the ground to
be
> > aft of the forward CG limit in the air.
> >
> > >The 12.5% you refer to as the in flight forward cg limit is in fact the
> > >VERTICAL (y axis) location of the cg for the fully loaded aircraft.
> > >
> > >These are of no concern for our purposes in locating the longitudinal
(x
> > >axis) CG.
> >
> > I agree but what really concerns me is that the documentation provided
by
> > Yakity Yaks could be so wrong. This means that I have been promulgating
> > incorrect information, something that bothers me greatly.
> >
> > >Max. rearward cg limit is correct at 24.1%. with the gear retracted. A
> > >normal landing gear retraction moment is not given in the
specifications
> > >since no standard datum point is specified. You can't have a moment
> without
> > >a starting point.
> >
> > And it doesn't matter where the datum is since all the moments will be
> > relative to that datum plane. Once you translate MAC and percent of MAC
> to
> > the datum of your choice, you can figure out where the CG is.
> >
> > >What they have done instead is tell us that the cg moves
> > >aft by the amount of 0.7% MAC (0.48 inches) when the gear is retracted.
> This
> > >is fine, once you have selected a datum point you can determine the
> moment
> > >if you wish to show it in the W&B report.
> >
> > That works and it doesn't matter what datum plane you chose then.
> >
> > >The allowable C of G range is 124 mm or 4.9".
> >
> > Ahhhh, that is a fair bit different. Seems anyone who has W&B data from
> > Yakity Yaks needs to check their paperwork. Now I really need to find
the
> > Chinese data and adjust my paperwork.
> >
> >
> > > Stations:
> > > >
> > > > Station name: Position:
> > > >
> > > > prop 24"
> > > > engine 45"
> > > > nosewheel (ground contact) 57"
> > > > engine accessory section 60"
> > > > oil tank 69"
> > > > front seat 123"
> > > > wing jack point 129"
> > > > front spar 131.5"
> > > > main gear (ground contact) 146.5"
> > > > fuel 149"
> > > > rear seat 174"
> > > > avionics bay behind rear seat 188"
> > > > battery box 199"
> > > > ADF electronics tray 214"
> > > > tail skid 338"
> > > >
> > > > To weigh the airplane and calculate empty weight and CG:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Put a scale under each of the wheels.
> > > >
> > > > 2. Level the aircraft by adding or removing air from the tires with
a
> > > > level on the canopy rails.
> > >
> > >You might get the aircraft level by this method though you may have to
> > >remove nitrogen from the nose gear shock strut as well. But due to the
> nose
> > >gear caster angle you will change the dimension between the NG and MG
> > >centers and introduce an incorrect moment.
> >
> > yup. You may need to put a block under the main gear tires.
> >
> > >The correct procedure (if you are using scales under the wheels) is to
> jack
> > >the aircraft and fit appropriate blocking under the main wheels to
level
> the
> > >aircraft. If you are using load cells at the jack points then blocking
is
> > >not required. The blocks are tare weight which is deducted from the
main
> > >wheel measured weights.
> > >
> > > > 3. Multiply the weight at each wheel by its station to get the
moment
> at
> > > > each wheel.
> > > >
> > > > 4. Sum the moments and sum the weights. The sum of the weights is
> the
> > > > empty weight of the airplane.
> > >
> > >Yes, assuming it was weighed with no oil or fuel.
> >
> > You have to leave unusable fuel in the aircraft. For that matter, you
can
> > weigh it with known fuel and oil then subtract their weights and moments
> to
> > figure empty weight, moment, and CG.
> >
> > >If not the weights and
> > >moments of those items must be deducted to determine the empty weight
and
> > >CG. Standard practice is zero fuel. Oil is generally acceptable as the
> > >quantity is small and readily identified for calculation purposes.
> >
> > Insofar as 3.5 gallons of oil is a small quantity.
> >
> > I guess this is yet another lesson to me to be rigidly accurate in all
> > things. I will indulge in self-flagellation with a CD-ROM in penance.
> >
> > "Forgive me father for I have sinned ..."
> >
> >
> > Brian Lloyd
> > brian(at)lloyd.com
> > +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> > +1.360.838.9669 - fax
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Drew A. Blahnick ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Drew A. Blahnick
Subject: Assorted pics of the First Annual Red Star West
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/aapilot@adelphia.net.05.27.2002/index.html
--------------------------------------------
o EMAIL LIST PHOTO SHARE
Share your files and photos with other List members simply by
emailing the files to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
Please view the typical Share above and include the Description Text
Fields as shown along with your submission of files and photos.
o Main Photo Share Index:
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [ Patrick Elliott ] : New Email List Photo Share Available! |
| From: | Email List Photo Shares <pictures(at)matronics.com> |
A new Email List Photo Share is available:
Poster: Patrick Elliott
Subject: CJ6 trio at a Chinese airshow.
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/patrick.elliott@attws.com.05.27.2002/index.html
--------------------------------------------
o EMAIL LIST PHOTO SHARE
Share your files and photos with other List members simply by
emailing the files to:
pictures(at)matronics.com
Please view the typical Share above and include the Description Text
Fields as shown along with your submission of files and photos.
o Main Photo Share Index:
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CG information for the CJ6A |
At 05:01 AM 5/27/2002, you wrote:
>
>Brian,
>
>All of this weight and balance information is on page 5 of the manual you
>were given by Yakity Yaks. Obviously, it is difficult to dispute the
>information that you claim you were given by Fred, but all the weight and
>balance info that Yakity Yaks gives out is accurate and is located on page 5
>of the manual.
I accepted the information I was given in good faith assuming it was
correct as I had been told it was correct. The copy of the manual I was
given did not contain chapter I, the chapter with the W&B data, which I
have subsequently found on the CD-ROM. Thank goodness for the CD-ROM. The
manual Yakity Yaks provided also did not contain a Table of Contents. The
W&B data was provided in a separate document attached to the aircraft
weight sheet and listed the acceptable CG range as well as the stations for
the various items in the airplane.
BTW, what is the W&B data you provide today?
>Instead of blaming someone else for your mistakes as usual, why not just say
>that you got caught putting out more B.S. on the Yak List! I have asked you
>time after time to not publish information when you don't know what you are
>talking about.
I love you too Mike. I suppose I could explain it to you again but I
suspect the effort would be lost again as usual. Oh, what the heck. This
wouldn't be the Yak-list if it didn't have the occasional Brian/Mike flame
fest so here goes.
Let me put it this way: your company, Yakity Yaks, failed to provide proper
documentation and training, failed to adhere to my requests and
requirements when I purchased the airplane, has failed to make good on
subsequent promises, and has made no attempt to rectify any of the
problems. I asked both you and Fred for a list of the documents available
and never received any information. I asked both you and Fred for more
documentation and never received any.
Clearly *you*, as an officer of Yakity Yaks, have a serious quality control
problem and now you are blaming me for it? If I were in your shoes I would
be bending over backward to sweet talk me and solve the problems. Your
customers and potential customers are here on this list and they see these
discussions. How do you think you look to them?
But, yes, I *am* embarassed. I was lazy and failed to verify information I
presented that turned out to be incorrect and could cause problems if
used. I accept full responsibility for that. My only defense is that I
thought I was providing the correct information that had been provided to
me by your company.
Fortunately one of the good things about this list is that the information
is placed in public view for all to see and discuss. It worked. Walt
Lannon caught the error and brought it to my attention. I, and others, now
have an idea that there is documentation floating around out there that may
be incorrect. We now have the ability to share information and correct
that problem. If I waited for you to rectify the problem, I would probably
still be waiting long after hell freezes over.
You see Mike, I *AM* trying to be part of the solution, not part of the
problem. Now you can work with me on this, both as your customer and a
fellow CFI, to ensure that we are all singing from the same page of the
hymnal, or you can continue your abrasive, abusive, negative, nonproductive
ways. If you persist in the latter you are only hurting yourself and your
company. I don't sell these aircraft and my living doesn't depend on
them. You do and yours does. I am just an owner and a CFI who is trying
to do his level best to see to it that people who fly these airplanes have
the best information and understanding possible.
And to the rest of you, I will work out a new W&B sheet for the CJ6A using
the correct information and post it here for review, discussion, and
correction.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CG information for the CJ6A |
At 08:55 AM 5/27/2002, you wrote:
>
>The manual is Chujiao-6 Technical Specification for Service and Maintenance.
>Weight & Balance is on pg. 5 and 6. The bulk of this info. is in Fig.1.3 and
>notes.
>
>The manual is available from Doug Sapp. come on guys, how can you know your
>aircraft without the BOOK?
I agree. Mea maxima culpa.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)aol.com |
Troops,
The hotel of choise in Manitowoc this year is Super 8.
Located at ; 4004
Kalmet Av.
Manitowoc, WI 54220
1-920-684-7841
rate is $55.00 / night.
Paper work is in for the acro box. No word from the Feds yet.
Starting date is the morning of July 20.2002. Those who show up with
recommendations for formation check ride will be looked after first as has
been our passed SOP. Newbies will get our full attention after that. The
schedule is still being form up.
Jim Goolsby
cjpilot710(at)aol.com
386-467-3313 voice
386-467-3193 fax
386-569-7060 cell "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain
a little safety, deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"There is no "innocence" in war. All
collateral damage
is acceptable."
unk.
"With my shield, or on it"
Trojan Warriors BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
At 05:42 PM 5/27/2002, you wrote:
>
>
>Troops,
>
>The hotel of choise in Manitowoc this year is Super 8.
>Located at ; 4004
>Kalmet Av.
>
>
> Manitowoc, WI 54220
>
>
> 1-920-684-7841
>rate is $55.00 / night.
>
>Paper work is in for the acro box. No word from the Feds yet.
>
>Starting date is the morning of July 20.2002. Those who show up with
>recommendations for formation check ride will be looked after first as has
>been our passed SOP. Newbies will get our full attention after that. The
>schedule is still being form up.
Jim,
My only questions are:
1. When is the Crud tournament?
2. Where will we be doing Carrier Quals?
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Robert Schroeder" <firedog(at)visi.com> |
Gentlemen,
I'm concerned about the proposed "Carrier Qualifications".
As a former Air Force grunt, we stayed away from water and short
runways...My suspicion is that the "arresting cable" for the
proposed quals will not be Mil Spec. Can you confirm its
conformance? What will be the "landing deck"? Folding tables like at the
O Club?
Reporting for duty...See you in Nebraska.
Robert Schroeder, CJ Driver from MIC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
Subject: Re: Yak-List: MTW/OSH
At 05:42 PM 5/27/2002, you wrote:
>
>
>Troops,
>
>The hotel of choise in Manitowoc this year is Super 8.
>Located at ; 4004
>Kalmet Av.
>
>
> Manitowoc, WI 54220
>
>
> 1-920-684-7841
>rate is $55.00 / night.
>
>Paper work is in for the acro box. No word from the Feds yet.
>
>Starting date is the morning of July 20.2002. Those who show up with
>recommendations for formation check ride will be looked after first as has
>been our passed SOP. Newbies will get our full attention after that. The
>schedule is still being form up.
Jim,
My only questions are:
1. When is the Crud tournament?
2. Where will we be doing Carrier Quals?
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walt Lannon" <lannon(at)look.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: CG information for the CJ6A |
Hi All;
Maybe as a final note to this subject; ---. I have been lurking on the list
for quite some time and would like to say that Brian puts out some great
material. I love it and I hope it continues. If I don't agree with it I will
say so and I am sure Brian will do the same. I tend to get foot in mouth
disease with nauseating regularity so it's just a matter of time----- Hang
in there Brian
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CG information for the CJ6A
>
> At 05:01 AM 5/27/2002, you wrote:
> >
> >Brian,
> >
> >All of this weight and balance information is on page 5 of the manual you
> >were given by Yakity Yaks. Obviously, it is difficult to dispute the
> >information that you claim you were given by Fred, but all the weight and
> >balance info that Yakity Yaks gives out is accurate and is located on
page 5
> >of the manual.
>
> I accepted the information I was given in good faith assuming it was
> correct as I had been told it was correct. The copy of the manual I was
> given did not contain chapter I, the chapter with the W&B data, which I
> have subsequently found on the CD-ROM. Thank goodness for the CD-ROM.
The
> manual Yakity Yaks provided also did not contain a Table of Contents. The
> W&B data was provided in a separate document attached to the aircraft
> weight sheet and listed the acceptable CG range as well as the stations
for
> the various items in the airplane.
>
> BTW, what is the W&B data you provide today?
>
> >Instead of blaming someone else for your mistakes as usual, why not just
say
> >that you got caught putting out more B.S. on the Yak List! I have asked
you
> >time after time to not publish information when you don't know what you
are
> >talking about.
>
> I love you too Mike. I suppose I could explain it to you again but I
> suspect the effort would be lost again as usual. Oh, what the heck. This
> wouldn't be the Yak-list if it didn't have the occasional Brian/Mike flame
> fest so here goes.
>
> Let me put it this way: your company, Yakity Yaks, failed to provide
proper
> documentation and training, failed to adhere to my requests and
> requirements when I purchased the airplane, has failed to make good on
> subsequent promises, and has made no attempt to rectify any of the
> problems. I asked both you and Fred for a list of the documents available
> and never received any information. I asked both you and Fred for more
> documentation and never received any.
>
> Clearly *you*, as an officer of Yakity Yaks, have a serious quality
control
> problem and now you are blaming me for it? If I were in your shoes I
would
> be bending over backward to sweet talk me and solve the problems. Your
> customers and potential customers are here on this list and they see these
> discussions. How do you think you look to them?
>
> But, yes, I *am* embarassed. I was lazy and failed to verify information
I
> presented that turned out to be incorrect and could cause problems if
> used. I accept full responsibility for that. My only defense is that I
> thought I was providing the correct information that had been provided to
> me by your company.
>
> Fortunately one of the good things about this list is that the information
> is placed in public view for all to see and discuss. It worked. Walt
> Lannon caught the error and brought it to my attention. I, and others,
now
> have an idea that there is documentation floating around out there that
may
> be incorrect. We now have the ability to share information and correct
> that problem. If I waited for you to rectify the problem, I would
probably
> still be waiting long after hell freezes over.
>
> You see Mike, I *AM* trying to be part of the solution, not part of the
> problem. Now you can work with me on this, both as your customer and a
> fellow CFI, to ensure that we are all singing from the same page of the
> hymnal, or you can continue your abrasive, abusive, negative,
nonproductive
> ways. If you persist in the latter you are only hurting yourself and your
> company. I don't sell these aircraft and my living doesn't depend on
> them. You do and yours does. I am just an owner and a CFI who is trying
> to do his level best to see to it that people who fly these airplanes have
> the best information and understanding possible.
>
> And to the rest of you, I will work out a new W&B sheet for the CJ6A using
> the correct information and post it here for review, discussion, and
> correction.
>
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Calloway" <TCalloway(at)datatechnique.com> |
Jim,
What is the first night we need reservations in OSH?
tc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
WHat are the dates again???
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry Calloway" <TCalloway(at)datatechnique.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: MTW/OSH
>
> Jim,
> What is the first night we need reservations in OSH?
> tc
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike McCoy" <mike(at)aircraftsales.com> |
| Subject: | Excuses, excuses |
Brian,
You ALWAYS have an excuse! How convenient that the manual you got from
Yakity Yaks didn't have the weight and balance chapter. How easy it is to
blame Fred when he can't defend himself! What a bunch of crap! You admit
that you have the W&B chapter on the CD's that you're selling, so why didn't
you check that if you don't know what the Weight and Balance numbers are?
To the best of my knowledge, everyone got a complete manual with their
airplane. I have never had a single person tell me that they didn't get a
complete manual, but then again no one else needs an excuse as often as you
do. I do give each of our customers a complete manual and yes it does have
an index right there in the front.
Also, nearly every one of our customers is a safe pilot and has had an
extremely good safety record. As for training, our record speaks for
tself -- and so does yours!!!
What we do provide our customers are the highest quality CJ's in the country
( I'm sure Dougs new CJ's are of the highest quality also). You will
recognize our airplanes at the fly-ins -- they are the ones flying and not
being worked on. You will NOT hear from many of our customers on the Yak
List -- because they don't continually need maintenance advice (because
their airplanes are not broken down). You will NOT see our customers
seeking advice on flying their airplanes on this list, because they've had
training by Yakity Yaks.
So, instead of blaming Fred for your problems, why not just say that you got
caught putting out more B.S. Also, please don't blame me for your problems
as I have never flown with you and to the best of my knowledge did not get a
request from you regarding your missing chapter one. (However, in fairness
I'd have to admit that I delete a LOT of your e-mails on the Yak List).
Mike McCoy (This will be my last post on this subject, so I'll give Brian
the last page of excuses)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seat Cushion for the CJ |
Drew,
The seat cushions are a bit like ballast in a way, you can load in the lead
or you can put something in its place that will do you some good, like a aux
air tank, move the batt, etc. Consider loading your cushion with survival
gear, any number of things could be loaded into it the seat pans, without
sacrificing comfort. Come on gang lets have a show of hands, who carries
even enough gear to survive a 2 day (minor injured) stint in the bush??
.............hmmmmm, that's what I thought. Keeping warm is a big key to
survival, food's good too, small 1 man tent, a throw away anti exposure
suit's is smaller than a paper back book, use your imagination.
Always Yakin,
Doug Sapp
----- Original Message -----
From: "Drew" <drew(at)allredstar.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Seat Cushion for the CJ
>
> Folks,
>
> I need a couple of seat cushions for the CJ buckets, does anyone know of
> a distributor from whom I can order a set? thanks,
>
> Drew
>
>
> Drew A. Blahnick
> Red Stars Inc.
> Cell 310-372-6328
> Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Seat Cushion for the CJ |
| From: | Ernie martinez <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
I live in Fl, Doug. I keep sunscreen in my seats :)
Ernie
On Monday, May 27, 2002, at 11:27 PM, Doug wrote:
>
> Drew,
> The seat cushions are a bit like ballast in a way, you can load in the
> lead
> or you can put something in its place that will do you some good, like
> a aux
> air tank, move the batt, etc. Consider loading your cushion with
> survival
> gear, any number of things could be loaded into it the seat pans,
> without
> sacrificing comfort. Come on gang lets have a show of hands, who
> carries
> even enough gear to survive a 2 day (minor injured) stint in the bush??
> .............hmmmmm, that's what I thought. Keeping warm is a big key
> to
> survival, food's good too, small 1 man tent, a throw away anti exposure
> suit's is smaller than a paper back book, use your imagination.
>
> Always Yakin,
> Doug Sapp
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Drew" <drew(at)allredstar.com>
> To:
> Subject: Yak-List: Seat Cushion for the CJ
>
>
>>
>> Folks,
>>
>> I need a couple of seat cushions for the CJ buckets, does anyone know
>> of
>> a distributor from whom I can order a set? thanks,
>>
>> Drew
>>
>>
>> Drew A. Blahnick
>> Red Stars Inc.
>> Cell 310-372-6328
>> Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Drew" <aapilot(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Seat Cushion for the CJ and the Portland RQS |
Great idea Doug, I was thinking of loading a small survival kit in a
mil-spec fanny pack we were issued in sof (supposedly buckle wouldn't
fail on bailout) for x/c. The other option is a surv vest... the seat
pan cushion/survival pack is a good idea, especially for you guys up in
the Pac Nwst, remember D.B. Cooper ;) I was flying over Utah heading to
NY yesterday wondering what I would need if I had to set down/bail my CJ
enroute to SLC.
exposure blanket X 2
whistle
local terrain map
compass/spare garmin pilot i/ii/iii
energy bars
Iodine pills
small med kit
sig mirror
snare wire/line/hooks
Radio like the prc 90s, but I'm not rich..
if you still have your chinese flare pistol, you have a nice signaling
device for the Portland RQS HC-130s or MH-60s circling overhead (if they
are still up there)
Drew
Drew A. Blahnick
Red Stars Inc.
Cell 310-372-6328
www.allredstar.com
Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
----- Original Message -----
From: Doug
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 8:27 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Seat Cushion for the CJ
Drew,
The seat cushions are a bit like ballast in a way, you can load in the
lead
or you can put something in its place that will do you some good, like
a aux
air tank, move the batt, etc. Consider loading your cushion with
survival
gear, any number of things could be loaded into it the seat pans,
without
sacrificing comfort. Come on gang lets have a show of hands, who
carries
even enough gear to survive a 2 day (minor injured) stint in the
bush??
.............hmmmmm, that's what I thought. Keeping warm is a big key
to
survival, food's good too, small 1 man tent, a throw away anti
exposure
suit's is smaller than a paper back book, use your imagination.
Always Yakin,
Doug Sapp
----- Original Message -----
From: "Drew" <drew(at)allredstar.com>
To:
Subject: Yak-List: Seat Cushion for the CJ
>
> Folks,
>
> I need a couple of seat cushions for the CJ buckets, does anyone
know of
> a distributor from whom I can order a set? thanks,
>
> Drew
>
>
> Drew A. Blahnick
> Red Stars Inc.
> Cell 310-372-6328
> Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
>
>
=
=
messages.
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
Doug,
Did you get my last email regading a power amp?
Ernie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)aol.com |
Troops,
The first day of MTW/OSH is 20 July 2002 AM.
I plan on arriving 19 July to set up and get ready for yawl.
Yes, Russ, we do need you as airboss again. Your size 20s and fu man chew,
keep the troops hopping.
Carrier deck qual and lat/long plus Crud positioning is under review. MTW
population not known for such activities therefore, a "biker bar" maybe our
only refuge (and I don't have any tattoos plus the last one I went to was
called "Brain Dead").
I think I'll send Craig Payne on recon.
Jim Goolsby
cjpilot710(at)aol.com
386-467-3313 voice
386-467-3193 fax
386-569-7060 cell "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain
a little safety, deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"There is no "innocence" in war. All
collateral damage
is acceptable."
unk.
"With my shield, or on it"
Trojan Warriors BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Calloway" <tcalloway(at)datatechnique.com> |
Same question phrased differently.
What day of the month of July will we fly mass formation into Oshkosh
from MTW.
tc
>>> cjpilot710(at)aol.com 05/28/02 15:54 PM >>>
Troops,
The first day of MTW/OSH is 20 July 2002 AM.
I plan on arriving 19 July to set up and get ready for yawl.
Yes, Russ, we do need you as airboss again. Your size 20s and fu man
chew,
keep the troops hopping.
Carrier deck qual and lat/long plus Crud positioning is under review.
MTW
population not known for such activities therefore, a "biker bar" maybe
our
only refuge (and I don't have any tattoos plus the last one I went to
was
called "Brain Dead").
I think I'll send Craig Payne on recon.
Jim Goolsby
cjpilot710(at)aol.com
386-467-3313 voice
386-467-3193 fax
386-569-7060 cell "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain
a little safety, deserve neither liberty
nor
safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"There is no "innocence" in war. All
collateral damage
is acceptable."
unk.
"With my shield, or on it"
Trojan Warriors BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Drew" <drew(at)allredstar.com> |
This is why I would like to see all Red Star aircraft owners actively
recruited for events; we need an Antonov AN-2 Colt to haul around the
crud table!!
Beautiful day in Socal...
Drew
Drew A. Blahnick
Red Stars Inc.
Cell 310-372-6328
www.allredstar.com
Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
----- Original Message -----
From: cjpilot710(at)aol.com
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 1:45 PM
Subject: Yak-List: MTW/OSH
Troops,
The first day of MTW/OSH is 20 July 2002 AM.
I plan on arriving 19 July to set up and get ready for yawl.
Yes, Russ, we do need you as airboss again. Your size 20s and fu man
chew,
keep the troops hopping.
Carrier deck qual and lat/long plus Crud positioning is under review.
MTW
population not known for such activities therefore, a "biker bar"
maybe our
only refuge (and I don't have any tattoos plus the last one I went to
was
called "Brain Dead").
I think I'll send Craig Payne on recon.
Jim Goolsby
cjpilot710(at)aol.com
386-467-3313 voice
386-467-3193 fax
386-569-7060 cell "They that can give up essential liberty to
obtain
a little safety, deserve neither
liberty nor
safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"There is no "innocence" in war. All
collateral damage
is acceptable."
unk.
"With my shield, or on it"
Trojan Warriors BC
=
=
messages.
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Stelwagon" <pfstelwagon(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Excuses, excuses |
Mike,
I didn't get a complete manual from Fred with the CJ that I bought. I also
didn't get US Altimeters, Airspeeds etc.
Fred was a nice guy, but he was a salesman first .
Also if you want to discuss weight and balance you can try and explain how
my aircraft had the Chinese radios removed and had no added weight, yet the
weight and balance was signed off as good. I am not bad mouthing Fred as I
bought the plane. A lot of stuff sold was not as represented.
Frank Stelwagon
408 259 2320
CJ-6A
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike McCoy" <mike(at)aircraftsales.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Excuses, excuses
>
> Brian,
>
> You ALWAYS have an excuse! How convenient that the manual you got from
> Yakity Yaks didn't have the weight and balance chapter. How easy it is to
> blame Fred when he can't defend himself! What a bunch of crap! You admit
> that you have the W&B chapter on the CD's that you're selling, so why
didn't
> you check that if you don't know what the Weight and Balance numbers are?
>
> To the best of my knowledge, everyone got a complete manual with their
> airplane. I have never had a single person tell me that they didn't get a
> complete manual, but then again no one else needs an excuse as often as
you
> do. I do give each of our customers a complete manual and yes it does
have
> an index right there in the front.
>
> Also, nearly every one of our customers is a safe pilot and has had an
> extremely good safety record. As for training, our record speaks for
> tself -- and so does yours!!!
>
> What we do provide our customers are the highest quality CJ's in the
country
> ( I'm sure Dougs new CJ's are of the highest quality also). You will
> recognize our airplanes at the fly-ins -- they are the ones flying and
not
> being worked on. You will NOT hear from many of our customers on the Yak
> List -- because they don't continually need maintenance advice (because
> their airplanes are not broken down). You will NOT see our customers
> seeking advice on flying their airplanes on this list, because they've had
> training by Yakity Yaks.
>
> So, instead of blaming Fred for your problems, why not just say that you
got
> caught putting out more B.S. Also, please don't blame me for your
problems
> as I have never flown with you and to the best of my knowledge did not get
a
> request from you regarding your missing chapter one. (However, in
fairness
> I'd have to admit that I delete a LOT of your e-mails on the Yak List).
>
> Mike McCoy (This will be my last post on this subject, so I'll give Brian
> the last page of excuses)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Schrick" <schrick(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Excuses, excuses (Brain: 1; Mike -1) it continues |
Don't you hate when someone calls you to the carpet and your
face is straight down in the dog crap for getting caught.
Lessons learned.
Score ONE for Brian
Minus ONE for Mike
Next round to begin soon.
Mark Schrick
966 Wallace Drive
San Jose, CA 95120
(408) 323-5150(H) or (408) 391-6664 (Car)
>--- Original Message ---
>From: Frank Stelwagon <pfstelwagon(at)earthlink.net>
>To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: 5/28/02 2:36:22 PM
>
>
>Mike,
>
>I didn't get a complete manual from Fred with the CJ that I
bought. I also
>didn't get US Altimeters, Airspeeds etc.
>Fred was a nice guy, but he was a salesman first .
>
>Also if you want to discuss weight and balance you can try and
explain how
>my aircraft had the Chinese radios removed and had no added
weight, yet the
>weight and balance was signed off as good. I am not bad mouthing
Fred as I
>bought the plane. A lot of stuff sold was not as represented.
>
>Frank Stelwagon
>408 259 2320
>CJ-6A
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Mike McCoy" <mike(at)aircraftsales.com>
>To:
>Subject: Yak-List: Excuses, excuses
>
>
>>
>> Brian,
>>
>> You ALWAYS have an excuse! How convenient that the manual
you got from
>> Yakity Yaks didn't have the weight and balance chapter. How
easy it is to
>> blame Fred when he can't defend himself! What a bunch of
crap! You admit
>> that you have the W&B chapter on the CD's that you're selling,
so why
>didn't
>> you check that if you don't know what the Weight and Balance
numbers are?
>>
>> To the best of my knowledge, everyone got a complete manual
with their
>> airplane. I have never had a single person tell me that they
didn't get a
>> complete manual, but then again no one else needs an excuse
as often as
>you
>> do. I do give each of our customers a complete manual and
yes it does
>have
>> an index right there in the front.
>>
>> Also, nearly every one of our customers is a safe pilot and
has had an
>> extremely good safety record. As for training, our record
speaks for
>> tself -- and so does yours!!!
>>
>> What we do provide our customers are the highest quality CJ's
in the
>country
>> ( I'm sure Dougs new CJ's are of the highest quality also).
You will
>> recognize our airplanes at the fly-ins -- they are the ones
flying and
>not
>> being worked on. You will NOT hear from many of our customers
on the Yak
>> List -- because they don't continually need maintenance
advice (because
>> their airplanes are not broken down). You will NOT see our
customers
>> seeking advice on flying their airplanes on this list, because
they've had
>> training by Yakity Yaks.
>>
>> So, instead of blaming Fred for your problems, why not just
say that you
>got
>> caught putting out more B.S. Also, please don't blame me
for your
>problems
>> as I have never flown with you and to the best of my knowledge
did not get
>a
>> request from you regarding your missing chapter one. (However,
in
>fairness
>> I'd have to admit that I delete a LOT of your e-mails on the
Yak List).
>>
>> Mike McCoy (This will be my last post on this subject, so
I'll give Brian
>> the last page of excuses)
>>
>>
>
>
of
form
messages.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ByronMFox(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | 600X6 Cleveland Wheel |
On Doug Sapp's recommendation, I'm going to change the nose wheel on my CJ to
the 600X6 Cleveland variety. Unfortunately, Doug is having difficulty
locating used 600X6 Cleveland wheels. Does anyone out there happen to have
one gathering dust? ...Blitz
Byron M. Fox
80 Milland Drive
Mill Valley, CA 94941
Home 415-380-0907
Cell 415-307-2405
Fax 415-380-0917
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
I've just received a W&B sheet on a neighbors CJ which reads as follows.
Item or Position weight arm Moment
Nose Wheel 580 57.0" 33060.0
Main Wheels 1498 146.5 219457.0
Datum 24" Forward of Properller Axial
MAC 65" cord 42" outboard of wing joint
Max forward empty CG 121.5 " or 11% of MAC
"" "" takeoff CG 122.12" or 12.5% of MAC
Max rear CG 129.67" or 24.1% of MAC
aircraft basic empty weight
2078.0 CG 12.52
Now all of his radios have been removed and he has no added weight but
for a small scuba cylinder mounted on the right side fuselage about 1 ft
aft of the rear radio tray, it cant weigh more that 20 lbs full.
