Yak-Archive.digest.vol-dt
August 04, 2005 - August 15, 2005
But on this whole risk thing, what mods really do reduce errors and failures?
I see increasing fuel capacity as being a good thing as running out of gas has
always been a problem. The risk is that the mod will compromise the structure.
The reward is that the pilot is less likely to run out of gas by
overextending. There are more "ran out of gas" incidents in the accident stats
than "airframe failure in flight" accidents.
So everything is risk/reward.
And do I think that the metalized control surfaces are bad? Well, knowing both
Barry and Doug I suspect they are of high quality.
As they say: you pay your money and take your choice.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brian-yak(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Payne" <cpayne(at)joimail.com> |
Richard,
Thanks for the update, I'm glad to hear about the planned production. That's why
I raised the issue, to get an idea of what is going on with the M-14P availability.
Craig Payne
cpayne(at)joimail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | South Central Clinic |
To all RPA Members:
Another reminder about the upcoming South Central Fly-In and FAST Clinic. I
now have an Airboss and a Training Officer. I'm still looking for a records
guy who can handle the RPA and FAST documents and see that they get to the
right folks. In exchange I am offering to waive the registration fee of $75 and
provide a free dinner at the banquet. If your coming to Lamar and would like
to help out please let me know. This event will be the only event this summer
in the central US. The NC Clinic (Columbus, NE) has been postponed until next
year. If your looking for some training this is the spot.
Again the dates are September 21 - 25.
Airport: KLAA
Scott McMillan
RPA SC Coordinator
_aviatr(at)aol.com_ (mailto:aviatr(at)aol.com)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Watch Out For Fatigue Cracks! |
Watch Out for Fatigue Cracks!
What happens when fatigue sets in.....
Helicopter Fatigue cracks warning.
http://home.earthlink.net/~yak52driver/helicoptercracks.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Dalton" <sdalton(at)goeaston.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Control Surface Modifications |
I am amazed that owners are replacing fabric surfaces with metal. There
are relatively
minor reasons not to - such as ribs being made of too thin metal to
properly
rivet, but the fundamental reason must be the unacceptability of
non-aviation
designers making unofficial modifications on control surfaces.<<<
My -52TW (the first one manufactured by Aerostar) has over 400 hours on
it, and no problems with the metal control surfaces...and I fly a lot of
acro. However, I do believe my experience has been better (luckier?)
than most. I know of several -52W and -52TW owners who have suffered
cracks in the rudder and elevators. I have not heard of any cracks in
the ailerons.
If they do not crack they are better looking and longer lasting than
fabric. But if they crack...well, not so good. A roll of the dice?
Last year at OSH I talked to Cristian (from Aerostar) about the metal
surfaces and he thought Aerostar *might* return to fabric covering. I
do not know what their final decision was. I offer all this as just
something to consider. Your mileage may vary and never attempt this at
home. Fly safe.
Steve Dalton
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Dalton" <sdalton(at)goeaston.net> |
| Subject: | RE: M-14P Engines |
During MTW/OSH, the subject of M-14P engine availability came up. George
Coy told
me that Aerostar had about 25 more new ones that they could build up.
Terminus
in also had a limited quantity.
However, while arranging for my freshly OH'd M-14P to be shipped from
Vladimirs
place, I mentioned what I'd heard. Vladimir says that the Russian
factory is
still making them as well as OH. He has 4 in OH now, available in about
6 months
if anyone is interested. If anyone needs an engine overhaul, Vlad will
arrange
another batch, but it won't be as cheap as the last batch.<<<<
Fellow Yak drivers,
My understanding of this issue is that NOBODY is making some of the
parts required to build COMPLETELY NEW STOCK M-14P's. Overhauling them
is another issue. The following is from George & Cliff Coy's web site
at GESOCO.com;
"They {meaning Romania} have a limited supply of some parts. Primarily
the carburetors and cam disks. The factory {in Russia} that made the
original carburetors is no longer in production. They now make furniture
and no one at the factory remembers how to make the carburetors. The
tooling was all scrapped as well. We are investigating replacing the
Russian pressure carb with a fuel injection system. We are also looking
to other sources for the carburetors."
Please correct me, George or anyone else, but I believe that after the
last of these new carbs, new cam disks, and also new magnetos are gone,
nobody will be able to build entirely new and complete M-14P's as we
know them now...just versions that partly new and partly overhauled.
Or, more likely, they'll also make totally new engines with newly
designed fuel injection, electronic mags, etc., etc.
With the market's demands, Romania's Motorstar (active M-14P
manufacturer), the Russian businesses, and organizations like Bill
Blackwell's "Stinky Works" (really cool M-14P stuff) I suspect we will
be able to get "new" engines for a while longer. Just not as "stock" as
today's. Thank goodness we don't need new Merlins!!
Cheers,
Steve Dalton
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Davis" <l39parts(at)hotmail.com> |
This site http://www.grtavionics.com/index.htm has EFIS displays. They seem
to work. They have a patient, knowledgeable tech support guy (Todd). They
offer a money-back guarantee. They will take it back if it doesn't work, or
if it works and you don't like it, or if it works perfect and you love it
and your wife hates it.
I have no financial interest in the company, nor do I know anyone who does.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Roger Bieberdorf <rogerbyak(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Fwd: RE: [airportlighting] "B" cable vs "c" Cable |
Al Regal , yak-list(at)matronics.com
Please see attached re: B vs C cable. Thanks, Roger B
Note: forwarded message attached.
---------------------------------
Authentication-Results: mta183.mail.re2.yahoo.com
from=yahoogroups.com; domainkeys=pass (ok)
mail.elcon.com
HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.61
From: "Dean Ralphs" <dralphs(at)elcon.com>
List-Id:
List-Unsubscribe:
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2005 15:07:39 -0700
Subject: RE: [airportlighting] "B" cable vs "c" Cable
Half the cost.
Half the diameter.
Readily available (since few buy the B, it isn't kept in stock by the vendor
reps).
_____
From: airportlighting(at)yahoogroups.com
[mailto:airportlighting(at)yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Roger Bieberdorf
Subject: [airportlighting] "B" cable vs "c" Cable
Gentlemen;
Over the past 20 years, we have made many installations of Type C cable for
5KV series circuits. We now have encountered an appliction where the Owner
has requested information of the advisability of the use of Type B cable to
get longer life in respect to insulation resistance. Type B is EPR while I
believe that Type C is XLP. Can anyone shed some light on why the industry
(in the U.S. at least) has almost universally gone to Type C from the B?
Thank you, Roger Bieberdorf
_____
Start your <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=34442/*http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs>
SPONSORED LINKS
Electrical
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Electrical+engineering&w1=Electrical+en
gineering&w2=Electrical+engineering+jobs&w3=Airport+lighting&w4=Empire+landm
ark+hotel&c=4&s=110&.sig=TwdQ93RA4vStWZFSEBF2-A> engineering Electrical
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Electrical+engineering+jobs&w1=Electric
al+engineering&w2=Electrical+engineering+jobs&w3=Airport+lighting&w4=Empire+
landmark+hotel&c=4&s=110&.sig=lJ-j_I6Xq-hHnyJXHSPaIA> engineering jobs
Airport
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Airport+lighting&w1=Electrical+engineer
ing&w2=Electrical+engineering+jobs&w3=Airport+lighting&w4=Empire+landmark+ho
tel&c=4&s=110&.sig=9E6rz9WZDOXl8R_2muiivw> lighting
Empire
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Empire+landmark+hotel&w1=Electrical+eng
ineering&w2=Electrical+engineering+jobs&w3=Airport+lighting&w4=Empire+landma
rk+hotel&c=4&s=110&.sig=3-ySLx7d7RElGt7b5ueTxw> landmark hotel
_____
* Visit your group "airportlighting
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/airportlighting> " on the web.
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
airportlighting-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
_____
Half the cost.
Half the diameter.
Readily available (since fewbuy the B, it isn't kept
in stock by the vendor reps).
From: airportlighting(at)yahoogroups.com
[mailto:airportlighting(at)yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Roger
Bieberdorf
airportlighting(at)yahoogroups.com
Subject: [airportlighting] "B" cable
vs "c" Cable
Gentlemen;
Over the past 20 years, we have made many installations of Type C cable for
5KV series circuits. We now have encountered an appliction where the Owner has
requested information of the advisability of the use of Type B cable to get
longer life in respect to insulation resistance. Type B is EPR while
I believe that Type C is XLP.Can anyone shed some light on why the
industry (in the U.S. at least) has almost universally gone to Type C from the
B?
Thank you, Roger Bieberdorf
Start your
Visit your group "airportlighting" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
airportlighting-unsubscribe(at)yahoogroups.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | c w <pilotcraig2001(at)yahoo.com> |
I still have 6 M14s left.
Craig
__________________________________
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 8/3/2005 2:04:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
erniel29(at)gmail.com writes:
> Pappy,
>
> How are you making out with your EFIS Sport? The reason I ask, is that
> a friend here, is having a hell of a time with his EFIS 1, bad
> documentation, wrong specs, things flat dont work, etc.
>
> Ernie
>
Ernie,
What problem I had was with a lose connection in side the box. Once I seated
the plug it gave me all the right colors. The one thing that is wrong is the
template dimensions for the panel cutout. The mounting holes are very close
tolerances to the sides.
The real problem is when you go to change the flash card for updates, you
need to take the whole unit out of the panel and take the top on the box off.
This can be a real pain with some installation (mine).
I guess the documentation stinks, but I'm one of those guys who usually don't
read it anyway. :}
Pappy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Goode" <richard.goode(at)russianaeros.com> |
| Subject: | Control Surface Modifications |
In response to Steve Dalton, there is absolutely nothing wrong with metalized control
surfaces =96 many of the world=92s production aeroplanes have them.=20
In terms of the new Aerostar Yak-52TW etc., it seems that the change to metalized
surfaces has been a bit problematic =96 but this is nothing to do with the
concept of metalized control surfaces.
My concern is of UNQUALIFIED people adding weight onto control surfaces without
appropriate analysis, and, most importantly, without subsequent flutter tests.
This is the critical issue.
As for Aerostar, I am sure they would have gone through this process before metalizing
the control surfaces of their current aircraft.=20
Richard Goode
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Mob: +44 (0) 7768 610389
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
dangerous content by the http://www.invictawiz.com
MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Goode" <richard.goode(at)russianaeros.com> |
In reply to Steve Dalton's letter.
The simple position is as follows:
Aerostar in Romania was supplied with the raw castings/forgings to make engines.
These all came from the Voronezh Mechanical Plant in Voronezh, Russia.=20
VMP have not made a new engine in its entirety since 1994. (This excludes a handful
of the new M9F (430/450) engines made for the Russian Team Sukhois).
HOWEVER, VMP have all jigs and tooling, and indeed are making a number of new components
today.
It is absolutely correct to say that no one is TODAY making totally new engines.
VMP are going to make new engines, and clearly have the technical ability to do
so having produced the vast majority of M14Ps that already are in service.
It is a very good point that there are no current manufacturers of bought-in items
such as carburettors and magnetos.
Further there are many M14P powered aircraft in the West; a significant amount
from the home-builder market, and without doubt both overhauled and new engines
will be available well into the future. However the prices will not be the
same as we have grown complacent about!
Richard Goode
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Mob: +44 (0) 7768 610389
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
dangerous content by the http://www.invictawiz.com
MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Martinez <erniel29(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks for the input.
Ernie
On 8/5/05, cjpilot710(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 8/3/2005 2:04:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> erniel29(at)gmail.com writes:
>
>
> > Pappy,
> >
> > How are you making out with your EFIS Sport? The reason I ask, is that
> > a friend here, is having a hell of a time with his EFIS 1, bad
> > documentation, wrong specs, things flat dont work, etc.
> >
> > Ernie
> >
>
> Ernie,
>
> What problem I had was with a lose connection in side the box. Once I seated
> the plug it gave me all the right colors. The one thing that is wrong is the
> template dimensions for the panel cutout. The mounting holes are very close
> tolerances to the sides.
>
> The real problem is when you go to change the flash card for updates, you
> need to take the whole unit out of the panel and take the top on the box off.
> This can be a real pain with some installation (mine).
>
> I guess the documentation stinks, but I'm one of those guys who usually don't
> read it anyway. :}
>
> Pappy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Basiliere" <BasiliereR(at)ci.boulder.co.us> |
Craig;
How much? My bud that flys SU-26 is looking hard. His name is Don
Nelson, of Unlimited competition and airshow "fame".
Thanks, Rick
>>> pilotcraig2001(at)yahoo.com 8/5/2005 1:18:01 AM >>>
I still have 6 M14s left.
Craig
__________________________________
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Sapp" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | Control Surface Modifications |
Richard,
I normally would not say this on the list but it needs to be said. What you
think qualifies an individual to do a specific task may be quite different
in the UK than here in the US. Most every new idea in aviation today from
VG's to the new ignition systems came from the US experimental aircraft
community. Very few of the contributors were or are in your definition,
"qualified engineers" (hell the Wright brothers were bicycle mechanics). If
we waited for the engineers, and or the FAA to bless the popular mods of
today we would have a long wait indeed. The Skunk Works mentality is shared
by many of the US contingent of the EAA and I am happy to say that the
feeling is alive and well within the Yak community today. But Sadly, when
looking at the many recent advancements I can think of none, not one, that
comes from the UK, why is that? We, here in the US, by our very nature are
a bunch of experimenters and entrepreneurs all trying to build a better
mouse trap, it's all part of who we are. We are brash upstarts, modifiers,
and in many cases just idealistic dam fools, but we keep on trying, that's
what makes this a great country. (please excuse the flag waving)
You mention Aerostar and say that "you are sure". Why are you are sure??
It's nice that you have such confidence in them but the truth is that you
don't really know! All you really know is that you would like to think, and
you hope that they did the testing. They are playing to a experimental
market, not a certified market, IMHO their motivation to do complete testing
may be different than that of Cessna, Beech or Piper. Consider the first
TW's, they did very little or no testing on load factors for the attach
brackets for the new tail wheel modification. This is evidenced by the fact
(not opinion or supposition) that the first aircraft had many problems with
poor construction methods which led to weakness and structural failures in
the tail wheel attachment area, and metalized control surfaces cracked
within a very few hours. All this would tend to make one believe that these
first aircraft were rushed into service without proper research or actual
long term flight testing. To their credit however most problems were
quickly rectified. My point here is that we do not actually know to what
extent Aerostar has gone to to test for flutter, so why post unless you are
sure that they have even done the testing? My research shows that at least
on the early TW's they simply have pop riveted (yes pop riveted) metal skins
to the stock standard fabric control surface, rather they changed the weight
of the bob weight is unknown to me at this time, but I have inquiries out to
gather this information. My guess is that they metalized the surfaces, flew
that aircraft and found no problems and shipped them out. Again that is my
guess, and is not fact at this writing.
I agree with you, this is a critical issue, technical in nature, and as such
there is little or no room for wild eyed conjecture. You are looked upon as
being an authority on Yaks, when you say "I am sure" it tends to take the
weight of truth. So if you post to the list on items of such a critical
nature please do us all a service and post what you know to be fact, if not
fact, state it that way. I also think it better to post to the originator
of the post who would be Barry Hancock at WWW, and not feed the rumor mill
with information that you "think" is correct.
Anyone wishing to comment or anyone that has good factual information that
would help shed light on the issue and thusly make the whole project safer,
please respond to either Barry or myself off list.
Always Yakin,
Doug Sapp
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Richard Goode
Subject: Yak-List: Control Surface Modifications
In response to Steve Dalton, there is absolutely nothing wrong with
metalized control surfaces =96 many of the world=92s production aeroplanes
have them.
In terms of the new Aerostar Yak-52TW etc., it seems that the change to
metalized surfaces has been a bit problematic =96 but this is nothing to do
with the concept of metalized control surfaces.