I thought the CG range of the airplane was only about 4"..... here its
more than 8
As I understand, fuel afffects the CG on this aircraft very little, if
this is indeed true, then how can the max forward CG and the basic empty
CG be the same, wouldnt that put the plane forward of CG with a pilot up
front???
Ernie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 600X6 Cleveland Wheel |
I understand that Desser tire now has a tire which will fit the stock CJ
wheel.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: <ByronMFox(at)aol.com>
Subject: Yak-List: 600X6 Cleveland Wheel
>
> On Doug Sapp's recommendation, I'm going to change the nose wheel on my CJ
to
> the 600X6 Cleveland variety. Unfortunately, Doug is having difficulty
> locating used 600X6 Cleveland wheels. Does anyone out there happen to have
> one gathering dust? ...Blitz
>
> Byron M. Fox
> 80 Milland Drive
> Mill Valley, CA 94941
> Home 415-380-0907
> Cell 415-307-2405
> Fax 415-380-0917
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
oops, I had a typo at the bottom it should read "Aircraft basic empty weight
2078 CG 121.52
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com>
Subject: Yak-List: More W&B
>
> I've just received a W&B sheet on a neighbors CJ which reads as follows.
>
> Item or Position weight arm Moment
>
> Nose Wheel 580 57.0" 33060.0
> Main Wheels 1498 146.5 219457.0
>
>
> Datum 24" Forward of Properller Axial
> MAC 65" cord 42" outboard of wing joint
>
> Max forward empty CG 121.5 " or 11% of MAC
> "" "" takeoff CG 122.12" or 12.5% of MAC
> Max rear CG 129.67" or 24.1% of MAC
>
>
> aircraft basic empty weight
> 2078.0 CG 12.52
>
> Now all of his radios have been removed and he has no added weight but
> for a small scuba cylinder mounted on the right side fuselage about 1 ft
> aft of the rear radio tray, it cant weigh more that 20 lbs full.
>
> I thought the CG range of the airplane was only about 4"..... here its
> more than 8
> As I understand, fuel afffects the CG on this aircraft very little, if
> this is indeed true, then how can the max forward CG and the basic empty
> CG be the same, wouldnt that put the plane forward of CG with a pilot up
> front???
>
> Ernie
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
Geeze I just noticed, that this is exactly what Brian posted the other day
minus the stations.
Sorry for being redundant.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com>
Subject: Yak-List: More W&B
>
> I've just received a W&B sheet on a neighbors CJ which reads as follows.
>
> Item or Position weight arm Moment
>
> Nose Wheel 580 57.0" 33060.0
> Main Wheels 1498 146.5 219457.0
>
>
> Datum 24" Forward of Properller Axial
> MAC 65" cord 42" outboard of wing joint
>
> Max forward empty CG 121.5 " or 11% of MAC
> "" "" takeoff CG 122.12" or 12.5% of MAC
> Max rear CG 129.67" or 24.1% of MAC
>
>
> aircraft basic empty weight
> 2078.0 CG 12.52
>
> Now all of his radios have been removed and he has no added weight but
> for a small scuba cylinder mounted on the right side fuselage about 1 ft
> aft of the rear radio tray, it cant weigh more that 20 lbs full.
>
> I thought the CG range of the airplane was only about 4"..... here its
> more than 8
> As I understand, fuel afffects the CG on this aircraft very little, if
> this is indeed true, then how can the max forward CG and the basic empty
> CG be the same, wouldnt that put the plane forward of CG with a pilot up
> front???
>
> Ernie
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
I just realized another thing..............
My neighbor's airplane came from Yakity Yaks, along with this weight and
balance report. Verbatum to Brians. hmmmmmmmmm.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com>
Subject: Yak-List: More W&B
>
> I've just received a W&B sheet on a neighbors CJ which reads as follows.
>
> Item or Position weight arm Moment
>
> Nose Wheel 580 57.0" 33060.0
> Main Wheels 1498 146.5 219457.0
>
>
> Datum 24" Forward of Properller Axial
> MAC 65" cord 42" outboard of wing joint
>
> Max forward empty CG 121.5 " or 11% of MAC
> "" "" takeoff CG 122.12" or 12.5% of MAC
> Max rear CG 129.67" or 24.1% of MAC
>
>
> aircraft basic empty weight
> 2078.0 CG 12.52
>
> Now all of his radios have been removed and he has no added weight but
> for a small scuba cylinder mounted on the right side fuselage about 1 ft
> aft of the rear radio tray, it cant weigh more that 20 lbs full.
>
> I thought the CG range of the airplane was only about 4"..... here its
> more than 8
> As I understand, fuel afffects the CG on this aircraft very little, if
> this is indeed true, then how can the max forward CG and the basic empty
> CG be the same, wouldnt that put the plane forward of CG with a pilot up
> front???
>
> Ernie
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
I have examined the relevant pages of The Book (actually the CD-ROM) and it
is less than useful in its present form. Still, if you are masochistic and
mathematically inclined, you can probably turn it into something useful,
which is what I will attempt to do in this message. I will probably come
up with what Walt Lannon came up with but at least that way we will have
two corroborating sources.
Since the book gives distances relative to the front of the MAC I will use
that as my standard datum plane for the initial calculations. After that I
will translate to the standard datum plane I was using in my previous
message which is 24" ahead of the prop axial plane.
From diagram 1.3 we find:
The MAC is 1.747M (68.78") wide (long?).
The main gear is located 769mm (30.27") aft of a vertical plane defined by
the front of the MAC.
The CG moves aft by 0.7% when the gear is retracted but since they don't
specify a weight and CG at which this happens, there is no way to determine
the actual arm and moment change. From the discussion I suspect this is at
a sample take-off weight of 1400 Kg and a CG of 23.4% of MAC. After
looking at the diagram, do others agree? If so, I can calculate the arm
and moment change.
Limiting forward CG is 17% of MAC or 11.7" (17% * 68.78") aft of the front
of MAC.
Limiting aft CG is 24.1% of MAC or 16.57" (24.1% * 68.78") aft of the front
of the MAC.
This gives a CG range of 4.9"
So far I am tracking 100% with what Walt sent. Now let's convert to the
standard datum plane (SDP) 24" ahead of the propeller axial plane.
The main gear is 146.5" aft of the SDP. The front of the MAC is 30.27"
forward of the gear. The CG ranges from 11.7" to 16.57" aft of the front
of the MAC. Therefore:
Front of MAC = 116.23"
Forward CG = 127.93" (front of MAC + 11.7")
Aft CG = 132.8" (front of MAC + 16.57")
Here are the stations from my W&B sheet again. Given that there were
errors in the CG range there may be errors in the locations of the stations
also so it is probably worthwhile to verify the stations if possible.
prop 24"
engine 45"
nosewheel 57"
accessory section 60"
oil 69"
front of MAC 116.23"
front seat 123"
jack point 129"
front spar 131.5 "
main wheel 146.5"
fuel 149"
rear seat 174"
avionics rack
(behind rear seat) 188"
Battery box 199"
ADF rack 214"
tail skid 338"
Forward CG limit: 127.93"
Aft CG limit: 132.80"
Comments?
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 600X6 Cleveland Wheel |
At 04:23 PM 5/28/2002, you wrote:
>
>I understand that Desser tire now has a tire which will fit the stock CJ
>wheel.
Yes. Given that, I am not sure it is worth the time, effort, and expense
of converting to the Cleveland nose wheel.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seat Cushion for the CJ |
You might consider your water wings and your rubber ducky.
Always Yakin,
Doug
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernie martinez" <ernie(at)gscinc.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Seat Cushion for the CJ
>
> I live in Fl, Doug. I keep sunscreen in my seats :)
>
> Ernie
> On Monday, May 27, 2002, at 11:27 PM, Doug wrote:
>
> >
> > Drew,
> > The seat cushions are a bit like ballast in a way, you can load in the
> > lead
> > or you can put something in its place that will do you some good, like
> > a aux
> > air tank, move the batt, etc. Consider loading your cushion with
> > survival
> > gear, any number of things could be loaded into it the seat pans,
> > without
> > sacrificing comfort. Come on gang lets have a show of hands, who
> > carries
> > even enough gear to survive a 2 day (minor injured) stint in the bush??
> > .............hmmmmm, that's what I thought. Keeping warm is a big key
> > to
> > survival, food's good too, small 1 man tent, a throw away anti exposure
> > suit's is smaller than a paper back book, use your imagination.
> >
> > Always Yakin,
> > Doug Sapp
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Drew" <drew(at)allredstar.com>
> > To:
> > Subject: Yak-List: Seat Cushion for the CJ
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Folks,
> >>
> >> I need a couple of seat cushions for the CJ buckets, does anyone know
> >> of
> >> a distributor from whom I can order a set? thanks,
> >>
> >> Drew
> >>
> >>
> >> Drew A. Blahnick
> >> Red Stars Inc.
> >> Cell 310-372-6328
> >> Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 600X6 Cleveland Wheel |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: 600X6 Cleveland Wheel
>
> At 04:23 PM 5/28/2002, you wrote:
> >
> >I understand that Desser tire now has a tire which will fit the stock CJ
> >wheel.
>
> Yes. Given that, I am not sure it is worth the time, effort, and expense
> of converting to the Cleveland nose wheel.
Unless you damage a wheel in Backwoods Nebraska (its not the end of the
world, but your can see it from there) then its real nice to have a good ol
made in USA wheel on your bird. Also they are getting hard to find new
one's from China. Most of the original ones are pretty corroded under the
felt seals as this wheel is mostly magnesium.
Always Yakin,
Doug Sapp
>
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael DiMarco <mgdimarco(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CG information for the CJ6A |
Thank You Walt!
Mike
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael DiMarco <mgdimarco(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Our Next Subject for Flaming - Auto Fuel and the CJ |
Oh great Gurus of the Yak-List, I summon your knowledge of all things
CJ and beg your indulgence and patience with my ignorance.
Assume the auto fuel in question is free of alcohol.
Assume that MTBE (while arguably is a form of alcohol) is safe in
airplane engines per the EAA sponsored STC.
Assume that the Housai 6A is truly capable of burning down to 70
octane fuel.
Are there any know ill effects burning auto fuel without Marvel's or
lead or fake lead additives?
Thanks,
Mike and China Blue
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charlie Lynch" <lynch(at)netjets.com> |
Those of us who have spent anytime reading this list know full well the
great admiration, respect and love that Brian and Mike McCoy have for each
other ....
Recently Brian shared his experience and relationship with Yakity Yaks and
Mike McCoy. I thought that it might be helpful to others on our list to
hear another man's experience. I purchased a 1980 CJ-6A from Fred and Mike
several years ago and have only the highest praise. The aircraft was
thoroughly inspected and made ready to go. I had a fairly long list of
add-ons and additional equipment. It was all installed well at no
additional labor cost. It has been four years and no problems to date. The
one or two minor issues were quickly resolved, some at no charge. I
received my initial check out from Mike and it was world class. The more I
put in, the more I got out. I received my FAST card from Mike and Mike. I
also received some additional arco from Mike. There is little doubt that he
is truly an exceptional pilot. He does demand a lot, but you receive lot in
return. The manuals were excellent and Mike's service was outstanding. I
would recommend Yakity Yaks to others. Mike may not be named good will
ambassador to the U.N. anytime soon, but he is a skilled aviator, a
dedicated teacher and a man whose personal integrity is beyond reproach.
There is little doubt that the personality conflict between Brian, Mike and
Fred has soured that relationship forever and I am not surprised that the
service Brian experienced was quite different from what I experienced. Like
Brian, I too am biased. By stating that I would fly with Mike McCoy anytime
or anyplace, I'll let you guess which way I lean. I would, however, suggest
to anyone considering buying a CJ-6A that you do call Mike as part of your
due diligence.
Hope to see everyone next week.
Best Regards,
Charlie Lynch N116RL
203 637 2914
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Our Next Subject for Flaming - Auto Fuel and the CJ |
Mike;
Lead in fuel does more than suppress detonation or pre-ignition. It also
acts to lubricate the valve seats. Modern cars have hardened valve seats
so that the valves and seats will survive on unleaded fuel. Older auto
engines don't have that feature so eventual valve damage will occur.
This then begs the question........... Are Chinese and Russian engines
manufactured with hardened valve seats? Does Chinese and Russian fuel
contain lead or do they burn what is known as "white gas"? Do they use
any additives in their fuel?
Personally, I wouldn't run straight auto fuel, at least for extended
periods, without adding a lead substitute know to help protect the
valves. This at least until some of my previous questions are answered.
Frank
Chino
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
DiMarco
Subject: Yak-List: Our Next Subject for Flaming - Auto Fuel and the CJ
Oh great Gurus of the Yak-List, I summon your knowledge of all things
CJ and beg your indulgence and patience with my ignorance.
Assume the auto fuel in question is free of alcohol.
Assume that MTBE (while arguably is a form of alcohol) is safe in
airplane engines per the EAA sponsored STC.
Assume that the Housai 6A is truly capable of burning down to 70
octane fuel.
Are there any know ill effects burning auto fuel without Marvel's or
lead or fake lead additives?
Thanks,
Mike and China Blue
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael DiMarco <mgdimarco(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Our Next Subject for Flaming - Auto Fuel and the CJ |
>
> This then begs the question........... Are Chinese and Russian
> engines
> manufactured with hardened valve seats? Does Chinese and Russian
> fuel
> contain lead or do they burn what is known as "white gas"? Do they
> use
> any additives in their fuel?
Thanks Frank! These questions I have received in my quest for advise
too. I agree hardened (steel) valve seats would not require added
lead or lead substitute. But are they?
Mike and China Blue
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Payne <cpayne(at)mc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Excuses, excuses |
Guys,
CJ's at Dawn, mano y mano at 3000 AGL....just give us time to draw a
crowd.
Craig "Yes, I love this list" Payne
Mike McCoy wrote:
>
>
> Brian,
>
> You ALWAYS have an excuse! .......
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Our Next Subject for Flaming - Auto Fuel and the CJ |
In a message dated 5/28/02 10:40:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
mgdimarco(at)yahoo.com writes:
>
> > This then begs the question........... Are Chinese and Russian
> > engines
> > manufactured with hardened valve seats? Does Chinese and Russian
> > fuel
> > contain lead or do they burn what is known as "white gas"? Do they
> > use
> > any additives in their fuel?
>
> Thanks Frank! These questions I have received in my quest for advise
> too. I agree hardened (steel) valve seats would not require added
> lead or lead substitute. But are they?
>
> Mike and China Blue
>
One of the other concerns about alcohol fuels, was what they did or how they
react to the rubber fuel lines. The valve stems, I believe are sodium filled
however I don't believe the seats are hardened, at least they didn't seem to
be when I reground one. I have no bases for my concern, but I'd be hesitant
about using alcohol fuels.
Jim Goolsby
cjpilot710(at)aol.com
386-467-3313 voice
386-467-3193 fax
386-569-7060 cell "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain
a little safety, deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"There is no "innocence" in war. All
collateral damage
is acceptable."
unk.
"With my shield, or on it"
Trojan Warriors BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | D Zeman <curious_wings(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Excuses, excuses |
Lithium friends, lithium. Just a pinch between the
cheek and gum...
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Roger Bieberdorf <rogerbyak(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 600X6 Cleveland Wheel |
Does anyone want an original one owner, in good shape, CJ nose wheel....got one,
even with a tire installed left over from my conversion of several years ago,
that has been stored in "It;s a Dry Heat Arizona". But please, if your response
includes criticism for Commericialism; Lack of Documentation, etc; Thanks,
I would just as soon keep the wheel. RB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd"
Subject: Re: Yak-List: 600X6 Cleveland Wheel
>
> At 04:23 PM 5/28/2002, you wrote:
> >
> >I understand that Desser tire now has a tire which will fit the stock CJ
> >wheel.
>
> Yes. Given that, I am not sure it is worth the time, effort, and expense
> of converting to the Cleveland nose wheel.
Unless you damage a wheel in Backwoods Nebraska (its not the end of the
world, but your can see it from there) then its real nice to have a good ol
made in USA wheel on your bird. Also they are getting hard to find new
one's from China. Most of the original ones are pretty corroded under the
felt seals as this wheel is mostly magnesium.
Always Yakin,
Doug Sapp
>
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | possibly bogus W&B data (was: More W&B) |
At 04:29 PM 5/28/2002, you wrote:
>
>oops, I had a typo at the bottom it should read "Aircraft basic empty weight
>2078 CG 121.52
The numbers from Ernie's message (above and below) looked very familiar so
I went out to the airplane and pulled the aircraft weight document. Turns
out that, according to the documentation provided with my airplane, it
weighs 2078 lbs with a CG of 121.52". The weights, arms, and moments are
exactly the same as those posted by Ernie.
Anyone else who purchased an aircraft from Yakity Yaks on the West Coast,
please go check your aircraft W&B data. If your airplane also weighs 2078
lbs with a purported CG of 121.52", you probably need to reweigh your
aircraft. It seems to me that there is a strong chance that someone just
made copies of the same W&B data and put it on at least two and maybe more
aircraft.
BTW, the header on my sheet has my aircraft hull number and serial number
correct and the signature on the bottom, while illegible, appears to be an
original signature and not a copy. I suspect that whoever was putting the
airplanes together for Fred just used the same numbers for several aircraft.
And before Mike McCoy gets his knickers in a knot, I do not believe that
Mike would do such a thing or would be a party to fraudulent W&B data. I
also don't think that Fred would either. OTOH, it appears that at least
two aircraft were delivered by Yakity Yaks with the same W&B data so I
would suspect a subcontractor.
Mike, if I were you, I would offer to reweigh any aircraft that have the
duplicated W&B data.
Also, I suspect that the weight of my aircraft is greater than what the W&B
sheet shows which is probably why my climb tests showed the 285-powered
CJ6A to be less than stellar. Also, if my CG is well forward of the
forward CG limit, it may also answer why my CJ6A will not stay in a spin.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com>
>To:
>Subject: Yak-List: More W&B
>
>
> >
> > I've just received a W&B sheet on a neighbors CJ which reads as follows.
> >
> > Item or Position weight arm Moment
> >
> > Nose Wheel 580 57.0" 33060.0
> > Main Wheels 1498 146.5 219457.0
> >
> >
> > Datum 24" Forward of Properller Axial
> > MAC 65" cord 42" outboard of wing joint
> >
> > Max forward empty CG 121.5 " or 11% of MAC
> > "" "" takeoff CG 122.12" or 12.5% of MAC
> > Max rear CG 129.67" or 24.1% of MAC
> >
> >
> > aircraft basic empty weight
> > 2078.0 CG 12.52
> >
> > Now all of his radios have been removed and he has no added weight but
> > for a small scuba cylinder mounted on the right side fuselage about 1 ft
> > aft of the rear radio tray, it cant weigh more that 20 lbs full.
> >
> > I thought the CG range of the airplane was only about 4"..... here its
> > more than 8
> > As I understand, fuel afffects the CG on this aircraft very little, if
> > this is indeed true, then how can the max forward CG and the basic empty
> > CG be the same, wouldnt that put the plane forward of CG with a pilot up
> > front???
> >
> > Ernie
> >
> >
>
>
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Seat Cushion for the CJ |
In a message dated 5/28/02 8:20:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
rvfltd(at)televar.com writes:
Troops,
At first I thought these messages on survival stuff a little silly -- that is
until I remembered my hunting days in the great north woods of Maine and the
mountains of Colorado. Mine you, I was not a road hunter nor did I sit in a
stand. I was a stalker. I was very good at it. I walked a very long way
and dragged many a deer back. Every type of terrain here in the US, has its
particular hazards. Cold, wet, dry, hot, vertical or flat. Each can be a
challenge to any one and impossible to everyone with so much as sprained
ankle. Any survival school will tell you, your first point in survival is
attitude. Accept that something may happen, than prepare for it. I believe
our brother aviators up in the Big Dipper State (AK) are required by state
law to carry survival gear which includes a rifle. That being said, Doug has
a very good point about what we carry. It should depend somewhat on where
we're flying or about to fly. We need to think about this and have an
attitude adjustment.
Aside story. I was a search & rescue mission coordinator in CAP for a number
of years. I've found my share of the missing (I have no saves). I did a
little study on my own about the changes of a survivor walking out from a
crash site any place in the MA, RI, CT, and eastern NY area. With no
problems, a person could walk to a road in about 2 hours even in the most
remote areas. I based it on my hunting experiences. A short time later, 6
of my cadets (youngest 14) were sent out to help in a search for missing
elderly man. The local civil cops in charge, sent the "kids" into an area
they figured would "get them out of the way." Those six kids found the
gentleman less than an hour later. He wasn't lost but had become mired in a
mud hole and because his age, was to feeble to get out. He was less than 125
yards from houses in any direction.
Now one more story. One day as first officer on a trip between JFK and
Tokyo, (we monitored 121.5 on our #2 VHF at all times) 100nm west of ANC, I
heard on 121.5 "Does anyone read Aeronca N ****** ?" I answered and found
the guy had had a force landing 5 days before on a lake. (The Aeronca had
floats) He would watch the sky for contrails and give out a call. We
answered. I passed back his predicament to ANC. In a short talk with him, I
learn that his survival stuff and by his attitude, he was and would be OK.
Why? He told me "the fishing is great!"
>
>
> You might consider your water wings and your rubber ducky.
>
> Always Yakin,
> Doug
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ernie martinez" <ernie(at)gscinc.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Seat Cushion for the CJ
>
>
> >
> > I live in Fl, Doug. I keep sunscreen in my seats :)
> >
> > Ernie
> > On Monday, May 27, 2002, at 11:27 PM, Doug wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Drew,
> > > The seat cushions are a bit like ballast in a way, you can load in the
> > > lead
> > > or you can put something in its place that will do you some good, like
> > > a aux
> > > air tank, move the batt, etc. Consider loading your cushion with
> > > survival
> > > gear, any number of things could be loaded into it the seat pans,
> > > without
> > > sacrificing comfort. Come on gang lets have a show of hands, who
> > > carries
> > > even enough gear to survive a 2 day (minor injured) stint in the bush??
> > > .............hmmmmm, that's what I thought. Keeping warm is a big key
> > > to
> > > survival, food's good too, small 1 man tent, a throw away anti exposure
> > > suit's is smaller than a paper back book, use your imagination.
> > >
> > > Always Yakin,
> > > Doug Sapp
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Drew" <drew(at)allredstar.com>
> > > To:
> > > Subject: Yak-List: Seat Cushion for the CJ
> > >>
> > >> Folks,
> > >>
> > >> I need a couple of seat cushions for the CJ buckets, does anyone know
> > >> of
> > >> a distributor from whom I can order a set? thanks,
> > >>
> > >> Drew
> > >> Drew A. Blahnick
> > >> Red Stars Inc.
> > >> Cell 310-372-6328
> > >> Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
> > >>
> > >>
Jim Goolsby
cjpilot710(at)aol.com
386-467-3313 voice
386-467-3193 fax
386-569-7060 cell "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain
a little safety, deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"There is no "innocence" in war. All
collateral damage
is acceptable."
unk.
"With my shield, or on it"
Trojan Warriors BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Our Next Subject for Flaming - Auto Fuel and the |
CJ
At 06:57 PM 5/28/2002, you wrote:
>Are there any know ill effects burning auto fuel without Marvel's or
>lead or fake lead additives?
I have been running Betty on 87 octane Union 76 gas for much of the time I
have owned her. She gets 100LL on the road because that is all I can get
but the rest of the time it is mogas and the occasional tank of 80/87.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Our Next Subject for Flaming - Auto Fuel and the |
CJ
At 07:25 PM 5/28/2002, you wrote:
>
>This then begs the question........... Are Chinese and Russian engines
>manufactured with hardened valve seats? Does Chinese and Russian fuel
>contain lead or do they burn what is known as "white gas"? Do they use
>any additives in their fuel?
I was under the impression that 70 octane fuel used back in the olden days
was lead-free.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Yakity Yaks |
At 07:10 PM 5/28/2002, you wrote:
>
>
>Those of us who have spent anytime reading this list know full well the
>great admiration, respect and love that Brian and Mike McCoy have for each
>other ....
Lest anyone get me wrong, I happen to think that Mike is extremely
knowledgeable and a good instructor. I also think I got a good airplane
from Yakity Yaks.
I also think that things took place out here on the west coast in which
Mike had no participation or control. Regardless of my personal
relationship with Mike, I continue to recommend that a new CJ6A buyer talk
with Mike in his/her search for an aircraft.
>There is little doubt that the personality conflict between Brian, Mike and
>Fred has soured that relationship forever and I am not surprised that the
>service Brian experienced was quite different from what I experienced. Like
>Brian, I too am biased.
The "personality conflict" came after, not before. It came as a result of
how I was treated. But there is still a chance that Yakity Yaks might
correct the problems as they promised. But it was Fred who promised and
Fred isn't here to make good. And for some reason I just don't expect Mike
to make good strictly based on my word alone.
>By stating that I would fly with Mike McCoy anytime
>or anyplace, I'll let you guess which way I lean. I would, however, suggest
>to anyone considering buying a CJ-6A that you do call Mike as part of your
>due diligence.
I agree. I would also fly with Mike McCoy anytime or any place. Just
because he gets a bit carried away here in print doesn't mean he isn't a
top-notch pilot and capable instructor. I also think he is a decent and
honorable man. He and I just manage to rub each other the wrong way,
that's all.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Our Next Subject for Flaming - Auto Fuel and the CJ |
Mike;
By the way......if the Russians and Chinese do in fact use non-addative
fuels in engines without hardened valve seats, it could account for the
notoriously short TBO they suggest.
Here in the US, we use leaded fuels, harden our valve seats and
(usually) filter our oil. My suggestion here is that this combination of
lubricating fuels and multi-viscosity oils could account for the longer
TBO's we have on US made engines.
I think that using US fuels and oils can, and probly would, extend the
TBO of Russian and Chinese engines.
Frank
Chino
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Yak list <yaklist(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Yakity Yaks |
You guys..... team hug ?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: RE: Yakity Yaks
>
> At 07:10 PM 5/28/2002, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >Those of us who have spent anytime reading this list know full well the
> >great admiration, respect and love that Brian and Mike McCoy have for
each
> >other ....
>
> Lest anyone get me wrong, I happen to think that Mike is extremely
> knowledgeable and a good instructor. I also think I got a good airplane
> from Yakity Yaks.
>
> I also think that things took place out here on the west coast in which
> Mike had no participation or control. Regardless of my personal
> relationship with Mike, I continue to recommend that a new CJ6A buyer talk
> with Mike in his/her search for an aircraft.
>
> >There is little doubt that the personality conflict between Brian, Mike
and
> >Fred has soured that relationship forever and I am not surprised that the
> >service Brian experienced was quite different from what I experienced.
Like
> >Brian, I too am biased.
>
> The "personality conflict" came after, not before. It came as a result of
> how I was treated. But there is still a chance that Yakity Yaks might
> correct the problems as they promised. But it was Fred who promised and
> Fred isn't here to make good. And for some reason I just don't expect
Mike
> to make good strictly based on my word alone.
>
> >By stating that I would fly with Mike McCoy anytime
> >or anyplace, I'll let you guess which way I lean. I would, however,
suggest
> >to anyone considering buying a CJ-6A that you do call Mike as part of
your
> >due diligence.
>
> I agree. I would also fly with Mike McCoy anytime or any place. Just
> because he gets a bit carried away here in print doesn't mean he isn't a
> top-notch pilot and capable instructor. I also think he is a decent and
> honorable man. He and I just manage to rub each other the wrong way,
> that's all.
>
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Yak list <yaklist(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 600X6 Cleveland Wheel |
My 52 has a cessna 210 nose wheel which is great is this the same item ?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Bieberdorf" <rogerbyak(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: 600X6 Cleveland Wheel
>
>
> Does anyone want an original one owner, in good shape, CJ nose
wheel....got one, even with a tire installed left over from my conversion of
several years ago, that has been stored in "It;s a Dry Heat Arizona". But
please, if your response includes criticism for Commericialism; Lack of
Documentation, etc; Thanks, I would just as soon keep the wheel. RB
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Lloyd"
>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: 600X6 Cleveland Wheel
>
>
> >
> > At 04:23 PM 5/28/2002, you wrote:
> > >
> > >I understand that Desser tire now has a tire which will fit the stock
CJ
> > >wheel.
> >
> > Yes. Given that, I am not sure it is worth the time, effort, and expense
> > of converting to the Cleveland nose wheel.
>
> Unless you damage a wheel in Backwoods Nebraska (its not the end of the
> world, but your can see it from there) then its real nice to have a good
ol
> made in USA wheel on your bird. Also they are getting hard to find new
> one's from China. Most of the original ones are pretty corroded under the
> felt seals as this wheel is mostly magnesium.
>
> Always Yakin,
> Doug Sapp
> >
> >
> > Brian Lloyd
> > brian(at)lloyd.com
> > +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> > +1.360.838.9669 - fax
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike McCoy" <mike(at)aircraftsales.com> |
Brian,
IF the weight and balance data on your aircraft is incorrect, I can assure
you that Fred was not to blame. Fred was not an A & P, nor did he pretend
to be one. He certainly did not personally weigh the airplanes that were
assembled on the west coast and was most definitely counting on the mechanic
(IA) that he hired to do the job correctly. Is it possible that he was
ripped off? I don't know, but I would appreciate knowing who signed the
weight and balance forms that you are talking about. Either the name or
certificate number should be sufficient. Regardless, if there is a
question, I will be happy to re-weigh your airplane for you.
Nearly all Yakity Yaks airplanes for the past 3 years have been assembled in
Ohio. I personally oversee the assembly of these aircraft and I will say
with 100% certainty that each and every one was accurately weighed. In
fact, I have personally signed off some of the weight and balance forms.
(We are using the datum 30.28 inches forward of the MLG axle at the leading
edge of MAC).
In addition, every Yakity Yaks airplane that we assemble is subjected to our
exclusive 50 page checklist, during which each and every part of the
airplane is inspected by one of our three ex-military mechanics (IA's).
Then each and every part of the airplane is re-inspected by me (A & P) prior
to my test flying the airplane. Each mechanic that inspects a
part/component initials the checklist and is personally responsible for that
the part/component. After the airplane is assembled and inspected twice
with the 50 page checklist, I personally put the airplanes through a
comprehensive documented flight test program in which all systems are
checked and the entire flight envelope is explored (including VNE and all
aerobatics). Yakity Yaks guarantees that everything (except Chinese ADF,
radios, etc) works for the customer and we stand by our aircraft.
The bottom line is that our airplanes are out there flying safely every day
with very few mechanical problems. You will not find a Yakity Yaks
airplane that is chronically broken down. Many others certainly can not
make that claim!
Mike McCoy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Schrick <schrick(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Prop Seals for V530 propellers $45/set (Someone at Redstar |
needed
one) GESOCO running Summer special
Dear Redstar YAKers
Didn't someone have a need for V530 prop seals at Redstar? I saw that
GESOCO is running a summer special on V530 replacement seals and they
are cheaper then the other suppliers in USA (Summer special). You may
want to have one on the shelf just in case for this price. (Others run
$120 for seals). Good luck, here is the ad I pulled down from George
Coy's website last night.
Mark
George Coy's Ad:
GESOCO is running a summer special on the two seals for the V530
propellers. The kit comes with the two (new production seals - date
coded March 2002) and three of the safety tabs for attaching the
propeller is being offered for $45.00.
************************************************************
Mark Schrick
966 Wallace Drive
San Jose, CA 95120-1848
(408) 323-5150 Phone/Fax (408) 391-6664 (Cell)
schrick(at)pacbell.net
************************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
Mike,
If it helps any the A/P # on the W&B sheet I have is 2179436 dated
12-11-97. I cant read the signature.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike McCoy" <mike(at)aircraftsales.com>
Subject: Yak-List: W & B Data
>
> Brian,
>
> IF the weight and balance data on your aircraft is incorrect, I can assure
> you that Fred was not to blame. Fred was not an A & P, nor did he pretend
> to be one. He certainly did not personally weigh the airplanes that were
> assembled on the west coast and was most definitely counting on the
mechanic
> (IA) that he hired to do the job correctly. Is it possible that he was
> ripped off? I don't know, but I would appreciate knowing who signed the
> weight and balance forms that you are talking about. Either the name or
> certificate number should be sufficient. Regardless, if there is a
> question, I will be happy to re-weigh your airplane for you.
>
> Nearly all Yakity Yaks airplanes for the past 3 years have been assembled
in
> Ohio. I personally oversee the assembly of these aircraft and I will say
> with 100% certainty that each and every one was accurately weighed. In
> fact, I have personally signed off some of the weight and balance forms.
> (We are using the datum 30.28 inches forward of the MLG axle at the
leading
> edge of MAC).
>
> In addition, every Yakity Yaks airplane that we assemble is subjected to
our
> exclusive 50 page checklist, during which each and every part of the
> airplane is inspected by one of our three ex-military mechanics (IA's).
> Then each and every part of the airplane is re-inspected by me (A & P)
prior
> to my test flying the airplane. Each mechanic that inspects a
> part/component initials the checklist and is personally responsible for
that
> the part/component. After the airplane is assembled and inspected twice
> with the 50 page checklist, I personally put the airplanes through a
> comprehensive documented flight test program in which all systems are
> checked and the entire flight envelope is explored (including VNE and all
> aerobatics). Yakity Yaks guarantees that everything (except Chinese ADF,
> radios, etc) works for the customer and we stand by our aircraft.
>
> The bottom line is that our airplanes are out there flying safely every
day
> with very few mechanical problems. You will not find a Yakity Yaks
> airplane that is chronically broken down. Many others certainly can not
> make that claim!
>
> Mike McCoy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry W. Hancock" <radialpower(at)cox.net> |
Well, you can call it the Biscut....as a Memorial to my past woes. But
frankly, I have nothing left to fix, the plane is like new again.
> Doug said:
> My real reason for this posting is to first offer to assemble a first
> aid kit for the YPA
> gatherings. This kit could be purchased by the YPA (at a discounted
> price)
> and managed by someone they appoint, or it could remain my property, but
> would have to be shipped to and from the gatherings @ YPA's expense.
> Considering the weight involved (over 50 lbs. went to Red Star) shipping
> would get to be expensive after awhile. I am up for suggestions as to
> how
> to handle this and also as to what parts the kit should contain.
Doug, the cost is easily covered with a $2-5 per person event charge.
Kinda like the taxes on airline tickets...the only difference being our
money is actually used for the intended purpose.
Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
At 06:49 AM 5/29/2002, you wrote:
>
>Brian,
>
>IF the weight and balance data on your aircraft is incorrect, I can assure
>you that Fred was not to blame. Fred was not an A & P, nor did he pretend
>to be one. He certainly did not personally weigh the airplanes that were
>assembled on the west coast and was most definitely counting on the mechanic
>(IA) that he hired to do the job correctly. Is it possible that he was
>ripped off? I don't know, but I would appreciate knowing who signed the
>weight and balance forms that you are talking about.
Thank you for the reasonable response. I suspect that is exactly what
happened; that the A&P was cutting corners. Given the time frame, it could
have either been Ken Olinger (the signature on the W&B data is illegible)
or Leonard, the radio guy Fred had working for him. If the aircraft was
weighed by Ken before the airplane went up to Aurora then Leonard should
have done a new W&B after the radios, instruments, and paint were put
on. There isn't a second W&B doc showing changes from the previous W&B if
one was done by Ken prior to Betty going north for paint and radios.
>Either the name or certificate number should be sufficient.
Given the time frame, I suspect it is the same as the cert number that
Ernie posted. I will check later today or tomorrow morning and forward it
this evening or tomorrow. I am back from the airport today and didn't plan
to go back out there until tomorrow.
>Regardless, if there is a
>question, I will be happy to re-weigh your airplane for you.
Thank you. I appreciate you making the offer. I will reweigh the aircraft
myself as I have access to scales here. I would rather not fly the
aircraft again until I have known good W&B data.
>Nearly all Yakity Yaks airplanes for the past 3 years have been assembled in
>Ohio. I personally oversee the assembly of these aircraft and I will say
>with 100% certainty that each and every one was accurately weighed.
I don't doubt that for a moment. We may have our moments but I believe you
to be meticulous.
>In
>fact, I have personally signed off some of the weight and balance forms.
>(We are using the datum 30.28 inches forward of the MLG axle at the leading
>edge of MAC).
So you are using the leading edge of the MAC as your standard datum
plane? That seems quite reasonable. I prefer a SDP that is ahead of the
airplane so that all the arms and moments are positive since that helps
reduce arithmetic errors but the leading edge of the MAC works just fine too.
>In addition, every Yakity Yaks airplane that we assemble is subjected to our
>exclusive 50 page checklist, during which each and every part of the
>airplane is inspected by one of our three ex-military mechanics (IA's).
>Then each and every part of the airplane is re-inspected by me (A & P) prior
>to my test flying the airplane. Each mechanic that inspects a
>part/component initials the checklist and is personally responsible for that
>the part/component. After the airplane is assembled and inspected twice
>with the 50 page checklist, I personally put the airplanes through a
>comprehensive documented flight test program in which all systems are
>checked and the entire flight envelope is explored (including VNE and all
>aerobatics). Yakity Yaks guarantees that everything (except Chinese ADF,
>radios, etc) works for the customer and we stand by our aircraft.
>
>The bottom line is that our airplanes are out there flying safely every day
>with very few mechanical problems. You will not find a Yakity Yaks
>airplane that is chronically broken down. Many others certainly can not
>make that claim!
Betty has been extremely reliable. I have been very happy with the
aircraft. That is why I tell people they need to consider you in their
search for a CJ6A.
(And to those of you who bet that Mike and I could not have a civil
exchange, pay up. :
)
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walt Lannon" <lannon(at)look.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Our Next Subject for Flaming - Auto Fuel and the CJ |
Hi Mike;
Don't really know any of the answers to the fuel question but have some
reservations re auto gas. I don't use it in the Harvard (R1340) even though
there is an STC for it.
I had one customer using auto fuel in his 1340 who had serious valve
sticking problems. He was not using 25% 100LL as the I have been told the
STC requires.
The Specs. for the Housai sure enough say not less than 70 octane but there
are other considerations. How do the carb. diaphragms handle auto fuel,
particularly if there is any alchohol involved?
None of the CJ's I maintain use auto fuel and I won't be using it in my own
unless I find some credible information to support it.
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael DiMarco" <mgdimarco(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Our Next Subject for Flaming - Auto Fuel and the CJ
>
> Oh great Gurus of the Yak-List, I summon your knowledge of all things
> CJ and beg your indulgence and patience with my ignorance.
>
> Assume the auto fuel in question is free of alcohol.
>
> Assume that MTBE (while arguably is a form of alcohol) is safe in
> airplane engines per the EAA sponsored STC.
>
> Assume that the Housai 6A is truly capable of burning down to 70
> octane fuel.
>
> Are there any know ill effects burning auto fuel without Marvel's or
> lead or fake lead additives?
>
> Thanks,
> Mike and China Blue
>
> http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | brian olofsson <brian060901(at)yahoo.com> |
I hate to show my ignorance. I know the dangers of rear c.g... But, how important
is the forward c.g. limit. My 52 (radios removed) is slightly forward of
the forward c.g. limit when I'm solo. What I've noticed is that I have to pull
a little harder in loops/8's, spins are more predictable, (upright or inverted).
I haven't done a flat spin solo. Hammerhead seem to hesitate less @ the top
and I seem to pull less G's. With g.i.b. I at times surprise my self at how
little pull results in 5-6 g's. My concern of course is increased stress in the
tail but I cannot believe this is significant. Ok, folks tell me the errors
of my ways.(but don't tell the FAA) Thanks Brian
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Asleep at the switch |
| From: | "Barry W. Hancock" <radialpower(at)cox.net> |
OK, time for me to vent a little frustration on the group.
Recently, Doug Sapp offered a wonderful thing to the group...a "First
Aid Kit" for all YPA gatherings. Having been stranded on the ground
with a couple of problems in the past 2 years, I fully understand the
value of having parts on hand for the inevitable problems. We go to
these events to fly, not sit around and wait for parts to arrive while
everybody else is flying. When my compressor pins sheared at SnF, I
lost 2 days of flying waiting for parts to arrive. Had the First Aid
kit been there, I would have been flying in less than 24 hours. In
other words I would have been doing what I went there to do.
Things break at the most inopportune times. Just ask me, Brian Lloyd,
Roger Modglin, Craig Payne, Jim Goolsby, Don Andrews, Kirk Ihlenburg,
and others who have had the airplane they're flying frustrate the crap
out of them because some little part gives up the ghost, or something
needs adjusting they don't have the tools for because they're ON THE
ROAD.
What Doug is offering here is to spend hours of his time putting
together a care package for all of us to minimize our frustration and
maximize our enjoyment at these events. And he gets ZERO response? I'm
amazed. The expense would be minimal ($5 each, max?) and potential
benefit is 10 to 20 times that.
Guys, no one in this group supports our aircraft and our community more
than Doug. No one cares about the community more than Doug. No one
comes up with more good ideas or solves more problems than Doug. Yet
when he throws this good idea out there, you all are asleep at the
switch. What gives?
Needless to say, I'm a little disappointed.
Barry
PS This is not self serving... :)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walt Lannon" <lannon(at)look.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Yak-List: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames)
>
> I have examined the relevant pages of The Book (actually the CD-ROM) and
it
> is less than useful in its present form. Still, if you are masochistic
and
> mathematically inclined, you can probably turn it into something useful,
> which is what I will attempt to do in this message. I will probably come
> up with what Walt Lannon came up with but at least that way we will have
> two corroborating sources.
Brian;
Thanks (I think);
I find the information very useful even though it's presented in a rather
goofy format. That one drawing gives virtually everthing there is to know
about the CG location. Actually far more than is needed to do a weight and
balance. Maybe that's the problem.
Walt
> Since the book gives distances relative to the front of the MAC I will use
> that as my standard datum plane for the initial calculations. After that
I
> will translate to the standard datum plane I was using in my previous
> message which is 24" ahead of the prop axial plane.
How do you drop a plumb bob from the prop. axial plane?
> From diagram 1.3 we find:
>
> The MAC is 1.747M (68.78") wide (long?).
>
> The main gear is located 769mm (30.27") aft of a vertical plane defined by
> the front of the MAC.
>
> The CG moves aft by 0.7% when the gear is retracted but since they don't
specify a weight and CG at which this happens, there is no way to determine
Happens at any weight and/or CG whenever the gear is retracted.
> the actual arm and moment change. From the discussion I suspect this is
at
> a sample take-off weight of 1400 Kg and a CG of 23.4% of MAC. After
> looking at the diagram, do others agree? If so, I can calculate the arm
> and moment change.
You are of necessity doing the W&B with the gear down. After getting all
your weights and the arms you have marked on the floor you can determine the
empty wt.and CG. You don't care where the gear UP empty CG is.
Now, you will want to produce a loading guide. Calculate the Most Forward
CG. - Full oil, Min.fuel, Pilot, No pass., no baggage. This is gear down
because the CG moves forward when the gear is extended.
Do the Most Rearward numbers - Min. oil, everthing else full. Your final
entry will show the weight, arm and moment GEAR DOWN. Now you make the real
final entry - Landing Gear UP - Weight is the same. Arm is increased by 0.48
inches (this is your most rearward CG)The moment is 0.48W if you really want
to know.
> Limiting forward CG is 17% of MAC or 11.7" (17% * 68.78") aft of the front
> of MAC.
>
> Limiting aft CG is 24.1% of MAC or 16.57" (24.1% * 68.78") aft of the
front
> of the MAC.
>
> This gives a CG range of 4.9"
>
> So far I am tracking 100% with what Walt sent. Now let's convert to the
> standard datum plane (SDP) 24" ahead of the propeller axial plane.
>
> The main gear is 146.5" aft of the SDP. The front of the MAC is 30.27"
> forward of the gear. The CG ranges from 11.7" to 16.57" aft of the front
> of the MAC. Therefore:
>
> Front of MAC = 116.23"
> Forward CG = 127.93" (front of MAC + 11.7")
> Aft CG = 132.8" (front of MAC + 16.57")
>
> Here are the stations from my W&B sheet again. Given that there were
> errors in the CG range there may be errors in the locations of the
stations
> also so it is probably worthwhile to verify the stations if possible.
>
> prop 24"
> engine 45"
> nosewheel 57"
> accessory section 60"
> oil 69"
> front of MAC 116.23"
> front seat 123"
> jack point 129"
> front spar 131.5 "
> main wheel 146.5"
> fuel 149"
> rear seat 174"
> avionics rack
> (behind rear seat) 188"
> Battery box 199"
> ADF rack 214"
> tail skid 338"
>
> Forward CG limit: 127.93"
> Aft CG limit: 132.80"
>
> Comments?
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | brian olofsson <brian060901(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Asleep at the switch |
I think a first aid kit would be a great idea. Let me know where to send my $5
Brian
OK, time for me to vent a little frustration on the group.
Recently, Doug Sapp offered a wonderful thing to the group...a "First
Aid Kit" for all YPA gatherings. Having been stranded on the ground
with a couple of problems in the past 2 years, I fully understand the
value of having parts on hand for the inevitable problems. We go to
these events to fly, not sit around and wait for parts to arrive while
everybody else is flying. When my compressor pins sheared at SnF, I
lost 2 days of flying waiting for parts to arrive. Had the First Aid
kit been there, I would have been flying in less than 24 hours. In
other words I would have been doing what I went there to do.
Things break at the most inopportune times. Just ask me, Brian Lloyd,
Roger Modglin, Craig Payne, Jim Goolsby, Don Andrews, Kirk Ihlenburg,
and others who have had the airplane they're flying frustrate the crap
out of them because some little part gives up the ghost, or something
needs adjusting they don't have the tools for because they're ON THE
ROAD.
What Doug is offering here is to spend hours of his time putting
together a care package for all of us to minimize our frustration and
maximize our enjoyment at these events. And he gets ZERO response? I'm
amazed. The expense would be minimal ($5 each, max?) and potential
benefit is 10 to 20 times that.
Guys, no one in this group supports our aircraft and our community more
than Doug. No one cares about the community more than Doug. No one
comes up with more good ideas or solves more problems than Doug. Yet
when he throws this good idea out there, you all are asleep at the
switch. What gives?
Needless to say, I'm a little disappointed.
Barry
PS This is not self serving... :)
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russ Dycus" <dycusr(at)hotmail.com> |
Gents, I put together a survival pack (1 man) that fits into a leg
pocket.
Included
Blanket
Whistle
Signaling mirror
Zenon strobe
Food bars
Waterproof matches
The other leg pcoket holds a First Aid kit
Russ Dycus
(847)287-1287
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Asleep at the switch |
I thought I had showed a vote for it. I'll vote once more.
A few things I'd like see in that kit.
1. A compressor with it's specialized tools + 12 penny nail.
2. Overhaul kit for check valves.
3. A set of main gear actuator seals.
4. A set of generator brushes.
5. 1/2 set of plugs
6. Carburetor diaphragm.
7. 1/2 set of Rocker box cover O rings.
8. An overhaul/repair kit for the emergency shuttle valves.
9. Parts to overhaul/repair a mag.
10. Replacement drain pulgs for lower intake tubes.
I'm sure you guys/gals out there can do better than me. I'd be happy to pay
a service charge at our events to have some stuff like this handy.
Jim Goolsby
cjpilot710(at)aol.com
386-467-3313 voice
386-467-3193 fax
386-569-7060 cell "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain
a little safety, deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"There is no "innocence" in war. All
collateral damage
is acceptable."
unk.
"With my shield, or on it"
Trojan Warriors BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Calloway" <TCalloway(at)datatechnique.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Asleep at the switch |
Yak 2's in. Just fell asleep I guess. Thanks Doug, I'll contribute and
equal share.
I think Walt knows where we can get a good price on the big ass Russian
Plane.
Thanks for the wake-up call Barry.
tc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Payne <cpayne(at)mc.net> |
| Subject: | Be's sleep'n NOT |
Lighten up Grasshopper; I got $5 for the kitty. Geez, I'll spend that on
the 1st Tsing Tao. My head's still spinning from all those W&B numbers
and the Lloyd V. McCoy mano y mano.
Craig Payne
Barry W. Hancock wrote:
>
>
> OK, time for me to vent a little frustration on the group.
>
> Recently, Doug Sapp offered a wonderful thing to the group...a "First
> Aid Kit" for all YPA gatherings. Having been stranded on the ground
> with a couple of problems in the past 2 years, I fully understand the
> value of having parts on hand for the inevitable problems. We go to
> these events to fly, not sit around and wait for parts to arrive while
> everybody else is flying. When my compressor pins sheared at SnF, I
> lost 2 days of flying waiting for parts to arrive. Had the First Aid
> kit been there, I would have been flying in less than 24 hours. In
> other words I would have been doing what I went there to do.
>
> Things break at the most inopportune times. Just ask me, Brian Lloyd,
> Roger Modglin, Craig Payne, Jim Goolsby, Don Andrews, Kirk Ihlenburg,
> and others who have had the airplane they're flying frustrate the crap
> out of them because some little part gives up the ghost, or something
> needs adjusting they don't have the tools for because they're ON THE
> ROAD.
>
> What Doug is offering here is to spend hours of his time putting
> together a care package for all of us to minimize our frustration and
> maximize our enjoyment at these events. And he gets ZERO response? I'm
> amazed. The expense would be minimal ($5 each, max?) and potential
> benefit is 10 to 20 times that.
>
> Guys, no one in this group supports our aircraft and our community more
> than Doug. No one cares about the community more than Doug. No one
> comes up with more good ideas or solves more problems than Doug. Yet
> when he throws this good idea out there, you all are asleep at the
> switch. What gives?
>
> Needless to say, I'm a little disappointed.
>
> Barry
>
> PS This is not self serving... :)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Payne <cpayne(at)mc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Survival Kit |
Russ,
Them food bars will get a big fellow like you about 1/2 day. Try my
list:
First Aid kit
Bug spray
Flashlight
Space blanket/ground cloth and distress marker
Spare batteries for the flashlight and ELT
Handheld radio
TP
Water bottles (always)
2 cans of beer
Everything I used to carry when I was one of Uncle Sams Misguided
Children. Not much difference...I'm still behind an M-14 but I lost my
K-bar.
Craig "Travel'n lite" Payne
Russ Dycus wrote:
>
> Gents, I put together a survival pack (1 man) that fits into a leg
> pocket.
>
> Included
> Blanket
> Whistle
> Signaling mirror
> Zenon strobe
> Food bars
> Waterproof matches
>
> The other leg pcoket holds a First Aid kit
>
> Russ Dycus
> (847)287-1287
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
At 06:14 PM 5/29/2002, you wrote:
>Thanks (I think);
You're welcome, I'm sure.
>I find the information very useful even though it's presented in a rather
>goofy format. That one drawing gives virtually everthing there is to know
>about the CG location. Actually far more than is needed to do a weight and
>balance. Maybe that's the problem.
Yes, it is a bit rococo.
>Walt
> > Since the book gives distances relative to the front of the MAC I will use
> > that as my standard datum plane for the initial calculations. After that
>I
> > will translate to the standard datum plane I was using in my previous
> > message which is 24" ahead of the prop axial plane.
>
>How do you drop a plumb bob from the prop. axial plane?
With a prop axe? Actually it seems to me to be pretty straight forward
since that would be from the middle of the prop hub.
> > From diagram 1.3 we find:
> >
> > The MAC is 1.747M (68.78") wide (long?).
> >
> > The main gear is located 769mm (30.27") aft of a vertical plane defined by
> > the front of the MAC.
> >
> > The CG moves aft by 0.7% when the gear is retracted but since they don't
> > specify a weight and CG at which this happens, there is no way to determine
>
>Happens at any weight and/or CG whenever the gear is retracted.
Nope. The arm, mass, and moment of the gear change is constant. The arm
(CG), mass, and moment of the aircraft is not. If the aircraft is lightly
loaded the moment change for the gear retraction will be proportionally
more of the total mass and moment of the aircraft. Therefore the CG will
change more if the aircraft is lightly loaded as opposed to operating at
max gross weight. Likewise if the aircraft is at aft CG the effective arm
change of the gear retraction will be a greater proportion.
If you don't believe me, make up a moment change for the gear and apply it
to the CG calculation for the aircraft at max and min gross weight to see
what happens.
> > the actual arm and moment change. From the discussion I suspect this is at
> > a sample take-off weight of 1400 Kg and a CG of 23.4% of MAC. After
> > looking at the diagram, do others agree? If so, I can calculate the arm
> > and moment change.
>
>You are of necessity doing the W&B with the gear down. After getting all
>your weights and the arms you have marked on the floor you can determine the
>empty wt.and CG. You don't care where the gear UP empty CG is.
>
>Now, you will want to produce a loading guide. Calculate the Most Forward
>CG. - Full oil, Min.fuel, Pilot, No pass., no baggage. This is gear down
>because the CG moves forward when the gear is extended.
>
>Do the Most Rearward numbers - Min. oil, everthing else full. Your final
>entry will show the weight, arm and moment GEAR DOWN. Now you make the real
>final entry - Landing Gear UP - Weight is the same. Arm is increased by 0.48
>inches (this is your most rearward CG)The moment is 0.48W if you really want
>to know.
The mass of the gear remains the same with retraction. The arm changes by
a fixed amount. Therefore the moment change due to gear retract is a
constant, not a proportion based on aircraft mass and moment. The formula
for the CG change is:
mg + ma
CG = -------
Ma
mg: moment due to gear change
ma: total moment of aircraft
Ma: total mass of aircraft
If we do this calculation with the aircraft nearly empty mg will be a
larger proportion of final value of CG than it will if ma and Ma are for an
aircraft at max gross weight. Therefore CG will change more due to gear
retraction if the aircraft is lightly loaded than if the aircraft is fully
loaded.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim & Alice" <alikatz(at)mbay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Asleep at the switch |
Doug,
You can count us in on the First Aid Kit. It really is a great idea.
Jim Selby, Jr
----- Original Message -----
From: brian olofsson <brian060901(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Asleep at the switch
>
>
> I think a first aid kit would be a great idea. Let me know where to send
my $5 Brian
> "Barry W. Hancock" wrote: --> Yak-List message
posted by: "Barry W. Hancock"
>
> OK, time for me to vent a little frustration on the group.
>
> Recently, Doug Sapp offered a wonderful thing to the group...a "First
> Aid Kit" for all YPA gatherings. Having been stranded on the ground
> with a couple of problems in the past 2 years, I fully understand the
> value of having parts on hand for the inevitable problems. We go to
> these events to fly, not sit around and wait for parts to arrive while
> everybody else is flying. When my compressor pins sheared at SnF, I
> lost 2 days of flying waiting for parts to arrive. Had the First Aid
> kit been there, I would have been flying in less than 24 hours. In
> other words I would have been doing what I went there to do.
>
> Things break at the most inopportune times. Just ask me, Brian Lloyd,
> Roger Modglin, Craig Payne, Jim Goolsby, Don Andrews, Kirk Ihlenburg,
> and others who have had the airplane they're flying frustrate the crap
> out of them because some little part gives up the ghost, or something
> needs adjusting they don't have the tools for because they're ON THE
> ROAD.
>
> What Doug is offering here is to spend hours of his time putting
> together a care package for all of us to minimize our frustration and
> maximize our enjoyment at these events. And he gets ZERO response? I'm
> amazed. The expense would be minimal ($5 each, max?) and potential
> benefit is 10 to 20 times that.
>
> Guys, no one in this group supports our aircraft and our community more
> than Doug. No one cares about the community more than Doug. No one
> comes up with more good ideas or solves more problems than Doug. Yet
> when he throws this good idea out there, you all are asleep at the
> switch. What gives?
>
> Needless to say, I'm a little disappointed.
>
> Barry
>
> PS This is not self serving... :)
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry W. Hancock" <radialpower(at)cox.net> |
Well, I actually meant to do this a couple weeks ago, but it's time to
throw up the white flag.
About a month ago, a Yak-3U (as seen on the cover of EAA's Warbird
magazine), took a header on landing. The pilot, fairly new to the
airplane, got on the breaks a little hard during roll out behind an FM2
and caught the prop....well, OK, it tore the nose bowl off, the nose
case off, hosed the cowl, and created various other shrapnel damages.
The owner (different guy), an aquaintence of mine, bought me off. He
told me if I were to allow Dave (the mech putting my project together -
he also built this Yak-3U) to get his airplane back flying for the Chino
Airshow, he'd give me a full hour flight in the Yak - enough to get to
the desert for some WFO throttle flying. With the R-2000, this thing is
easily faster than a stock P-51(approx. same horsepower but 2000 lbs.
lighter!) and has a quicker roll rate. It took me 2 seconds to decide.
So now I am out of the running for the "Project Pool" but behind more
horses than 3 M14P's combined. This definitely takes the sting out of
the "I told you so's" that are sure to follow.
As for the project, well Vladimir is coming for the first engine runs in
2 weeks, interior is nearly complete, and the FLIR pod mount engineering
is almost done. Still trying to figure out how to mount the AIM-9's and
where to put the hard points for the watermelons.
So now it's either Jim, Brian, Terry, or Doug for a fist full of cash
(if you use one's), and bragging rights as the Yak Grand Swami.
Barry (No, Craig, I haven't forgotten you) Hancock
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Asleep at the switch |
Guys:
I completely agree that creating and maintaining a "first-aid" kit is a great
idea. Doug Sapp is incredibly helpful and a great guy (despite his plebeian
tastes vis a vis limerick verse) as is Jim Selby.
Just tell me where to send the cash.
John Zecherle
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walt Lannon" <lannon(at)look.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames)
>
> At 06:14 PM 5/29/2002, you wrote:
> >Thanks (I think);
>
> You're welcome, I'm sure.
>
> >I find the information very useful even though it's presented in a rather
> >goofy format. That one drawing gives virtually everthing there is to know
> >about the CG location. Actually far more than is needed to do a weight
and
> >balance. Maybe that's the problem.
>
> Yes, it is a bit rococo.
>
> >Walt
> > > Since the book gives distances relative to the front of the MAC I will
use
> > > that as my standard datum plane for the initial calculations. After
that
> >I
> > > will translate to the standard datum plane I was using in my previous
> > > message which is 24" ahead of the prop axial plane.
> >
> >How do you drop a plumb bob from the prop. axial plane?
>
> With a prop axe? Actually it seems to me to be pretty straight forward
> since that would be from the middle of the prop hub.
>
>
> > > From diagram 1.3 we find:
> > >
> > > The MAC is 1.747M (68.78") wide (long?).
> > >
> > > The main gear is located 769mm (30.27") aft of a vertical plane
defined by
> > > the front of the MAC.
> > >
> > > The CG moves aft by 0.7% when the gear is retracted but since they
don't
> > > specify a weight and CG at which this happens, there is no way to
determine
> >
> >Happens at any weight and/or CG whenever the gear is retracted.
>
> Nope. The arm, mass, and moment of the gear change is constant. The arm
> (CG), mass, and moment of the aircraft is not. If the aircraft is lightly
> loaded the moment change for the gear retraction will be proportionally
> more of the total mass and moment of the aircraft. Therefore the CG will
> change more if the aircraft is lightly loaded as opposed to operating at
> max gross weight. Likewise if the aircraft is at aft CG the effective arm
> change of the gear retraction will be a greater proportion.
>
> If you don't believe me, make up a moment change for the gear and apply it
> to the CG calculation for the aircraft at max and min gross weight to see
> what happens.
Brian;
No need; You are absolutely correct but it does not matter. We are
concerned only that the effect of gear retraction does not move the CG
beyond the Aft Limit.
We determine that using the most rearward loading condition. The effect at
reduced weights will be slightly different but who cares; the aft limit
cannot possibly be exceeded at lower weights if we have done the most
rearward correctly.
The designer has elected to give us retraction effect on CG in dimensional
units rather than a moment. This would have been determined at the weight
and loading condition where gear retraction would have the most adverse
effect. I think he has given all we require.
Walt
> > > the actual arm and moment change. From the discussion I suspect this
is at
> > > a sample take-off weight of 1400 Kg and a CG of 23.4% of MAC. After
> > > looking at the diagram, do others agree? If so, I can calculate the
arm
> > > and moment change.
> >
> >You are of necessity doing the W&B with the gear down. After getting all
> >your weights and the arms you have marked on the floor you can determine
the
> >empty wt.and CG. You don't care where the gear UP empty CG is.
> >
> >Now, you will want to produce a loading guide. Calculate the Most Forward
> >CG. - Full oil, Min.fuel, Pilot, No pass., no baggage. This is gear down
> >because the CG moves forward when the gear is extended.
> >
> >Do the Most Rearward numbers - Min. oil, everthing else full. Your final
> >entry will show the weight, arm and moment GEAR DOWN. Now you make the
real
> >final entry - Landing Gear UP - Weight is the same. Arm is increased by
0.48
> >inches (this is your most rearward CG)The moment is 0.48W if you really
want
> >to know.