My concern is of UNQUALIFIED people adding weight onto control surfaces
without appropriate analysis, and, most importantly, without subsequent
flutter tests. This is the critical issue.
As for Aerostar, I am sure they would have gone through this process before
metalizing the control surfaces of their current aircraft.
Richard Goode
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Mob: +44 (0) 7768 610389
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
dangerous content by the http://www.invictawiz.com
MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Sapp" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | Geo Baker Aviation? |
Could someone out there either give me the phone number for Geo Baker
Aviation or get word to them to call me @ 509-826-4610. Many thanks.
Always Yakin,
Doug Sapp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Herb Coussons <drc(at)wscare.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Control Surface Modifications |
I can tell you that TW concerns are not always thought out well by
the factory.
At OSH this year our oil cooler relocation from the belly to the wing
was admired heavily by Christian Dragoi from the factory.
He said when he figures out which cooler is in the wing "we steal it"
- not re-engineer it.
Imagine in general aviation having a pilot rebuild a major system on
a Cessna /Piper/Beech and have the factory walk up and say "I like
it, we'll start doing it that way" I would say that Aerostar is very
much an experimental aircraft company. This does not mean anything
derogatory - I'm glad we aren't paying certified prices for our
ships. I think they are better designed, stronger, better
performance etc for less than half the money of anything certified in
the USA. But I do not think all the flight test data exists behind
the design either. (Doug, I said "I think" NOT "I am sure")
I am now the joke of the local field - in addition to the YAK I have
a Wilga - you know the Polish experimental. I even think the Poles
had a more methodical design process than the Romanians/Russians.
Neat plane.
Anyway - I hope the factory steals our design to improve the TW oil
cooler - it only validates our work. $12,000 out of our pockets to
get the right design. Available in kit form - $2900. Consistent oil
temps of 150-155 C. Even on the long OSH taxi at 90F outside temp
max oil temp was 160 C.
Looks cool, works great (see pics in archive)
We have flight tested to extreme now - all manuevers including
inverted spins, and gyroscopic acro - tumbling etc. +7 to -3 G's.
Now about 50 hours of flight with half of that acro.
I love experimental - !!
Herb
On Aug 5, 2005, at 1:36 PM, Doug Sapp wrote:
>
> Richard,
> I normally would not say this on the list but it needs to be said.
> What you
> think qualifies an individual to do a specific task may be quite
> different
> in the UK than here in the US. Most every new idea in aviation
> today from
> VG's to the new ignition systems came from the US experimental
> aircraft
> community. Very few of the contributors were or are in your
> definition,
> "qualified engineers" (hell the Wright brothers were bicycle
> mechanics). If
> we waited for the engineers, and or the FAA to bless the popular
> mods of
> today we would have a long wait indeed. The Skunk Works mentality
> is shared
> by many of the US contingent of the EAA and I am happy to say that the
> feeling is alive and well within the Yak community today. But
> Sadly, when
> looking at the many recent advancements I can think of none, not
> one, that
> comes from the UK, why is that? We, here in the US, by our very
> nature are
> a bunch of experimenters and entrepreneurs all trying to build a
> better
> mouse trap, it's all part of who we are. We are brash upstarts,
> modifiers,
> and in many cases just idealistic dam fools, but we keep on trying,
> that's
> what makes this a great country. (please excuse the flag waving)
>
> You mention Aerostar and say that "you are sure". Why are you are
> sure??
> It's nice that you have such confidence in them but the truth is
> that you
> don't really know! All you really know is that you would like to
> think, and
> you hope that they did the testing. They are playing to a
> experimental
> market, not a certified market, IMHO their motivation to do
> complete testing
> may be different than that of Cessna, Beech or Piper. Consider the
> first
> TW's, they did very little or no testing on load factors for the
> attach
> brackets for the new tail wheel modification. This is evidenced by
> the fact
> (not opinion or supposition) that the first aircraft had many
> problems with
> poor construction methods which led to weakness and structural
> failures in
> the tail wheel attachment area, and metalized control surfaces cracked
> within a very few hours. All this would tend to make one believe
> that these
> first aircraft were rushed into service without proper research or
> actual
> long term flight testing. To their credit however most problems were
> quickly rectified. My point here is that we do not actually know
> to what
> extent Aerostar has gone to to test for flutter, so why post unless
> you are
> sure that they have even done the testing? My research shows that
> at least
> on the early TW's they simply have pop riveted (yes pop riveted)
> metal skins
> to the stock standard fabric control surface, rather they changed
> the weight
> of the bob weight is unknown to me at this time, but I have
> inquiries out to
> gather this information. My guess is that they metalized the
> surfaces, flew
> that aircraft and found no problems and shipped them out. Again
> that is my
> guess, and is not fact at this writing.
>
> I agree with you, this is a critical issue, technical in nature,
> and as such
> there is little or no room for wild eyed conjecture. You are
> looked upon as
> being an authority on Yaks, when you say "I am sure" it tends to
> take the
> weight of truth. So if you post to the list on items of such a
> critical
> nature please do us all a service and post what you know to be
> fact, if not
> fact, state it that way. I also think it better to post to the
> originator
> of the post who would be Barry Hancock at WWW, and not feed the
> rumor mill
> with information that you "think" is correct.
>
> Anyone wishing to comment or anyone that has good factual
> information that
> would help shed light on the issue and thusly make the whole
> project safer,
> please respond to either Barry or myself off list.
>
> Always Yakin,
> Doug Sapp
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Richard Goode
> To: YAK USA LIST
> Subject: Yak-List: Control Surface Modifications
>
>
>
>
> In response to Steve Dalton, there is absolutely nothing wrong with
> metalized control surfaces =96 many of the world=92s production
> aeroplanes
> have them.
>
>
> In terms of the new Aerostar Yak-52TW etc., it seems that the
> change to
> metalized surfaces has been a bit problematic =96 but this is
> nothing to do
> with the concept of metalized control surfaces.
>
>
> My concern is of UNQUALIFIED people adding weight onto control
> surfaces
> without appropriate analysis, and, most importantly, without
> subsequent
> flutter tests. This is the critical issue.
>
>
> As for Aerostar, I am sure they would have gone through this
> process before
> metalizing the control surfaces of their current aircraft.
>
>
> Richard Goode
>
>
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Herefordshire
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Mob: +44 (0) 7768 610389
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com
>
> dangerous content by the http://www.invictawiz.com
> MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Control Surface Modifications |
Doug Sapp wrote:
>
> Richard,
> I normally would not say this on the list but it needs to be said. What you
> think qualifies an individual to do a specific task may be quite different
> in the UK than here in the US. Most every new idea in aviation today from
> VG's to the new ignition systems came from the US experimental aircraft
> community. Very few of the contributors were or are in your definition,
> "qualified engineers" (hell the Wright brothers were bicycle mechanics).
I am not sure that I totally agree with you Doug. There are innovations that
we are seeing in the experimental community but they are not really in areas
of aerodynamics. Materials, modeling, systems, and avionics, yes.
Aerodynamics, no.
VGs are not new. They have been around for many decades and have long been
used to extend the low speed part of the envelope, mostly on jets, but they
were the result of professional application of science and engineering.
The Wright Brothers may have been early and may have made their living fixing
bicycles, but they were consummate professional aeronautical engineers. Their
methods made them so. They approached flight in a dispassionate manner and
used formal scientific method and experimentation to separate fact from fancy.
As a result, they were successful where so many other failed. They may have
been amateurs in that they didn't make any money from it at first but they
were 100% professional engineers and scientists in their application.
> If
> we waited for the engineers, and or the FAA to bless the popular mods of
> today we would have a long wait indeed.
I agree with you on the FAA as they are mostly clueless. Most of the people
within that organization just don't know anything about airplanes anymore.
I think that you are wrong about engineering tho'. Burt Rutan, Dick
VanGrunsven, and Curtis Pitts are/were consummate engineers and they, among
others, have certainly led the experimental aircraft revolution. Amateur
aircraft building and professional engineering go hand-in-hand. They are most
definitely not mutually exclusive. The advantage we have here in the US is
that, in the experimental aircraft field, we can put good engineering to use
more rapidly than can people tied to FAA or CAA certification. That is how we
get rapid advances. But that in no way sidesteps the need for good engineering.
> The Skunk Works mentality is shared
> by many of the US contingent of the EAA and I am happy to say that the
> feeling is alive and well within the Yak community today. But Sadly, when
> looking at the many recent advancements I can think of none, not one, that
> comes from the UK, why is that?
They are too tightly regulated, even more so than with our FAA (which is bad
enough). That does not prevent Richard from making valid observations. A
government can regulate to the point where people can no longer act but that
does not prevent their brains from working. Richard brings up valid points.
> We, here in the US, by our very nature are
> a bunch of experimenters and entrepreneurs all trying to build a better
> mouse trap, it's all part of who we are. We are brash upstarts, modifiers,
> and in many cases just idealistic dam fools, but we keep on trying, that's
> what makes this a great country. (please excuse the flag waving)
This is not a political or geographic issue. You have chosen to offer a
product. Knowing the kinds of problems that a product like this *might* have,
Mike, Richard, and I have raised valid questions. We are not calling into
question your ability to do good work but we are asking for further
clarification on your methods for determining its safety and efficacy.
I have said two things:
1. there are problems associated with metalized control surfaces that must be
dealt with to ensure safety;
2. I do not see that the advantages are great enough to justify the effort
*FOR* *ME*.
Both of these statements are valid and true.
> My point here is that we do not actually know to what
> extent Aerostar has gone to to test for flutter, so why post unless you are
> sure that they have even done the testing? My research shows that at least
> on the early TW's they simply have pop riveted (yes pop riveted)
Well, they may have been something like Cherry-Max blind rivets. While those
look like pop-rivets, they are definitely best available practice for
attaching skins in an area that is inaccessible.
> metal skins
> to the stock standard fabric control surface, rather they changed the weight
> of the bob weight is unknown to me at this time, but I have inquiries out to
> gather this information. My guess is that they metalized the surfaces, flew
> that aircraft and found no problems and shipped them out. Again that is my
> guess, and is not fact at this writing.
And that may be so but that is not really the issue here. The discussion was
about the product that you and Barry are promulgating. What Aerostar is doing
is a bit of a red herring at the moment.
> I agree with you, this is a critical issue, technical in nature, and as such
> there is little or no room for wild eyed conjecture.
I agree with you 100% on this.
> You are looked upon as
> being an authority on Yaks, when you say "I am sure" it tends to take the
> weight of truth. So if you post to the list on items of such a critical
> nature please do us all a service and post what you know to be fact, if not
> fact, state it that way. I also think it better to post to the originator
> of the post who would be Barry Hancock at WWW, and not feed the rumor mill
> with information that you "think" is correct.
But we have no facts at the moment. We are at the point of early discussion.
We are asking questions, not condemning. We are saying, "gee, there could be a
problem with this. How have you dealt with the potential problems?" I do know
that metalizing control surfaces can reduce flutter margin and that people
have died from control surface flutter. Is it not reasonable to point that out
and then ask how you have ensured adequate flutter margin? That is just common
sense.
> Anyone wishing to comment or anyone that has good factual information that
> would help shed light on the issue and thusly make the whole project safer,
> please respond to either Barry or myself off list.
Why off list? Public discourse brings in ideas from other areas and may
short-circuit the process and lead to a better solution. It will certainly
elevate the level of education for everyone.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brian-yak(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Control Surface Modifications |
Herb,
I do not have a TW and am only asking the question out of curiosity. What
does it do to the stall characteristics of the wing. At what A/S does it
stall? Does it come at about 8-10 kilometers/hr after onset of the buffet?
Does it snap to the right with full power at high alpha? How does it
recover?
Again, I am not questioning anybody's engineering intregrity or judgement.
Certainly the Oil cooler under the chin did not work out. Never knew why
they moved it from the wing root but the the TD is having it's own set of
problems too.
The good thing about our eastern bloc friends is they never threw out the
mousetrap to invent another one. They just keep refining it.
Viperdoc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim & Jessie Windsor" <windsorsedge(at)ozemail.com.au> |
Hi Craig
I am Yak 52 owner in Australia , what is your location and details of your
engines.
Best Regards,
Tim & Jessie Windsor
Windsor's Edge
McDonalds Rd
Pokolbin. NSW
Ph (02) 4998 7737
windsorsedge(at)ozemail.com.au
----- Original Message -----
From: "c w" <pilotcraig2001(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Yak-List: M14
>
> I still have 6 M14s left.
> Craig
>
>
> __________________________________
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
>
>
> __________ NOD32 1.1187 (20050805) Information __________
>
> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Aluminum Control Surfaces VS Ceconite (Stits) |
Richard
Don't worry about some of the blowhards on this list. They may email you
off list chastising your posts about metal control surfaces but I'm here
to tell you your posts are appreciated.
One of the great things about this list is that it goes worldwide so any
bullsh!t posts are quickly known for what they are....bullsh!t. If it's
a technical discussion it belongs right here on the list out in the
open! Not behind closed doors (off list).
You just keep right on informing us of your opinions about anything YAK
and to hell with those who'd sell you snake oil.
Frank
N9110M
YAK-52
L71
PS I've seen numerous examples of metalized control surfaces on YAKS.
It's obvious that in time they get beat up and look like crap. On the
other hand, you can slam your fist into a Ceconite control surface, put
a huge dent in it and the next day see nothing wrong as the Ceconite
will "heal itself" to the point where you can't tell were the surface
was dented. I should know....I ran into a bench vise pushing my plane
into the hanger and put a severe creased in the left aileron. I figured
I would have to recover that control surface. The next day I couldn't
find where the damage was as the Ceconite had "healed itself". Let's see
aluminum do that!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Samuel Sax" <cd001633(at)mindspring.com> |
Does anyone know the story with the Helicopter version of the M-14P engines?
There were several advertised for sale a while ago, and were represented as
"practically identical powertrain and an easy conversion" to the stock M-14P
(a different nose bowl and gears). Has anyone here on the list worked on
these engines? if yes, what was the experience? Any Merit to the claim that
they can be converted (modified) to be a stock engine for fixed wing (read
Yak, CJ) aircraft flight?
Thanks in advance,
Sam Sax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: M14P Engines |
Sam,
Steve Culp in Louisiana was selling several of the helicopter engines. As
you know, Steve has been involved in Yak's and M14's for years and is quite
knowledgeable about them. I would suggest you contact Steve directly at
culpspecial(at)yahoo.com. I'm pretty sure he can elaborate on the conversion.
Good luck,
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Samuel Sax" <cd001633(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: M14P Engines
>
> Does anyone know the story with the Helicopter version of the M-14P
> engines?
> There were several advertised for sale a while ago, and were represented
> as
> "practically identical powertrain and an easy conversion" to the stock
> M-14P
> (a different nose bowl and gears). Has anyone here on the list worked on
> these engines? if yes, what was the experience? Any Merit to the claim
> that
> they can be converted (modified) to be a stock engine for fixed wing (read
> Yak, CJ) aircraft flight?
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Sam Sax
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
> [Original Message]
> From: Samuel Sax <cd001633(at)mindspring.com>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: M14P Engines
>
>
> Does anyone know the story with the Helicopter version of the M-14P
engines?
Sam,
Google Culp Special experimental aircraft. Steve Culp has been importing
them and converting them. There is a difference in the RPM since it is not
geared like our M-14 P's. I understand you can take the nose case off our's
and transfer it to the helicopter version.
Sorry, but that is the extent of my knowledge base on the conversion.
Viperdoc
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Geo Baker Aviation? |
| From: | Cliff Umscheid <netmaster15(at)juno.com> |
Doug,
George Baker's phone: 386-427- 2727
For CURTIS @ George's, Call 386-837-4073
If you fail to make connection call ME at 386 345 1861 ,I will patch you
through.