>
> The mass of the gear remains the same with retraction. The arm changes by
> a fixed amount. Therefore the moment change due to gear retract is a
> constant, not a proportion based on aircraft mass and moment. The formula
> for the CG change is:
>
> mg + ma
> CG = -------
> Ma
>
> mg: moment due to gear change
> ma: total moment of aircraft
> Ma: total mass of aircraft
>
> If we do this calculation with the aircraft nearly empty mg will be a
> larger proportion of final value of CG than it will if ma and Ma are for
an
> aircraft at max gross weight. Therefore CG will change more due to gear
> retraction if the aircraft is lightly loaded than if the aircraft is fully
> loaded.
>
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
At 10:06 PM 5/29/2002, you wrote:
> > If you don't believe me, make up a moment change for the gear and apply it
> > to the CG calculation for the aircraft at max and min gross weight to see
> > what happens.
>
>Brian;
>No need; You are absolutely correct but it does not matter. We are
>concerned only that the effect of gear retraction does not move the CG
>beyond the Aft Limit.
>We determine that using the most rearward loading condition. The effect at
>reduced weights will be slightly different but who cares; the aft limit
>cannot possibly be exceeded at lower weights if we have done the most
>rearward correctly.
That is all well and good but I have a W&B program that I carry with me in
my Palm Pilot that understands moment change with gear retraction. I
haven't figured out how to tell it to just move the CG aft by so many
inches with gear retraction since it is rather literal.
>The designer has elected to give us retraction effect on CG in dimensional
>units rather than a moment.
Oh, I understand what I am seeing in the document but that doesn't really
help when I want to do it right. If we know the conditions that they
chose, and that is why I asked if others thought that it was the worst-case
aft CG scenario, which is what I think you are implying, then I can turn
the CG change into a change in moment and do it right at no extra cost. So
humor me.
>This would have been determined at the weight
>and loading condition where gear retraction would have the most adverse
>effect. I think he has given all we require.
Call me anal retentive but it really bugs me when my checkbook doesn't
balance. Knowing that there is enough money in there to keep me from
bouncing checks is fine but I still want the damned thing to balance. Same
thing here. I want the numbers to all work out right.
And I am also interested in finding out how my airplane will fly if I
finally get the W&B right.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wes Warner <wes(at)lppcs.com> |
| Subject: | Used MT prop wanted |
Does anyone happen to have a used MT that they want to sell?
Thanks,
Wes
________________________________________________________________________________
Forgotten me!! Hey, what about that $20 I put up on the bet?? And the
Tsing Tao?? Looks like Dinner AND Brews to me.
Craig "No Grand Swami" Payne
Well, I actually meant to do this a couple weeks ago, but it's time to
throw up the white flag.
......
So now it's either Jim, Brian, Terry, or Doug for a fist full of cash
(if you use one's), and bragging rights as the Yak Grand Swami.
Barry (No, Craig, I haven't forgotten you) Hancock
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | First aid box (again) |
Listers and lurkers,
The options are:
1. I retain ownership of the parts, and bill YPA to ship them back and forth
to someone that they appoint to watch over the parts. In this scenario the
unfortunate CJ driver would sign for the part and I would bill him later
after the box was again returned to me.
2. I bill YPA for the parts, @ a 15% discount off my list price. This will
give them a small return for their money, and the box is their
responsibility to do with as they wish. I like this method best as I
envision many problems in keeping track of things, shipping back and forth,
insurance, etc, etc. Also, In the 1st scenario, I have both my parts and
money tied up, wherein the 2nd I at least have my investment back and can
renew my stock with those funds. As Barry has pointed out, maybe the
attendee's could pay for the parts via a slight increase in entry fees.
Depending on the total value of the list this may or may not be enough to
completely pay for the parts. All this would of course require the
blessings of the YPA board. Mike, what's your opinion on this? I am open
to any and all suggestions.
If anyone wants to help in the making up of the list please e-mail me off
list. I will post the entire "semi final" list of parts on Monday.
Hopefully I will have all the required parts/tools in stock. Engine tools
are already there as Keith @ Avcraft has my set.
Maybe George Coy would put together a Yak 52 box. Mark Schrick, could you
check that out??
I do need nod from the YPA board as to rather they want to own the parts or
to stand good for the shipping back and forth. Boxes (2) will weigh about
60-70 lbs. total if we have the same mix that went to Red Star.
Now for the bad news (for me), I will not be able to be at the Nebraska
gathering. We are in the middle of the driest spring in a long time and the
growing / blooming time table has moved up accordingly. It looks like I'll
be deep in harvest during the time when you guys are having fun. So when
you are drinking that first cup of joe @ 7 AM, just consider that I already
have 3 hours in am just about to break for lunch. So, Have a safe gathering
and give me a call if the part you need is not in the box.
I look forward to getting all your suggestions as to what should be in the
box. I have checked and found that I have no stock of flight line or prop
wash, so don't bother asking :>)
Always Yakin,
Doug (wish I could be there,but I'm stuck here pickin )Sapp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Be's sleep'n NOT |
Hey!!!
Grasshopper is my handle!
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Payne" <cpayne(at)mc.net>
Subject: Yak-List: Be's sleep'n NOT
>
> Lighten up Grasshopper; I got $5 for the kitty. Geez, I'll spend that on
> the 1st Tsing Tao. My head's still spinning from all those W&B numbers
> and the Lloyd V. McCoy mano y mano.
>
> Craig Payne
>
> Barry W. Hancock wrote:
> >
> >
> > OK, time for me to vent a little frustration on the group.
> >
> > Recently, Doug Sapp offered a wonderful thing to the group...a "First
> > Aid Kit" for all YPA gatherings. Having been stranded on the ground
> > with a couple of problems in the past 2 years, I fully understand the
> > value of having parts on hand for the inevitable problems. We go to
> > these events to fly, not sit around and wait for parts to arrive while
> > everybody else is flying. When my compressor pins sheared at SnF, I
> > lost 2 days of flying waiting for parts to arrive. Had the First Aid
> > kit been there, I would have been flying in less than 24 hours. In
> > other words I would have been doing what I went there to do.
> >
> > Things break at the most inopportune times. Just ask me, Brian Lloyd,
> > Roger Modglin, Craig Payne, Jim Goolsby, Don Andrews, Kirk Ihlenburg,
> > and others who have had the airplane they're flying frustrate the crap
> > out of them because some little part gives up the ghost, or something
> > needs adjusting they don't have the tools for because they're ON THE
> > ROAD.
> >
> > What Doug is offering here is to spend hours of his time putting
> > together a care package for all of us to minimize our frustration and
> > maximize our enjoyment at these events. And he gets ZERO response? I'm
> > amazed. The expense would be minimal ($5 each, max?) and potential
> > benefit is 10 to 20 times that.
> >
> > Guys, no one in this group supports our aircraft and our community more
> > than Doug. No one cares about the community more than Doug. No one
> > comes up with more good ideas or solves more problems than Doug. Yet
> > when he throws this good idea out there, you all are asleep at the
> > switch. What gives?
> >
> > Needless to say, I'm a little disappointed.
> >
> > Barry
> >
> > PS This is not self serving... :)
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
Brian,
I really appreciate all the aeronautical engineering mumbo jumbo, but I,m
seeing crosseyed right about now. I just removed all the radios yesterday,
which included the big ADF and the rear shelf with the associated
receiver,transmitter, and Inverter (I think). If I put 25 lbs in the tail,
should I be OK to fly till I get weighed next week?????
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames)
>
> At 06:14 PM 5/29/2002, you wrote:
> >Thanks (I think);
>
> You're welcome, I'm sure.
>
> >I find the information very useful even though it's presented in a rather
> >goofy format. That one drawing gives virtually everthing there is to know
> >about the CG location. Actually far more than is needed to do a weight
and
> >balance. Maybe that's the problem.
>
> Yes, it is a bit rococo.
>
> >Walt
> > > Since the book gives distances relative to the front of the MAC I will
use
> > > that as my standard datum plane for the initial calculations. After
that
> >I
> > > will translate to the standard datum plane I was using in my previous
> > > message which is 24" ahead of the prop axial plane.
> >
> >How do you drop a plumb bob from the prop. axial plane?
>
> With a prop axe? Actually it seems to me to be pretty straight forward
> since that would be from the middle of the prop hub.
>
>
> > > From diagram 1.3 we find:
> > >
> > > The MAC is 1.747M (68.78") wide (long?).
> > >
> > > The main gear is located 769mm (30.27") aft of a vertical plane
defined by
> > > the front of the MAC.
> > >
> > > The CG moves aft by 0.7% when the gear is retracted but since they
don't
> > > specify a weight and CG at which this happens, there is no way to
determine
> >
> >Happens at any weight and/or CG whenever the gear is retracted.
>
> Nope. The arm, mass, and moment of the gear change is constant. The arm
> (CG), mass, and moment of the aircraft is not. If the aircraft is lightly
> loaded the moment change for the gear retraction will be proportionally
> more of the total mass and moment of the aircraft. Therefore the CG will
> change more if the aircraft is lightly loaded as opposed to operating at
> max gross weight. Likewise if the aircraft is at aft CG the effective arm
> change of the gear retraction will be a greater proportion.
>
> If you don't believe me, make up a moment change for the gear and apply it
> to the CG calculation for the aircraft at max and min gross weight to see
> what happens.
>
> > > the actual arm and moment change. From the discussion I suspect this
is at
> > > a sample take-off weight of 1400 Kg and a CG of 23.4% of MAC. After
> > > looking at the diagram, do others agree? If so, I can calculate the
arm
> > > and moment change.
> >
> >You are of necessity doing the W&B with the gear down. After getting all
> >your weights and the arms you have marked on the floor you can determine
the
> >empty wt.and CG. You don't care where the gear UP empty CG is.
> >
> >Now, you will want to produce a loading guide. Calculate the Most Forward
> >CG. - Full oil, Min.fuel, Pilot, No pass., no baggage. This is gear down
> >because the CG moves forward when the gear is extended.
> >
> >Do the Most Rearward numbers - Min. oil, everthing else full. Your final
> >entry will show the weight, arm and moment GEAR DOWN. Now you make the
real
> >final entry - Landing Gear UP - Weight is the same. Arm is increased by
0.48
> >inches (this is your most rearward CG)The moment is 0.48W if you really
want
> >to know.
>
> The mass of the gear remains the same with retraction. The arm changes by
> a fixed amount. Therefore the moment change due to gear retract is a
> constant, not a proportion based on aircraft mass and moment. The formula
> for the CG change is:
>
> mg + ma
> CG = -------
> Ma
>
> mg: moment due to gear change
> ma: total moment of aircraft
> Ma: total mass of aircraft
>
> If we do this calculation with the aircraft nearly empty mg will be a
> larger proportion of final value of CG than it will if ma and Ma are for
an
> aircraft at max gross weight. Therefore CG will change more due to gear
> retraction if the aircraft is lightly loaded than if the aircraft is fully
> loaded.
>
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry W. Hancock" <radialpower(at)cox.net> |
Got this off the Aero Commander Chat list...
On some air bases, the military is on one side of the field and
civilian aircraft use the other side of the field, with the control
tower in the middle. One day, on just such a field, the tower
received a call from an aircraft asking, "What time is it?"
The tower responded, "Who is calling?"
The aircraft replied, "What difference does it make?"
The tower replied, "It makes a lot of difference. If you
are a commercial airlines flight, it is 3 o'clock. If you
are an Air Force aircraft, it is 1500 hours. If you are a
Navy aircraft, it is 6 bells. If you are an Army aircraft,
the big hand is on the 12 and the little hand is on the 3.
If you are a Marine Corps aircraft, it's Thursday afternoon.
If you are in the National Guard, it's still a couple of
hours until quitting time."
Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
Am trying to scare up a metal fuel primer line for my M14P (Yak 50
application). It is the line that mounts to the intake pipe on the upper
left side of engine and snakes its way to the case fitting on the right
side. Mine broke about an inch from the engine case fitting.
Anyone have an old M14P sitting around that has this line on it and is
available for sale? I can email a photo of the broken line if need be.
Regards,
Francis Butler
Yak 50
(701) 298-1758 direct
(701) 476-3208 fax
francis_butler@butler-machinery.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Asleep at the switch |
----- Original Message -----
From: <YakL1(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Asleep at the switch
> Doug Sapp is incredibly helpful and a great guy (despite his plebeian
> tastes vis a vis limerick verse) as is Jim Selby.
"plebeian" weren't they a small fighter used by the French? Geeze guys!
cut me some slack!
Thanks for your kind words (those above, not your "lamericks") :>)
Always Yakin,
Doug
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Asleep at the switch |
Doug:
No...I think the French used a fighter called "Enuresis"...
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hal Morley" <yakjock(at)msn.com> |
I'd like to thank the folks who have shared the contents of their
survival pacs. I'll be adding to mine.
The most useful piece of equipment one can have is one of the new
generation three-frequency ELTs. These units provide an immediate link
between your GPS and a satellite and can be triggered before you land.
SAR groups receive immediate notification of your position within about
100 meters. On the other hand, it can take 8-10 HOURS to get a Doppler
"fix" on a current 121.5 ELT, and then the SAR groups have about a 20 KM
RADIUS area to search (have you ever watched someone try to find one of
these ELTs going off at an airport? They can be right next to it and
not know for sure). Short moral: if you're using an old style ELT carry
lots of groceries and don't expect anyone to be around for a long time -
if ever.
Artex has just come out with a lower priced three frequency unit for
general aviation. You can get information at artex.net .
I'm in for Doug's Hancock Special.
Hal (I want someone coming NOW) Morley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Calloway" <TCalloway(at)datatechnique.com> |
>>Hal (I want someone coming NOW) Morley
I'll do you one better. We're waiting for you to get lost Hal. :<)
I just think you've seen CAP searchers from the left coast. If you
find our guys walking around an airport, they won't be long in finding
and ELT going off. Our guys are good and I challenge you on that.
Terry (CAP Captain, Former Squadron Commander) Calloway
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | brian olofsson <brian060901(at)yahoo.com> |
Guys: I'm disappointed. No one picked up the gauntlet. I really am interested
if any one knows why the forward c.g. is that critical. In my 52 I'm sitting
on the forward edge, maybe even a little past it, (radio's removed) and I prefer
the way in handles vs. with a g.i.b. moving the c.g. back.. Brian
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Painter" <wild.blue(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Yak-List Digest: 24 Msgs - 05/29/02 |
Changsters/Yaksters,
FWIW:
W&B is serious stuff. So is structure. Things like relocating the
battery box and putting lead in places not designed for it may not be a
wise move. Maybe keeping that 50 lb. WWII ADF (a dead ringer for WWII
US military issue, see T-6 et al) and the battery box where the
engineers designed the structure for them and will maintain the W&B is
not such a bad idea. Is a little extra weight (you gotta have it
somewhere!) a bad thing if it keeps things in balance and the structure
is designed for it? If you have a baggage area in your CJ you may be
able to trade baggage for the ADF on x-c's and stay in balance. If your
airplane hasn't been weighed since it arrived in the US and was
assembled, the old radios removed (i.e., if you got them with the
airplane--except for maybe the ADF, not likely) avionicked, mordified,
oops!--I mean modified, and painted, you could be in for a very
attention getting little surprise when you're least prepared for it.
Desser has been selling tires and tubes ("Aero Classic" brand,
"experimental" tires) for some time that will fit CJ's and -52's. They
are much better than the Chinese or Russian tires, outlast them several
times over and the nosewheel tire even has tread! Watch out for their
tubes, though. The stem may not be the right shape. Landing on a flat
tire can be interesting and attention getting!
Finally, these engines have pressure carburetors. Lots of diaphragms
and rubber parts. Are you sure mogas won't turn the inside of your carb
to goo? Howzabout your rubber fuel line hoses? Could be inconvenient
even if a buck per cheaper.
One never knows, do one?
Best regards,
Jerry Painter
Wild Blue Aviation
425.258.4522
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Payne <cpayne(at)mc.net> |
brian olofsson wrote:
>
>
> Guys: I'm disappointed. No one picked up the gauntlet. I really am interested
if any one knows why the forward c.g. is that critical. In my 52 I'm sitting
on the forward edge, maybe even a little past it, (radio's removed) and I prefer
the way in handles vs. with a g.i.b. moving the c.g. back.. Brian
>
Brian,
For W&B purposes you should have revealed what the "crew load" is when
you fly solo.....The forward CG is going to do a lot of things
aerodynamically, but heh, you got a license so you should know.
Craig Payne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
At 08:28 AM 5/30/2002, you wrote:
>
>Brian,
>
>I really appreciate all the aeronautical engineering mumbo jumbo, but I,m
>seeing crosseyed right about now. I just removed all the radios yesterday,
>which included the big ADF and the rear shelf with the associated
>receiver,transmitter, and Inverter (I think). If I put 25 lbs in the tail,
>should I be OK to fly till I get weighed next week?????
I have no clue. Unless you weighed each component and subtracted its
moment from the aircraft total in order to calculate a new CG, you don't
know for sure where your CG is. Either calculate the moments or reweigh
the aircraft. Don't fly until you do either one or the other.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Brian's Yak-52 CG too far forward |
At 05:57 PM 5/30/2002, you wrote:
>
>Guys: I'm disappointed. No one picked up the gauntlet. I really am
>interested if any one knows why the forward c.g. is that critical. In my
>52 I'm sitting on the forward edge, maybe even a little past it, (radio's
>removed) and I prefer the way in handles vs. with a g.i.b. moving the c.g.
>back.. Brian
CG too far forward is safer than one that is too far aft but the airplane
is designed for a certain CG range and there is no guarantee it will
perform safely with the CG in excess of either the forward or aft CG limits.
CG too far forward:
more stable
greater elevator and rudder authority
increased stick force in pitch
reduced pitch and yaw rates
possibly insufficient up-elevator at low airspeeds
higher stall speed
Don't fly with your CG out of the design range. Fix it.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russ Dycus" <dycusr(at)hotmail.com> |
All, I am leaving for OLU from Chicagoland on Wed. the 5th. Anyone need
a ride or stuff hauled? I will be returning to Chicagoland on Sunday
the 9th.
Russ (Spam flight) Dycus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
Ok,
I've got the original weight of the airplane at 2495 lbs with the chinese
radios and empty fuel.
I've just weighed the radios and is as follows.
Avionics rack behind rear seat 96 lbs
ADF rack 50 lbs
Since I didnt remove anything else, I figured I could do a quick and dirt
W&B to see what I would need to add the the tail skid.
I multipled 96 * 188 (weight * arm) to arrive at a moment of 18048
then 50 * 214 "
" 10700
total 28748
I then divided 28748/ 338" (tail skid arm) and arrived at a tad over 85 lbs.
This doesnt sound right.
What am I doing wrong?
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames)
>
> Brian,
>
> I really appreciate all the aeronautical engineering mumbo jumbo, but I,m
> seeing crosseyed right about now. I just removed all the radios yesterday,
> which included the big ADF and the rear shelf with the associated
> receiver,transmitter, and Inverter (I think). If I put 25 lbs in the tail,
> should I be OK to fly till I get weighed next week?????
>
> Ernie
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames)
>
>
> >
> > At 06:14 PM 5/29/2002, you wrote:
> > >Thanks (I think);
> >
> > You're welcome, I'm sure.
> >
> > >I find the information very useful even though it's presented in a
rather
> > >goofy format. That one drawing gives virtually everthing there is to
know
> > >about the CG location. Actually far more than is needed to do a weight
> and
> > >balance. Maybe that's the problem.
> >
> > Yes, it is a bit rococo.
> >
> > >Walt
> > > > Since the book gives distances relative to the front of the MAC I
will
> use
> > > > that as my standard datum plane for the initial calculations. After
> that
> > >I
> > > > will translate to the standard datum plane I was using in my
previous
> > > > message which is 24" ahead of the prop axial plane.
> > >
> > >How do you drop a plumb bob from the prop. axial plane?
> >
> > With a prop axe? Actually it seems to me to be pretty straight forward
> > since that would be from the middle of the prop hub.
> >
> >
> > > > From diagram 1.3 we find:
> > > >
> > > > The MAC is 1.747M (68.78") wide (long?).
> > > >
> > > > The main gear is located 769mm (30.27") aft of a vertical plane
> defined by
> > > > the front of the MAC.
> > > >
> > > > The CG moves aft by 0.7% when the gear is retracted but since they
> don't
> > > > specify a weight and CG at which this happens, there is no way to
> determine
> > >
> > >Happens at any weight and/or CG whenever the gear is retracted.
> >
> > Nope. The arm, mass, and moment of the gear change is constant. The
arm
> > (CG), mass, and moment of the aircraft is not. If the aircraft is
lightly
> > loaded the moment change for the gear retraction will be proportionally
> > more of the total mass and moment of the aircraft. Therefore the CG
will
> > change more if the aircraft is lightly loaded as opposed to operating at
> > max gross weight. Likewise if the aircraft is at aft CG the effective
arm
> > change of the gear retraction will be a greater proportion.
> >
> > If you don't believe me, make up a moment change for the gear and apply
it
> > to the CG calculation for the aircraft at max and min gross weight to
see
> > what happens.
> >
> > > > the actual arm and moment change. From the discussion I suspect
this
> is at
> > > > a sample take-off weight of 1400 Kg and a CG of 23.4% of MAC. After
> > > > looking at the diagram, do others agree? If so, I can calculate the
> arm
> > > > and moment change.
> > >
> > >You are of necessity doing the W&B with the gear down. After getting
all
> > >your weights and the arms you have marked on the floor you can
determine
> the
> > >empty wt.and CG. You don't care where the gear UP empty CG is.
> > >
> > >Now, you will want to produce a loading guide. Calculate the Most
Forward
> > >CG. - Full oil, Min.fuel, Pilot, No pass., no baggage. This is gear
down
> > >because the CG moves forward when the gear is extended.
> > >
> > >Do the Most Rearward numbers - Min. oil, everthing else full. Your
final
> > >entry will show the weight, arm and moment GEAR DOWN. Now you make the
> real
> > >final entry - Landing Gear UP - Weight is the same. Arm is increased by
> 0.48
> > >inches (this is your most rearward CG)The moment is 0.48W if you really
> want
> > >to know.
> >
> > The mass of the gear remains the same with retraction. The arm changes
by
> > a fixed amount. Therefore the moment change due to gear retract is a
> > constant, not a proportion based on aircraft mass and moment. The
formula
> > for the CG change is:
> >
> > mg + ma
> > CG = -------
> > Ma
> >
> > mg: moment due to gear change
> > ma: total moment of aircraft
> > Ma: total mass of aircraft
> >
> > If we do this calculation with the aircraft nearly empty mg will be a
> > larger proportion of final value of CG than it will if ma and Ma are for
> an
> > aircraft at max gross weight. Therefore CG will change more due to gear
> > retraction if the aircraft is lightly loaded than if the aircraft is
fully
> > loaded.
> >
> >
> > Brian Lloyd
> > brian(at)lloyd.com
> > +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> > +1.360.838.9669 - fax
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry W. Hancock" <radialpower(at)cox.net> |
Craig,
> Forgotten me!! Hey, what about that $20 I put up on the bet?? And the
> Tsing Tao?? Looks like Dinner AND Brews to me.
One thing to remember here, *dude* (for those of you unfamiliar, "dude"
is a SoCal reference to the male gender. In Ebonics it's "homey"...but
I digress) is that you have to WIN the bet. Yes, I owe you Tsing Tao,
with interest I believe we're up to a dozen. But remember you have to
drink this all at one sitting...you guys see where I'm headed. I plan
to pay off at OSH 2004 so I get some *real* enjoyment out of it! :)
As far as dinner goes, your dart is going to have to land closer on the
calendar than the others. I'll let someone research the archives to see
who bet what....
>
> Craig "No Grand Swami" Payne
Yeah, but Chris Berman doesn't fly a CJ, either.
Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
In a message dated 5/31/02 11:23:31 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
ernie(at)gscinc.com writes:
> Ok,
>
> I've got the original weight of the airplane at 2495 lbs with the chinese
> radios and empty fuel.
>
> I've just weighed the radios and is as follows.
>
> Avionics rack behind rear seat 96 lbs
> ADF rack 50 lbs
>
> Since I didnt remove anything else, I figured I could do a quick and dirt
> W&B to see what I would need to add the the tail skid.
>
> I multipled 96 * 188 (weight * arm) to arrive at a moment of 18048
> then 50 * 214 "
> " 10700
>
> total 28748
>
> I then divided 28748/ 338" (tail skid arm) and arrived at a tad over 85 lbs.
> This doesnt sound right.
>
> What am I doing wrong?
>
> Ernie
>
>
That is way to much.
Jim Goolsby
cjpilot710(at)aol.com
386-467-3313 voice
386-467-3193 fax
386-569-7060 cell "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain
a little safety, deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"There is no "innocence" in war. All
collateral damage
is acceptable."
unk.
"With my shield, or on it"
Trojan Warriors BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Sun 'n Fun numbers |
| From: | "Barry W. Hancock" <radialpower(at)cox.net> |
Guys,
I don't remember how many ships we had airborne the first day of SnF?
Please email me directly with the number (can't remember if it was 19 or
15, or....) as I'm trying to wrap up the WB Flyer today and only receive
the digest version of the list. Thanks!
Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
At 08:22 AM 5/31/2002, you wrote:
>
>Ok,
>
>I've got the original weight of the airplane at 2495 lbs with the chinese
>radios and empty fuel.
>I've just weighed the radios and is as follows.
>
>Avionics rack behind rear seat 96 lbs
>ADF rack 50 lbs
>
>Since I didnt remove anything else, I figured I could do a quick and dirt
>W&B to see what I would need to add the the tail skid.
>
>I multipled 96 * 188 (weight * arm) to arrive at a moment of 18048
>then 50 * 214 "
>" 10700
>
>total 28748
>
>I then divided 28748/ 338" (tail skid arm) and arrived at a tad over 85 lbs.
>This doesnt sound right.
>
>What am I doing wrong?
Your method appears correct. If the weights and the arms are as you say,
your answer also appears to be correct. If you put 85# in the tail, the CG
should remain in exactly the same place.
OTOH, I agree that 85# sounds like too much. Are you sure about the
weights of the removed components? They seem to be on the high side.
I would approach the problem by figuring out your worst case loading that
would produce a CG at the forward limit. I would then add sufficient
weight to the tail to move the CG to the forward limit at this worst case
loading. That requires good weight information about your airplane.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Payne <cpayne(at)mc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sun 'n Fun numbers |
Barry W. Hancock wrote:
>
>
Breakdown Barry:(2B or Double-B?)
My logbook shows a 21 ship over to LAL on 4/7 and an 18-ship in the
airshow that day.
Craig Payne
> Guys,
>
> I don't remember how many ships we had airborne the first day of SnF?
> Please email me directly with the number (can't remember if it was 19 or
> 15, or....) as I'm trying to wrap up the WB Flyer today and only receive
> the digest version of the list. Thanks!
>
> Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Sun 'n Fun numbers |
In a message dated 5/31/02 1:26:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
radialpower(at)cox.net writes:
>
> I don't remember how many ships we had airborne the first day of SnF?
> Please email me directly with the number (can't remember if it was 19 or
> 15, or....) as I'm trying to wrap up the WB Flyer today and only receive
> the digest version of the list. Thanks!
>
>
19 aircraft. I remember telling BOW tower that number.
Jim Goolsby
cjpilot710(at)aol.com
386-467-3313 voice
386-467-3193 fax
386-569-7060 cell "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain
a little safety, deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"There is no "innocence" in war. All
collateral damage
is acceptable."
unk.
"With my shield, or on it"
Trojan Warriors BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Sun 'n Fun numbers |
In a message dated 5/31/02 11:14:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, cpayne(at)mc.net
writes:
> Breakdown Barry:(2B or Double-B?)
>
> My logbook shows a 21 ship over to LAL on 4/7 and an 18-ship in the
> airshow that day.
>
> Craig Payne
>
> > Guys,
> >
> > I don't remember how many ships we had airborne the first day of SnF?
> > Please email me directly with the number (can't remember if it was 19 or
> > 15, or....) as I'm trying to wrap up the WB Flyer today and only receive
> > the digest version of the list. Thanks!
> >
> > Barry
>
>
Maybe I should agree with Craig. I was thinking 'airshow' not 'on the way to
the airshow'
Jim Goolsby
cjpilot710(at)aol.com
386-467-3313 voice
386-467-3193 fax
386-569-7060 cell "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain
a little safety, deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"There is no "innocence" in war. All
collateral damage
is acceptable."
unk.
"With my shield, or on it"
Trojan Warriors BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike McCoy" <mike(at)aircraftsales.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
Ernie,
I agree with Brian and Jim, I would NOT add 85 pounds to the tail based on
what you've done so far. You really need to weigh the airplane if you're
thinking of putting fixed ballast in the tail. We recently had a CJ come
through here with an M14 on the front and the radios mostly removed from the
rear. As I recall, it only had about 50 pounds in the tail.
On another front, Brian has talked about polar moment of inertia on several
occasions. IF he is right about that, then how much weight in the tail will
be too much? Also, with 85 pounds of weight in the tail, you're putting a
lot of weight where it wasn't designed to go. Could a hard landing cause
structural damage? I don't know the answers to these questions -- DO YOU?
Again, as I said before, the internet is not the right place to learn to fly
or the right place to learn maintenance.
Mike McCoy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
I agree, but I cant trust any of the numbers I'm finding. The W&B sheet I
have from my neighbor states an empty weight of 2078 lbs, whereas the book
states about 2414 lbs, as well as the british W&B that came with my plane.
At most 200lbs have been removed from the aircraft, so I'm having trouble
finding the discrepancy.
Fortunately my flight planning software has a W&B calculator and allows you
to input the stations, and also MAC and LEMAC, unfortunately there are no
instructions on what the units of mac and LEMAC are, I'm not sure if they
want % or inches. But at least its calculating the CG which puts me between
127 & 132" using the nose and main wheel weights from my neigbors plane and
calculating different payloads, which seems to coincide with your numbers.
I'm going to have the plane weighed next week, and I will have the exact
numbers by then.
Either way, in talking with most of the folks on this list, most everyone
has got somewhere between 25 and 35 lbs in the tail so I assumed I should be
ok, and the software allowed me to remove the radios and install the weight
aft and the CG moved forward a few inches, so I decided to test fly it
today, with minimum fuel and my skinny but up front with no GIB. The plane
flew great and I did my best landings to date. Taking off was a breeze,
whereas I used to have to hold rear stick then immediately apply forward
stick upon leaving the ground to keep her in the right attitude, now I need
a deliberate pull to raise the nose wheel and just hold that attitude
through gear up. Landings were also much easier, she didnt tend to balloon
in the flare but just settled in nice and flat. Overall much much nicer.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames)
>
> At 08:22 AM 5/31/2002, you wrote:
> >
> >Ok,
> >
> >I've got the original weight of the airplane at 2495 lbs with the chinese
> >radios and empty fuel.
> >I've just weighed the radios and is as follows.
> >
> >Avionics rack behind rear seat 96 lbs
> >ADF rack 50 lbs
> >
> >Since I didnt remove anything else, I figured I could do a quick and dirt
> >W&B to see what I would need to add the the tail skid.
> >
> >I multipled 96 * 188 (weight * arm) to arrive at a moment of 18048
> >then 50 * 214 "
> >" 10700
> >
> >total 28748
> >
> >I then divided 28748/ 338" (tail skid arm) and arrived at a tad over 85
lbs.
> >This doesnt sound right.
> >
> >What am I doing wrong?
>
> Your method appears correct. If the weights and the arms are as you say,
> your answer also appears to be correct. If you put 85# in the tail, the
CG
> should remain in exactly the same place.
>
> OTOH, I agree that 85# sounds like too much. Are you sure about the
> weights of the removed components? They seem to be on the high side.
>
> I would approach the problem by figuring out your worst case loading that
> would produce a CG at the forward limit. I would then add sufficient
> weight to the tail to move the CG to the forward limit at this worst case
> loading. That requires good weight information about your airplane.
>
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry W. Hancock" <radialpower(at)cox.net> |
> Maybe I should agree with Craig. I was thinking 'airshow' not 'on the
> way to
> the airshow'
> Jim Goolsby
OK, that puts a little sting it it. The 19 was with me on the way to
the show, the 18 was with me sitting on the ramp with sheared compressor
pins getting left in the barn. Thanks for stirring up bad memories,
Jim! :) The price I pay for accuracy....
Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
I agree Mike
Theres no way I'm putting 85 lbs in the tail. I went and put in 25 lbs,
based on everyones comments and my calculations. 25 lbs moved the CG forward
approx 2", but well withing limits, now I can have a GIB and Luggage without
exceeding aft CG. Untill I have the plane weighed next weekend and have the
exact CG envelope for MY airplane, I will limit myself to just flying with a
GIB and no luggage.
I spoke with Jim Goolsby and he had this discussion with the designer of the
aircraft, and the concensus is that there is no danger of polar intertial
moment with the weights we're discussing. As far as structual integrity, I
asked an aeronautical engineer here, and he said that we should be OK.
I agree with you again that the internet is no place to learn to fly or how
to maintain an aircraft, its just another resource. I live in a flyin
community surrounded by some of the most talented people in the industry,
this forum is just my way of adding to my already formidable arsenal of
information.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike McCoy" <mike(at)aircraftsales.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames)
>
> Ernie,
>
> I agree with Brian and Jim, I would NOT add 85 pounds to the tail based on
> what you've done so far. You really need to weigh the airplane if you're
> thinking of putting fixed ballast in the tail. We recently had a CJ come
> through here with an M14 on the front and the radios mostly removed from
the
> rear. As I recall, it only had about 50 pounds in the tail.
>
> On another front, Brian has talked about polar moment of inertia on
several
> occasions. IF he is right about that, then how much weight in the tail
will
> be too much? Also, with 85 pounds of weight in the tail, you're putting a
> lot of weight where it wasn't designed to go. Could a hard landing cause
> structural damage? I don't know the answers to these questions -- DO
YOU?
>
> Again, as I said before, the internet is not the right place to learn to
fly
> or the right place to learn maintenance.
>
> Mike McCoy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MFilucci(at)aol.com |
Doug,
I will need some more information before we can evaluate the merits of this
project. What would the cost be to purchase the entire replacement kit? What
does it cost, on average, to ship the boxes around the country?
After you have finalized a list of parts to be included in the kit, maybe you
can fill in the answers for us.
Thanks,
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
Heres a question for you Brian.
I have the weight of the aircraft on the nose wheel and the main wheel based
on a total weight of 2078 lbs as per my neighbors W&B, it is empty with no
radios. Now if we were to use the total empty weight stated in the book,
which is very close to the weight that I have listed for my airplane, can we
determine what the weight distribution would be on the wheels? Would it be a
linear increase in weight?
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames)
>
> At 06:14 PM 5/29/2002, you wrote:
> >Thanks (I think);
>
> You're welcome, I'm sure.
>
> >I find the information very useful even though it's presented in a rather
> >goofy format. That one drawing gives virtually everthing there is to know
> >about the CG location. Actually far more than is needed to do a weight
and
> >balance. Maybe that's the problem.
>
> Yes, it is a bit rococo.
>
> >Walt
> > > Since the book gives distances relative to the front of the MAC I will
use
> > > that as my standard datum plane for the initial calculations. After
that
> >I
> > > will translate to the standard datum plane I was using in my previous
> > > message which is 24" ahead of the prop axial plane.
> >
> >How do you drop a plumb bob from the prop. axial plane?
>
> With a prop axe? Actually it seems to me to be pretty straight forward
> since that would be from the middle of the prop hub.
>
>
> > > From diagram 1.3 we find:
> > >
> > > The MAC is 1.747M (68.78") wide (long?).
> > >
> > > The main gear is located 769mm (30.27") aft of a vertical plane
defined by
> > > the front of the MAC.
> > >
> > > The CG moves aft by 0.7% when the gear is retracted but since they
don't
> > > specify a weight and CG at which this happens, there is no way to
determine
> >
> >Happens at any weight and/or CG whenever the gear is retracted.
>
> Nope. The arm, mass, and moment of the gear change is constant. The arm
> (CG), mass, and moment of the aircraft is not. If the aircraft is lightly
> loaded the moment change for the gear retraction will be proportionally
> more of the total mass and moment of the aircraft. Therefore the CG will
> change more if the aircraft is lightly loaded as opposed to operating at
> max gross weight. Likewise if the aircraft is at aft CG the effective arm
> change of the gear retraction will be a greater proportion.
>
> If you don't believe me, make up a moment change for the gear and apply it
> to the CG calculation for the aircraft at max and min gross weight to see
> what happens.
>
> > > the actual arm and moment change. From the discussion I suspect this
is at
> > > a sample take-off weight of 1400 Kg and a CG of 23.4% of MAC. After
> > > looking at the diagram, do others agree? If so, I can calculate the
arm
> > > and moment change.
> >
> >You are of necessity doing the W&B with the gear down. After getting all
> >your weights and the arms you have marked on the floor you can determine
the
> >empty wt.and CG. You don't care where the gear UP empty CG is.
> >
> >Now, you will want to produce a loading guide. Calculate the Most Forward
> >CG. - Full oil, Min.fuel, Pilot, No pass., no baggage. This is gear down
> >because the CG moves forward when the gear is extended.
> >
> >Do the Most Rearward numbers - Min. oil, everthing else full. Your final
> >entry will show the weight, arm and moment GEAR DOWN. Now you make the
real
> >final entry - Landing Gear UP - Weight is the same. Arm is increased by
0.48
> >inches (this is your most rearward CG)The moment is 0.48W if you really
want
> >to know.
>
> The mass of the gear remains the same with retraction. The arm changes by
> a fixed amount. Therefore the moment change due to gear retract is a
> constant, not a proportion based on aircraft mass and moment. The formula
> for the CG change is:
>
> mg + ma
> CG = -------
> Ma
>
> mg: moment due to gear change
> ma: total moment of aircraft
> Ma: total mass of aircraft
>
> If we do this calculation with the aircraft nearly empty mg will be a
> larger proportion of final value of CG than it will if ma and Ma are for
an
> aircraft at max gross weight. Therefore CG will change more due to gear
> retraction if the aircraft is lightly loaded than if the aircraft is fully
> loaded.
>
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
Ok,
I think I've got it now.
By combining the data from my British W&B report and the data Brian has
supplied I have come up with the following.
My airplane with radios had the following data from a weigh in that was done
in the UK, this W&B is for MY plane.
Nose gear 256.6 KG or 565.25 lbs at 938mm or 36.92" from THEIR datum.
Main gear 850.4KG or 1874.8 lbs at 3161mm or 124.4" "
"
an additional 25 lbs was added somewhere but no arm was given.
Total Empty weight = 1131.8 KG or 2495 LBS with a CG of 2689mm or 105.8"
I went and measured the distance between the main wheels and the nose gear
and the datum and they're all correct.
Now by comparing the stations given by Brian as to the location of the main
and nose gear to the staions on my W&B I can deduce the Datum.
UK Brian
Nose Gear 36.92" 57"
Diff = 20.8"
Main Gear 124.4" 146.5
22.1"
So if we interpolate, my datum is about 22.1" behind Brians, which puts my
CG around 127.9" using Brians Datum.
I added another station to Brians list which is for the ADF sence antennae
at about 233"
Now using the Normal Flight weight from the book of 3086 lbs as my max I
came up with the following scenarios;
First with the radios installed with the following weights.
Rear seat Avionics and racks 96 lbs
ADF Unit 50 lbs
ADF Sence Ant 15 lbs
I tried using an empty weight of 2495 minus the 160 lbs of removed radios
and then added the weight on the appropriate stations using my software.
This then moved the empty weight CG forward to 132.9", about 5" so I then
tried subtracting those 5" from my empty weight CG and I got a CG of about
122.9" or very close to what my neighbors CG was listed from the Yakity Yaks
W&B report. Once I added back the 160lbs at the appropriate stations my CG
moved back to 127.9" So here goes.
Pilot GIB Fuel Radios ADF Ant Skid
0 0 60lbs 96 50 15 0
2555lbs CG 128.3
200 0 60 96 50 15 0
2755lbs CG 127.9
200 200 240 96 50 15 0
3135lbs CG 132.1
Radios Removed
0 0 60 0 0 0 30
2439lbs CG 126.1
200 200 60 0 0 0 30
2624lbs CG 125.9
200 200 240 0 0 0 30
3004lbs CG 130.5
The only thing thats in question is the actual empty weight CG since I had
to move it back 5", but all things being equal I'm in pretty good shape with
the weight I added in the back.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames)
>
> At 06:14 PM 5/29/2002, you wrote:
> >Thanks (I think);
>
> You're welcome, I'm sure.
>
> >I find the information very useful even though it's presented in a rather
> >goofy format. That one drawing gives virtually everthing there is to know
> >about the CG location. Actually far more than is needed to do a weight
and
> >balance. Maybe that's the problem.
>
> Yes, it is a bit rococo.
>
> >Walt
> > > Since the book gives distances relative to the front of the MAC I will
use
> > > that as my standard datum plane for the initial calculations. After
that
> >I
> > > will translate to the standard datum plane I was using in my previous
> > > message which is 24" ahead of the prop axial plane.
> >
> >How do you drop a plumb bob from the prop. axial plane?
>
> With a prop axe? Actually it seems to me to be pretty straight forward
> since that would be from the middle of the prop hub.
>
>
> > > From diagram 1.3 we find:
> > >
> > > The MAC is 1.747M (68.78") wide (long?).
> > >
> > > The main gear is located 769mm (30.27") aft of a vertical plane
defined by
> > > the front of the MAC.
> > >
> > > The CG moves aft by 0.7% when the gear is retracted but since they
don't
> > > specify a weight and CG at which this happens, there is no way to
determine
> >
> >Happens at any weight and/or CG whenever the gear is retracted.
>
> Nope. The arm, mass, and moment of the gear change is constant. The arm
> (CG), mass, and moment of the aircraft is not. If the aircraft is lightly
> loaded the moment change for the gear retraction will be proportionally
> more of the total mass and moment of the aircraft. Therefore the CG will
> change more if the aircraft is lightly loaded as opposed to operating at
> max gross weight. Likewise if the aircraft is at aft CG the effective arm
> change of the gear retraction will be a greater proportion.
>
> If you don't believe me, make up a moment change for the gear and apply it
> to the CG calculation for the aircraft at max and min gross weight to see
> what happens.
>
> > > the actual arm and moment change. From the discussion I suspect this
is at
> > > a sample take-off weight of 1400 Kg and a CG of 23.4% of MAC. After
> > > looking at the diagram, do others agree? If so, I can calculate the
arm
> > > and moment change.
> >
> >You are of necessity doing the W&B with the gear down. After getting all
> >your weights and the arms you have marked on the floor you can determine
the
> >empty wt.and CG. You don't care where the gear UP empty CG is.
> >
> >Now, you will want to produce a loading guide. Calculate the Most Forward
> >CG. - Full oil, Min.fuel, Pilot, No pass., no baggage. This is gear down
> >because the CG moves forward when the gear is extended.
> >
> >Do the Most Rearward numbers - Min. oil, everthing else full. Your final
> >entry will show the weight, arm and moment GEAR DOWN. Now you make the
real
> >final entry - Landing Gear UP - Weight is the same. Arm is increased by
0.48
> >inches (this is your most rearward CG)The moment is 0.48W if you really
want
> >to know.
>
> The mass of the gear remains the same with retraction. The arm changes by
> a fixed amount. Therefore the moment change due to gear retract is a
> constant, not a proportion based on aircraft mass and moment. The formula
> for the CG change is:
>
> mg + ma
> CG = -------
> Ma
>
> mg: moment due to gear change
> ma: total moment of aircraft
> Ma: total mass of aircraft
>
> If we do this calculation with the aircraft nearly empty mg will be a
> larger proportion of final value of CG than it will if ma and Ma are for
an
> aircraft at max gross weight. Therefore CG will change more due to gear
> retraction if the aircraft is lightly loaded than if the aircraft is fully
> loaded.
>
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
| From: | Ernie martinez <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
I just realized a typo,
The second entry for the removed radios list should have read
200 0 60 not 200 200 60
Ernie
On Saturday, June 1, 2002, at 01:21 PM, Ernie wrote:
>
> Ok,
>
> I think I've got it now.
>
> By combining the data from my British W&B report and the data Brian has
> supplied I have come up with the following.
>
> My airplane with radios had the following data from a weigh in that was
> done
> in the UK, this W&B is for MY plane.
>
> Nose gear 256.6 KG or 565.25 lbs at 938mm or 36.92" from THEIR datum.
> Main gear 850.4KG or 1874.8 lbs at 3161mm or 124.4" "
> "
> an additional 25 lbs was added somewhere but no arm was given.
>
> Total Empty weight = 1131.8 KG or 2495 LBS with a CG of 2689mm or 105.8"
>
> I went and measured the distance between the main wheels and the nose
> gear
> and the datum and they're all correct.
>
> Now by comparing the stations given by Brian as to the location of the
> main
> and nose gear to the staions on my W&B I can deduce the Datum.
>
> UK
> Brian
>
> Nose Gear 36.92" 57"
> Diff = 20.8"
> Main Gear 124.4" 146.5
> 22.1"
>
> So if we interpolate, my datum is about 22.1" behind Brians, which puts
> my
> CG around 127.9" using Brians Datum.
>
> I added another station to Brians list which is for the ADF sence
> antennae
> at about 233"
>
> Now using the Normal Flight weight from the book of 3086 lbs as my max I
> came up with the following scenarios;
>
> First with the radios installed with the following weights.
> Rear seat Avionics and racks 96 lbs
> ADF Unit 50 lbs
> ADF Sence Ant 15 lbs
>
> I tried using an empty weight of 2495 minus the 160 lbs of removed
> radios
> and then added the weight on the appropriate stations using my software.
> This then moved the empty weight CG forward to 132.9", about 5" so I
> then
> tried subtracting those 5" from my empty weight CG and I got a CG of
> about
> 122.9" or very close to what my neighbors CG was listed from the Yakity
> Yaks
> W&B report. Once I added back the 160lbs at the appropriate stations my
> CG
> moved back to 127.9" So here goes.
>
> Pilot GIB Fuel Radios ADF Ant Skid
> 0 0 60lbs 96 50 15 0
> 2555lbs CG 128.3
> 200 0 60 96 50 15 0
> 2755lbs CG 127.9
> 200 200 240 96 50 15 0
> 3135lbs CG 132.1
> Radios Removed
> 0 0 60 0 0 0 30
> 2439lbs CG 126.1
> 200 200 60 0 0 0 30
> 2624lbs CG 125.9
> 200 200 240 0 0 0 30
> 3004lbs CG 130.5
>
> The only thing thats in question is the actual empty weight CG since I
> had
> to move it back 5", but all things being equal I'm in pretty good shape
> with
> the weight I added in the back.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames)
>
>
>>
>> At 06:14 PM 5/29/2002, you wrote:
>>> Thanks (I think);
>>
>> You're welcome, I'm sure.
>>
>>> I find the information very useful even though it's presented in a
>>> rather
>>> goofy format. That one drawing gives virtually everthing there is to
>>> know
>>> about the CG location. Actually far more than is needed to do a weight
> and
>>> balance. Maybe that's the problem.
>>
>> Yes, it is a bit rococo.
>>
>>> Walt
>>>> Since the book gives distances relative to the front of the MAC I
>>>> will
> use
>>>> that as my standard datum plane for the initial calculations. After
> that
>>> I
>>>> will translate to the standard datum plane I was using in my previous
>>>> message which is 24" ahead of the prop axial plane.
>>>
>>> How do you drop a plumb bob from the prop. axial plane?
>>
>> With a prop axe? Actually it seems to me to be pretty straight forward
>> since that would be from the middle of the prop hub.
>>
>>
>>>> From diagram 1.3 we find:
>>>>
>>>> The MAC is 1.747M (68.78") wide (long?).
>>>>
>>>> The main gear is located 769mm (30.27") aft of a vertical plane
> defined by
>>>> the front of the MAC.
>>>>
>>>> The CG moves aft by 0.7% when the gear is retracted but since they
> don't
>>>> specify a weight and CG at which this happens, there is no way to
> determine
>>>
>>> Happens at any weight and/or CG whenever the gear is retracted.
>>
>> Nope. The arm, mass, and moment of the gear change is constant. The
>> arm
>> (CG), mass, and moment of the aircraft is not. If the aircraft is
>> lightly
>> loaded the moment change for the gear retraction will be proportionally
>> more of the total mass and moment of the aircraft. Therefore the CG
>> will
>> change more if the aircraft is lightly loaded as opposed to operating
>> at
>> max gross weight. Likewise if the aircraft is at aft CG the effective
>> arm
>> change of the gear retraction will be a greater proportion.
>>
>> If you don't believe me, make up a moment change for the gear and
>> apply it
>> to the CG calculation for the aircraft at max and min gross weight to
>> see
>> what happens.
>>
>>>> the actual arm and moment change. From the discussion I suspect this
> is at
>>>> a sample take-off weight of 1400 Kg and a CG of 23.4% of MAC. After
>>>> looking at the diagram, do others agree? If so, I can calculate the
> arm
>>>> and moment change.
>>>
>>> You are of necessity doing the W&B with the gear down. After getting
>>> all
>>> your weights and the arms you have marked on the floor you can
>>> determine
> the
>>> empty wt.and CG. You don't care where the gear UP empty CG is.
>>>
>>> Now, you will want to produce a loading guide. Calculate the Most
>>> Forward
>>> CG. - Full oil, Min.fuel, Pilot, No pass., no baggage. This is gear
>>> down
>>> because the CG moves forward when the gear is extended.
>>>
>>> Do the Most Rearward numbers - Min. oil, everthing else full. Your
>>> final
>>> entry will show the weight, arm and moment GEAR DOWN. Now you make the
> real
>>> final entry - Landing Gear UP - Weight is the same. Arm is increased
>>> by
> 0.48
>>> inches (this is your most rearward CG)The moment is 0.48W if you
>>> really
> want
>>> to know.
>>
>> The mass of the gear remains the same with retraction. The arm
>> changes by
>> a fixed amount. Therefore the moment change due to gear retract is a
>> constant, not a proportion based on aircraft mass and moment. The
>> formula
>> for the CG change is:
>>
>> mg + ma
>> CG = -------
>> Ma
>>
>> mg: moment due to gear change
>> ma: total moment of aircraft
>> Ma: total mass of aircraft
>>
>> If we do this calculation with the aircraft nearly empty mg will be a
>> larger proportion of final value of CG than it will if ma and Ma are
>> for
> an
>> aircraft at max gross weight. Therefore CG will change more due to
>> gear
>> retraction if the aircraft is lightly loaded than if the aircraft is
>> fully
>> loaded.
>>
>>
>> Brian Lloyd
>> brian(at)lloyd.com
>> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
>> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael DiMarco <mgdimarco(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Asleep at the switch |
>
> Guys, no one in this group supports our aircraft and our community
> more
> than Doug. No one cares about the community more than Doug. No
> one
> comes up with more good ideas or solves more problems than Doug.
Agreed and I'd love to own the AN2 that transports the kit, but no
money for two airplanes yet. Especially one that gobbles 50 gal/hr
at 100 mph. Some day I'll be there and will "volunteer" the
services.
Mike
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | brian olofsson <brian060901(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
Guy"s: My point with asking the forward c.g. question is what's safer. Flying slightly
forward of c.g. in a plane with full elevator authority, no change in
cruise speed, no change in stall (power off, full flaps, up gear), can land uncomfortably
nose high or with 25-80lbs of ballast in the tail. I have not seen
in all this lengthy discussion the stress analysis of this ballast in the tail.
Much less @5 or more G's or with repeated hard landings. I thought the c.j.'s
had tail cracks to start with, will this effect this. What happens if this
ballast brakes loose (by your control cables, yrs from now). I don't pretend
to know the answers to these questions but I do know my plane is fully controllable
in the worst configuration possible, I have plenty of room for a f.g.i.b.
and luggage. (rear c.g. scares me). Also, I have been emailed that a couple
of or experts do not what to publish their opinions. This might be a good
one for a phone call. Lastly, the reason I'm even !
chirping in is ~ 10 yrs ago I had a friend with a Prescot pusher. The nose ballast
shifted in flight, and he couldn't recover . Brian
Ernie wrot
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
And to expound even further.
Using a LEMAC of 116.23 (30.27" forward of the main gear) and a MAC of
68.78"
I get the following for the last 6 Scenarios
With Radios
Empty Plane min fuel 17.5% mac
200lb Pilot min Fuel 17% mac
200lb Pilot and gib full fuel 23.1% mac
No radios 30lbs in Skid
Empty Plane min fuel 14.4% MAC
200lb pilot min fuel 14.1% mac
200lb pilot and GIB full fuel 20.7% mac
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames)
>
> Ok,
>
> I think I've got it now.
>
> By combining the data from my British W&B report and the data Brian has
> supplied I have come up with the following.
>
> My airplane with radios had the following data from a weigh in that was
done
> in the UK, this W&B is for MY plane.
>
> Nose gear 256.6 KG or 565.25 lbs at 938mm or 36.92" from THEIR datum.
> Main gear 850.4KG or 1874.8 lbs at 3161mm or 124.4" "
> "
> an additional 25 lbs was added somewhere but no arm was given.
>
> Total Empty weight = 1131.8 KG or 2495 LBS with a CG of 2689mm or 105.8"
>
> I went and measured the distance between the main wheels and the nose gear
> and the datum and they're all correct.
>
> Now by comparing the stations given by Brian as to the location of the
main
> and nose gear to the staions on my W&B I can deduce the Datum.
>
> UK
Brian
>
> Nose Gear 36.92" 57"
> Diff = 20.8"
> Main Gear 124.4" 146.5
> 22.1"
>
> So if we interpolate, my datum is about 22.1" behind Brians, which puts my
> CG around 127.9" using Brians Datum.
>
> I added another station to Brians list which is for the ADF sence antennae
> at about 233"
>
> Now using the Normal Flight weight from the book of 3086 lbs as my max I
> came up with the following scenarios;
>
> First with the radios installed with the following weights.
> Rear seat Avionics and racks 96 lbs
> ADF Unit 50 lbs
> ADF Sence Ant 15 lbs
>
> I tried using an empty weight of 2495 minus the 160 lbs of removed radios
> and then added the weight on the appropriate stations using my software.
> This then moved the empty weight CG forward to 132.9", about 5" so I then
> tried subtracting those 5" from my empty weight CG and I got a CG of about
> 122.9" or very close to what my neighbors CG was listed from the Yakity
Yaks
> W&B report. Once I added back the 160lbs at the appropriate stations my CG
> moved back to 127.9" So here goes.
>
> Pilot GIB Fuel Radios ADF Ant Skid
> 0 0 60lbs 96 50 15 0
> 2555lbs CG 128.3
> 200 0 60 96 50 15 0
> 2755lbs CG 127.9
> 200 200 240 96 50 15 0
> 3135lbs CG 132.1
> Radios Removed
> 0 0 60 0 0 0 30
> 2439lbs CG 126.1
> 200 200 60 0 0 0 30
> 2624lbs CG 125.9
> 200 200 240 0 0 0 30
> 3004lbs CG 130.5
>
> The only thing thats in question is the actual empty weight CG since I had
> to move it back 5", but all things being equal I'm in pretty good shape
with
> the weight I added in the back.
>
> Ernie
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames)
>
>
> >
> > At 06:14 PM 5/29/2002, you wrote:
> > >Thanks (I think);
> >
> > You're welcome, I'm sure.
> >
> > >I find the information very useful even though it's presented in a
rather
> > >goofy format. That one drawing gives virtually everthing there is to
know
> > >about the CG location. Actually far more than is needed to do a weight
> and
> > >balance. Maybe that's the problem.
> >
> > Yes, it is a bit rococo.
> >
> > >Walt
> > > > Since the book gives distances relative to the front of the MAC I
will
> use
> > > > that as my standard datum plane for the initial calculations. After
> that
> > >I
> > > > will translate to the standard datum plane I was using in my
previous
> > > > message which is 24" ahead of the prop axial plane.
> > >
> > >How do you drop a plumb bob from the prop. axial plane?
> >
> > With a prop axe? Actually it seems to me to be pretty straight forward
> > since that would be from the middle of the prop hub.
> >
> >
> > > > From diagram 1.3 we find:
> > > >
> > > > The MAC is 1.747M (68.78") wide (long?).
> > > >
> > > > The main gear is located 769mm (30.27") aft of a vertical plane
> defined by
> > > > the front of the MAC.
> > > >
> > > > The CG moves aft by 0.7% when the gear is retracted but since they
> don't
> > > > specify a weight and CG at which this happens, there is no way to
> determine
> > >
> > >Happens at any weight and/or CG whenever the gear is retracted.
> >
> > Nope. The arm, mass, and moment of the gear change is constant. The
arm
> > (CG), mass, and moment of the aircraft is not. If the aircraft is
lightly
> > loaded the moment change for the gear retraction will be proportionally
> > more of the total mass and moment of the aircraft. Therefore the CG
will
> > change more if the aircraft is lightly loaded as opposed to operating at
> > max gross weight. Likewise if the aircraft is at aft CG the effective
arm
> > change of the gear retraction will be a greater proportion.
> >
> > If you don't believe me, make up a moment change for the gear and apply
it
> > to the CG calculation for the aircraft at max and min gross weight to
see
> > what happens.
> >
> > > > the actual arm and moment change. From the discussion I suspect
this
> is at
> > > > a sample take-off weight of 1400 Kg and a CG of 23.4% of MAC. After
> > > > looking at the diagram, do others agree? If so, I can calculate the
> arm
> > > > and moment change.
> > >
> > >You are of necessity doing the W&B with the gear down. After getting
all
> > >your weights and the arms you have marked on the floor you can
determine
> the
> > >empty wt.and CG. You don't care where the gear UP empty CG is.
> > >
> > >Now, you will want to produce a loading guide. Calculate the Most
Forward
> > >CG. - Full oil, Min.fuel, Pilot, No pass., no baggage. This is gear
down
> > >because the CG moves forward when the gear is extended.
> > >
> > >Do the Most Rearward numbers - Min. oil, everthing else full. Your
final
> > >entry will show the weight, arm and moment GEAR DOWN. Now you make the
> real
> > >final entry - Landing Gear UP - Weight is the same. Arm is increased by
> 0.48
> > >inches (this is your most rearward CG)The moment is 0.48W if you really
> want
> > >to know.
> >
> > The mass of the gear remains the same with retraction. The arm changes
by
> > a fixed amount. Therefore the moment change due to gear retract is a
> > constant, not a proportion based on aircraft mass and moment. The
formula
> > for the CG change is:
> >
> > mg + ma
> > CG = -------
> > Ma
> >
> > mg: moment due to gear change
> > ma: total moment of aircraft
> > Ma: total mass of aircraft
> >
> > If we do this calculation with the aircraft nearly empty mg will be a
> > larger proportion of final value of CG than it will if ma and Ma are for
> an
> > aircraft at max gross weight. Therefore CG will change more due to gear
> > retraction if the aircraft is lightly loaded than if the aircraft is
fully
> > loaded.
> >
> >
> > Brian Lloyd
> > brian(at)lloyd.com
> > +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> > +1.360.838.9669 - fax
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
At 10:21 AM 6/1/2002, you wrote:
>
>Ok,
>
>I think I've got it now.
>
>By combining the data from my British W&B report and the data Brian has
>supplied I have come up with the following.
>
>My airplane with radios had the following data from a weigh in that was done
>in the UK, this W&B is for MY plane.
>
>Nose gear 256.6 KG or 565.25 lbs at 938mm or 36.92" from THEIR datum.
>Main gear 850.4KG or 1874.8 lbs at 3161mm or 124.4" "
>"
>an additional 25 lbs was added somewhere but no arm was given.
Argggh! You *MUST* know the arm in order to be able to calculate a moment.
>Total Empty weight = 1131.8 KG or 2495 LBS with a CG of 2689mm or 105.8"
>
>I went and measured the distance between the main wheels and the nose gear
>and the datum and they're all correct.
>
>Now by comparing the stations given by Brian as to the location of the main
>and nose gear to the staions on my W&B I can deduce the Datum.
>
> UK Brian
>
>Nose Gear 36.92" 57"
>Diff = 20.8"
>Main Gear 124.4" 146.5
>22.1"
>
>So if we interpolate, my datum is about 22.1" behind Brians,
Well, it isn't mine. It is the one that was provided with my aircraft and
the one I have been using in leu of anything else. Mike McCoy says they
use the front of the MAC as his datum which makes a lot of sense given that
is the reference point used by the Chinese in their documentation. It just
results in negative moments for everything forward of that (oil, engine, etc.).
22.1" aft sounds like it is being measured at the front of the prop,
another logical place given you can hang a plumb bob on it. For those who
asked why one would put the datum 2' in front of the aircraft I suggest
that it would make it convenient to place the nose of the aircraft 2' from
a wall and then you can use that wall as your datum plane for making
measurements.