Cliff Umscheid
writes:
>
> Could someone out there either give me the phone number for Geo
> Baker
> Aviation or get word to them to call me @ 509-826-4610. Many
> thanks.
>
> Always Yakin,
> Doug Sapp
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Payne" <cpayne(at)joimail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Experimental |
"Imagine in general aviation having a pilot rebuild a major system on
a Cessna /Piper/Beech and have the factory walk up and say "I like
it, we'll start doing it that way"
Well, there's Cessna's adaptation of Steve Whitman's landing gear, the Beech Starship
and advanced composite construction ala Rutan, the scimicar prop, etc.
Recently it's all the low-cost electronics that will find it's way through the
certification process eventually.
YES! we are endless experimenters. If something doesn't work right, we change it.
If it works OK but could work better, we change it. No more certified spam
for me!
Some day, I'll marry my accumulated aeromods to one of those Arizona engines. Then
watch out!
Craig Payne
cpayne(at)joimail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Dalton" <sdalton(at)goeaston.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Control Surface Modifications |
>>>>From: "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Control Surface Modifications
Again, I am not questioning anybody's engineering intregrity or
judgement. Certainly the Oil cooler under the chin did not work out.
Never knew why they moved it from the wing root but the the TD is having
it's own set of problems too. <<<<<
Hi Doc,
Just FYI from another old Viper driver. And with Brian's excellent
comments in mind.the more we talk about this stuff the better.here are
some "facts" about the TW.
Aerostar moved the oil cooler under the chin (ala the Yak-50) because
the wheel well replaced the fuel tank area in the wing and the AUX fuel
tank was placed where the oil cooler was previously located. IOW, they
had to move it.
For some reason, and I am NOT an engineer (just a Peelot), this location
works fine for some TW's and doesn't for others. For example, my TW
(the first one made) has absolutely no oil temp problems after debugging
the cooler door mechanism. In fact, flying in 95 degree heat my oil is
cooler than Herb is getting with the new location. It never reaches
150F until after landing.then up to 160F. (Herb's leading edge cooler
does look much better though.)
But on Ski's TW, he has problems with the oil getter too hot in a climb
and has to power back and let it cool before continuing to climb. Exact
same location, installation, debugging and cooler.go figure.
And in reference to the metal control surfaces some more TW facts. Some
have cracked, others have not. Mine have over 400 hours and have seen
240+ mph, and much acro flying with no problems. They look great.and
since I spoke up will probably crack tomorrow. :-)
I totally agree with Richard Goode: "My concern is of UNQUALIFIED people
adding weight onto control surfaces without appropriate analysis, and,
most importantly, without subsequent flutter tests. This is the
critical issue."
However, I have not heard of anyone having flutter problems. Aerostar
did no flight testing for flutter problems.I did it (unknowingly) for
them, along with all the spin testing! They wanted the plane at OSH in
2001 and had no time for flight testing before having to ship it.
Aerostar switched to a slightly thicker skin several years ago in an
attempt to stop the cracking. I do not know the result of this
switch.anybody else?
Cheers,
Steve Dalton
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Control Surface Modifications |
Brian,
Did not know you were an ol'Viper driver. Thanks for the info on the TW.
Admittedly, I am learning more about this airplane everyday and loving it
more as I go. Sure can not find anything as well built for the money in US
spam. We have to build an RV or a Glassair to get close. Then the avionics
becomes another issue. Have not seen a King ADI standup to 30 minutes of
acro without going TU, having to recage and then land to get the little
bugger to right itself. Give that Russian unit a minute of level flight and
she is back on the money. Just an example of the many things I respect
about these Aircraft. Tough as nails, fun to fly, safe (if flown within
limits) and look great.
Just glad we did not have to face them down in the Folga Gap.
Must be the reason most US acro aircraft do not even have ADI's. Aw Hell
probably started another pissing match with that. Who's got the best ADI.
My vote is on the Russian one in my YAK! Getting replacement ones for a
reasonable price is another problem. Ever notice that just about everything
in YAK replacement parts (magneto's, compressors, control cable sets, ect)
all cost around $1000? Hum, the parts guys must be talking to the handy men
around my house....$1200...Damned, I'm getting a deal aren't I? Saving $200
on YAK parts. Must mean I need to buy more YAK parts and work on the house
less to see such savings.
Enough rambling.
Thanks for the TW info.
Jump on Ski's wing and come down to KSEM 14 to 16 OCT. Can use another
experienced scheduler and tactician! We are up to 37! Hell we are looking
at spinning off to AUX fields to get in all the sorties. A SOF's nightmare.
Damn, gonna be just like being back in the squadron! Scheduling airspace,
mass breifs, hard show/step/start/TO/land times....
Fly safe and Vipers forever! (Problem is there is a new bad boy on the
block...Raptor! Man even Rope-A-Dope and Post Holes don't work with those
guys! Image going to the merge with total SA!)
Doc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Herb Coussons <drc(at)wscare.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Control Surface Modifications |
Our TW came with the lighter skins on it - we had a small crack in
the rudder skin and at the first annual replaced with the heavier
skin - Now about 250 hours with some hard acro including tailslides
and no problems.
Herb
On Aug 6, 2005, at 9:10 AM, Steve Dalton wrote:
>
>
>>>>> From: "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com>
>>>>>
>
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Control Surface Modifications
>
> Again, I am not questioning anybody's engineering intregrity or
> judgement. Certainly the Oil cooler under the chin did not work out.
> Never knew why they moved it from the wing root but the the TD is
> having
> it's own set of problems too. <<<<<
>
>
> Hi Doc,
>
> Just FYI from another old Viper driver. And with Brian's excellent
> comments in mind.the more we talk about this stuff the better.here are
> some "facts" about the TW.
>
> Aerostar moved the oil cooler under the chin (ala the Yak-50) because
> the wheel well replaced the fuel tank area in the wing and the AUX
> fuel
> tank was placed where the oil cooler was previously located. IOW,
> they
> had to move it.
>
> For some reason, and I am NOT an engineer (just a Peelot), this
> location
> works fine for some TW's and doesn't for others. For example, my TW
> (the first one made) has absolutely no oil temp problems after
> debugging
> the cooler door mechanism. In fact, flying in 95 degree heat my
> oil is
> cooler than Herb is getting with the new location. It never reaches
> 150F until after landing.then up to 160F. (Herb's leading edge cooler
> does look much better though.)
>
> But on Ski's TW, he has problems with the oil getter too hot in a
> climb
> and has to power back and let it cool before continuing to climb.
> Exact
> same location, installation, debugging and cooler.go figure.
>
> And in reference to the metal control surfaces some more TW facts.
> Some
> have cracked, others have not. Mine have over 400 hours and have seen
> 240+ mph, and much acro flying with no problems. They look great.and
> since I spoke up will probably crack tomorrow. :-)
>
> I totally agree with Richard Goode: "My concern is of UNQUALIFIED
> people
> adding weight onto control surfaces without appropriate analysis, and,
> most importantly, without subsequent flutter tests. This is the
> critical issue."
>
> However, I have not heard of anyone having flutter problems. Aerostar
> did no flight testing for flutter problems.I did it (unknowingly) for
> them, along with all the spin testing! They wanted the plane at
> OSH in
> 2001 and had no time for flight testing before having to ship it.
> Aerostar switched to a slightly thicker skin several years ago in an
> attempt to stop the cracking. I do not know the result of this
> switch.anybody else?
>
> Cheers,
> Steve Dalton
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Jefferies YAK UK Ltd <mark.j(at)yakuk.com> |
| Subject: | YAK-52TW and Aerostar |
Gentlemen, gentlmen, its very easy to resolve these issure and get the truth without
guessing or speculating.
Very simple, Christian Dragoi of Aerostar, reads this list, as the marketing person
for the "west" its in his interest that he promotes the company in good
light.
May I respectfully suggest that a list of pertinant questions are drawn up by one
individual and then posted to the list.
For example, tail spring was raised, metal skins another, so I suggest these as
sample questions for those that are concerned.
1. What is the weight differance with metal skins v fabric? (MJ comment, the skins
are thin so to be as near to the weight as possible, i think it was 4oz heavier,
than fabric but thin means cracking, so what are the new skin sizes now
and weight differance.
2. Were flutter tests carried out. If so, what was the failure mode/ speed.
3. What spin trials were done before dispatching a/c? (mj, none as I know, they
asked me to do the spinning tests (approx 4 shipped by that time) I went 2 weeks
after the schedualed ready date and it was not, so no spinning done by myself.
I think there pilots were not experianced in aerobatics, hence one did a
snap roll at 300ft and did 1.5 turns and pulled into the deck. Whenever I went
there to accept a/c and fly to Lithuania for painting the test pilots always
wanted to fly with me as this was the only oppertunity they got to fly aeros.
Unlike Zlin in CZ aerostar did not own a spin recover parachute for any trials.
4. What aerodynamic changes made to justify an aft C of G moving to 31% from YBD
27% (yak 50 and 52 with clark Y wing)
5. what aft C of G trials were done to (spinning at max weight etc) to substanciate the rear C of G limits being moved from the YDB limit of 27% mac to 31% mac. (none as I know it was moved as a means of selling the a/c with a usable envelope- just-) http://www.yakuk.com/Yak52TW_W&B.xls schedual drawn up by steve dalton, one of the first TW owners.
6. then you can turn to the main u/c that had problems and the tail u/c mentioned
also.
These are some questions that I presume aerostar can substanciate the answers,
afterall they want you to buy the a/c. If they dont answer draw your own conclusions.
Richard and I both are aware of making false acusations, litigation can follow.
He is right to assume that Aerostar did all the nessasary justification, it would
be irrisponcible if they did not however after being at aerostar on numerous
occasions from way back in 1991 I have my own knowledge of the true and sumised
situation to which I am not going to report.
Richard is a valuable contributor to this list, the compertition he gives me in
the UK is very welcome, he does not make his living selling YAK's but like I
, he is an entusiastic aviator who saw a market for a type (firstly SU26 then
following me to the YAK 52) and put his passion first and spent many years cultivating
the business, traveling to piss poor places, enduring personal hardships
in the FSU, personal risk, poor food etc etc. To bring suberbly advanced a/c
to the GA market at silly prices .
Experimental is a good and bad certification, (BTW, Wilga is fully certifed to
FAR 23 like the AN2, just usa/faa does not like the "unfair" compertition so dont
recogise this) Experimental lets superior (to budget built spams) military
a/c fly in USA, thats good, the bad is when a "clown" uses a rose joing end in
the elivator control system in the bending plain resulting in a failure, the
pilot tried landing on trim for 30 mins till he ran out of fuel and had to jump.
Using the rose joint like this was idiotic in the extream but DIY experiments
are allowed under "experimental" Some YAK's are an EXperiment, ie directives
concerning structure not implimented. These are the guineepigs of the world
that help the wise man stay alive.
still reading? Have a nice day.
BR, mj
Best regards, Mark
www.yakuk.com
+44 (0)1767 651156 office +44 (0)7785 538 317 mobile
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Geo Baker Aviation? |
His number is 386-427-2727
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jon Boede" <jon(at)email.net> |
http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~panugant/downloads/chineese.wmv
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Timothy Gagnon <NiftyYak50(at)msn.com> |
It is the Fulda Gap.
By the way, I heard there was a gear collapse issue in MTW? Anyone know the
details?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)AOL.COM |
In a message dated 8/7/2005 8:23:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
NiftyYak50(at)msn.com writes:
> It is the Fulda Gap.
>
> By the way, I heard there was a gear collapse issue in MTW? Anyone know the
> details?
>
During the Saturday show at OSH, the last aircraft to land from our 'RedStar'
group was "Wild Bill" Walker in his Yak 52 TD. The 'over center' lock'
material failed is shear, (apparently not enough material surface) the gear passed
the locked position folding inward, and the airplane went up on its nose,
closing rwy 9 for a short time. It will be an easy repair, to prop, cowl, and
wing tip.
I believe the designer has already worked out a very easy modification to
keep that from happening again.
Wild Bill could really tell you the details. The "TD" is another version of
the TW but done from a straight 52 by the Lithuanians I believe.
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FamilyGage(at)aol.com |
Troopers:
Have not entered any information on my 9 April 05 accident, as I felt that
there was nothing positive to offer RPA.
I was one of our usual Saturday morning fly out for breakfast at Titusville.
Had put about 70 hours on the demonstration TW that Cliff Coy had built for
me. Granted, had put too much equipment and money into this ship but she
was designed to sell planes for Bill Austin.
No doubt I deserved all of the sharp remarks from Craig and others for
spending too much.
Anyway, on the return trip an unknown female (a friend or a friend) asked
to return to the Creek with me. I told her no, as I feel uncomfortable with
having strange and non-pilots in the back. Everything in the formation was
nominal on the return. I was the last plane to land.
Bill Walker has warned me about tail shimmy after a wheel landing, and he
was correct. Therefore, had been doing three point landings.
Was in the flair at or very slightly above stall. The tail wheel touched
first (no big deal). As the main gear touched the left wing went right down to
the tarmac and touched the wing tip.
I added some power and tried to unload plus right aileron and rudder. The
right gear collapsed forward and the right wing hit the tarmac so hard that it
jammed the controls.
We have a park next to our runway and all that I could think of was not to
cart wheel into the crowd of spectators.
From this point the plane became a sled. Hit the trees on the left side of
the runway at a good speed. Luckily, the first tree hit was one of the few
dead trees left from last years hurricanes. That tree fractured in to a
thousand pieces. The next tree was healthy and hit the left wing, which spun
the
plane around and aimed the spinner dead on to the next tree which stopped the
slide.
The Romanians truly build an amazingly strong plane. The left wing remained
on the plane, although now pointing aft about 15 degrees. The front end
moved back about three inches. The fuselage and right wing were in tack. The
right gear folded forward, and the left gear sheared off about thirty yards
back up the runway.
After the accident, there were plenty of questions but no answers. Yes, the
pilot is responsible for landing accidents and I accept. Some of the
questions: Did a landing gear part fail; Did the unknown passenger grab the
controls; Did the pilot make a major mistake?
May heart goes out to Bill Walker, as believe me, I know how he feels!
However, his incident may give a clue as to what occurred to my ex-TW. Having
several thousand hours of tail wheel time does not mean that I didn't screw up
this time.
Thanks to the built in strength of the Yak, both the passenger and myself
only had shoulder bruises from being jerked about in the cockpit.
I am now back in the air. I repurchased the W that I had sold 18 months
ago. She is in great shape with only another 30 hours on the engine. In fact,
the plane is in some ways better in that a Dynon EFIS installed and a fresh
annual.
If my experience can aid anyone else, please feel free to contact me off
list.
Ray Gage
wolfman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com> |
Wolfman,
I'm pretty sure I speak for most everyone on the list; we're glad you and
your passenger are safe and sound and back flying with us.
Welcome back.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: <FamilyGage(at)aol.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Accident
>
> Troopers:
>
> Have not entered any information on my 9 April 05 accident, as I felt that
> there was nothing positive to offer RPA.
>
> I was one of our usual Saturday morning fly out for breakfast at
> Titusville.
> Had put about 70 hours on the demonstration TW that Cliff Coy had built
> for
> me. Granted, had put too much equipment and money into this ship but she
> was designed to sell planes for Bill Austin.
> No doubt I deserved all of the sharp remarks from Craig and others for
> spending too much.
>
> Anyway, on the return trip an unknown female (a friend or a friend)
> asked
> to return to the Creek with me. I told her no, as I feel uncomfortable
> with
> having strange and non-pilots in the back. Everything in the formation
> was
> nominal on the return. I was the last plane to land.
>
> Bill Walker has warned me about tail shimmy after a wheel landing, and he
> was correct. Therefore, had been doing three point landings.
>
> Was in the flair at or very slightly above stall. The tail wheel touched
> first (no big deal). As the main gear touched the left wing went right
> down to
> the tarmac and touched the wing tip.
>
> I added some power and tried to unload plus right aileron and rudder.
> The
> right gear collapsed forward and the right wing hit the tarmac so hard
> that it
> jammed the controls.
>
> We have a park next to our runway and all that I could think of was not to
> cart wheel into the crowd of spectators.
>
> From this point the plane became a sled. Hit the trees on the left side
> of
> the runway at a good speed. Luckily, the first tree hit was one of the
> few
> dead trees left from last years hurricanes. That tree fractured in to a
> thousand pieces. The next tree was healthy and hit the left wing, which
> spun the
> plane around and aimed the spinner dead on to the next tree which stopped
> the
> slide.
>
> The Romanians truly build an amazingly strong plane. The left wing
> remained
> on the plane, although now pointing aft about 15 degrees. The front end
> moved back about three inches. The fuselage and right wing were in tack.
> The
> right gear folded forward, and the left gear sheared off about thirty
> yards
> back up the runway.
>
> After the accident, there were plenty of questions but no answers. Yes,
> the
> pilot is responsible for landing accidents and I accept. Some of the
> questions: Did a landing gear part fail; Did the unknown passenger grab
> the
> controls; Did the pilot make a major mistake?
>
> May heart goes out to Bill Walker, as believe me, I know how he feels!
> However, his incident may give a clue as to what occurred to my ex-TW.
> Having
> several thousand hours of tail wheel time does not mean that I didn't
> screw up
> this time.
>
> Thanks to the built in strength of the Yak, both the passenger and myself
> only had shoulder bruises from being jerked about in the cockpit.
>
> I am now back in the air. I repurchased the W that I had sold 18 months
> ago. She is in great shape with only another 30 hours on the engine. In
> fact,
> the plane is in some ways better in that a Dynon EFIS installed and a
> fresh
> annual.
>
> If my experience can aid anyone else, please feel free to contact me off
> list.
>
> Ray Gage
> wolfman
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ByronMFox(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: chinese radial |
In a message dated 8/6/2005 7:32:36 PM Pacific Standard Time, jon(at)email.net
writes:
http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~panugant/downloads/chineese.wmv
Spectacular, Jon. Thanks!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | st.ellison(at)comcast.net |
1.25 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains an IP address used for HELO
Yakmen:
I'm looking for a little insight into a problem I am encountering on my Yak-52.
I am guessing it is a fuel system problem but being such a beginner at this I really
don't know. Here are the symptoms I have experienced.
1. After flying about 1/2 hour doing rolls and loops I landed and fueled the plane.
After takeoff back toward the practice area I rolled inverted and continued
the climb at 82% and 80mmHg at about 110mph. About 10 seconds after rolling
inverted the prop % and mmhg both started to drop noticeably. I rolled upright
and leveled the plane. As I would advance the throttle forward from there the
RPM% would drop. Air mix was set at the mid position.. I backed everything off
to 70 65 and went home.
2. Next day I flew again. Checked everything on the ground and all tested well.
Took off and climbed to 3000 ft. At altitude I set the prop to about 82% and
advanced the throttle. Things seemd a little sluggish but nothing you could put
your finger on until very near full throttle when you could feel the engine
start to surge very slightly. Air mix was tried in both the closed and open positions
with the same result. This would disappear as you reduced the throttle
and return as you advance near full throttle again.
3. Upon landing from the second flight described above I checked the idle to power
transition while sitting on the tarmac. The was now a very definite hesitation
when you advance the throttle off of 40% unless it is done very slowly.
I would appreciate and comments on what the problem might be and where to look
for the fix. Has anyone experienced this themselves?
Thanks for you help!!!!
Steve
Yakmen:
I'm looking for a little insight into a problem I am encountering on my Yak-52.
I am guessing it is a fuel system problem but being such a beginner at this I really
don't know. Here are the symptoms I have experienced.
1. After flying about 1/2 hour doing rolls and loops I landed and fueled the plane.
After takeoff back toward the practice area I rolled inverted and continued
the climb at 82% and 80mmHg at about 110mph. About 10 seconds after rolling
inverted the prop % and mmhg both started to drop noticeably. I rolled upright
and leveled the plane. As I would advance the throttle forward from there the
RPM% would drop. Air mix was set at the mid position.. I backed everything off
to 70 65 and went home.
2. Next day I flew again. Checked everything on the ground and all tested well.
Took off and climbed to 3000 ft. At altitude I set the prop to about 82% and
advanced the throttle. Things seemd a little sluggish but nothing you could put
your finger on until very near full throttle when you could feel the engine
start to surge very slightly. Air mix was tried in both the closed and open positions
with the same result. This would disappear as you reduced the throttle
and return as you advance near full throttle again.
3. Upon landing from the second flight described above I checked the idle to power
transition while sitting on the tarmac. The was now a very definite hesitation
when you advance the throttle off of 40% unless it is done very slowly.
I would appreciate and comments on what the problem might be and where to look
for the fix. Has anyone experienced this themselves?
Thanks for you help!!!!
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Ivey <jim(at)jimivey.com> |
| Subject: | CJ Emergency Parachute |
Does anybody have experience with the Strong Squadron-type seatpack
parachutes?
I have a Strong backpack and Strong gave me a great price at OSH to re-install
my old canopy into a Squadron chute container at a reasonable price. I wonder
how well the Srong Squadron, either type, fit into a CJ seatpan. Comments?
Jim Ivey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Martinez <erniel29(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ Emergency Parachute |
I did exactly that. The chute fits fine. Paid $800.00 to have them put
my C-9 chute in a new seat pack. I thought it was a good price at the
time, until I realized that I paid $800.00 for a piece of canvas and
some clasps. Dont really know if it was such a good deal.
Ernie
On 8/7/05, Jim Ivey wrote:
>
> Does anybody have experience with the Strong Squadron-type seatpack
> parachutes?
> I have a Strong backpack and Strong gave me a great price at OSH to re-install
> my old canopy into a Squadron chute container at a reasonable price. I wonder
> how well the Srong Squadron, either type, fit into a CJ seatpan. Comments?
>
> Jim Ivey
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Martinez <erniel29(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Yak-Question |
Check your primer and make sure you werent flying with it engaged.
Sounds like you may be running too rich.
Ernie
On 8/7/05, st.ellison(at)comcast.net wrote:
>
> Yakmen:
>
> I'm looking for a little insight into a problem I am encountering on my Yak-52.
> I am guessing it is a fuel system problem but being such a beginner at this I
really don't know. Here are the symptoms I have experienced.
>
> 1. After flying about 1/2 hour doing rolls and loops I landed and fueled the
plane. After takeoff back toward the practice area I rolled inverted and continued
the climb at 82% and 80mmHg at about 110mph. About 10 seconds after rolling
inverted the prop % and mmhg both started to drop noticeably. I rolled upright
and leveled the plane. As I would advance the throttle forward from there
the RPM% would drop. Air mix was set at the mid position.. I backed everything
off to 70 65 and went home.
>
> 2. Next day I flew again. Checked everything on the ground and all tested well.
Took off and climbed to 3000 ft. At altitude I set the prop to about 82% and
advanced the throttle. Things seemd a little sluggish but nothing you could
put your finger on until very near full throttle when you could feel the engine
start to surge very slightly. Air mix was tried in both the closed and open
positions with the same result. This would disappear as you reduced the throttle
and return as you advance near full throttle again.
>
> 3. Upon landing from the second flight described above I checked the idle to
power transition while sitting on the tarmac. The was now a very definite hesitation
when you advance the throttle off of 40% unless it is done very slowly.
>
> I would appreciate and comments on what the problem might be and where to look
for the fix. Has anyone experienced this themselves?
>
> Thanks for you help!!!!
>
> Steve
>
> Yakmen:
>
> I'm looking for a little insight into a problem I am encountering on my Yak-52.
> I am guessing it is a fuel system problem but being such a beginner at this I
really don't know. Here are the symptoms I have experienced.
>
> 1. After flying about 1/2 hour doing rolls and loops I landed and fueled the
plane. After takeoff back toward the practice area I rolled inverted and continued
the climb at 82% and 80mmHg at about 110mph. About 10 seconds after rolling
inverted the prop % and mmhg both started to drop noticeably. I rolled upright
and leveled the plane. As I would advance the throttle forward from there
the RPM% would drop. Air mix was set at the mid position.. I backed everything
off to 70 65 and went home.
>
> 2. Next day I flew again. Checked everything on the ground and all tested well.
Took off and climbed to 3000 ft. At altitude I set the prop to about 82% and
advanced the throttle. Things seemd a little sluggish but nothing you could
put your finger on until very near full throttle when you could feel the engine
start to surge very slightly. Air mix was tried in both the closed and open
positions with the same result. This would disappear as you reduced the throttle
and return as you advance near full throttle again.
>
> 3. Upon landing from the second flight described above I checked the idle to
power transition while sitting on the tarmac. The was now a very definite hesitation
when you advance the throttle off of 40% unless it is done very slowly.
>
> I would appreciate and comments on what the problem might be and where to look
for the fix. Has anyone experienced this themselves?
>
> Thanks for you help!!!!
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Mortara" <rob(at)robinhill.com> |
| Subject: | CJ Emergency Parachute |
My butt says it's a good deal
rob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ Emergency Parachute
I did exactly that. The chute fits fine. Paid $800.00 to have them put
my C-9 chute in a new seat pack. I thought it was a good price at the
time, until I realized that I paid $800.00 for a piece of canvas and
some clasps. Dont really know if it was such a good deal.
Ernie
On 8/7/05, Jim Ivey wrote:
>
> Does anybody have experience with the Strong Squadron-type seatpack
> parachutes?
> I have a Strong backpack and Strong gave me a great price at OSH to
re-install
> my old canopy into a Squadron chute container at a reasonable price. I
wonder
> how well the Srong Squadron, either type, fit into a CJ seatpan.
Comments?
>
> Jim Ivey
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
Wolfman,
So it is to W and not TW. Glad you are back in the Air. A day with no air
under your ass is a long day indeed!
Viperdoc
Roger"Doc" Kemp
YAK 552SH
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Ivey <jim(at)jimivey.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ Emergency Parachute |
I was quoted $650.00 OSH special including any embroidering and a large
red star
with yellow outlining on the shoulder straps. I elected to go with military
green for the container. They are waiting for me to ship the old chute
to them
for transfer of the canopy. Between your comments and others I'm
mailng it off
tomorrow.
Jim Ivey
N46YK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: CJ Emergency Parachute |
Jim,
It is about 1/2 the cost of a new seat pack. So it may not be a bad deal. I
added the 3 1/2 space foam pad to my second pack after not having it with
the first one. My but appreciated it a whole lot more. In the YAK it fits
perfect in the pan. I however put my canopy cover folded in the pan first.
It adds about an inch to the base of the pan and it got my knees an extra
inch or so of extension. For a tall guy, the extra inches helped with the
leg room.
Viperdoc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Samuel Sax" <cd001633(at)mindspring.com> |
Dennis and Roger, thanks for the info.
In my research, I have information that such conversion (Helicopter M-14 to
stock M-14P) is not at all that simple - i.e. changing nose case, drive
gear and front bearing housing/plate.
I also heard the Les Crowder was working on such conversion before he passed
away earlier this year.
Did anyone on the List actually worked or knows of someone who worked on
such conversion?
Tx,
Sam Sax
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese
Subject: Re: Yak-List: M14P Engines
Sam,
Steve Culp in Louisiana was selling several of the helicopter engines. As
you know, Steve has been involved in Yak's and M14's for years and is quite
knowledgeable about them. I would suggest you contact Steve directly at
culpspecial(at)yahoo.com. I'm pretty sure he can elaborate on the conversion.
Good luck,
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Samuel Sax" <cd001633(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: M14P Engines
>
> Does anyone know the story with the Helicopter version of the M-14P
> engines?
> There were several advertised for sale a while ago, and were represented
> as
> "practically identical powertrain and an easy conversion" to the stock
> M-14P
> (a different nose bowl and gears). Has anyone here on the list worked on
> these engines? if yes, what was the experience? Any Merit to the claim
> that
> they can be converted (modified) to be a stock engine for fixed wing (read
> Yak, CJ) aircraft flight?
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Sam Sax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Yak-Question |
I have a question Steve. By "air mix" do you mean carbureator heat? If you
haven't checked the fine fuel screen for debris, I'd like to suggest you
remove the screen and examine it carefully for debris. At least this is a
starting point.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: <st.ellison(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Yak-List: Yak-Question
>
> Yakmen:
>
> I'm looking for a little insight into a problem I am encountering on my
> Yak-52.
> I am guessing it is a fuel system problem but being such a beginner at
> this I really don't know. Here are the symptoms I have experienced.
>
> 1. After flying about 1/2 hour doing rolls and loops I landed and fueled
> the plane. After takeoff back toward the practice area I rolled inverted
> and continued the climb at 82% and 80mmHg at about 110mph. About 10
> seconds after rolling inverted the prop % and mmhg both started to drop
> noticeably. I rolled upright and leveled the plane. As I would advance the
> throttle forward from there the RPM% would drop. Air mix was set at the
> mid position.. I backed everything off to 70 65 and went home.
>
> 2. Next day I flew again. Checked everything on the ground and all tested
> well. Took off and climbed to 3000 ft. At altitude I set the prop to about
> 82% and advanced the throttle. Things seemd a little sluggish but nothing
> you could put your finger on until very near full throttle when you could
> feel the engine start to surge very slightly. Air mix was tried in both
> the closed and open positions with the same result. This would disappear
> as you reduced the throttle and return as you advance near full throttle
> again.
>
> 3. Upon landing from the second flight described above I checked the idle
> to power transition while sitting on the tarmac. The was now a very
> definite hesitation when you advance the throttle off of 40% unless it is
> done very slowly.
>
> I would appreciate and comments on what the problem might be and where to
> look for the fix. Has anyone experienced this themselves?
>
> Thanks for you help!!!!
>
> Steve
>
> Yakmen:
>
> I'm looking for a little insight into a problem I am encountering on my
> Yak-52.
> I am guessing it is a fuel system problem but being such a beginner at
> this I really don't know. Here are the symptoms I have experienced.
>
> 1. After flying about 1/2 hour doing rolls and loops I landed and fueled
> the plane. After takeoff back toward the practice area I rolled inverted
> and continued the climb at 82% and 80mmHg at about 110mph. About 10
> seconds after rolling inverted the prop % and mmhg both started to drop
> noticeably. I rolled upright and leveled the plane. As I would advance the
> throttle forward from there the RPM% would drop. Air mix was set at the
> mid position.. I backed everything off to 70 65 and went home.
>
> 2. Next day I flew again. Checked everything on the ground and all tested
> well. Took off and climbed to 3000 ft. At altitude I set the prop to about
> 82% and advanced the throttle. Things seemd a little sluggish but nothing
> you could put your finger on until very near full throttle when you could
> feel the engine start to surge very slightly. Air mix was tried in both
> the closed and open positions with the same result. This would disappear
> as you reduced the throttle and return as you advance near full throttle
> again.
>
> 3. Upon landing from the second flight described above I checked the idle
> to power transition while sitting on the tarmac. The was now a very
> definite hesitation when you advance the throttle off of 40% unless it is
> done very slowly.
>
> I would appreciate and comments on what the problem might be and where to
> look for the fix. Has anyone experienced this themselves?
>
> Thanks for you help!!!!
>
> Steve
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Yak-Question |
Another question Steve. Have you had or do you know if any fuel hoses have
been rebuilt recently? There may be a "flapper" on the inside of one of the
fuel hoses causing a reduced fuel flow. If there is, it could possibly
cause complete fuel shut off.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak-Question
>
>
> I have a question Steve. By "air mix" do you mean carbureator heat? If
> you
> haven't checked the fine fuel screen for debris, I'd like to suggest you
> remove the screen and examine it carefully for debris. At least this is a
> starting point.