>which puts my
>CG around 127.9" using Brians Datum.
>
>I added another station to Brians list which is for the ADF sence antennae
>at about 233"
Sense or loop antenna? The sense antenna is the wire the runs from just
below the rear canopy to the top of the vertical stab. The loop antenna is
the big heavy thing in the belly.
>Now using the Normal Flight weight from the book of 3086 lbs as my max I
>came up with the following scenarios;
>
>First with the radios installed with the following weights.
> Rear seat Avionics and racks 96 lbs
>ADF Unit 50 lbs
>ADF Sence Ant 15 lbs
>
>I tried using an empty weight of 2495 minus the 160 lbs of removed radios
>and then added the weight on the appropriate stations using my software.
>This then moved the empty weight CG forward to 132.9", about 5" so I then
>tried subtracting those 5" from my empty weight CG and I got a CG of about
>122.9" or very close to what my neighbors CG was listed from the Yakity Yaks
>W&B report. Once I added back the 160lbs at the appropriate stations my CG
>moved back to 127.9" So here goes.
>
>Pilot GIB Fuel Radios ADF Ant Skid
>0 0 60lbs 96 50 15 0
>2555lbs CG 128.3
>200 0 60 96 50 15 0
>2755lbs CG 127.9
>200 200 240 96 50 15 0
>3135lbs CG 132.1
> Radios Removed
>0 0 60 0 0 0 30
>2439lbs CG 126.1
>200 200 60 0 0 0 30
>2624lbs CG 125.9
>200 200 240 0 0 0 30
>3004lbs CG 130.5
>
>The only thing thats in question is the actual empty weight CG since I had
>to move it back 5", but all things being equal I'm in pretty good shape with
>the weight I added in the back.
Given all the changes and the lack of certainty, I strongly recommend you
go back and reweigh the airplane. It *sounds* like the CG is probably near
where it should be and, of course, the proof of the pudding is in the
flying. If it flies right then the CG is pretty close to where it should
be. Still, if it were my airplane, I would reweigh it so that I would know
for sure.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
At 04:54 AM 6/1/2002, you wrote:
>On another front, Brian has talked about polar moment of inertia on several
>occasions. IF he is right about that, then how much weight in the tail will
>be too much?
If you recall, I asked Mr. Cheng about that and he replied that it is a
non-issue, that the stability of the aircraft would not be compromised.
Regardless, I would not advocate adding 85 pounds to the tail.
>Also, with 85 pounds of weight in the tail, you're putting a
>lot of weight where it wasn't designed to go. Could a hard landing cause
>structural damage? I don't know the answers to these questions -- DO YOU?
Good point.
>Again, as I said before, the internet is not the right place to learn to fly
>or the right place to learn maintenance.
This mailing list is a good place to talk with other people about their
experiences with this aircraft. In that, it is no better or worse than
talking with people in a coffee shop, while standing around the airplane at
a fly-in, or any other venue. One advantage of this forum is that there
are more people listening and likely to raise questions if someone says
something that doesn't look right.
Heck Mike, if Ernie and I were standing next to the airplane talking, he
wouldn't have the benefit of you looking on to call me out should I say
something that isn't correct.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
At 06:26 AM 6/2/2002, you wrote:
An amplification on my comment here:
>Given all the changes and the lack of certainty, I strongly recommend you
>go back and reweigh the airplane. It *sounds* like the CG is probably near
>where it should be and, of course, the proof of the pudding is in the
>flying. If it flies right then the CG is pretty close to where it should
>be.
OK Ernie, you probably dodged the bullet this time. But, as Mike has asked
in the past, do you really want to be a test pilot? If the airplane flies
right, the CG must be right but who wants to find out that it doesn't fly
right 10 seconds after liftoff. There ain't no Martin-Baker seat in the CJ
to save your sorry butt if turns out you guessed wrong.
Reweigh the airplane. That is what I am going to do to mine before I fly
it again.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | CJ6A engine baffle seals |
The CJ6A has leather-covered baffle seals around the engine perimeter to
seal the baffling against the cowl and to prevent chafing. Some of these
are wearing out on Betty so I would like to replace them. Has anyone tried
to make their own? If so, how successful were you?
Doug: are new ones available?
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames) |
Point well taken,
She is getting weighed next weekend.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ6A CG and W&B (serious stuff -- no flames)
>
> At 06:26 AM 6/2/2002, you wrote:
> An amplification on my comment here:
>
> >Given all the changes and the lack of certainty, I strongly recommend you
> >go back and reweigh the airplane. It *sounds* like the CG is probably
near
> >where it should be and, of course, the proof of the pudding is in the
> >flying. If it flies right then the CG is pretty close to where it should
> >be.
>
> OK Ernie, you probably dodged the bullet this time. But, as Mike has
asked
> in the past, do you really want to be a test pilot? If the airplane flies
> right, the CG must be right but who wants to find out that it doesn't fly
> right 10 seconds after liftoff. There ain't no Martin-Baker seat in the
CJ
> to save your sorry butt if turns out you guessed wrong.
>
> Reweigh the airplane. That is what I am going to do to mine before I fly
> it again.
>
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A engine baffle seals |
Brian,
Well, I suppose that you could cut up your old Nike's, and cover the strips
with unborn Nauga hide, but then you would have to go out and slaughter a
bunch of pregnant Naugas (Naugi??). It would probably be easier just to
tell me how many you need.
Yep, got em in stock.
Always yakin,
Doug
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Yak-List: CJ6A engine baffle seals
>
> The CJ6A has leather-covered baffle seals around the engine perimeter to
> seal the baffling against the cowl and to prevent chafing. Some of these
> are wearing out on Betty so I would like to replace them. Has anyone
tried
> to make their own? If so, how successful were you?
>
> Doug: are new ones available?
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Drew" <drew(at)allredstar.com> |
Doug, I got a rush order...
I need a Chinese two seat Mig-17, I also need you to gin-up about 4
other airline pilots to partner in with me and, oh, and I need jet fuel
in bulk at no more than .33 cents a gallon. Thanks Doug, I know I can
count on you - pay-pal still ok?
P.S. If the Chinese give you any flak, can I just get your new
adjustable oil blocker door when your done with the design phase.
Your friend,
Drew
Drew A. Blahnick
Red Stars Inc.
Cell 310-372-6328
www.allredstar.com
Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | VDesi10492(at)aol.com |
Hi guys
I have about 35 hours now on my m14p engine. It starts
fine, runs great and does not hesitate during throttle movement at all. At
OAT of 85F and 75% power the oil temp stays at 80, right near redline. I
have to pull back to about 65% power to get the oil temp back in the green
arc. Oil cooler door is wide open. Is this normal for a new engine? The
cht is right in the middle of the green arc.
Also I am getting a 50 hr check soon. As I get more
time on the engine it seems to leak a bit more oil. One oil input tube is a
little wet, some gaskets are a bit wet and the case bolts on the front of
the engine weep a bit. At the end of a 1hr flight there is a small bit of
oil on the left side of the card. I am consuming about 1qt @ 1.5 hrs. Do
these engines ever appear totally dry, or is this about normal for a new
engine just before a 50hr check? What kind of oil leaks should get my
attention?
Dave DeSimone
vdesi10492(at)AOL.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Drew" <drew(at)allredstar.com> |
Dave,
In flight or ground at 75% this is a constant? What happens at
altitude? How is the inlet temp after running through the cooler?
I just finished the break in of my M-14P, I often have high engine
outlet temps (not in the red, but high green to just about yellow if I
drag along the taxi) on the ground now that the summer temps are in the
70-80s here while taxing. Temps respond well with altitude (OAT)
I was told to expect a higher than normal Cylinder Hed Temp by some
prior to shutdown, and the temp was high. It has come down somewhat. I
suspect the temp probe to gage reading may have some slop involved as
well. So my first inclination is if the engine is absolutely normal,
always consider if there could be reading error, just in case you are
chasing a phantom...
My M-14 is very dry, and I'm trying to picture your cylinder "weep"
without photos. I have very, very little, but I've seen some engines
that are really wet. I have a small leak from one exhaust coupling that
is a tough one to rectify with this titanium pipe.
Finally, I'm running at about 1.3 - 1.5 qts per hour. It never really
changed much during break-in. Yours sounds great, just as long as the
oil is getting to all parts of the engine and so being exposed to
consumption.
My original M-14P had a mysterious blocked feed line or other internal
damage somewhere, as evidenced by an inability to provide oil pressure
to the prop governor. Tom Rowe, whom I bought the airplane from,
replaced the engine and we never found the source of the restriction.
Just letting you know some weird things can occur, but they are highly
unlikely/rare based on my discussions...
Just another M-14P story...
Drew A. Blahnick
Red Stars Inc.
Cell 310-372-6328
www.allredstar.com
Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
----- Original Message -----
From: VDesi10492(at)aol.com
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Oil leaks
Hi guys
I have about 35 hours now on my m14p engine. It
starts
fine, runs great and does not hesitate during throttle movement at
all. At
OAT of 85F and 75% power the oil temp stays at 80, right near redline.
I
have to pull back to about 65% power to get the oil temp back in the
green
arc. Oil cooler door is wide open. Is this normal for a new engine?
The
cht is right in the middle of the green arc.
Also I am getting a 50 hr check soon. As I get
more
time on the engine it seems to leak a bit more oil. One oil input
tube is a
little wet, some gaskets are a bit wet and the case bolts on the
front of
the engine weep a bit. At the end of a 1hr flight there is a small
bit of
oil on the left side of the card. I am consuming about 1qt @ 1.5 hrs.
Do
these engines ever appear totally dry, or is this about normal for a
new
engine just before a 50hr check? What kind of oil leaks should get my
attention?
Dave DeSimone
vdesi10492(at)AOL.com
=
=
messages.
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Doug I need... |
Drew,
You need to crank up your 02 levels a bit bud.
Yes, I will get you one of the new adjustable oil cooler air inlet doors to
you as soon as it's done.
Always yakin,
Doug
----- Original Message -----
From: "Drew" <drew(at)allredstar.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Doug I need...
>
> Doug, I got a rush order...
>
> I need a Chinese two seat Mig-17, I also need you to gin-up about 4
> other airline pilots to partner in with me and, oh, and I need jet fuel
> in bulk at no more than .33 cents a gallon. Thanks Doug, I know I can
> count on you - pay-pal still ok?
>
> P.S. If the Chinese give you any flak, can I just get your new
> adjustable oil blocker door when your done with the design phase.
>
> Your friend,
>
> Drew
>
>
> Drew A. Blahnick
> Red Stars Inc.
> Cell 310-372-6328
> www.allredstar.com
> Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Payne <cpayne(at)mc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A engine baffle seals |
Brian Lloyd wrote:
> The CJ6A has leather-covered baffle seals around the engine perimeter to
> seal the baffling against the cowl and to prevent chafing. Some of these
> are wearing out on Betty so I would like to replace them. Has anyone tried
> to make their own? If so, how successful were you?
>
> Doug: are new ones available?
>
> Brian Lloyd
Been there done that. My basic problem was finding suitable foam rubber
material that stood up to oil and had some flammablity resistance. My
experiment flopped, although it really looked pretty for abot the first
25 hours.
Immediate Solution: call Doug.
However, I might raise another issue; my M14P baffles sit about 3/8" off
the centerline of the CJ cowling ring so the baffle seals get skewed a
bit. What helped me was using teflon tape bonded to the metal ring on
the cowl. Longer life for those baffle seals.
Craig Payne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A engine baffle seals |
Where can I order the Formation Flying video and book?
Dont worry Mike, I'm not going to try it after reading the book, I was told
it was mandatory to buy it in order to get FAST training.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Yak-List: CJ6A engine baffle seals
>
> The CJ6A has leather-covered baffle seals around the engine perimeter to
> seal the baffling against the cowl and to prevent chafing. Some of these
> are wearing out on Betty so I would like to replace them. Has anyone
tried
> to make their own? If so, how successful were you?
>
> Doug: are new ones available?
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | VDesi10492(at)aol.com |
Hi Drew
Thanks for the input. I recently went to 25w60 oil
instead of the 100 wt I was using and this is when most of the leaking
started. I will go back to 100wt for a while.
I also have an anti hydraulic lock kit on the engine. I
pull at least 12 blades thru prior to each start. I do get some oil out of
the drain when I do this and also out of the exhaust at times. Do I also
have to pull lower plugs to prevent hydraulic lock damage. At times when I
pull it thru I do feel some resistance but it not difficult to pull thru.
The fellow that I bought it from said a 50 hr would be a good idea since the
engine was new. I will have this done at Yak center of america in St. Louis.
I have been told that the oil temp will cool off at altitude
with the same power setting. I do not understand why.
Any input would help
Dave DeSimone
vdesi10492(at)AOL.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <adsavar(at)gte.net> |
Hi Dave,
I don't believe the 25W-60 caused the oil leaks and I don't believe changing
back to the 100W will make any difference. At least I've never heard of it
making a difference. Sounds more coincidental than anything else. Plus the
25W-60 should help with lower oil temps in hotter weather.
As for the high oil temps, as I believe Drew suggested, verify the oil
temperature probe is sending the correct information before chasing a
potential phantom. Personally, with your 50 check coming up, I'd address
the question with Igor. He's suppose to be the expert, isn't he?
Dennis Savarese
----- Original Message -----
From: <VDesi10492(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Oil leaks
>
>
> Hi Drew
>
> Thanks for the input. I recently went to 25w60
oil
> instead of the 100 wt I was using and this is when most of the leaking
> started. I will go back to 100wt for a while.
>
> I also have an anti hydraulic lock kit on the engine. I
> pull at least 12 blades thru prior to each start. I do get some oil out
of
> the drain when I do this and also out of the exhaust at times. Do I also
> have to pull lower plugs to prevent hydraulic lock damage. At times when
I
> pull it thru I do feel some resistance but it not difficult to pull thru.
> The fellow that I bought it from said a 50 hr would be a good idea since
the
> engine was new. I will have this done at Yak center of america in St.
Louis.
>
> I have been told that the oil temp will cool off at
altitude
> with the same power setting. I do not understand why.
>
>
> Any input would help
>
> Dave DeSimone
> vdesi10492(at)AOL.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "T.A. Lewis" <talewis(at)attbi.com> |
Hi All,
First I want to thank all of you who answered my inquiry concerning the
measurement to the tail cone. From some of the answers and discussions I
read I would say that if you didn't see it weighed you might want to
have it done yourself.
I referenced all of my measurements from the technical data in the
Chinese manual.
I then used the information in Bull. #5 of the YAK Pilots' Club dated
9/7/99 and found this to be extremely accurate (negative moments and
zero moments don't bother me). Even the loading graph confirms what I am
going to say next.
From the Chinese manual I have concluded that the most aft CG that you
can use for takeoff, and be legal, is not 24.1% ie. 16.57 in. but is
actually 23.4% ie. 16.1 in. If the a/c is loaded at 23.4% at takeoff,
when the nose wheel retracts you will then be at 24.1%.
The only weight they show for this .7% aft cg shift is 3086 so I must
assume it does for all weights.
Comments?
Terry Lewis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A engine baffle seals |
At 11:12 AM 6/2/2002, you wrote:
>
>Brian,
>Well, I suppose that you could cut up your old Nike's, and cover the strips
>with unborn Nauga hide, but then you would have to go out and slaughter a
>bunch of pregnant Naugas (Naugi??). It would probably be easier just to
>tell me how many you need.
>
>Yep, got em in stock.
Damn! This is like owning a Cessna. :
)
Let me count and get back to you in private email.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Payne <cpayne(at)mc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A engine baffle seals |
Ernie wrote:
>
> Where can I order the Formation Flying video and book?
>
> Dont worry Mike, I'm not going to try it after reading the book, I was told
> it was mandatory to buy it in order to get FAST training.
>
> Ernie
http://www.shop.eaa.org/html/2warbirds_books.html?cart_id
Craig Payne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Doug I need... |
At 12:42 PM 6/2/2002, you wrote:
>
>Doug, I got a rush order...
>
>I need a Chinese two seat Mig-17, I also need you to gin-up about 4
>other airline pilots to partner in with me and, oh, and I need jet fuel
>in bulk at no more than .33 cents a gallon. Thanks Doug, I know I can
>count on you - pay-pal still ok?
>
>P.S. If the Chinese give you any flak, can I just get your new
>adjustable oil blocker door when your done with the design phase.
Why stoop to a MiG-17. I have a contact who offered me a MiG-29 for
$150,000. And as I sat there a bit speechless he added, "Oh, and Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms your problem."
As for jet fuel, you can always do what Fred did. As I recall, he bought
an old fuel truck and was available day or night to haul away jet fuel from
airliners that needed to offload fuel for W&B reasons.
And if that fails, I hear they run just peachy on home heating oil.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
At 01:27 PM 6/2/2002, you wrote:
>
>
> Hi guys
>
> I have about 35 hours now on my m14p engine. It
> starts
>fine, runs great and does not hesitate during throttle movement at all. At
>OAT of 85F and 75% power the oil temp stays at 80, right near redline. I
>have to pull back to about 65% power to get the oil temp back in the green
>arc. Oil cooler door is wide open.
Is this inlet oil temp or outlet oil temp? US oils are designed to operate
at higher temperatures than Russian or Chinese oils. My feeling (and you
will hear arguments to the contrary from others) is that inlet oil temps
should be at 80C with outlet temps at or below 120C. What is the outlet
oil temp limitation for the engine? That is the critical number, not inlet
oil temp.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ6A engine baffle seals |
At 03:41 PM 6/2/2002, you wrote:
>However, I might raise another issue; my M14P baffles sit about 3/8" off
>the centerline of the CJ cowling ring so the baffle seals get skewed a
>bit. What helped me was using teflon tape bonded to the metal ring on
>the cowl. Longer life for those baffle seals.
Good idea. Thanks!
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
At 06:19 PM 6/2/2002, you wrote:
> From the Chinese manual I have concluded that the most aft CG that you
>can use for takeoff, and be legal, is not 24.1% ie. 16.57 in. but is
>actually 23.4% ie. 16.1 in. If the a/c is loaded at 23.4% at takeoff,
>when the nose wheel retracts you will then be at 24.1%.
>The only weight they show for this .7% aft cg shift is 3086 so I must
>assume it does for all weights.
No, it doesn't. The moment for the retract change is constant but the
moment for the aircraft varies with loading. Therefore the CG change will
be greater at lower gross weights. The saving grace is that the CG tends
to move forward at lower gross weights so a more aft CG change from the
retract moment is less of an issue.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Payne <cpayne(at)mc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Doug I need... |
Brian Lloyd wrote:
> As for jet fuel, you can always do what Fred did. As I recall, he bought
> an old fuel truck and was available day or night to haul away jet fuel from
> airliners that needed to offload fuel for W&B reasons.
>
> And if that fails, I hear they run just peachy on home heating oil.
>
> Brian Lloyd
Yep, a local MiG 21 jock uses #1 Kerosene (#2 is smokey) and adds a
little Prist. He buys in bulk from an Ag distributor since we are
located at the edge of the country. But, because of airport regs, local
city politics, the FAA and the sort, he has to slip it in.
Craig Payne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Drew" <aapilot(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Doug I need... |
Gees, if I were the FBI and didn't realize you all were patriots, I
might be monitoring this site for as much knowledge as you guys generate
on operating ex-communist military airplanes cheaply...
Thanks for the tips...
Drew A. Blahnick
Red Stars Inc.
Cell 310-372-6328
www.allredstar.com
Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Payne
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Doug I need...
Brian Lloyd wrote:
> As for jet fuel, you can always do what Fred did. As I recall, he
bought
> an old fuel truck and was available day or night to haul away jet
fuel from
> airliners that needed to offload fuel for W&B reasons.
>
> And if that fails, I hear they run just peachy on home heating oil.
>
> Brian Lloyd
Yep, a local MiG 21 jock uses #1 Kerosene (#2 is smokey) and adds a
little Prist. He buys in bulk from an Ag distributor since we are
located at the edge of the country. But, because of airport regs,
local
city politics, the FAA and the sort, he has to slip it in.
Craig Payne
=
=
messages.
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Drew" <aapilot(at)adelphia.net> |
Dave,
On changing oils from mineral to multi-grade: The issue is insuring your
break-in period is complete to the best of your knowledge. It sounds
like you are changing at 35 hours? Since there are few external
measurements to count on when the rings have seated and the break-in is
complete (CHT moderate's, oil consumption stabilizes etc.), just follow
those experts advice such as Vladimir Yastremski here in CA. The risk,
as you probably know, in not completing the break-in period is higher
oil consumption and perhaps other indicators others are better able to
explain...
On pulling through the M-14P: I also have the intake drain system as
well. I have a very conservative start routine for my M-14P and pull it
through as many blades before starting to check for hyd lock. I often
get oil coming from either the left or right exhaust during this
process, and/or a little from the intake drain. This has increased a
bit since I switched to my multi-grade oil, and I suspect it's from the
oil being much less thick at lower temps, so it 'drains' more
efficiently, thus I'm evacuating more oil during this process from the
lower reaches of the engine. I have the MTV-9 three blade prop, and it
is much 'stiffer' to pull through than my friends Hunsai 260 HP with
Chinese metal two blade. Why? It isn't hydraulic lock, I suspect it is
compression and my prop is a larger mass to move through.
If you are pulling through your blades and oil is evacuating, sounds
like you are in good shape. You should not have to remove your plugs in
this process. My friend went to pull his blades through one morning and
it didn't want to budge at a certain point; he suspected a cylinder had
a good amount of oil sitting there and removed the plugs, sure
enough...A mod you might want to consider is a manual or electrical
shut-off valve inserted just below the oil tank that stops gravity feed
of oil from the tank after shut down.
You oil inlet temps should be lower with a constant volume of airflow at
higher altitudes based on your oil cooler performing much more
effectively (and for the Canadians, too effectively), as the airflow
over the radiator is of course much cooler, likewise, the entire engine,
from front cylinders to oil tank is subjected to a sustained lower
temperature condition [airflow] at altitude due to the lapse rate.
Again, these are my experiences and may differ from U.S. Government FDA
requirements....
Drew A. Blahnick
Red Stars Inc.
Cell 310-372-6328
www.allredstar.com
Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
----- Original Message -----
From: VDesi10492(at)aol.com
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 4:38 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Oil leaks
Hi Drew
Thanks for the input. I recently went to
25w60 oil
instead of the 100 wt I was using and this is when most of the leaking
started. I will go back to 100wt for a while.
I also have an anti hydraulic lock kit on the engine.
I
pull at least 12 blades thru prior to each start. I do get some oil
out of
the drain when I do this and also out of the exhaust at times. Do I
also
have to pull lower plugs to prevent hydraulic lock damage. At times
when I
pull it thru I do feel some resistance but it not difficult to pull
thru.
The fellow that I bought it from said a 50 hr would be a good idea
since the
engine was new. I will have this done at Yak center of america in St.
Louis.
I have been told that the oil temp will cool off at
altitude
with the same power setting. I do not understand why.
Any input would help
Dave DeSimone
vdesi10492(at)AOL.com
=
=
messages.
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Drew" <drew(at)allredstar.com> |
| Subject: | Radial Engines and Multigrade oil |
A question for anyone:
What is your opinion of 15W-50 multigrade? Besides the fact that it is
it is very expensive. Any rumors out there? The company likes to brag
in their oil products brochure it is the oil for P&W Radials...
I already know how much we love 25W-60, and have several cases on
order....
Thanks,
Drew
Drew A. Blahnick
Red Stars Inc.
Cell 310-372-6328
www.allredstar.com
Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
At 11:49 PM 6/2/2002, you wrote:
>
>Dave,
>
>On changing oils from mineral to multi-grade: The issue is insuring your
>break-in period is complete to the best of your knowledge. It sounds
>like you are changing at 35 hours?
Many overhaulers are recommending multi-vis oil for break-in. Phillips has
a multi-vis oil specifically for break in, 20W50M. It is a multi-vis oil
without the dispersant additives so it acts like a mineral oil. (Actually,
Phillips multi-vis oils are all mineral oil.
>Since there are few external
>measurements to count on when the rings have seated and the break-in is
>complete (CHT moderate's, oil consumption stabilizes etc.), just follow
>those experts advice such as Vladimir Yastremski here in CA. The risk,
>as you probably know, in not completing the break-in period is higher
>oil consumption and perhaps other indicators others are better able to
>explain...
Keep the throttle setting high so that the engine experiences high BMEPs
will help ensure that the rings seat properly. Don't baby the engine.
>enough...A mod you might want to consider is a manual or electrical
>shut-off valve inserted just below the oil tank that stops gravity feed
>of oil from the tank after shut down.
The M14P already has an anti-drain-down valve built into the engine. I
know it is a popular mod but it is superfluous. I would rather deal with
oil in the engine than to have an extra valve fail in flight. I know,
everyone says it is so reliable it will never fail.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Radial Engines and Multigrade oil |
At 11:54 PM 6/2/2002, you wrote:
>
>A question for anyone:
>
>What is your opinion of 15W-50 multigrade? Besides the fact that it is
>it is very expensive. Any rumors out there?
It'll work.
>The company likes to brag
>in their oil products brochure it is the oil for P&W Radials...
Sure it is. And at something like $4/qt Shell certainly loves it when
people pour it into an engine that has oil consumption measured in gallons
per hour. If our engines had turbochargers I might be tempted but they
don't so ...
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Jefferies , YAK UK Ltd" <yakuk(at)compuserve.com> |
Why does not someone draw up a C of G calculator that the pilot may just
insert his own a/c data (weight & arm) post it on a web site. I will
even host a CJ6 calculator. Take a look at www.yakuk.co.uk/downloads.htm
for calculator for the YAK 52, L-29. I have an advanced copy for YAK 50
but its just in the checking stages, this one will do mac & distance
calks.
When the CJ6 one is done all this bickering can stop.
Brian, you have a copy of my YAK 50 draft calculator, use this as a
template?
Best regards, Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ernie" <ernie(at)gscinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Doug I need... |
I have 2 300 GAL tanks here. 1 for K1 the other for 100LL. The local oil
distributor brings me both. Shouldnt run Diesl though, too high a sulfur
content, and the burn range is unacceptably high.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Payne" <cpayne(at)mc.net>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Doug I need...
>
> Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
> > As for jet fuel, you can always do what Fred did. As I recall, he
bought
> > an old fuel truck and was available day or night to haul away jet fuel
from
> > airliners that needed to offload fuel for W&B reasons.
> >
> > And if that fails, I hear they run just peachy on home heating oil.
> >
> > Brian Lloyd
>
> Yep, a local MiG 21 jock uses #1 Kerosene (#2 is smokey) and adds a
> little Prist. He buys in bulk from an Ag distributor since we are
> located at the edge of the country. But, because of airport regs, local
> city politics, the FAA and the sort, he has to slip it in.
>
> Craig Payne
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <adsavar(at)gte.net> |
As for the additional shut off valve, I completely agree with Brian and add
one additional point. It is also something we could easily forget to turn
on or if connected to the starting system, may fail and bingo, no oil to the
engine. I'd leave well enough alone.
Dennis Savarese
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Oil leaks
>
> At 11:49 PM 6/2/2002, you wrote:
> >
> >Dave,
> >
> >On changing oils from mineral to multi-grade: The issue is insuring your
> >break-in period is complete to the best of your knowledge. It sounds
> >like you are changing at 35 hours?
>
> Many overhaulers are recommending multi-vis oil for break-in. Phillips
has
> a multi-vis oil specifically for break in, 20W50M. It is a multi-vis oil
> without the dispersant additives so it acts like a mineral oil. (Actually,
> Phillips multi-vis oils are all mineral oil.
>
> >Since there are few external
> >measurements to count on when the rings have seated and the break-in is
> >complete (CHT moderate's, oil consumption stabilizes etc.), just follow
> >those experts advice such as Vladimir Yastremski here in CA. The risk,
> >as you probably know, in not completing the break-in period is higher
> >oil consumption and perhaps other indicators others are better able to
> >explain...
>
> Keep the throttle setting high so that the engine experiences high BMEPs
> will help ensure that the rings seat properly. Don't baby the engine.
>
> >enough...A mod you might want to consider is a manual or electrical
> >shut-off valve inserted just below the oil tank that stops gravity feed
> >of oil from the tank after shut down.
>
> The M14P already has an anti-drain-down valve built into the engine. I
> know it is a popular mod but it is superfluous. I would rather deal with
> oil in the engine than to have an extra valve fail in flight. I know,
> everyone says it is so reliable it will never fail.
>
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian(at)lloyd.com
> +1.530.676.1113 - voice
> +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
>Why does not someone draw up a C of G calculator that the pilot may just
>insert his own a/c data (weight & arm) post it on a web site.
>When the CJ6 one is done all this bickering can stop.
>
>Best regards, Mark
Mark,
This has been done by several people including myself. The problem is that
there are so many modifications out there that what works for me may not
be valid for someone else. The best Way is to Weigh...and do it yourself.
Craig Payne
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Genzlinger, Reade" <ReadeG(at)Cairnwood.com> |
Drew, Dave and others:
We have a Yak-52 with 450 hours - started very dry and now has dampness on
left side only (looking from front). We have from day one used 1 quart per
hour (Phillips 25/60). As I understand it, this is very reasonable
consumption and a wet engine is simply the nature of a round engine. Took a
little getting used to coming form a predominately flat engine environment.
Tips - check all the union fittings for the oil system. We were able to
tighten every one in the system (I believe there are 7). Also, we routinely
check and tighten the intake and exhaust ring nuts. I have also replaced
several of the valve cover gaskets from supplied spares. I believe there
are silicone gaskets available as well. Another spot to check are the four
nuts that secure the oil sump to the engine case. You will need a long
extension to reach these. And finally - check the clamps securing the
rubber push rod seals. I'm sure there are others but these will keep you
busy for awhile!
I have the opposite problem on oil cooling. I have to keep the cooler door
closed most of the time. Only half open on the hottest summer days
(suburban Philadelphia location) and this is with one of the factory
supplied screens installed to block air flow entering the cooler! There
seems to be tremendous cooling capacity in the system. I would check for a
possible restriction in the line somewhere.
I have never had a problem controlling cylinder head temps either. Remember
to let the engine cool to 150 C before initiating the shutdown procedure.
FWIW - We have the intake drain kit installed. When pulling through we have
had oil from all possible combinations between drains and exhaust. Only
once do I recall oil from all four points at the same time. I am tempted to
say that, based upon our limited experience to date, there appears to be a
direct correlation between regular consistent use (time between flights) and
the amount of oil one leaves on the ramp. Nothing approaching the
scientific method involved here!