> Dennis
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <st.ellison(at)comcast.net>
> To:
> Subject: Yak-List: Yak-Question
>
>
>>
>> Yakmen:
>>
>> I'm looking for a little insight into a problem I am encountering on my
>> Yak-52.
>> I am guessing it is a fuel system problem but being such a beginner at
>> this I really don't know. Here are the symptoms I have experienced.
>>
>> 1. After flying about 1/2 hour doing rolls and loops I landed and fueled
>> the plane. After takeoff back toward the practice area I rolled inverted
>> and continued the climb at 82% and 80mmHg at about 110mph. About 10
>> seconds after rolling inverted the prop % and mmhg both started to drop
>> noticeably. I rolled upright and leveled the plane. As I would advance
>> the
>> throttle forward from there the RPM% would drop. Air mix was set at the
>> mid position.. I backed everything off to 70 65 and went home.
>>
>> 2. Next day I flew again. Checked everything on the ground and all tested
>> well. Took off and climbed to 3000 ft. At altitude I set the prop to
>> about
>> 82% and advanced the throttle. Things seemd a little sluggish but nothing
>> you could put your finger on until very near full throttle when you could
>> feel the engine start to surge very slightly. Air mix was tried in both
>> the closed and open positions with the same result. This would disappear
>> as you reduced the throttle and return as you advance near full throttle
>> again.
>>
>> 3. Upon landing from the second flight described above I checked the idle
>> to power transition while sitting on the tarmac. The was now a very
>> definite hesitation when you advance the throttle off of 40% unless it is
>> done very slowly.
>>
>> I would appreciate and comments on what the problem might be and where to
>> look for the fix. Has anyone experienced this themselves?
>>
>> Thanks for you help!!!!
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> Yakmen:
>>
>> I'm looking for a little insight into a problem I am encountering on my
>> Yak-52.
>> I am guessing it is a fuel system problem but being such a beginner at
>> this I really don't know. Here are the symptoms I have experienced.
>>
>> 1. After flying about 1/2 hour doing rolls and loops I landed and fueled
>> the plane. After takeoff back toward the practice area I rolled inverted
>> and continued the climb at 82% and 80mmHg at about 110mph. About 10
>> seconds after rolling inverted the prop % and mmhg both started to drop
>> noticeably. I rolled upright and leveled the plane. As I would advance
>> the
>> throttle forward from there the RPM% would drop. Air mix was set at the
>> mid position.. I backed everything off to 70 65 and went home.
>>
>> 2. Next day I flew again. Checked everything on the ground and all tested
>> well. Took off and climbed to 3000 ft. At altitude I set the prop to
>> about
>> 82% and advanced the throttle. Things seemd a little sluggish but nothing
>> you could put your finger on until very near full throttle when you could
>> feel the engine start to surge very slightly. Air mix was tried in both
>> the closed and open positions with the same result. This would disappear
>> as you reduced the throttle and return as you advance near full throttle
>> again.
>>
>> 3. Upon landing from the second flight described above I checked the idle
>> to power transition while sitting on the tarmac. The was now a very
>> definite hesitation when you advance the throttle off of 40% unless it is
>> done very slowly.
>>
>> I would appreciate and comments on what the problem might be and where to
>> look for the fix. Has anyone experienced this themselves?
>>
>> Thanks for you help!!!!
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Goode" <richard.goode(at)russianaeros.com> |
| Subject: | Control Surface Modifications |
This story has probably gone on too long, but to clear the air:
I am not sure what work Aerostar did before metalizing the control surfaces.
I would be surprised and disappointed if they had 'simply pop riveted metal skins
onto stock ailerons' without:
Having access to the original design data of the aircraft.
Knowing the results of the original flutter tests.
Extrapolating the historic data for the new ailerons.
(Probably) performing new static and dynamic flutter tests.
In case Doug Sapp has any doubts, I am full of admiration for American inventiveness,
and also jealous of your freedom to be inventive.
However, that is a digression - my only point is that ANY modification that affects
the weight/centre of gravity of a control surface should be examined by appropriately
qualified individuals for its affect on flutter characteristics.
Nothing more was intended or implied.
I have no commercial interest in this issue, and no other aim apart from safety.
Richard Goode
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Mob: +44 (0) 7768 610389
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
dangerous content by the http://www.invictawiz.com
MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Goode" <richard.goode(at)russianaeros.com> |
| Subject: | M14 Helicopter Engines |
The engine is officially the M-14V-26.
It was made for the Kamov and then Ka-26 helicopter which had two of them.
Although its rated power was 325-hp at 2,800 I understand it is identical in all
respects with the M14P.
Of course a totally different gearbox, but a fixed-wing gearbox can be fitted straight
on.
Also I believe different magnetos, but I don't think important.
If anyone is interested in eight/ten M14V engines, all out of official overhaul
life, but complete and cheap, please contact me off list.
Richard Goode
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Mob: +44 (0) 7768 610389
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
dangerous content by the http://www.invictawiz.com
MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Fwd: Carbon monoxide poisoning |
From: EdrisDee(at)aol.com
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 10:27:06 EDT
Subject: Carbon monoxide poisoning
Troops,
An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put one of
our pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of episodes that lead
to tragedy.
Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the
hospital.
Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon monoxide
molecules to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen molecules, if not
removed from the its presents or not medically treated can led to death. Some
people respond to its presents more quickly than others. Some times the symptoms
are just feeling tired. Any exposure degrades response time and judgment.
The most critical abilities of a pilot.
In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system you
tell it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE A PROBLEM.
I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to escape
into the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be noted on the
ground with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke system on if you have
one. This leakage does not effect engine cooling but you will quickly notice
just how much exhaust gas is coming from those joints.
2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in a CJ
can tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an increase
in the angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along side another
aircraft, you will see that it does not all go under the wing, particularly
during times when there is an increase in the angle of attack. The flow will
visibly increase over the wing. From here it migrates into the cockpit via canopy
seals, ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit. I have seen the flow as high as the rear
cockpit intake vent. I have seen the smoke come from the rear cockpit,
flowing toward the low pressure area made by the forward wind shield.
3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel wells.
It is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is basically a
high pressure area, that than passes though holes and seams into the cockpit.
This can be validated by unburned smoke oil on the rear of the airplane, in
wheel wells, under the belly and even in the flap well.
The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate" and seal
the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led to
the demise in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable. Just one of the
more dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we must get the info out to
everyone. We need to get out info on the best and the CHEAPEST (the most likely
to get done) fixes. KISS all the way.
I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more drag
but even Craig is slowing down now days).
2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints.
3. Sealing the seams under the cockpit.
4. Putting vents on all detachable panels under the fuselage and on the tail
5. Sealing the rear cockpit from outside airflow, particularly the very rear
canopy.
6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to hell with
the GIB :-) )
I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
Troops,
An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put one=20of our
pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of episodes that lead
to tragedy.
Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the hospital.
Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon monoxide=20molecules
to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen molecules, if not removed
from the its presents or not medically treated can led to death.=20Some people
respond to its presents more quickly than others. Some times the symptoms
are just feeling tired. Any exposure degrades response time and judgment. The
most critical abilities of a pilot.
In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system you tell
it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE A PROBLEM.
I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to escape into
the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be noted on the ground
with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke system on if you have one. This
leakage does not effect engine cooling but you will quickly notice just how
much exhaust gas is coming from those joints.
2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in a CJ can
tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an increase in the
angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along side another aircraft,
you will see that it does not all go under the wing, particularly during times
when there is an increase in the angle of attack. The flow will visibly increase
over the wing. From here it migrates into the cockpit via canopy seals,
ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit. I have seen the flow as high as the rear cockpit
intake vent. I have seen the smoke come from the rear cockpit, flowing toward
the low pressure area made by the forward wind shield.
3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel wells. It
is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is basically a high
pressure area, that than passes though holes and seams=20into the cockpit. This
can be validated by unburned smoke oil on the rear of the airplane, in wheel
wells, under the belly and even in the flap well.
The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate" and=20seal
the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led to the demise
in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable.=20Just one of the more
dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we=20must get the info out to everyone.
We need to get out info on the best and the CHEAPEST (the most likely to get
done) fixes. KISS all the way.
I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more drag but
even Craig is slowing down now days).
2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints.
3. Sealing the seams under the cockpit.
4. Putting vents on all detachable panels under the fuselage and on the=20tail
5. Sealing the rear cockpit from outside airflow, particularly the very=20rear
canopy.
6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to=20hell with the
GIB :-) )
I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cory Emberson" <bootless(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Fwd: Carbon monoxide poisoning |
A very important post.
May I suggest a good CO detector as well? (Aeromedix has a couple) Not those
little stick-on things - a real device. I just looked on their website, and
the model shown is CO Experts (a little over a hundred bucks), with
sensitivities from 10 to 70 ppm. It says the visual alert is a flashing red
LED light, and the audible alert is a 85dB horn.
I had a slight touch of CO while sitting in the back seat of a Cherokee 180
about 25 years ago (I guess they're notorious for exhaust coming in through
the tail cone), and it was very unpleasant. I was sick as a dog, and very
lucky that was it.
best,
Cory
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
cjpilot710(at)aol.com
Subject: Yak-List: Fwd: Carbon monoxide poisoning
From: EdrisDee(at)aol.com
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 10:27:06 EDT
Subject: Carbon monoxide poisoning
Troops,
An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put one of
our pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of episodes that
lead
to tragedy.
Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the
hospital.
Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon monoxide
molecules to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen molecules, if
not
removed from the its presents or not medically treated can led to death.
Some
people respond to its presents more quickly than others. Some times the
symptoms
are just feeling tired. Any exposure degrades response time and judgment.
The most critical abilities of a pilot.
In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system you
tell it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE A
PROBLEM.
I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to
escape
into the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be noted on the
ground with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke system on if you have
one. This leakage does not effect engine cooling but you will quickly
notice
just how much exhaust gas is coming from those joints.
2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in a
CJ
can tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an increase
in the angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along side another
aircraft, you will see that it does not all go under the wing, particularly
during times when there is an increase in the angle of attack. The flow
will
visibly increase over the wing. From here it migrates into the cockpit via
canopy
seals, ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit. I have seen the flow as high as the
rear
cockpit intake vent. I have seen the smoke come from the rear cockpit,
flowing toward the low pressure area made by the forward wind shield.
3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel wells.
It is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is basically a
high pressure area, that than passes though holes and seams into the
cockpit.
This can be validated by unburned smoke oil on the rear of the airplane, in
wheel wells, under the belly and even in the flap well.
The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate" and seal
the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led to
the demise in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable. Just one of
the
more dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we must get the info out to
everyone. We need to get out info on the best and the CHEAPEST (the most
likely
to get done) fixes. KISS all the way.
I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more drag
but even Craig is slowing down now days).
2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints.
3. Sealing the seams under the cockpit.
4. Putting vents on all detachable panels under the fuselage and on the tail
5. Sealing the rear cockpit from outside airflow, particularly the very rear
canopy.
6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to hell with
the GIB :-) )
I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
Troops,
An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put one=20of
our pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of episodes that
lead to tragedy.
Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the
hospital.
Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon
monoxide=20molecules to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen
molecules, if not removed from the its presents or not medically treated can
led to death.=20Some people respond to its presents more quickly than
others. Some times the symptoms are just feeling tired. Any exposure
degrades response time and judgment. The most critical abilities of a pilot.
In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system you
tell it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE A
PROBLEM.
I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to escape
into the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be noted on the
ground with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke system on if you have
one. This leakage does not effect engine cooling but you will quickly notice
just how much exhaust gas is coming from those joints.
2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in a CJ
can tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an increase
in the angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along side another
aircraft, you will see that it does not all go under the wing, particularly
during times when there is an increase in the angle of attack. The flow will
visibly increase over the wing. From here it migrates into the cockpit via
canopy seals, ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit. I have seen the flow as high as
the rear cockpit intake vent. I have seen the smoke come from the rear
cockpit, flowing toward the low pressure area made by the forward wind
shield.
3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel wells.
It is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is basically a
high pressure area, that than passes though holes and seams=20into the
cockpit. This can be validated by unburned smoke oil on the rear of the
airplane, in wheel wells, under the belly and even in the flap well.
The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate"
and=20seal the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led to
the demise in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable.=20Just one of
the more dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we=20must get the info out
to everyone. We need to get out info on the best and the CHEAPEST (the most
likely to get done) fixes. KISS all the way.
I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more drag
but even Craig is slowing down now days).
2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints.
3. Sealing the seams under the cockpit.
4. Putting vents on all detachable panels under the fuselage and on
the=20tail
5. Sealing the rear cockpit from outside airflow, particularly the
very=20rear canopy.
6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to=20hell
with the GIB :-) )
I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bitterlich GS11 Mark G <BitterlichMG(at)cherrypoint.usmc.mil> |
| Subject: | Fwd: Carbon monoxide poisoning |
The original Russian joint seals for the YAKS and SUKES are next to
impossible to obtain, leading to a lot of backyard engineering on replacing
them. One source advised me to use the High Performance Automobile Header
Wrapping tape underneath the original clamps... which are ALSO getting very
hard to find by the way. I have searched for very thin titanium strips ala
the orignal design, and all I can come up with is .020 titanium, which is
too thick really. I'd be interested in hearing from anyone else who has
developed a really good cure/fix for this problem.
Also, there was a post some time back that I forgot to save that addressed
exactly how to take the ball out of the valve in the oil pump and polish it
to eliminate oil bypass that then accumulates in the sump and lower
cylinders of the engine, and which then eventually drains out the stacks.
Could I ask the author to possible repeat that post or send it to me offline
please?
Thanks!
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: cjpilot710(at)aol.com [mailto:cjpilot710(at)aol.com]
Subject: Yak-List: Fwd: Carbon monoxide poisoning
From: EdrisDee(at)aol.com
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 10:27:06 EDT
Subject: Carbon monoxide poisoning
Troops,
An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put one of
our pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of episodes that
lead
to tragedy.
Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the
hospital.
Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon monoxide
molecules to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen molecules, if
not
removed from the its presents or not medically treated can led to death.
Some
people respond to its presents more quickly than others. Some times the
symptoms
are just feeling tired. Any exposure degrades response time and judgment.
The most critical abilities of a pilot.
In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system you
tell it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE A
PROBLEM.
I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to
escape
into the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be noted on the
ground with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke system on if you have
one. This leakage does not effect engine cooling but you will quickly
notice
just how much exhaust gas is coming from those joints.
2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in a
CJ
can tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an increase
in the angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along side another
aircraft, you will see that it does not all go under the wing, particularly
during times when there is an increase in the angle of attack. The flow
will
visibly increase over the wing. From here it migrates into the cockpit via
canopy
seals, ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit. I have seen the flow as high as the
rear
cockpit intake vent. I have seen the smoke come from the rear cockpit,
flowing toward the low pressure area made by the forward wind shield.
3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel wells.
It is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is basically a
high pressure area, that than passes though holes and seams into the
cockpit.
This can be validated by unburned smoke oil on the rear of the airplane, in
wheel wells, under the belly and even in the flap well.
The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate" and seal
the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led to
the demise in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable. Just one of
the
more dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we must get the info out to
everyone. We need to get out info on the best and the CHEAPEST (the most
likely
to get done) fixes. KISS all the way.
I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more drag
but even Craig is slowing down now days).
2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints.
3. Sealing the seams under the cockpit.
4. Putting vents on all detachable panels under the fuselage and on the tail
5. Sealing the rear cockpit from outside airflow, particularly the very rear
canopy.
6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to hell with
the GIB :-) )
I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
Troops,
An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put one=20of
our pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of episodes that
lead to tragedy.
Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the
hospital.
Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon
monoxide=20molecules to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen
molecules, if not removed from the its presents or not medically treated can
led to death.=20Some people respond to its presents more quickly than
others. Some times the symptoms are just feeling tired. Any exposure
degrades response time and judgment. The most critical abilities of a pilot.