Reade Genzlinger
Cairnwood Cooperative Corporation
215.914.0370
readeg(at)cairnwood.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Drew" <aapilot(at)adelphia.net> |
Good post, I'm sure right now hundreds of pilots are tightening up their
ships...
I installed the silicon gaskets provided by you know who..Doug Sapp
I should add on the oil shutoff valve mod under the tank - it is a
moving part and will eventually fail to respond; mine is electrically
operated from in the cockpit and the teeth on the valve are skipping at
times during actuation and will be replaced. Likewise, although you
can't start with the valve closed the way mine is wired, if the CB is
popped for this item, you can get around that safety feature and start
up without oil.
Bottom line: if you already have it I would monitor it's health
routinely - you can hear it when you throw the switch from the cockpit
if you have the electrical-control mod, you may hear it 'skipping', that
might go unnoticed if your are not looking for it. I remove the helmet
after shutdown and specifically listen for the wirring swing of this
gate valve. I color coded the swing arm as it was tough to see with the
three point inspection panel removed without good light in the
preflight.
Brian, I'm going to check my schematics on the M-14P, do you have a pg #
describing this drain valve from the manual?
Drew
Drew A. Blahnick
Red Stars Inc.
Cell 310-372-6328
www.allredstar.com
Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
----- Original Message -----
From: Genzlinger, Reade
To: 'yak-list(at)matronics.com'
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 6:55 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oil leaks
Drew, Dave and others:
We have a Yak-52 with 450 hours - started very dry and now has
dampness on
left side only (looking from front). We have from day one used 1
quart per
hour (Phillips 25/60). As I understand it, this is very reasonable
consumption and a wet engine is simply the nature of a round engine.
Took a
little getting used to coming form a predominately flat engine
environment.
Tips - check all the union fittings for the oil system. We were able
to
tighten every one in the system (I believe there are 7). Also, we
routinely
check and tighten the intake and exhaust ring nuts. I have also
replaced
several of the valve cover gaskets from supplied spares. I believe
there
are silicone gaskets available as well. Another spot to check are the
four
nuts that secure the oil sump to the engine case. You will need a
long
extension to reach these. And finally - check the clamps securing the
rubber push rod seals. I'm sure there are others but these will keep
you
busy for awhile!
I have the opposite problem on oil cooling. I have to keep the cooler
door
closed most of the time. Only half open on the hottest summer days
(suburban Philadelphia location) and this is with one of the factory
supplied screens installed to block air flow entering the cooler!
There
seems to be tremendous cooling capacity in the system. I would check
for a
possible restriction in the line somewhere.
I have never had a problem controlling cylinder head temps either.
Remember
to let the engine cool to 150 C before initiating the shutdown
procedure.
FWIW - We have the intake drain kit installed. When pulling through
we have
had oil from all possible combinations between drains and exhaust.
Only
once do I recall oil from all four points at the same time. I am
tempted to
say that, based upon our limited experience to date, there appears to
be a
direct correlation between regular consistent use (time between
flights) and
the amount of oil one leaves on the ramp. Nothing approaching the
scientific method involved here!
Reade Genzlinger
Cairnwood Cooperative Corporation
215.914.0370
readeg(at)cairnwood.com
=
=
messages.
=
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hal Morley" <yakjock(at)msn.com> |
Dave:
My experience is that the M14P takes about 50 hours for breaking in.
Bill Blackwell told me that the engine would run hot for the first 35-50
hours and then cool down, and this was my experience. Likewise oil
consumption would be higher at first and then settle down. I now have
270 hours on the engine (with a 3 blade Whirlwind) and my oil
consumption runs 1.1 to 1.5 liters an hour, and this seems normal to a
little high. I know of some engines that run at .5 an hour or a little
less.
I have the quick drain kit with an oil cutoff. I usually get a little
drainage from the drain kit with a small amount coming from the exhaust
on pull through. I usually pull through 14 blades. not unusual to have
a little extra stiffness occasionally - I just let it stand a second and
it bleeds off.
I use the 25-60 Phillips. The engine is generally very dry although
there is always some part or another that wants to leak a bit. With the
new engine you need to go through it thoroughly and tighten everything
down to spec. You'll find things tend to back off with time. Shane
Wease and I go through mine very 50 hours at least.
When I shifted from 60 wt to 25-60 I experienced new leaks; when I added
some Marvel Mystery Oil I found a few more -- could be mere
coincidence..........
Every car and plane I've owned has had its own personality and the
CJ/M14P definitely has one. Some days it purrs like a kitten with nary
a vibration, the next start and I wonder who nicked the prop! My
overwhelming consideration is that this an engine and airplane I like a
lot and have great confidence in.
Hal Morley
Yakjock(at)msn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walt Lannon" <lannon(at)look.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Radial Engines and Multigrade oil |
Drew;
Aeroshell 15W50 seems to be an acceptable oil for horizontally opposed
engines. It is not for radials. The one thing it may be useful for is to
show you where the oil leaks are. It is so thin it will go right through the
porous castings of many older engines.
I don't believe there is anything on the market right now better than
Phillips 25W60 for radials. It is NOT a watery semi-synthetic like 15W50. It
is mineral oil with AD and viscosity modifying additives.
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Drew" <drew(at)allredstar.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Radial Engines and Multigrade oil
>
> A question for anyone:
>
> What is your opinion of 15W-50 multigrade? Besides the fact that it is
> it is very expensive. Any rumors out there? The company likes to brag
> in their oil products brochure it is the oil for P&W Radials...
>
> I already know how much we love 25W-60, and have several cases on
> order....
>
> Thanks,
>
> Drew
>
>
> Drew A. Blahnick
> Red Stars Inc.
> Cell 310-372-6328
> www.allredstar.com
> Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <adsavar(at)gte.net> |
I believe you will find the description of the valve in the M14P maintenance
manual, section 072.50.00, page 8. The last paragraph on the page refers to
the valve; "With the engine inoperative, the check valve precludes flow of
oil from the tank to the engine". Go to page 10 of the same section and see
figure 3, Oil Pump Reducing Valve assemble.
Dennis Savarese
----- Original Message -----
From: "Drew" <aapilot(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Oil leaks
>
> Good post, I'm sure right now hundreds of pilots are tightening up their
> ships...
>
> I installed the silicon gaskets provided by you know who..Doug Sapp
>
> I should add on the oil shutoff valve mod under the tank - it is a
> moving part and will eventually fail to respond; mine is electrically
> operated from in the cockpit and the teeth on the valve are skipping at
> times during actuation and will be replaced. Likewise, although you
> can't start with the valve closed the way mine is wired, if the CB is
> popped for this item, you can get around that safety feature and start
> up without oil.
> Bottom line: if you already have it I would monitor it's health
> routinely - you can hear it when you throw the switch from the cockpit
> if you have the electrical-control mod, you may hear it 'skipping', that
> might go unnoticed if your are not looking for it. I remove the helmet
> after shutdown and specifically listen for the wirring swing of this
> gate valve. I color coded the swing arm as it was tough to see with the
> three point inspection panel removed without good light in the
> preflight.
>
> Brian, I'm going to check my schematics on the M-14P, do you have a pg #
> describing this drain valve from the manual?
>
> Drew
>
>
> Drew A. Blahnick
> Red Stars Inc.
> Cell 310-372-6328
> www.allredstar.com
> Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Genzlinger, Reade
> To: 'yak-list(at)matronics.com'
> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 6:55 AM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oil leaks
>
>
>
>
> Drew, Dave and others:
>
> We have a Yak-52 with 450 hours - started very dry and now has
> dampness on
> left side only (looking from front). We have from day one used 1
> quart per
> hour (Phillips 25/60). As I understand it, this is very reasonable
> consumption and a wet engine is simply the nature of a round engine.
> Took a
> little getting used to coming form a predominately flat engine
> environment.
> Tips - check all the union fittings for the oil system. We were able
> to
> tighten every one in the system (I believe there are 7). Also, we
> routinely
> check and tighten the intake and exhaust ring nuts. I have also
> replaced
> several of the valve cover gaskets from supplied spares. I believe
> there
> are silicone gaskets available as well. Another spot to check are the
> four
> nuts that secure the oil sump to the engine case. You will need a
> long
> extension to reach these. And finally - check the clamps securing the
> rubber push rod seals. I'm sure there are others but these will keep
> you
> busy for awhile!
>
> I have the opposite problem on oil cooling. I have to keep the cooler
> door
> closed most of the time. Only half open on the hottest summer days
> (suburban Philadelphia location) and this is with one of the factory
> supplied screens installed to block air flow entering the cooler!
> There
> seems to be tremendous cooling capacity in the system. I would check
> for a
> possible restriction in the line somewhere.
>
> I have never had a problem controlling cylinder head temps either.
> Remember
> to let the engine cool to 150 C before initiating the shutdown
> procedure.
>
> FWIW - We have the intake drain kit installed. When pulling through
> we have
> had oil from all possible combinations between drains and exhaust.
> Only
> once do I recall oil from all four points at the same time. I am
> tempted to
> say that, based upon our limited experience to date, there appears to
> be a
> direct correlation between regular consistent use (time between
> flights) and
> the amount of oil one leaves on the ramp. Nothing approaching the
> scientific method involved here!
>
> Reade Genzlinger
> Cairnwood Cooperative Corporation
> 215.914.0370
> readeg(at)cairnwood.com
>
>
> messages.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YakPilot27(at)cs.com |
| Subject: | Yak Oil Temp & Usage |
I have 600 hours on my 1996 Yak-52. Using W100 since new, oil consumption
has consistently been 1 qt per hour. Cowl is mostly clean when removed for
oil changes at 25 hour intervals. All fittings are checked and tightened if
needed at time of oil change. In the Chicago area, at all power settings and
altitudes, oil temp never exceeds the middle of the green arc. Cylinder head
temp is fully manageable with the shutters except for long climbs when the
ground temp is above 90. About 3 years ago I decided I was a wise guy and
replaced the W100 with 15W50 when changing the oil. Within 90 seconds after
start up, the oil temp was at the top of the green arc and rising. Needless
to say, the 15W50 was immediately drained and replaced with W100. I have not
tried 25W50. Maybe I'll try it the next time I'm feeling wise guy-ish.
Bob M.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Schrick" <schrick(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | M14P Break In (Oil Shut off valve ???) |
Hal,
Where did you get your oil cut off valve and how did you attach
it. Vladimir just did my annual on "Mucus" and found that the
engine was in great shape but it just leaks oil. Compression
was high on all cylinders (78 was the lowest).
Vladimir was trying to find a mechanical one that could be attatched
to the fuel shut off lever in the cockpit.
What is your thoughts?
Mark Schrick
Mark Schrick
966 Wallace Drive
San Jose, CA 95120
(408) 323-5150(H) or (408) 391-6664 (Car)
>--- Original Message ---
>From: Hal Morley <yakjock(at)msn.com>
>To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: 6/3/02 8:25:20 AM
>
>
>Dave:
>
>My experience is that the M14P takes about 50 hours for breaking
in.
>Bill Blackwell told me that the engine would run hot for the
first 35-50
>hours and then cool down, and this was my experience. Likewise
oil
>consumption would be higher at first and then settle down.
I now have
>270 hours on the engine (with a 3 blade Whirlwind) and my oil
>consumption runs 1.1 to 1.5 liters an hour, and this seems normal
to a
>little high. I know of some engines that run at .5 an hour
or a little
>less.
>
>I have the quick drain kit with an oil cutoff. I usually get
a little
>drainage from the drain kit with a small amount coming from
the exhaust
>on pull through. I usually pull through 14 blades. not unusual
to have
>a little extra stiffness occasionally - I just let it stand
a second and
>it bleeds off.
>
>I use the 25-60 Phillips. The engine is generally very dry
although
>there is always some part or another that wants to leak a bit.
With the
>new engine you need to go through it thoroughly and tighten
everything
>down to spec. You'll find things tend to back off with time.
Shane
>Wease and I go through mine very 50 hours at least.
>
>When I shifted from 60 wt to 25-60 I experienced new leaks;
when I added
>some Marvel Mystery Oil I found a few more -- could be mere
>coincidence..........
>
>Every car and plane I've owned has had its own personality and
the
>CJ/M14P definitely has one. Some days it purrs like a kitten
with nary
>a vibration, the next start and I wonder who nicked the prop!
My
>overwhelming consideration is that this an engine and airplane
I like a
>lot and have great confidence in.
>
>Hal Morley
>
>Yakjock(at)msn.com
>
>
of
form
messages.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Ivey <jim(at)jimivey.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Yak Oil Temp & Usage |
Speaking of wise-guys doing dumb ass stunts, I decided to ad Avblend to
my W100 one day (I use W100 in Summer and W120 in Winter). I have
always liked Avblend (Lenkite) in my Comanche and it's FAA approved for
aircraft engines. However, in the M14P it made the engine leak like a
sieve. Oil came out of all sorts of places. I immediately switched
back to clean straight-weight oil and the problem subsided. I then and
swore off oil experimentation.
If I were breaking in and using a new engine I would probably go the
Phillips 25W50 route. But since my engine has been using Shell AD
straight-weight for hundreds of hours I will stick with it. I knew a
fellow one time who flew straight mineral oil for a couple of hundred
hours before switching to AD oil. His first flight with the "improved"
oil ended abruptly when the new detergents loosened up all the old
"gunk" in his motor and promptly plugged oil galleries. I learned from
him not to change horses in midstream.
Jim "was a dumb ass wiseguy one day" Ivey
YakPilot27(at)cs.com wrote:
>
>I have 600 hours on my 1996 Yak-52. Using W100 since new, oil consumption
>has consistently been 1 qt per hour. Cowl is mostly clean when removed for
>oil changes at 25 hour intervals. All fittings are checked and tightened if
>needed at time of oil change. In the Chicago area, at all power settings and
>altitudes, oil temp never exceeds the middle of the green arc. Cylinder head
>temp is fully manageable with the shutters except for long climbs when the
>ground temp is above 90. About 3 years ago I decided I was a wise guy and
>replaced the W100 with 15W50 when changing the oil. Within 90 seconds after
>start up, the oil temp was at the top of the green arc and rising. Needless
>to say, the 15W50 was immediately drained and replaced with W100. I have not
>tried 25W50. Maybe I'll try it the next time I'm feeling wise guy-ish.
>
>Bob M.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | Re: M14P Break In |
If the engine manufacturer has put test cell time on these engines before we
get them, are they already run in?? If no, then how can they know the
correct hp developed by each engine? Many of the M14 engines I have seen
have the hp listed in the front of the log book and many times it varies
from 345 to 385hp, how can they know this if the engine is fully run in?
Always Yakin,
Doug
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hal Morley" <yakjock(at)msn.com>
Subject: Yak-List: M14P Break In
>
> Dave:
>
> My experience is that the M14P takes about 50 hours for breaking in.
> Bill Blackwell told me that the engine would run hot for the first 35-50
> hours and then cool down, and this was my experience. Likewise oil
> consumption would be higher at first and then settle down. I now have
> 270 hours on the engine (with a 3 blade Whirlwind) and my oil
> consumption runs 1.1 to 1.5 liters an hour, and this seems normal to a
> little high. I know of some engines that run at .5 an hour or a little
> less.
>
> I have the quick drain kit with an oil cutoff. I usually get a little
> drainage from the drain kit with a small amount coming from the exhaust
> on pull through. I usually pull through 14 blades. not unusual to have
> a little extra stiffness occasionally - I just let it stand a second and
> it bleeds off.
>
> I use the 25-60 Phillips. The engine is generally very dry although
> there is always some part or another that wants to leak a bit. With the
> new engine you need to go through it thoroughly and tighten everything
> down to spec. You'll find things tend to back off with time. Shane
> Wease and I go through mine very 50 hours at least.
>
> When I shifted from 60 wt to 25-60 I experienced new leaks; when I added
> some Marvel Mystery Oil I found a few more -- could be mere
> coincidence..........
>
> Every car and plane I've owned has had its own personality and the
> CJ/M14P definitely has one. Some days it purrs like a kitten with nary
> a vibration, the next start and I wonder who nicked the prop! My
> overwhelming consideration is that this an engine and airplane I like a
> lot and have great confidence in.
>
> Hal Morley
>
> Yakjock(at)msn.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <adsavar(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: M14P Break In |
Doug,
This may come across as a naive statement/question, but here goes.
What's the difference if the engine is " fully run in" or not as to whether
horsepower is correct or not? Horsepower can be determined from the instant
the engine is run regardless of it's condition of break in. I can make a
timing adjustment and affect horsepower up or down. Also a change in inlet
air temperature will affect horsepower. On fuel injected engines and
possibly on pressure carbureted engines, adjusting the fuel pressure will
also affect horsepower. And that doesn't necessarily mean the more fuel
pressure, the more horsepower. Sometimes lowering the fuel pressure can
also increase horsepower. It all depends on how efficient that big 'ol
airpump is hanging on the front of your airplane. So my guess is these
variations in horsepower are really not of a scientific nature but rather a
single run after assembly to be relatively assured the engine operates well
and is within the manufacturers horsepower specs.
Just my 2 cents.
Dennis Savarese
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: M14P Break In
>
> If the engine manufacturer has put test cell time on these engines before
we
> get them, are they already run in?? If no, then how can they know the
> correct hp developed by each engine? Many of the M14 engines I have seen
> have the hp listed in the front of the log book and many times it varies
> from 345 to 385hp, how can they know this if the engine is fully run in?
>
> Always Yakin,
> Doug
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hal Morley" <yakjock(at)msn.com>
> To:
> Subject: Yak-List: M14P Break In
>
>
> >
> > Dave:
> >
> > My experience is that the M14P takes about 50 hours for breaking in.
> > Bill Blackwell told me that the engine would run hot for the first 35-50
> > hours and then cool down, and this was my experience. Likewise oil
> > consumption would be higher at first and then settle down. I now have
> > 270 hours on the engine (with a 3 blade Whirlwind) and my oil
> > consumption runs 1.1 to 1.5 liters an hour, and this seems normal to a
> > little high. I know of some engines that run at .5 an hour or a little
> > less.
> >
> > I have the quick drain kit with an oil cutoff. I usually get a little
> > drainage from the drain kit with a small amount coming from the exhaust
> > on pull through. I usually pull through 14 blades. not unusual to have
> > a little extra stiffness occasionally - I just let it stand a second and
> > it bleeds off.
> >
> > I use the 25-60 Phillips. The engine is generally very dry although
> > there is always some part or another that wants to leak a bit. With the
> > new engine you need to go through it thoroughly and tighten everything
> > down to spec. You'll find things tend to back off with time. Shane
> > Wease and I go through mine very 50 hours at least.
> >
> > When I shifted from 60 wt to 25-60 I experienced new leaks; when I added
> > some Marvel Mystery Oil I found a few more -- could be mere
> > coincidence..........
> >
> > Every car and plane I've owned has had its own personality and the
> > CJ/M14P definitely has one. Some days it purrs like a kitten with nary
> > a vibration, the next start and I wonder who nicked the prop! My
> > overwhelming consideration is that this an engine and airplane I like a
> > lot and have great confidence in.
> >
> > Hal Morley
> >
> > Yakjock(at)msn.com
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Drew" <drew(at)allredstar.com> |
| Subject: | Washing oil off the Cylinder walls |
Staying on the oil fuel subject...
I've always wondered about washing oil off the cylinder walls prior to
start by aggressive priming. Just a general statement to garner
opinions...
Here is one on intake drain position during priming I would like to see
an opinion on:
I was shown a few years ago a starting procedure in which after turning
the blade 12-14 times, with the intake drain open, the engine is primed
until fuel is seen draining from the intake drain (usually 4 strokes),
then to spin the prop 3X and closing the intake drain.
General comments from the peanut gallery?, specifically on intake drain
position...
I can't unload my 4 June trip at American, so besides attempting a
commercial air roll-in on N.P., I may be doing a Formation fly-by to
open the AVP pro-Volleyball tournament on Hermosa Beach. If anyone
(Ron, Barry) wants to do this Fri, sat, or sun morning in front of
thousands of bikini clad women, let me know...
Drew
Drew A. Blahnick
Red Stars Inc.
Cell 310-372-6328
www.allredstar.com
Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Washing oil off the Cylinder walls |
In a message dated 6/3/2002 1:34:58 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
drew(at)allredstar.com writes:
> I may be doing a Formation fly-by to
> open the AVP pro-Volleyball tournament on Hermosa Beach. If anyone
> (Ron, Barry) wants to do this Fri, sat, or sun morning in front of
> thousands of bikini clad women, let me know...
If this were in front of thong clad men, you could contact "Blitz" or
"Batman"...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | VDesi10492(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: oil temp and leakage |
Hi guys,
Since I am a new owner of a Yak 52, all the input from
fellow owners is really a big help. Since this is my first round engine not
seeing a dry engine compartment is a little spooky at first. These aircraft
are a ton of fun for the money.
Thanks for the info
Dave DeSimone DIMMER 26 USMC HMH 463
vdesi10492(at)AOL.com
bea
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Washing oil off the Cylinder walls |
Drew
As regards oil washed off of cylinder walls....................
Consider, for a moment, the life of a piston and rings in a 2 stroke
engine.
The piston and rings get their oil from pre-mixed gasoline. Some of the
better 2-stroke synthetics are mixed at ratios of 100:1 while cheaper
oils are mixed at ratios of 30:1. If you wash your cylinders with
gasoline during priming, that same gasoline now contains the washed off
oil and can only aid in lubricating the cylinder.....just like a two
stroke engine gets lubricated.
Even a cylinder that is completely bone dry, unlikely given that the
whole cylinder is not washed, and that there would be oil remaining in
various nooks and crannies, it is unlikely that a cylinder would be
damaged with reasonable priming. Even over aggressive priming wouldn't
strip all the oil from the cylinders and rings. The same gasoline that
may have diluted the oil in a portion of your cylinders will
subsequently release it's oil, and aid in lubricating your cylinders,
upon combustion. That's my educated opinion. My basic opinion is that
this is a non-issue and not worth worrying about.
If you need further proof, consider that in my, younger, wild and wooly
days of motocross racing, I would use motor oil mixed with gasoline in
my race bike. I experimented with increasingly leaner mix ratios of
motor oil to gasoline until I was in the area of about 50:1 ratios.
After seven years of riding the bike, I sold it to a friend who rode it
for a few more years after that. We never had to bore a cylinder or
replace the rings. It was a Yamaha YZ-465. It would still, easily, pull
wheelies for miles when I sold it.
Frank
Chino
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Drew
Subject: Yak-List: Washing oil off the Cylinder walls
Staying on the oil fuel subject...
I've always wondered about washing oil off the cylinder walls prior to
start by aggressive priming. Just a general statement to garner
opinions...
Here is one on intake drain position during priming I would like to see
an opinion on:
I was shown a few years ago a starting procedure in which after turning
the blade 12-14 times, with the intake drain open, the engine is primed
until fuel is seen draining from the intake drain (usually 4 strokes),
then to spin the prop 3X and closing the intake drain.
General comments from the peanut gallery?, specifically on intake drain
position...
I can't unload my 4 June trip at American, so besides attempting a
commercial air roll-in on N.P., I may be doing a Formation fly-by to
open the AVP pro-Volleyball tournament on Hermosa Beach. If anyone
(Ron, Barry) wants to do this Fri, sat, or sun morning in front of
thousands of bikini clad women, let me know...
Drew
Drew A. Blahnick
Red Stars Inc.
Cell 310-372-6328
www.allredstar.com
Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
Listers, Lurkers and Gibs,
Below is a list of parts which I feel the group may want to consider
having on hand at its functions. This list is a compilation of Jim
Goolsby's suggestions and my experience, as no one else seemed to have a
opinion as to what the kit should contain although there were many
members who have expressed opinions in favor of having a kit available.
I was hoping to get more input as to its content. Unfortunately we have
ran out of time for this gathering, but I personally feel that we should
move ahead with the idea. Pat Elliott has donated a great padded
box/chest for the parts to be kept and shipped in. Additions and
deletions to the list can be easily made so lets get together with
suggestions and work out the correct mix of parts. I have indicated my
idea of priority by *'s after the part name, no *'s means high priority.
2 *'s means it would be nice to have in the selection but most likely
will not be necessary. This gestimate (WAG) is based on how frequently
I sell the item. Quantities are 1 unless otherwise noted. Once we can
come up with a firm list I will figure the cost based on a 15% discount
off my printed price list.
1. Shutters, 2 of each style **
2. Gill bolts long and short 2 each*
3. Gill bolt nuts 6 nuts
4. Triple gauge
5. Flap valve / front gear valve
6. Prop tools, set
7. Main and emergency air valve
8. QS1 brake air pressure reducing valve
9. QS2 differential brake valve
10. Check valves 2 ea.
11. PTT switch
13. Gear diverter valve*
14. Diverter valve overhaul kit, 4 ea.
15. Primer
16. Nose gear actuator overhaul kit
17. Yak 52 mag
18. CJ6 mag
19. Pop off valve
20. Valve cover cables 4 each
21. Spark plugs, 10 each with gapping tool
22. Valve cover seals, red silicone 18 each
23. Carb diaphragm
24. Starter solenoid valve
25. Rear gear valve
26. Start booster coil
27. Lower cowl bushings 4 each**
28. Green nav light assy**
29. Red nav light assy**
30. Flap diverter valve
31. Shimmy damper repair kit 2 each
32. Ship material to shim scissors
33. Front brake cable
34. Rear brake cable
35. Landing light bulb 2 each
36. Gear and tail light bulb 2 each*
37. gear indicator (panel) bulbs 10 each
38. Engine cly repair kit 3 each (lock tabs, seals and gaskets)
39. Goolsby's compressor nail (aircraft quality of course) 2 ea.
40. Safety wire 1 roll .032 stainless wire
41. Oil pump**
42. Fuel pump**
43. Oil and fuel pump drive
44. Oil door**
45. Fuel door**
46. Selection of metric wrenches
47. Selection of metric sockets with ratchet handle
48. Generator brushes**
49. Brake handle
Again guys, please be a part of this process, don't count on my HUA
memory to provide an accurate list of everything you might need if your
CJ decides to go TU.
Always Yakin,
Doug Sapp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Payne <cpayne(at)mc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: oil temp and leakage |
VDesi10492(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Hi guys,
>
> Since I am a new owner of a Yak 52, all the input from
> fellow owners is really a big help. Since this is my first round engine not
> seeing a dry engine compartment is a little spooky at first. These aircraft
> are a ton of fun for the money.
>
> Thanks for the info
> Dave DeSimone DIMMER 26 USMC HMH 463
> vdesi10492(at)AOL.com
Semper Fi, dude
Craig Payne 4th LAAM, Force Troops USMC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Engine characteristics |
| From: | "Barry W. Hancock" <radialpower(at)cox.net> |
Let me preface this by saying I'm not an engine expert. But as our
friend Mr. McCoy points out, the information on this list is worthless,
so bear that in mind.
I have over 100 hrs. of flying behind the M14P, and over 200 behind the
Housai, not a ton but enough to make some valid observations.
The Housai is considerably easier to pull through because of the lower
compression. Remember, the engines have the same total cubic inches.
Oil running from the exhausts prior to start is totally normal. If you
are flying on a regular basis this amount *may* be less. I have about
120 hrs on my M14P now adn there is considerably less oil out of the
exhausts recently as compared to prior to 70 or so hours. I had two
hydraulic lock incidents in the first 50 hours and none since. I
switched to 25W60 at 100 hrs. and have noticed no difference in oil
"loss" during the pull through phase.
As for pulling through 12 blades...can't hurt. The M14P manual says 3
or 4 blades. I pull through 6, and more if I get significant oil
(anything more than dripping from the exhaust) during the first six. I
also have the intake drains and am now getting very little, even when
the plane sits for awhile. Also, when you prime, you are also pulling
through as well. Remember this is a geared engine, so if you pull
through 6 blades to clear oil and 6 for priming, you will have cleared
all cylinders a couple of times (Brian, feel free to jump in here with
the exact math - and any other useless information.)
It is only necessary to pull a plug (usually #5) when you have hydraulic
lock, both to drain the oil and clean the plug. How do you know when
you have hydraulic lock? When you are exerting significantly more force
to pull a blade and it still doesn't go, and your tendency is to go
further out on the blade for more leverage...DON'T!!!!!! The typical
person has more than enough strength to bend the engine if they get
enough leverage (i.e. creating a longer arm by pulling on the prop
futher from the hub). If you pay close attention you can also hear a
squishing sound as you apply more pressure.
Though hydraulic lock can happen at any time, both engines have less
propensity for it with consistent use (greater than twice a week, or
so). These engines were made to be flown on a daily basis...anything
less requires greater care and precaution.
While we're on the subject of pulling blades, I've recently seen a
couple in our group pulling blades with significant body parts in the
arc. You're mag switch may be off, confirmed off, and double
confirmed. But are you willing to be your life there's not a broken
wire somewhere? If you're not treating your blades like a loaded gun,
you're probably not giving them enough respect when you pull them
through. If you're having trouble pulling blades through while
remaining clear of the prop arc, there are several techniques that work
and any number of people on this list willing to share how you can
accomplish pulling blades through safely.
I'm not a CFI, engineer, salesman, A&P, insurance broker, FAA
representative, or other aviation authority. I've just been around a
little while now, care about our people, and hope these observations
help. But remember, this information is of little value.
Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hal Morley" <yakjock(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Any Left-Coasters going to the YPA Columbus Fly-out? |
If anyone from the Best Coast side of the World is planning on going to
Columbus please let me know so we can see about joining forces. I will
be leaving Oregon Wednesday morning, picking up Buck Bender in Idaho and
then on via Malad City, Rock Springs, Laramie and direct KOLU. Plan to
arrive 1800-1900 local.
Hal Morley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: M14P Break In |
At 10:29 AM 6/3/2002, you wrote:
>
>If the engine manufacturer has put test cell time on these engines before we
>get them, are they already run in??
No. They run them long enough to determine that they work properly and
maybe do the initial ring seating under controlled conditions.
>If no, then how can they know the
>correct hp developed by each engine?
torque * RPM = horsepower
Put a brake on it, measure the torque available at differing RPM and
calculate HP. In another life this kind of setup is called a dynomometer.
>Many of the M14 engines I have seen
>have the hp listed in the front of the log book and many times it varies
>from 345 to 385hp, how can they know this if the engine is fully run in?
They just measure the torque and RPM and calculate the hp. As the engine
breaks-in and the internal friction decreases, slightly more torque becomes
available at the output shaft and HP goes up by a corresponding amount. I
doubt anyone will complain if they get a couple more HP after running the
engine for 50 hours or so. Still, there is probably more HP variability
between engines than the HP increase after any particular engine is finally
broken in.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Washing oil off the Cylinder walls |
At 01:34 PM 6/3/2002, you wrote:
>
>Staying on the oil fuel subject...
>
>I've always wondered about washing oil off the cylinder walls prior to
>start by aggressive priming. Just a general statement to garner
>opinions...
If the engine sits for a week without running the upper cylinders probably
have little or no oil left on the cylinder walls to wash away. The lower
cylinders are likely to be very well lubricated tho'. Once the engine
starts the cylinder walls become well lubricated. This is the reason
people install pre-oilers in their aircraft. Still, I haven't see a
pre-oiler that does a good job of oiling the cylinder walls.
Wanna make sure there is plenty of oil on the cylinder walls every time you
start your engine? Run your engine every day.
>I was shown a few years ago a starting procedure in which after turning
>the blade 12-14 times, with the intake drain open, the engine is primed
>until fuel is seen draining from the intake drain (usually 4 strokes),
>then to spin the prop 3X and closing the intake drain.
>
>General comments from the peanut gallery?, specifically on intake drain
>position...
How you get a proper mixture into the cylinder doesn't matter much. If
that technique gets the engine started the it got the right mixture into
the engine for start.
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dabear" <dabear(at)damned.org> |
| Subject: | Re: oil temp and leakage |
Hey, don't show the secret handshake in public their Craig.
Regards,
Al DeVere, 2ndBn, 10th Mar, 2MarDiv
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Payne" <cpayne(at)mc.net>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: oil temp and leakage
>
> VDesi10492(at)aol.com wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > Since I am a new owner of a Yak 52, all the
input from
> > fellow owners is really a big help. Since this is my first
round engine not
> > seeing a dry engine compartment is a little spooky at first.
These aircraft
> > are a ton of fun for the money.
> >
> > Thanks for the info
> > Dave DeSimone DIMMER 26 USMC HMH 463
> > vdesi10492(at)AOL.com
>
> Semper Fi, dude
>
> Craig Payne 4th LAAM, Force Troops USMC
>
>
=====
of
>
=====
messages.
members.
>
=====
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/yak-list
>
=====
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Calloway" <TCalloway(at)datatechnique.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First aid box |
Doug and those interested,
My not ever having experienced any trouble (in a CJ) while on the road,
I didn't think I was qualified to make a suggestions. But here are my
recommended additions.
Main and Nose tire and tubes
SS hose clamps
C U in OLU
tc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First aid box |
Terry,
The SS hose clamps area a great idea, The tubes had already been suggested.
This is great guys keep the suggestions coming.
Doug Sapp
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry Calloway" <TCalloway(at)datatechnique.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: First aid box
>
> Doug and those interested,
>
> My not ever having experienced any trouble (in a CJ) while on the road,
> I didn't think I was qualified to make a suggestions. But here are my
> recommended additions.
>
> Main and Nose tire and tubes
> SS hose clamps
>
> C U in OLU
> tc
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | First aid box updated 6/4/20 |
6/4/02 up dated list
> Listers, Lurkers and Gibs,
> Below is a list of parts which I feel the group may want to consider
> having on hand at its functions I have indicated my
> idea of priority by *'s after the part name, no *'s means high priority.
> 2 *'s means it would be nice to have in the selection but most likely
> will not be necessary. This gestimate (WAG) is based on how frequently
> I sell the item. Quantities are 1 unless otherwise noted. Once we can
> come up with a firm list I will figure the cost based on a 15% discount
> off my printed price list.
>
> 1. Shutters, 2 of each style **
> 2. Gill bolts long and short 2 each*
> 3. Gill bolt nuts 6 nuts
> 4. Triple gauge
> 5. Flap valve / front gear valve
> 6. Prop tools, set
> 7. Main and emergency air valve
> 8. QS1 brake air pressure reducing valve
> 9. QS2 differential brake valve
> 10. Check valves 2 ea.
> 11. PTT switch
> 13. Gear diverter valve*
> 14. Diverter valve overhaul kit, 4 ea.
> 15. Primer
> 16. Nose gear actuator overhaul kit
> 17. Yak 52 mag
> 18. CJ6 mag
> 19. Pop off valve
> 20. Valve cover cables 4 each
> 21. Spark plugs, 10 each with gapping tool
> 22. Valve cover seals, red silicone 18 each
> 23. Carb diaphragm
> 24. Starter solenoid valve
> 25. Rear gear valve
> 26. Start booster coil
> 27. Lower cowl bushings 4 each**
> 28. Green nav light assy**
> 29. Red nav light assy**
> 30. Flap diverter valve
> 31. Shimmy damper repair kit 2 each
> 32. Ship material to shim scissors
> 33. Front brake cable
> 34. Rear brake cable
> 35. Landing light bulb 2 each
> 36. Gear and tail light bulb 2 each*
> 37. gear indicator (panel) bulbs 10 each
> 38. Engine cly repair kit 3 each (lock tabs, seals and gaskets)
> 39. Goolsby's compressor nail (aircraft quality of course) 2 ea.
> 40. Safety wire 1 roll .032 stainless wire
> 41. Oil pump**
> 42. Fuel pump**
> 43. Oil and fuel pump drive
> 44. Oil door**
> 45. Fuel door**
> 46. Selection of metric wrenches
> 47. Selection of metric sockets with ratchet handle
> 48. Generator brushes**
> 49. Brake handle
50. Small selection of stainless steel clamps
51. Nose wheel tube
52. Main wheel tube
53. Special plug wrench
54. Small selection of hardware
>
> Again guys, please be a part of this process, don't count on my HUA
> memory to provide an accurate list of everything you might need if your
> CJ decides to go TU.
>
> Always Yakin,
> Doug Sapp
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <adsavar(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: oil temp and leakage |
Al,
Please contact me off list.
Dennis Savarese
adsavar(at)gte.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "dabear" <dabear(at)damned.org>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: oil temp and leakage
>
> Hey, don't show the secret handshake in public their Craig.
>
> Regards,
>
> Al DeVere, 2ndBn, 10th Mar, 2MarDiv
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Craig Payne" <cpayne(at)mc.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: oil temp and leakage
>
>
> >
> > VDesi10492(at)aol.com wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > Since I am a new owner of a Yak 52, all the
> input from
> > > fellow owners is really a big help. Since this is my first
> round engine not
> > > seeing a dry engine compartment is a little spooky at first.
> These aircraft
> > > are a ton of fun for the money.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the info
> > > Dave DeSimone DIMMER 26 USMC HMH 463
> > > vdesi10492(at)AOL.com
> >
> > Semper Fi, dude
> >
> > Craig Payne 4th LAAM, Force Troops USMC
> >
> >
> =====
> of
> >
> =====
> messages.
> members.
> >
> =====
> >
> =====
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Payne <cpayne(at)mc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine characteristics |
Barry W. Hancock wrote:
>
> Let me preface this by saying I'm not an engine expert. But as our
> friend Mr. McCoy points out, the information on this list is worthless,
> so bear that in mind.
>
Duh? What are you really saying??
> I have over 100 hrs. of flying behind the M14P, and over 200 behind the
> Housai, not a ton but enough to make some valid observations.
>
> The Housai is considerably easier to pull through because of the lower
> compression. Remember, the engines have the same total cubic inches.
>
Well, true...but also remember that the Huosai prop turns .787 times for
every engine turn as opposed to .658 times for the M14P, ergo:
"Leverage"; you get less turning the M14P engine...also a business-speak
term to explain how you can defy common sense, physics and economics,
all at the same time.
> I'm not a CFI, engineer, salesman, A&P, insurance broker, FAA
> representative, or other aviation authority.
So what's wrong with "Sports Pundit"? Gotta be as good any of the above.
> Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Parts kit content |
| From: | "Barry W. Hancock" <radialpower(at)cox.net> |
Doug,
How about flex hose for brake lines? Spare tires and/or tubes would be
good but take up lots of space.
George Coy sells a set of engine tools that is just about right for the
field. Standard metric stuff is of little use when it comes to changing
a compressor or other various hard-to-get-at-items, just ask me. :)
Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Over priming and hydraulic lock |
| From: | "Barry W. Hancock" <radialpower(at)cox.net> |
Taking off on the prime v. cylinder wash discussion, Vladimir Yastremski
spoke at Red Star. Perhaps the most interesting point he made is that
if you over-prime your engine you have created the potential for
hydraulic lock if you don't start your engine right away. Too much
prime + too much time = HLP (hydraulic lock potential).
I know that the M14P Manual calls for A LOT more prime than I use on
start up. I use more - 6-8 shots depending on temperature, pull through
6 blades, 2 shots and hit the button - but this is less than the manual
states. The engine fires on the first or second blade without fail.
I've tried it with less but starts are more problematic.
Considering what Vlad has said, it might be a good idea to figure out
the minimum prime required for snappy starts.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AirshowPilot1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Over priming and hydraulic lock |
Blade position is key too. When you hit the start button - you get a shower
of sparks. I have started my engine by setting the prop in the "right
position" thereby setting the pistons up to fire off without any air. This
also illustrates why it is extremely important to have someone at the
controls and more importantly the brakes when pulling through your blades.
Set up properly, the M-14P starts wonderfully. Overprime can cause a
backfire and engine reversal that can ruin your day too.
W. Addison Linscott
Paramount Aerobatics
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kpilling" <kjpilling(at)btclick.com> |
| Subject: | Weight and Balance |
From: "Mark Jefferies , YAK UK Ltd" <yakuk(at)compuserve.com>
Subject: Yak-List: C of G
Why does not someone draw up a C of G calculator that the pilot may just
insert his own a/c data (weight & arm) post it on a web site. I will
even host a CJ6 calculator. Take a look at www.yakuk.co.uk/downloads.htm
for calculator for the YAK 52, L-29. I have an advanced copy for YAK 50
but its just in the checking stages, this one will do mac & distance
calks.
When the CJ6 one is done all this bickering can stop.
Brian, you have a copy of my YAK 50 draft calculator, use this as a
template?
Best regards, Mark
Or even more simply........ put all the Original bloody Equipment back
where it was in the first place and ...Go fly the f*****@%
aeroplanes.....!....They all fly nicely inside the W & B parameters just
swell the way they were designed !
Or in other words less yak, yak, yak and more Yak Yak Yak ! ,,,.....and
maybe CJ as well.
No offence meant.
kp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kpilling" <kjpilling(at)btclick.com> |
| Subject: | Cylinder priming |
The main purpose of priming any engine before or during cold start-up
procedure is NOT to introduce the combustible mixture, but to reduce the
propensity for atomised petrol/air mixture from the Carb' or Injectors
to condense upon first contact with the cold piston/cylinder walls
during the start sequence.
By 'wetting' the cold piston/cylinder walls with raw non-atomised fuel
you reduce the tendency of the incoming atomised fuel/air mixture to
condense on the cold surfaces at first contact. Supercharged engines
have an added problem in that the cold surfaces of the supercharger
impeller (large surface area) have the same effect on the mixture as do
the long inlet tracts. Hence the need for judicious priming even after
initial fire-up and the variation in amount of prime needed at differing
ambient temperatures. Cold air cold metal. that's why Yak's
traditionally need more 'squirt than CJ's.
Need proof ? Just watch a bunch of Drag Racers squirt copious quantities
of pump gas into the cavernous blowers/engines of their fiery beasts.
The methanol/nitro mixtures their engines run on chill the blowers and
cylinders/pistons upon contact precluding any unassisted fire up.
Cylinder wall chill and piston crown/cylinder wall area are a big
consideration to manufacturers when designing low emission engines.
Longer stroke engines are easier to get 'clean' than shorter stroke ones
on the basis of the piston crown/cylinder wall surface area to
displacement ratio. Now you know.
Priming M14P's
I've heard/read every different method/combination of priming for a
sure start. I've owned several, flown a few more and I've still got two.
I assert the factory knows best !
The factory says:- After pull through etc. to cold start:
9 squirts simultaneously pulling 9 blades (impossible without help, or
of 9 ascents of the wing) ONLY THIS METHOD GIVES TOTAL SAFE CYLINDER
WETTING. See above.
Quarter throttle or as required for approx 42 % idle. Primer in hand
ready for a top up prime on initial fire-up if required. Press the start
button and after two blades have passed your eyes flick both mag's
'live' being careful to keep the starter button pushed until the engine
comes completely alive. It never fails for me.
However experience has tought me that it's the primer itself that varies
between planes rather than the engines. It's important to 'stroke' the
primer a couple of times (or until slight change of resistance/sound is
noticed) in order to 'prime the primer'. It's this that varies from
plane to plane. Some are instantly primed and others take up to 5
strokes to prime themselves. I only start the engine priming of 9
squirts once the primer is primed. As long as you pull through one blade
after each priming 'stroke' it's impossible to over prime.
IMPORTANT:
Its easy to rush the primer by pushing too fast or too hard. All that
happens if you do is that the priming fuel is forced past the seals in
the primer(creating premature wear) and it doesn't reach the cylinders.
Take 2<3 seconds for each stroke and you get a complete charge.
Washing oil off the cylinder walls is not worth talking about unless
your engine is so grossly over rich when running as to render it
unflyable. The start up procedure cannot last long enough for the heat
build up required before damage occurred.
All a bit long winded but definitive.
Fly safe
kp
From: "Drew" <drew(at)allredstar.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Washing oil off the Cylinder walls
Staying on the oil fuel subject...
I've always wondered about washing oil off the cylinder walls prior to
start by aggressive priming. Just a general statement to garner
opinions...
Here is one on intake drain position during priming I would like to see
an opinion on:
I was shown a few years ago a starting procedure in which after turning
the blade 12-14 times, with the intake drain open, the engine is primed
until fuel is seen draining from the intake drain (usually 4 strokes),
then to spin the prop 3X and closing the intake drain.
General comments from the peanut gallery?, specifically on intake drain
position...
I can't unload my 4 June trip at American, so besides attempting a
commercial air roll-in on N.P., I may be doing a Formation fly-by to
open the AVP pro-Volleyball tournament on Hermosa Beach. If anyone
(Ron, Barry) wants to do this Fri, sat, or sun morning in front of
thousands of bikini clad women, let me know...
Drew
Drew A. Blahnick
Red Stars Inc.
Cell 310-372-6328
www.allredstar.com
Communism: lousy politics - great airplanes!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russ Dycus" <dycusr(at)hotmail.com> |
Sitting in Chicago in increasingly IFR conditions wishing I had my
Instrument Rating finished so I could go get some actual on the way to
OLU.
Russ Dycus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Ivey <jim(at)jimivey.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cylinder priming |
kpilling wrote:
>
>Quarter throttle or as required for approx 42 % idle. Primer in hand
>ready for a top up prime on initial fire-up if required. Press the start
>button and after two blades have passed your eyes flick both mag's
>'live' being careful to keep the starter button pushed until the engine
>comes completely alive. It never fails for me.
>
My experience is simlar to kp's. On a cold start I have always primed
once followed by a one-blade pull through for a minimum of 6 blades (and
yes, I do jump up and down off the aircraft each time if there is no
helper). This is specific to the engine starting sequence and are in
addition to my initial cold pull-throughs.
However, I do have one detail that varies from kp. As we all know the
M14P will run nicely with the mags turned off and the start button
depressed (running on the shower of sparks without any magneto help).
If there is any confusion on this point try running the engine with the
mags off and the button depressed. Works fine until you release the
button. So with the M14P I go ahead and turn the mags on before
initial start button depress. The switch position isn't going to make
any difference on the engine firing so why wait to turn it on after two
blades? All the hydraulic lock issues in an M14P have been addressed
with the initial pulls, the prime/stroke multiple time sequence and
immediate starting.
Perhaps the "blade counting" is left over from operating P&W's or the
like. Those engines are different than the M14P's and aside from being
less prone to hydraulic lock, allow the engine to be turned by the
electrical starter without any "fire" in the cylinders. This is done to
make absolutely sure the engine is cleared before firing. This cannot
be avoided on the M14P with standard installation.
Jim Ivey
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kpilling" <kjpilling(at)btclick.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cylinder priming |
Sorry to disagree Jim but the two blades with mags off are vital to avoid
'Kick back' on start or the even less desirable the engine starting
backwards. Both are potentially highly damaging to the engine and propeller
reduction gearing. Sheared compressor drive pins are another tell tale sign
of kick back at start. DO NOT INITIATE THE START WITH MAG's LIVE. It could
cost you a lot of money.
You may 'get away with it' at high residual air tank pressure but if the
pressure's a little down on 'norm' you could have big trouble.
regards
kp
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Ivey" <jim(at)jimivey.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Cylinder priming
>
>
> kpilling wrote:
>
> >
> >Quarter throttle or as required for approx 42 % idle. Primer in hand
> >ready for a top up prime on initial fire-up if required. Press the start
> >button and after two blades have passed your eyes flick both mag's
> >'live' being careful to keep the starter button pushed until the engine
> >comes completely alive. It never fails for me.
> >
> My experience is simlar to kp's. On a cold start I have always primed
> once followed by a one-blade pull through for a minimum of 6 blades (and
> yes, I do jump up and down off the aircraft each time if there is no
> helper). This is specific to the engine starting sequence and are in
> addition to my initial cold pull-throughs.
>
> However, I do have one detail that varies from kp. As we all know the
> M14P will run nicely with the mags turned off and the start button
> depressed (running on the shower of sparks without any magneto help).
> If there is any confusion on this point try running the engine with the
> mags off and the button depressed. Works fine until you release the
> button. So with the M14P I go ahead and turn the mags on before
> initial start button depress. The switch position isn't going to make
> any difference on the engine firing so why wait to turn it on after two
> blades? All the hydraulic lock issues in an M14P have been addressed
> with the initial pulls, the prime/stroke multiple time sequence and
> immediate starting.
>
> Perhaps the "blade counting" is left over from operating P&W's or the
> like. Those engines are different than the M14P's and aside from being
> less prone to hydraulic lock, allow the engine to be turned by the
> electrical starter without any "fire" in the cylinders. This is done to
> make absolutely sure the engine is cleared before firing. This cannot
> be avoided on the M14P with standard installation.
>
> Jim Ivey
>
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Ivey <jim(at)jimivey.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cylinder priming |
kp:
So as I understand it effectively what you are saying is that the
magneto timing would cause the problem with kickback, and this is not an
issue with the shower of sparks. And all of this has nothing to do with
extra clearing for hydraulic lock reasons.
If I am understanding that correctly, then thank you. That is
enlightening. There could be no harm in me changing my ways as of today
(the conservative thing to do).
I have been using the Normal Operating Checklist as published at
CJ6.org. This checklist has the mags live on start. Perhaps if others
on the list come to the same consensus on the kickback issue this
checklist as posted could be updated? By the way, Jeff Linebaugh did a
wonderful job on this document (and others) as posted on this web site
as hosted by Brian Lloyd. Since the day I starting using this checklist
the aircraft has started practically flawlessly every time. However, I
think it is important to scrutinize any source of information whether on
the web or in writing from the various resellers out there.
Thanks again.
Jim Ivey
kpilling wrote:
>Sorry to disagree Jim but the two blades with mags off are vital to avoid
>'Kick back' on start or the even less desirable the engine starting
>backwards. Both are potentially highly damaging to the engine and propeller
>reduction gearing. Sheared compressor drive pins are another tell tale sign
>of kick back at start. DO NOT INITIATE THE START WITH MAG's LIVE. It could
>cost you a lot of money.
>You may 'get away with it' at high residual air tank pressure but if the
>pressure's a little down on 'norm' you could have big trouble.
>
>regards
>kp
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jim Ivey" <jim(at)jimivey.com>
>To:
>Cc: "kp"
>Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 4:58 PM
>Subject: Re: Yak-List: Cylinder priming
>
>
>>
>>kpilling wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Quarter throttle or as required for approx 42 % idle. Primer in hand
>>>ready for a top up prime on initial fire-up if required. Press the start
>>>button and after two blades have passed your eyes flick both mag's
>>>'live' being careful to keep the starter button pushed until the engine
>>>comes completely alive. It never fails for me.
>>>
>>My experience is simlar to kp's. On a cold start I have always primed
>>once followed by a one-blade pull through for a minimum of 6 blades (and
>>yes, I do jump up and down off the aircraft each time if there is no
>>helper). This is specific to the engine starting sequence and are in
>>addition to my initial cold pull-throughs.
>>
>>However, I do have one detail that varies from kp. As we all know the
>>M14P will run nicely with the mags turned off and the start button
>>depressed (running on the shower of sparks without any magneto help).
>>If there is any confusion on this point try running the engine with the
>>mags off and the button depressed. Works fine until you release the
>>button. So with the M14P I go ahead and turn the mags on before
>>initial start button depress. The switch position isn't going to make
>>any difference on the engine firing so why wait to turn it on after two
>>blades? All the hydraulic lock issues in an M14P have been addressed
>>with the initial pulls, the prime/stroke multiple time sequence and
>>immediate starting.
>>
>>Perhaps the "blade counting" is left over from operating P&W's or the
>>like. Those engines are different than the M14P's and aside from being
>>less prone to hydraulic lock, allow the engine to be turned by the
>>electrical starter without any "fire" in the cylinders. This is done to
>>make absolutely sure the engine is cleared before firing. This cannot
>>be avoided on the M14P with standard installation.
>>
>>Jim Ivey
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <adsavar(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cylinder priming |
I completely agree. The shower of sparks fires 10 degrees after TDC. The
mags fire 13-16 degrees before TDC. You really shouldn't initiate the start
with the mags live.
Dennis Savarese
----- Original Message -----
From: "kpilling" <kjpilling(at)btclick.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Cylinder priming
>
> Sorry to disagree Jim but the two blades with mags off are vital to avoid
> 'Kick back' on start or the even less desirable the engine starting
> backwards. Both are potentially highly damaging to the engine and
propeller
> reduction gearing. Sheared compressor drive pins are another tell tale
sign
> of kick back at start. DO NOT INITIATE THE START WITH MAG's LIVE. It could
> cost you a lot of money.
> You may 'get away with it' at high residual air tank pressure but if the
> pressure's a little down on 'norm' you could have big trouble.
>
> regards
> kp
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Ivey" <jim(at)jimivey.com>
> To:
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Cylinder priming
>
>
> >
> >
> > kpilling wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >Quarter throttle or as required for approx 42 % idle. Primer in hand
> > >ready for a top up prime on initial fire-up if required. Press the
start
> > >button and after two blades have passed your eyes flick both mag's
> > >'live' being careful to keep the starter button pushed until the engine
> > >comes completely alive. It never fails for me.
> > >
> > My experience is simlar to kp's. On a cold start I have always primed
> > once followed by a one-blade pull through for a minimum of 6 blades (and
> > yes, I do jump up and down off the aircraft each time if there is no
> > helper). This is specific to the engine starting sequence and are in
> > addition to my initial cold pull-throughs.
> >
> > However, I do have one detail that varies from kp. As we all know the
> > M14P will run nicely with the mags turned off and the start button
> > depressed (running on the shower of sparks without any magneto help).
> > If there is any confusion on this point try running the engine with the
> > mags off and the button depressed. Works fine until you release the
> > button. So with the M14P I go ahead and turn the mags on before
> > initial start button depress. The switch position isn't going to make
> > any difference on the engine firing so why wait to turn it on after two
> > blades? All the hydraulic lock issues in an M14P have been addressed
> > with the initial pulls, the prime/stroke multiple time sequence and
> > immediate starting.
> >
> > Perhaps the "blade counting" is left over from operating P&W's or the
> > like. Those engines are different than the M14P's and aside from being
> > less prone to hydraulic lock, allow the engine to be turned by the
> > electrical starter without any "fire" in the cylinders. This is done to
> > make absolutely sure the engine is cleared before firing. This cannot
> > be avoided on the M14P with standard installation.
> >
> > Jim Ivey
> >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Yak list <yaklist(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Weight and Balance |
OK try this. It is under development but I can easily change it. The figures
default to ones for a Yak 52 but I can soon produce one for the CJ folks.
Ignore the rest of the site as it is under development and I really do not
have a great deal of time to spend on it.
http://www.yakalog.com/main_pages/wandb.shtml
Hope this helps
Gus
----- Original Message -----
From: "kpilling" <kjpilling(at)btclick.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Weight and Balance
>
> From: "Mark Jefferies , YAK UK Ltd" <yakuk(at)compuserve.com>
> Subject: Yak-List: C of G
>
>
>
> Why does not someone draw up a C of G calculator that the pilot may just
> insert his own a/c data (weight & arm) post it on a web site. I will
> even host a CJ6 calculator. Take a look at www.yakuk.co.uk/downloads.htm
> for calculator for the YAK 52, L-29. I have an advanced copy for YAK 50
> but its just in the checking stages, this one will do mac & distance
> calks.
>
> When the CJ6 one is done all this bickering can stop.
>
> Brian, you have a copy of my YAK 50 draft calculator, use this as a
> template?
>
> Best regards, Mark
>
>
> Or even more simply........ put all the Original bloody Equipment back
> where it was in the first place and ...Go fly the f*****@%
> aeroplanes.....!....They all fly nicely inside the W & B parameters just
> swell the way they were designed !
>
> Or in other words less yak, yak, yak and more Yak Yak Yak ! ,,,.....and
> maybe CJ as well.
>
> No offence meant.
> kp
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First aid box updated 6/5/20 |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug" <rvfltd(at)televar.com>
Subject: Fw: Yak-List: First aid box updated 6/4/20
>
> 6/4/02 up dated list
> > Listers, Lurkers and Gibs,
> > Below is a list of parts which I feel the group may want to consider
> > having on hand at its functions I have indicated my
> > idea of priority by *'s after the part name, no *'s means high priority.
> > 2 *'s means it would be nice to have in the selection but most likely
> > will not be necessary. This gestimate (WAG) is based on how frequently
> > I sell the item. Quantities are 1 unless otherwise noted. Once we can
> > come up with a firm list I will figure the cost based on a 15% discount
> > off my printed price list.
> >
> > 1. Shutters, 2 of each style **
> > 2. Gill bolts long and short 2 each*
> > 3. Gill bolt nuts 6 nuts
> > 4. Triple gauge
> > 5. Flap valve / front gear valve
> > 6. Prop tools, set
> > 7. Main and emergency air valve
> > 8. QS1 brake air pressure reducing valve
> > 9. QS2 differential brake valve
> > 10. Check valves 2 ea.
> > 11. PTT switch
> > 13. Gear diverter valve*
> > 14. Diverter valve overhaul kit, 4 ea.
> > 15. Primer
> > 16. Nose gear actuator overhaul kit
> > 17. Yak 52 mag
> > 18. CJ6 mag
> > 19. Pop off valve
> > 20. Valve cover cables 4 each
> > 21. Spark plugs, 10 each with gapping tool
> > 22. Valve cover seals, red silicone 18 each
> > 23. Carb diaphragm
> > 24. Starter solenoid valve
> > 25. Rear gear valve
> > 26. Start booster coil
> > 27. Lower cowl bushings 4 each**
> > 28. Green nav light assy**
> > 29. Red nav light assy**
> > 30. Flap diverter valve
> > 31. Shimmy damper repair kit 2 each
> > 32. Ship material to shim scissors
> > 33. Front brake cable
> > 34. Rear brake cable
> > 35. Landing light bulb 2 each
> > 36. Gear and tail light bulb 2 each*
> > 37. gear indicator (panel) bulbs 10 each
> > 38. Engine cly repair kit 3 each (lock tabs, seals and gaskets)
> > 39. Goolsby's compressor nail (aircraft quality of course) 2 ea.
> > 40. Safety wire 1 roll .032 stainless wire
> > 41. Oil pump**
> > 42. Fuel pump**
> > 43. Oil and fuel pump drive
> > 44. Oil door**
> > 45. Fuel door**
> > 46. Selection of metric wrenches
> > 47. Selection of metric sockets with ratchet handle
> > 48. Generator brushes**
> > 49. Brake handle
> 50. Small selection of stainless steel clamps
> 51. Nose wheel tube
> 52. Main wheel tube
> 53. Special plug wrench
> 54. Small selection of hardware
> 55, Brake lines 2 each**
> >
> > Again guys, please be a part of this process, don't count on my HUA
> > memory to provide an accurate list of everything you might need if your
> > CJ decides to go TU.
> >
> > Always Yakin,
> > Doug Sapp
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Farley <david.farley(at)aspentech.com> |
| Subject: | Venting fuel on the ground |
Hi,
I've read lots of comments on the list about uneven fuel burn but I
appear to have a different problem.
My preference is to keep my fuel tanks full to avoid water from
condensation, however when I do this the left tank vents fuel out of the
overflow. This can be quite a lot of fuel, last week the tanks were filled
on Friday, by Saturday afternoon it had lost >15 litres!!!
I witnessed the venting for the first time on Saturday while I was cleaning
the aeroplane, it would stop when I loosened the tank cap, and there was a
significant hiss when I cracked the tank cap as the pressure equalized, so
there was definitly pressure build-up, it was a warm day! The thing that
confuses me is why don't I loose fuel from the right tank?
Is this level of fuel-loss normal? Do most people leave the tanks empty, or
do I have some blockage that is allowing the pressure to build up and push
the fuel out?
Dave Farley (Yak 52 N151PA)
Venting fuel on the ground
Hi,
I've read lots of comments on the list about uneven fuel
burn but I appear to have a different problem.
My preference is to keep my fuel
tanks full to avoid water from condensation, however when I do this the
left tank vents fuel out of the overflow. This can be quite a lot of
fuel, last week the tanks were filled on Friday, by Saturday afternoon
it had lost 15 litres!!!
I witnessed the venting for the first
time on Saturday while I was cleaning the aeroplane, it would stop when
I loosened the tank cap, and there was a significant hiss when I
cracked the tank cap as the pressure equalized, so there was definitly
pressure build-up, it was a warm day! The thing that confuses me is why
don't I loose fuel from the right tank?
Is this level of fuel-loss normal? Do
most people leave the tanks empty, or do I have some blockage that is
allowing the pressure to build up and push the fuel out?
Dave Farley (Yak 52 N151PA)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <adsavar(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Venting fuel on the ground |
David,
I have had the same problem with my YAK 52 for over 2 1/2 years now. It's
the hot sun heating up the fuel in the tank causing expansion. The only
place for it to go is on the ground via the overflow. You might try one
thing which could possibly help. Place a small hose on the belly overflow
between the wings; open up one tank cap and have someone ready to listen at
the tank opening. Now blow air into the center vent line. You should hear
May 27, 2002 - June 05, 2002
Yak-Archive.digest.vol-ba