In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system you
tell it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE A
PROBLEM.
I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to escape
into the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be noted on the
ground with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke system on if you have
one. This leakage does not effect engine cooling but you will quickly notice
just how much exhaust gas is coming from those joints.
2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in a CJ
can tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an increase
in the angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along side another
aircraft, you will see that it does not all go under the wing, particularly
during times when there is an increase in the angle of attack. The flow will
visibly increase over the wing. From here it migrates into the cockpit via
canopy seals, ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit. I have seen the flow as high as
the rear cockpit intake vent. I have seen the smoke come from the rear
cockpit, flowing toward the low pressure area made by the forward wind
shield.
3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel wells.
It is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is basically a
high pressure area, that than passes though holes and seams=20into the
cockpit. This can be validated by unburned smoke oil on the rear of the
airplane, in wheel wells, under the belly and even in the flap well.
The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate"
and=20seal the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led to
the demise in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable.=20Just one of
the more dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we=20must get the info out
to everyone. We need to get out info on the best and the CHEAPEST (the most
likely to get done) fixes. KISS all the way.
I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more drag
but even Craig is slowing down now days).
2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints.
3. Sealing the seams under the cockpit.
4. Putting vents on all detachable panels under the fuselage and on
the=20tail
5. Sealing the rear cockpit from outside airflow, particularly the
very=20rear canopy.
6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to=20hell
with the GIB :-) )
I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Payne" <cpayne(at)joimail.com> |
Despite what some of our muckity-mucks said about the incident, I was opposite
our sickly friend, in the trailing VIC during the airshow performance where the
problem occurred. As the 3rd flight back, we were flying with our rudders up
in the smoke of flights ahead. (Traffic below us) I had CO also. My headache
got worse as the 1.8 hr formation flight wore on and I'm thinking "boy this helmet
is pinching my head", "Gosh darn" (or words to that effect).
About an hour after the flight, no problems found my my Oregon Aero helmet conversion
and no headache but I was dragging anchor the rest of the night.
Next morning we learned of our comrade in the emergency room; in the room across
from him was a T-28 guy, in for the same problem.
Hearing of the AZ louver fix, I have been trying to find a louver forming die,
about 2-3/4" long. No joy yet but I'll be trying the hot-rod shops and sheet metal
shops.
Craig Payne
cpayne(at)joimail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Fwd: Carbon monoxide poisoning |
Mark,
Dennis Savarese has done it on a number of the YAKs around here. Polished
the oil valve. You can get him at dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com or his office #
is 334-285-2141.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Bitterlich GS11 Mark G <BitterlichMG(at)cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: 8/8/2005 2:27:52 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Fwd: Carbon monoxide poisoning
>
>
> The original Russian joint seals for the YAKS and SUKES are next to
> impossible to obtain, leading to a lot of backyard engineering on
replacing
> them. One source advised me to use the High Performance Automobile Header
> Wrapping tape underneath the original clamps... which are ALSO getting
very
> hard to find by the way. I have searched for very thin titanium strips
ala
> the orignal design, and all I can come up with is .020 titanium, which is
> too thick really. I'd be interested in hearing from anyone else who has
> developed a really good cure/fix for this problem.
>
> Also, there was a post some time back that I forgot to save that addressed
> exactly how to take the ball out of the valve in the oil pump and polish
it
> to eliminate oil bypass that then accumulates in the sump and lower
> cylinders of the engine, and which then eventually drains out the stacks.
> Could I ask the author to possible repeat that post or send it to me
offline
> please?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cjpilot710(at)aol.com [mailto:cjpilot710(at)aol.com]
> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: Fwd: Carbon monoxide poisoning
>
>
> From: EdrisDee(at)aol.com
> Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 10:27:06 EDT
> Subject: Carbon monoxide poisoning
> To: cjpilot710(at)aol.com
>
>
> Troops,
> An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put one
of
> our pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of episodes
that
> lead
> to tragedy.
>
> Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the
> hospital.
>
> Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon monoxide
> molecules to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen molecules, if
> not
> removed from the its presents or not medically treated can led to death.
> Some
> people respond to its presents more quickly than others. Some times the
> symptoms
> are just feeling tired. Any exposure degrades response time and
judgment.
> The most critical abilities of a pilot.
>
> In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system
you
> tell it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE A
> PROBLEM.
>
>
> I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
>
> 1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to
> escape
> into the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be noted on
the
>
> ground with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke system on if you
have
>
> one. This leakage does not effect engine cooling but you will quickly
> notice
> just how much exhaust gas is coming from those joints.
>
> 2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in a
> CJ
> can tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an
increase
> in the angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along side
another
>
> aircraft, you will see that it does not all go under the wing,
particularly
> during times when there is an increase in the angle of attack. The flow
> will
> visibly increase over the wing. From here it migrates into the cockpit
via
> canopy
> seals, ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit. I have seen the flow as high as the
> rear
> cockpit intake vent. I have seen the smoke come from the rear cockpit,
> flowing toward the low pressure area made by the forward wind shield.
>
> 3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel
wells.
>
> It is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is basically
a
> high pressure area, that than passes though holes and seams into the
> cockpit.
> This can be validated by unburned smoke oil on the rear of the airplane,
in
> wheel wells, under the belly and even in the flap well.
> The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate" and
seal
>
> the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
>
> This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led
to
> the demise in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable. Just one
of
> the
> more dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we must get the info out to
> everyone. We need to get out info on the best and the CHEAPEST (the most
> likely
> to get done) fixes. KISS all the way.
>
> I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
>
> Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
>
> 1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more
drag
> but even Craig is slowing down now days).
> 2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints.
> 3. Sealing the seams under the cockpit.
> 4. Putting vents on all detachable panels under the fuselage and on the
tail
> 5. Sealing the rear cockpit from outside airflow, particularly the very
rear
>
> canopy.
> 6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to hell
with
>
> the GIB :-) )
>
> I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
>
> JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
>
>
> Troops,
>
> An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put
one=20of
> our pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of episodes that
> lead to tragedy.
>
>
> Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the
> hospital.
>
>
> Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon
> monoxide=20molecules to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen
> molecules, if not removed from the its presents or not medically treated
can
> led to death.=20Some people respond to its presents more quickly than
> others. Some times the symptoms are just feeling tired. Any exposure
> degrades response time and judgment. The most critical abilities of a
pilot.
>
>
> In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system you
> tell it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE A
> PROBLEM.
>
>
> I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
>
>
> 1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to
escape
> into the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be noted on
the
> ground with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke system on if you
have
> one. This leakage does not effect engine cooling but you will quickly
notice
> just how much exhaust gas is coming from those joints.
>
>
> 2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in a
CJ
> can tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an
increase
> in the angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along side
another
> aircraft, you will see that it does not all go under the wing,
particularly
> during times when there is an increase in the angle of attack. The flow
will
> visibly increase over the wing. From here it migrates into the cockpit via
> canopy seals, ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit. I have seen the flow as high as
> the rear cockpit intake vent. I have seen the smoke come from the rear
> cockpit, flowing toward the low pressure area made by the forward wind
> shield.
>
>
> 3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel
wells.
> It is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is basically
a
> high pressure area, that than passes though holes and seams=20into the
> cockpit. This can be validated by unburned smoke oil on the rear of the
> airplane, in wheel wells, under the belly and even in the flap well.
>
> The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate"
> and=20seal the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
>
>
> This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led to
> the demise in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable.=20Just one
of
> the more dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we=20must get the info
out
> to everyone. We need to get out info on the best and the CHEAPEST (the
most
> likely to get done) fixes. KISS all the way.
>
>
> I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
>
>
> Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
>
>
> 1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more drag
> but even Craig is slowing down now days).
>
> 2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints.
>
> 3. Sealing the seams under the cockpit.
>
> 4. Putting vents on all detachable panels under the fuselage and on
> the=20tail
>
> 5. Sealing the rear cockpit from outside airflow, particularly the
> very=20rear canopy.
>
> 6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to=20hell
> with the GIB :-) )
>
>
> I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
>
>
> JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bitterlich GS11 Mark G <BitterlichMG(at)cherrypoint.usmc.mil> |
Hey Steve, for what it is worth, I'll offer this input:
I assume your RPM drops on the mag checks are normal. Just for the heck of
it, make a quick check and see if both of the mags are still in sync with
each other. A complete timing check is somewhat harder to do, but if you
just check to see if the mags are timed together, (with a light/buzzer mag
timing test set) you can pretty much assume it is not a timing issue. I
agree it sounds all fuel related anyway, but it is a good thing to check to
make sure it definately is not timing, which will often LOOK like a fuel
issue.
Check for any and all obstructions to the carb air inlet. (As previously
mentioned)
Check all fuel screens as Dennis suggested.
Next, check all your intake manifold tubes and make sure none of them have
come loose at the cylinder or the manifold.
Is your fuel burn very very high? If so, check to make sure that ... with
the engine running.... when you move the priming pump handle to the prime
engine position that the engine RPM decreases and runs rich. The idea here
being to make sure that your primer handle pump is not somehow STUCK in the
prime position making the engine run way rich.
Do you have an intake drain kit? If so, make sure none of the hoses or
fittings have broken or come loose, etc.
Did you drain the fuel sump and check for debris or water contamination? It
would be interesting to completely drain the tanks and put in known good
fresh fuel. Something as simple as bad fuel could easily cause what you are
seeing.
Honestly I doubt you'll find anything wrong with the above... they're just
check list items to "make sure" of.
What I am guessing is that this is a fuel VENTING problem (although a
clogged fuel filter would do the same thing) that is getting progressively
worse. I am not an expert on the 52 fuel system, YAK-50 yes, 52, no. If
you are in fact running lean, turning the priming handle to the prime
cylinder position will GROSSLY enrichen the engine mixture. If you are
running lean due to "whatever reason" turning the handle to prime and then
checking engine performance will tell you a lot. If all of a sudden the
engine now runs PERFECTLY with no stumbles or nonsense like that, then
indeed you are running lean.
Of course, last on the list is the carb. itself, but I have never heard of a
carb failing this way. But... the bottom line is that yes... a carb COULD
indeed cause all of the listed problems. The reason I am "hoping" it is not
the carb. is because this started while you were inverted. The pressure
carb does not really give a hoot about being right side up or upside
down.... but junk in the tanks sure does, or anywhere else.
That is why my guess (for what it is worth) is that you have a fuel
restriction someplace and the engine is running lean.. Some kind of
restriction due to venting, or stuff in a filter, or a clog in a line, etc.,
etc.
Best of luck,
Mark Bitterlich
N50YK
-----Original Message-----
From: A. Dennis Savarese [mailto:dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com]
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak-Question
I have a question Steve. By "air mix" do you mean carbureator heat? If you
haven't checked the fine fuel screen for debris, I'd like to suggest you
remove the screen and examine it carefully for debris. At least this is a
starting point.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: <st.ellison(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Yak-List: Yak-Question
>
> Yakmen:
>
> I'm looking for a little insight into a problem I am encountering on my
> Yak-52.
> I am guessing it is a fuel system problem but being such a beginner at
> this I really don't know. Here are the symptoms I have experienced.
>
> 1. After flying about 1/2 hour doing rolls and loops I landed and fueled
> the plane. After takeoff back toward the practice area I rolled inverted
> and continued the climb at 82% and 80mmHg at about 110mph. About 10
> seconds after rolling inverted the prop % and mmhg both started to drop
> noticeably. I rolled upright and leveled the plane. As I would advance the
> throttle forward from there the RPM% would drop. Air mix was set at the
> mid position.. I backed everything off to 70 65 and went home.
>
> 2. Next day I flew again. Checked everything on the ground and all tested
> well. Took off and climbed to 3000 ft. At altitude I set the prop to about
> 82% and advanced the throttle. Things seemd a little sluggish but nothing
> you could put your finger on until very near full throttle when you could
> feel the engine start to surge very slightly. Air mix was tried in both
> the closed and open positions with the same result. This would disappear
> as you reduced the throttle and return as you advance near full throttle
> again.
>
> 3. Upon landing from the second flight described above I checked the idle
> to power transition while sitting on the tarmac. The was now a very
> definite hesitation when you advance the throttle off of 40% unless it is
> done very slowly.
>
> I would appreciate and comments on what the problem might be and where to
> look for the fix. Has anyone experienced this themselves?
>
> Thanks for you help!!!!
>
> Steve
>
> Yakmen:
>
> I'm looking for a little insight into a problem I am encountering on my
> Yak-52.
> I am guessing it is a fuel system problem but being such a beginner at
> this I really don't know. Here are the symptoms I have experienced.
>
> 1. After flying about 1/2 hour doing rolls and loops I landed and fueled
> the plane. After takeoff back toward the practice area I rolled inverted
> and continued the climb at 82% and 80mmHg at about 110mph. About 10
> seconds after rolling inverted the prop % and mmhg both started to drop
> noticeably. I rolled upright and leveled the plane. As I would advance the
> throttle forward from there the RPM% would drop. Air mix was set at the
> mid position.. I backed everything off to 70 65 and went home.
>
> 2. Next day I flew again. Checked everything on the ground and all tested
> well. Took off and climbed to 3000 ft. At altitude I set the prop to about
> 82% and advanced the throttle. Things seemd a little sluggish but nothing
> you could put your finger on until very near full throttle when you could
> feel the engine start to surge very slightly. Air mix was tried in both
> the closed and open positions with the same result. This would disappear
> as you reduced the throttle and return as you advance near full throttle
> again.
>
> 3. Upon landing from the second flight described above I checked the idle
> to power transition while sitting on the tarmac. The was now a very
> definite hesitation when you advance the throttle off of 40% unless it is
> done very slowly.
>
> I would appreciate and comments on what the problem might be and where to
> look for the fix. Has anyone experienced this themselves?
>
> Thanks for you help!!!!
>
> Steve
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
Seems to me if you guys are going to continue to fly around in the diamond
sucking your exhaust and that of the one over your head, installing an 02
system with a tight fitting aviators mask is cure also. It has to be 100%
02 or you could get a closed scuba system so that you are not breathing any
ambient air. Just gonna add wt.but could flat ass save your ass since
Carbon Monoxide is colorless, odorless, and incidious.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Craig Payne <cpayne(at)joimail.com>
> To: yak-list
> Date: 8/8/2005 2:40:25 PM
> Subject: Yak-List: Re: CO Problems
>
>
> Despite what some of our muckity-mucks said about the incident, I was
opposite our sickly friend, in the trailing VIC during the airshow
performance where the problem occurred. As the 3rd flight back, we were
flying with our rudders up in the smoke of flights ahead. (Traffic below
us) I had CO also. My headache got worse as the 1.8 hr formation flight
wore on and I'm thinking "boy this helmet is pinching my head", "Gosh darn"
(or words to that effect).
>
> About an hour after the flight, no problems found my my Oregon Aero
helmet conversion and no headache but I was dragging anchor the rest of the
night.
>
> Next morning we learned of our comrade in the emergency room; in the room
across from him was a T-28 guy, in for the same problem.
>
> Hearing of the AZ louver fix, I have been trying to find a louver forming
die, about 2-3/4" long. No joy yet but I'll be trying the hot-rod shops and
sheet metal shops.
>
> Craig Payne
> cpayne(at)joimail.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Yak-Question |
Loose intake gland nuts will definitely give you irregular operation.
(Thanks for reminding me about them Mark). Particularly during other than
straight and level operations. If you don't have an M14 tool kit available
from George Coy, it would be a great thing to have. The tool kit includes
the unique intake gland nut wrench. Also, while you're at it, be sure to
tighten the intake and exhaust collars. Plus check the security of the nuts
that secure the carbureator to the engine.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bitterlich GS11 Mark G" <BitterlichMG(at)cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Yak-Question
>
>
> Hey Steve, for what it is worth, I'll offer this input:
>
>
> I assume your RPM drops on the mag checks are normal. Just for the heck
> of
> it, make a quick check and see if both of the mags are still in sync with
> each other. A complete timing check is somewhat harder to do, but if you
> just check to see if the mags are timed together, (with a light/buzzer mag
> timing test set) you can pretty much assume it is not a timing issue. I
> agree it sounds all fuel related anyway, but it is a good thing to check
> to
> make sure it definately is not timing, which will often LOOK like a fuel
> issue.
>
> Check for any and all obstructions to the carb air inlet. (As previously
> mentioned)
> Check all fuel screens as Dennis suggested.
> Next, check all your intake manifold tubes and make sure none of them have
> come loose at the cylinder or the manifold.
> Is your fuel burn very very high? If so, check to make sure that ... with
> the engine running.... when you move the priming pump handle to the prime
> engine position that the engine RPM decreases and runs rich. The idea
> here
> being to make sure that your primer handle pump is not somehow STUCK in
> the
> prime position making the engine run way rich.
> Do you have an intake drain kit? If so, make sure none of the hoses or
> fittings have broken or come loose, etc.
> Did you drain the fuel sump and check for debris or water contamination?
> It
> would be interesting to completely drain the tanks and put in known good
> fresh fuel. Something as simple as bad fuel could easily cause what you
> are
> seeing.
>
> Honestly I doubt you'll find anything wrong with the above... they're just
> check list items to "make sure" of.
>
> What I am guessing is that this is a fuel VENTING problem (although a
> clogged fuel filter would do the same thing) that is getting progressively
> worse. I am not an expert on the 52 fuel system, YAK-50 yes, 52, no. If
> you are in fact running lean, turning the priming handle to the prime
> cylinder position will GROSSLY enrichen the engine mixture. If you are
> running lean due to "whatever reason" turning the handle to prime and then
> checking engine performance will tell you a lot. If all of a sudden the
> engine now runs PERFECTLY with no stumbles or nonsense like that, then
> indeed you are running lean.
>
> Of course, last on the list is the carb. itself, but I have never heard of
> a
> carb failing this way. But... the bottom line is that yes... a carb COULD
> indeed cause all of the listed problems. The reason I am "hoping" it is
> not
> the carb. is because this started while you were inverted. The pressure
> carb does not really give a hoot about being right side up or upside
> down.... but junk in the tanks sure does, or anywhere else.
>
> That is why my guess (for what it is worth) is that you have a fuel
> restriction someplace and the engine is running lean.. Some kind of
> restriction due to venting, or stuff in a filter, or a clog in a line,
> etc.,
> etc.
>
> Best of luck,
>
> Mark Bitterlich
> N50YK
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: A. Dennis Savarese [mailto:dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com]
> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak-Question
>
>
>
>
> I have a question Steve. By "air mix" do you mean carbureator heat? If
> you
>
> haven't checked the fine fuel screen for debris, I'd like to suggest you
> remove the screen and examine it carefully for debris. At least this is a
> starting point.
> Dennis
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <st.ellison(at)comcast.net>
> To:
> Subject: Yak-List: Yak-Question
>
>
>>
>> Yakmen:
>>
>> I'm looking for a little insight into a problem I am encountering on my
>> Yak-52.
>> I am guessing it is a fuel system problem but being such a beginner at
>> this I really don't know. Here are the symptoms I have experienced.
>>
>> 1. After flying about 1/2 hour doing rolls and loops I landed and fueled
>> the plane. After takeoff back toward the practice area I rolled inverted
>> and continued the climb at 82% and 80mmHg at about 110mph. About 10
>> seconds after rolling inverted the prop % and mmhg both started to drop
>> noticeably. I rolled upright and leveled the plane. As I would advance
>> the
>
>> throttle forward from there the RPM% would drop. Air mix was set at the
>> mid position.. I backed everything off to 70 65 and went home.
>>
>> 2. Next day I flew again. Checked everything on the ground and all tested
>> well. Took off and climbed to 3000 ft. At altitude I set the prop to
>> about
>
>> 82% and advanced the throttle. Things seemd a little sluggish but nothing
>> you could put your finger on until very near full throttle when you could
>> feel the engine start to surge very slightly. Air mix was tried in both
>> the closed and open positions with the same result. This would disappear
>> as you reduced the throttle and return as you advance near full throttle
>> again.
>>
>> 3. Upon landing from the second flight described above I checked the idle
>> to power transition while sitting on the tarmac. The was now a very
>> definite hesitation when you advance the throttle off of 40% unless it is
>> done very slowly.
>>
>> I would appreciate and comments on what the problem might be and where to
>> look for the fix. Has anyone experienced this themselves?
>>
>> Thanks for you help!!!!
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> Yakmen:
>>
>> I'm looking for a little insight into a problem I am encountering on my
>> Yak-52.
>> I am guessing it is a fuel system problem but being such a beginner at
>> this I really don't know. Here are the symptoms I have experienced.
>>
>> 1. After flying about 1/2 hour doing rolls and loops I landed and fueled
>> the plane. After takeoff back toward the practice area I rolled inverted
>> and continued the climb at 82% and 80mmHg at about 110mph. About 10
>> seconds after rolling inverted the prop % and mmhg both started to drop
>> noticeably. I rolled upright and leveled the plane. As I would advance
>> the
>
>> throttle forward from there the RPM% would drop. Air mix was set at the
>> mid position.. I backed everything off to 70 65 and went home.
>>
>> 2. Next day I flew again. Checked everything on the ground and all tested
>> well. Took off and climbed to 3000 ft. At altitude I set the prop to
>> about
>
>> 82% and advanced the throttle. Things seemd a little sluggish but nothing
>> you could put your finger on until very near full throttle when you could
>> feel the engine start to surge very slightly. Air mix was tried in both
>> the closed and open positions with the same result. This would disappear
>> as you reduced the throttle and return as you advance near full throttle
>> again.
>>
>> 3. Upon landing from the second flight described above I checked the idle
>> to power transition while sitting on the tarmac. The was now a very
>> definite hesitation when you advance the throttle off of 40% unless it is
>> done very slowly.
>>
>> I would appreciate and comments on what the problem might be and where to
>> look for the fix. Has anyone experienced this themselves?
>>
>> Thanks for you help!!!!
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Sapp" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | Fwd: Carbon monoxide poisoning |
Shim stock is normally available is all metals and in many thicknesses, try
a machine shop supply house. I have a small roll of stainless .005 that is
about 1 inch wide in my tool chest, no idea where it came from. Wasn't
there a posting from someone in the past who found a high test tape from Mc
Master Carr or some such?
Always Yakin,
Doug Sapp
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bitterlich GS11
Mark G
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Fwd: Carbon monoxide poisoning
The original Russian joint seals for the YAKS and SUKES are next to
impossible to obtain, leading to a lot of backyard engineering on replacing
them. One source advised me to use the High Performance Automobile Header
Wrapping tape underneath the original clamps... which are ALSO getting very
hard to find by the way. I have searched for very thin titanium strips ala
the orignal design, and all I can come up with is .020 titanium, which is
too thick really. I'd be interested in hearing from anyone else who has
developed a really good cure/fix for this problem.
Also, there was a post some time back that I forgot to save that addressed
exactly how to take the ball out of the valve in the oil pump and polish it
to eliminate oil bypass that then accumulates in the sump and lower
cylinders of the engine, and which then eventually drains out the stacks.
Could I ask the author to possible repeat that post or send it to me offline
please?
Thanks!
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: cjpilot710(at)aol.com [mailto:cjpilot710(at)aol.com]
Subject: Yak-List: Fwd: Carbon monoxide poisoning
From: EdrisDee(at)aol.com
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 10:27:06 EDT
Subject: Carbon monoxide poisoning
Troops,
An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put one of
our pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of episodes that
lead
to tragedy.
Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the
hospital.
Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon monoxide
molecules to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen molecules, if
not
removed from the its presents or not medically treated can led to death.
Some
people respond to its presents more quickly than others. Some times the
symptoms
are just feeling tired. Any exposure degrades response time and judgment.
The most critical abilities of a pilot.
In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system you
tell it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE A
PROBLEM.
I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to
escape
into the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be noted on the
ground with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke system on if you have
one. This leakage does not effect engine cooling but you will quickly
notice
just how much exhaust gas is coming from those joints.
2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in a
CJ
can tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an increase
in the angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along side another
aircraft, you will see that it does not all go under the wing, particularly
during times when there is an increase in the angle of attack. The flow
will
visibly increase over the wing. From here it migrates into the cockpit via
canopy
seals, ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit. I have seen the flow as high as the
rear
cockpit intake vent. I have seen the smoke come from the rear cockpit,
flowing toward the low pressure area made by the forward wind shield.
3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel wells.
It is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is basically a
high pressure area, that than passes though holes and seams into the
cockpit.
This can be validated by unburned smoke oil on the rear of the airplane, in
wheel wells, under the belly and even in the flap well.
The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate" and seal
the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led to
the demise in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable. Just one of
the
more dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we must get the info out to
everyone. We need to get out info on the best and the CHEAPEST (the most
likely
to get done) fixes. KISS all the way.
I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more drag
but even Craig is slowing down now days).
2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints.
3. Sealing the seams under the cockpit.
4. Putting vents on all detachable panels under the fuselage and on the tail
5. Sealing the rear cockpit from outside airflow, particularly the very rear
canopy.
6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to hell with
the GIB :-) )
I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
Troops,
An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put one=20of
our pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of episodes that
lead to tragedy.
Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the
hospital.
Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon
monoxide=20molecules to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen
molecules, if not removed from the its presents or not medically treated can
led to death.=20Some people respond to its presents more quickly than
others. Some times the symptoms are just feeling tired. Any exposure
degrades response time and judgment. The most critical abilities of a pilot.
In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system you
tell it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE A
PROBLEM.
I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to escape
into the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be noted on the
ground with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke system on if you have
one. This leakage does not effect engine cooling but you will quickly notice
just how much exhaust gas is coming from those joints.
2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in a CJ
can tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an increase
in the angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along side another
aircraft, you will see that it does not all go under the wing, particularly
during times when there is an increase in the angle of attack. The flow will
visibly increase over the wing. From here it migrates into the cockpit via
canopy seals, ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit. I have seen the flow as high as
the rear cockpit intake vent. I have seen the smoke come from the rear
cockpit, flowing toward the low pressure area made by the forward wind
shield.
3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel wells.
It is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is basically a
high pressure area, that than passes though holes and seams=20into the
cockpit. This can be validated by unburned smoke oil on the rear of the
airplane, in wheel wells, under the belly and even in the flap well.
The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate"
and=20seal the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led to
the demise in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable.=20Just one of
the more dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we=20must get the info out
to everyone. We need to get out info on the best and the CHEAPEST (the most
likely to get done) fixes. KISS all the way.
I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more drag
but even Craig is slowing down now days).
2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints.
3. Sealing the seams under the cockpit.
4. Putting vents on all detachable panels under the fuselage and on
the=20tail
5. Sealing the rear cockpit from outside airflow, particularly the
very=20rear canopy.
6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to=20hell
with the GIB :-) )
I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Carbon monoxide poisoning |
Pappy
I did a modification that went a long way toward reducing exhaust gases
in the cockpit.
I removed the wing to fuselage fairings, put a small bead of clear
silicone on edges of the fairings, sprayed the faying surfaces on the
fuselage with silicone and then replaced the fairings while the clear
silicone on the fairings was still uncured. This created a custom seal
for each fairing section. The spray silicone acted as the release agent.
Allot of exhaust gases were getting into the cockpit via the bottom
fairings and with the silicone treatment much of it has gone away. I
still get some into the cockpit but not nearly as much as before the
wing to fuselage junction was sealed up.
Frank
9110M
YAK-52
L71
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
cjpilot710(at)aol.com
Subject: Yak-List: Fwd: Carbon monoxide poisoning
From: EdrisDee(at)aol.com
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 10:27:06 EDT
Subject: Carbon monoxide poisoning
Troops,
An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put one
of
our pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of episodes
that lead
to tragedy.
Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the
hospital.
Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon monoxide
molecules to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen molecules,
if not
removed from the its presents or not medically treated can led to death.
Some
people respond to its presents more quickly than others. Some times the
symptoms
are just feeling tired. Any exposure degrades response time and
judgment.
The most critical abilities of a pilot.
In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system
you
tell it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE A
PROBLEM.
I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to
escape
into the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be noted on
the
ground with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke system on if you
have
one. This leakage does not effect engine cooling but you will quickly
notice
just how much exhaust gas is coming from those joints.
2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in
a CJ
can tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an
increase
in the angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along side
another
aircraft, you will see that it does not all go under the wing,
particularly
during times when there is an increase in the angle of attack. The flow
will
visibly increase over the wing. From here it migrates into the cockpit
via canopy
seals, ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit. I have seen the flow as high as the
rear
cockpit intake vent. I have seen the smoke come from the rear cockpit,
flowing toward the low pressure area made by the forward wind shield.
3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel
wells.
It is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is
basically a
high pressure area, that than passes though holes and seams into the
cockpit.
This can be validated by unburned smoke oil on the rear of the airplane,
in
wheel wells, under the belly and even in the flap well.
The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate" and
seal
the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led
to
the demise in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable. Just one
of the
more dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we must get the info out
to
everyone. We need to get out info on the best and the CHEAPEST (the
most likely
to get done) fixes. KISS all the way.
I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more
drag
but even Craig is slowing down now days).
2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints. 3.
Sealing the seams under the cockpit. 4. Putting vents on all detachable
panels under the fuselage and on the tail 5. Sealing the rear cockpit
from outside airflow, particularly the very rear
canopy.
6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to hell
with
the GIB :-) )
I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
Troops,
An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put
one=20of our pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of
episodes that lead to tragedy.
Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the
hospital.
Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon
monoxide=20molecules to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen
molecules, if not removed from the its presents or not medically treated
can led to death.=20Some people respond to its presents more quickly
than others. Some times the symptoms are just feeling tired. Any
exposure degrades response time and judgment. The most critical
abilities of a pilot.
In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system
you tell it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE
A PROBLEM.
I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to
escape into the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be
noted on the ground with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke
system on if you have one. This leakage does not effect engine cooling
but you will quickly notice just how much exhaust gas is coming from
those joints.
2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in a
CJ can tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an
increase in the angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along
side another aircraft, you will see that it does not all go under the
wing, particularly during times when there is an increase in the angle
of attack. The flow will visibly increase over the wing. From here it
migrates into the cockpit via canopy seals, ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit.
I have seen the flow as high as the rear cockpit intake vent. I have
seen the smoke come from the rear cockpit, flowing toward the low
pressure area made by the forward wind shield.
3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel
wells. It is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is
basically a high pressure area, that than passes though holes and
seams=20into the cockpit. This can be validated by unburned smoke oil on
the rear of the airplane, in wheel wells, under the belly and even in
the flap well.
The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate"
and=20seal the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led
to the demise in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable.=20Just
one of the more dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we=20must get
the info out to everyone. We need to get out info on the best and the
CHEAPEST (the most likely to get done) fixes. KISS all the way.
I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more
drag but even Craig is slowing down now days).
2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints.
3. Sealing the seams under the cockpit.
4. Putting vents on all detachable panels under the fuselage and on
the=20tail
5. Sealing the rear cockpit from outside airflow, particularly the
very=20rear canopy.
6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to=20hell
with the GIB :-) )
I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Carbon monoxide poisoning |
Excellent suggestion Frank. For those who have not paid any attention to
it, there are some very large openings around the flap pushrods in the rear
cockpit, unless your airplane is one of the less than 50% that have the
original flap pushrod covers installed. You're GIB will definitely feel the
draft in the winter. Fabricating a cover can be very useful and much more
comfortable for your GIB during the colder months.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Yak-List: Carbon monoxide poisoning
>
>
> Pappy
>
> I did a modification that went a long way toward reducing exhaust gases
> in the cockpit.
>
> I removed the wing to fuselage fairings, put a small bead of clear
> silicone on edges of the fairings, sprayed the faying surfaces on the
> fuselage with silicone and then replaced the fairings while the clear
> silicone on the fairings was still uncured. This created a custom seal
> for each fairing section. The spray silicone acted as the release agent.
>
> Allot of exhaust gases were getting into the cockpit via the bottom
> fairings and with the silicone treatment much of it has gone away. I
> still get some into the cockpit but not nearly as much as before the
> wing to fuselage junction was sealed up.
>
> Frank
> 9110M
> YAK-52
> L71
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> cjpilot710(at)aol.com
> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: Fwd: Carbon monoxide poisoning
>
>
> From: EdrisDee(at)aol.com
> Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 10:27:06 EDT
> Subject: Carbon monoxide poisoning
> To: cjpilot710(at)aol.com
>
>
> Troops,
> An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put one
> of
> our pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of episodes
> that lead
> to tragedy.
>
> Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the
>
> hospital.
>
> Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon monoxide
> molecules to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen molecules,
> if not
> removed from the its presents or not medically treated can led to death.
> Some
> people respond to its presents more quickly than others. Some times the
> symptoms
> are just feeling tired. Any exposure degrades response time and
> judgment.
> The most critical abilities of a pilot.
>
> In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system
> you
> tell it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE A
> PROBLEM.
>
>
> I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
>
> 1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to
> escape
> into the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be noted on
> the
> ground with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke system on if you
> have
> one. This leakage does not effect engine cooling but you will quickly
> notice
> just how much exhaust gas is coming from those joints.
>
> 2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in
> a CJ
> can tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an
> increase
> in the angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along side
> another
> aircraft, you will see that it does not all go under the wing,
> particularly
> during times when there is an increase in the angle of attack. The flow
> will
> visibly increase over the wing. From here it migrates into the cockpit
> via canopy
> seals, ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit. I have seen the flow as high as the
> rear
> cockpit intake vent. I have seen the smoke come from the rear cockpit,
> flowing toward the low pressure area made by the forward wind shield.
>
> 3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel
> wells.
> It is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is
> basically a
> high pressure area, that than passes though holes and seams into the
> cockpit.
> This can be validated by unburned smoke oil on the rear of the airplane,
> in
> wheel wells, under the belly and even in the flap well.
> The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate" and
> seal
> the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
>
> This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led
> to
> the demise in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable. Just one
> of the
> more dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we must get the info out
> to
> everyone. We need to get out info on the best and the CHEAPEST (the
> most likely
> to get done) fixes. KISS all the way.
>
> I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
>
> Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
>
> 1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more
> drag
> but even Craig is slowing down now days).
> 2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints. 3.
> Sealing the seams under the cockpit. 4. Putting vents on all detachable
> panels under the fuselage and on the tail 5. Sealing the rear cockpit
> from outside airflow, particularly the very rear
> canopy.
> 6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to hell
> with
> the GIB :-) )
>
> I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
>
> JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
>
>
> Troops,
>
> An insentient happened at OSH during one of our formations that put
> one=20of our pilots into the hospital. It is one of the worst kind of
> episodes that lead to tragedy.
>
>
> Carbon monoxide poisoning. This was confrimed by a blood gas test at the
> hospital.
>
>
> Most of the time you can't smell the stuff, but because carbon
> monoxide=20molecules to attach to the red blood cells instead of oxygen
> molecules, if not removed from the its presents or not medically treated
> can led to death.=20Some people respond to its presents more quickly
> than others. Some times the symptoms are just feeling tired. Any
> exposure degrades response time and judgment. The most critical
> abilities of a pilot.
>
>
> In the CJ and Yak the problem is the same. If you have a smoke system
> you tell it just by turning on the smoke. IF YOU SMELL ANYTHING YOU HAVE
> A PROBLEM.
>
>
> I believe their are several cause in the CJ and Yaks.
>
>
> 1. The exhaust stack joint seals. They allow a lot of exhaust gas to
> escape into the rear engine area and out the cowl cheeks. This can be
> noted on the ground with the cowl off, engine running and the smoke
> system on if you have one. This leakage does not effect engine cooling
> but you will quickly notice just how much exhaust gas is coming from
> those joints.
>
>
> 2. Aerodynamic airflow's. Anyone who has done acrobatics with smoke in a
> CJ can tell you the smoke will inter the cockpit any time there is an
> increase in the angle of attack. Also just noting smoke flow from along
> side another aircraft, you will see that it does not all go under the
> wing, particularly during times when there is an increase in the angle
> of attack. The flow will visibly increase over the wing. From here it
> migrates into the cockpit via canopy seals, ESPECIALLY the rear cockpit.
> I have seen the flow as high as the rear cockpit intake vent. I have
> seen the smoke come from the rear cockpit, flowing toward the low
> pressure area made by the forward wind shield.
>
>
> 3. Exhaust migrating from the belly area into the fuselage via wheel
> wells. It is believe that the wheel wells trap a lot of gas in what is
> basically a high pressure area, that than passes though holes and
> seams=20into the cockpit. This can be validated by unburned smoke oil on
> the rear of the airplane, in wheel wells, under the belly and even in
> the flap well.
>
> The Arizona boys have tried with some great success to "ventilate"
> and=20seal the bottom of the fuselage under the cockpits.
>
>
> This is a serious problem folks. Who knows, maybe the effects have led
> to the demise in someway to fellow members. It is not unfixable.=20Just
> one of the more dangerous aspects of our airplanes. But we=20must get
> the info out to everyone. We need to get out info on the best and the
> CHEAPEST (the most likely to get done) fixes. KISS all the way.
>
>
> I put it to you our members, pilots and owners.
>
>
> Right now I plan on doing the following to mine.
>
>
> 1. Extending my exhaust stacks another 4 to 6 inches. (May cause more
> drag but even Craig is slowing down now days).
>
> 2. Coming up with a better seal for the exhaust stacks joints.
>
> 3. Sealing the seams under the cockpit.
>
> 4. Putting vents on all detachable panels under the fuselage and on
> the=20tail
>
> 5. Sealing the rear cockpit from outside airflow, particularly the
> very=20rear canopy.
>
> 6. Adding a supplemental oxygen bottle for the front cockpit. (to=20hell
> with the GIB :-) )
>
>
> I need to save what few cognitive brain cells I have left.
>
>
> JIm "Pappy" Goolsby
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Mortara" <rob(at)robinhill.com> |
| Subject: | Carbon monoxide poisoning |
I get copious amounts of smoke inside when I turn on the smoke system. I had
it so bad one time I went IFR inside the cockpit.
I have since put a one piece exhaust system which helps but I still get
smoke in side when I use it.
Any suggestions for a better CO dectector for inside
What to do to seal the cockpit
rob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Jefferies" <mark.j(at)yakuk.com> |
It Hungary a guy got carbon poisoning and dies in the crash. About 4 years
ago now.
1. its very well know adding colour to the exhaust (show smoke) shows
the poisoning in the cockpit all the time.
2. take a look at this pic http://www.yakuk.com/img/Aeros.jpg smoke
over the wing, just like the CJ.
3. bottom of the a/c is high pressure/ top is low pressure
4. the MAIN route for smoke in cockpit is via the oil cooler>to inside
wing>to fuselage via wing spar holes, aileron rod holes, and other openings.
5. As you see from the pic, smoke will also be coming in via the
tailplane. (same on stearmen dusters)
6. Opening the cockpit to let the smoke out just lets 150% more in from
the bottom!!!
7. If you look at a Y52 head on you will see a longer exhaust right
side, this is a "small" fix the OEM had at the problem. The real fix is to
put another 6" on the ex as we do in the aerostars team.
8. On the Y50 its possible to reduce the problem by 80% by completely
sealing the oil cooler/ fuselage opening, sheet ally and silicone sealer
needed. Do the wing fairings also and its almost 100% smoke free.
9. We have a neat little fuse vent mod that could be adapted to take an
ox mask hose for fresh air breathing.
10. I have done many days with 8/9 hrs in the seat of a YAK, and am very
conscious of feeling under par at the end of it all. I do cockpit checks
slowly and TWICE prior to landing.
11. Lastly, don't use diesel smoke adding to the poisoning. That's
castnergenic .
Best regards, fly safe-Mark Jefferies
For YAK UK Ltd www.yakuk.com
Lt Gransden Airfield
Sandy, Beds
SG19 3BP
England.
Tel +44 (0)1767 651156.
Fax +44 (0)1767 651157
Mobile +44 (0)7785 538 317
Conditions and terms of business
Aircraft for sale
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Payne" <cpayne(at)joimail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sealing up exhaust joints |
What seems to help with my Yak-18T exhaust system is small, interlocking strips
I made from .016 stainless, heavy fiberglass tape from Spruce, and a wrap of
heavy metal tape before applying the clamps. I buy the tape from my favorite Fly
Market vendor at OSH, it is mil surplus made by Lamar. $4 a roll for 1", he
was out of 2" this year.
Craig Payne
cpayne(at)joimail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Bernier" <JBernier(at)dart.org> |
A word of caution. I had been told that silicone sealer, with that ammonia smell,
will eat at the aluminum. Pencil lead and Simple Green can damage aluminum.
Although the makers of Simple Green makes a good, safe product to wash our planes.
Jim B
>>> mark.j(at)yakuk.com 08/09/05 2:43 AM >>>
It Hungary a guy got carbon poisoning and dies in the crash. About 4 years
ago now.
1. its very well know adding colour to the exhaust (show smoke) shows
the poisoning in the cockpit all the time.
2. take a look at this pic http://www.yakuk.com/img/Aeros.jpg smoke
over the wing, just like the CJ.
3. bottom of the a/c is high pressure/ top is low pressure
4. the MAIN route for smoke in cockpit is via the oil cooler>to inside
wing>to fuselage via wing spar holes, aileron rod holes, and other openings.
5. As you see from the pic, smoke will also be coming in via the
tailplane. (same on stearmen dusters)
6. Opening the cockpit to let the smoke out just lets 150% more in from
the bottom!!!
7. If you look at a Y52 head on you will see a longer exhaust right
side, this is a "small" fix the OEM had at the problem. The real fix is to
put another 6" on the ex as we do in the aerostars team.
8. On the Y50 its possible to reduce the problem by 80% by completely
sealing the oil cooler/ fuselage opening, sheet ally and silicone sealer
needed. Do the wing fairings also and its almost 100% smoke free.
9. We have a neat little fuse vent mod that could be adapted to take an
ox mask hose for fresh air breathing.
10. I have done many days with 8/9 hrs in the seat of a YAK, and am very
conscious of feeling under par at the end of it all. I do cockpit checks
slowly and TWICE prior to landing.
11. Lastly, don't use diesel smoke adding to the poisoning. That's
castnergenic .
Best regards, fly safe-Mark Jefferies
For YAK UK Ltd www.yakuk.com
Lt Gransden Airfield
Sandy, Beds
SG19 3BP
England.
Tel +44 (0)1767 651156.
Fax +44 (0)1767 651157
Mobile +44 (0)7785 538 317
Conditions and terms of business
Aircraft for sale
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Johnson" <tomjohnson(at)cox.net> |
I too have experienced CO in cockpit.
In my 52 returning from ARS 2004.
And don't bother buying a CO detector (IMHO, YMMV).
I bought an expensive detector with a digital readout of CO in PPM.
The readings were "redlined" all the time.
There is no question "if" we all have too much CO in cockpit, we do.
EXHAUST:
T-band clamps make for great clamps. Good looking, sturdy, inexpensive.
Try McMaster Carr or similar.
I experimented with the hi-temp exhaust wrap tape.
But I found it degraded over time. Perhaps there is a higher temp version
of this same product.
It did provide excellent sealing properties.
There is no one single cure to this dangerous problem.
Single exposure to very hi levels?
Repeated exposure to low levels (ARS, OSH type fly-ins).. .
The results are the same.
---------------------------
Thomas Johnson
Airpower Insurance, LLC
36 West Ocotillo Road
Phoenix, AZ 85013-1235
Tel: 602-628-2701
Fax: 623-321-5843
E: tomjohnson(at)cox.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
Jim Bernier wrote:
> A word of caution. I had been told that silicone sealer, with that ammonia
> smell, will eat at the aluminum. Pencil lead and Simple Green can damage
> aluminum. Although the makers of Simple Green makes a good, safe product to
> wash our planes.
I thought that the smell from silicone rubber caulking was acetic acid
(vinegar). I also thought it was safe to use on aluminum. I know that pencil
lead (carbon) causes embrittlement of stainless steel but I wasn't aware that
it attacks aluminum.
The place to look for sealing compounds might be the marine industry. I know
that they tend to avoid stuff like RTV silicone in preference to other types
of caulking. 3M 101, 4000, and 4200 are possibilities. Some of the
polysulfide-based caulks (Boat Life) look like they might work OK as they are
resistant to fuel and oil, bond to metals, yet remain flexible.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brian-yak(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com |
| From: | "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser(at)gs.com> |
Subject: RE: Yak-List: CO in cockpit
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 14:03:29 -0400
http://www.clampco.com
Have a selection of exhaust T clamps and other alternatives.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom Johnson
Subject: Yak-List: CO in cockpit
I too have experienced CO in cockpit.
In my 52 returning from ARS 2004.
And don't bother buying a CO detector (IMHO, YMMV).
I bought an expensive detector with a digital readout of CO in PPM.
The readings were "redlined" all the time.
There is no question "if" we all have too much CO in cockpit, we do.
EXHAUST:
T-band clamps make for great clamps. Good looking, sturdy, inexpensive.
Try McMaster Carr or similar.
I experimented with the hi-temp exhaust wrap tape.
But I found it degraded over time. Perhaps there is a higher temp version
of this same product.
It did provide excellent sealing properties.
There is no one single cure to this dangerous problem.
Single exposure to very hi levels?
Repeated exposure to low levels (ARS, OSH type fly-ins).. .
The results are the same.
---------------------------
Thomas Johnson
Airpower Insurance, LLC
36 West Ocotillo Road
Phoenix, AZ 85013-1235
Tel: 602-628-2701
Fax: 623-321-5843
E: tomjohnson(at)cox.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Martinez <erniel29(at)gmail.com> |
I was chatting with my neighbor who was at OSH this year. He remarked
about how many CJ-s and Yaks were there and how well you guys flew.
Not bad coming from a T-6 driver and the ex-president of EAA Warbirds :)
Kudos
Ernie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Spencer" <splitimage.wing(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | "A GuideTo Civilian Formation Aerobatics" |
1.96 DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX Date": yak-list(at)matronics.com
For those who have asked, the website is up and available for feed
back/comments or orders.
www.ronspencerairshows.com
regards, -rs-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "aaron marshall" <aaron(at)marshallservices.com> |
| Subject: | Re: : Carbon monoxide poisoningCarbon monoxide poisoning |
(not processed: message from valid local sender)
Excellent Information. I have often looked down at that primitive stove pipe
heat duct beneath the panel in my Yak and wondered just how good of a job
the person who originally tig welded the heat muff around the exhaust stack
did. For this reason I purchased at OSH this year a remote mounted CO
detector (www.coguardian.com). Jim your points about canopy and especially
lower fuselage gaps/holes are well taken. The TW has 6" holes in the wing
root as well as 2"x"2" holes in the lower fuselage which up here in the
north do an excellent job of blowing ice cold air right up onto the bottom
of the seat. (Ass freezes). Covering these gear well holes with duct tape
is easy and dramatically reduces the cold air problem so probably reduces
the CO potential as well. The CO monitor is 4"x2" and can be mounted easily
to the floor or under the panel. 2 small wires go to an amber light that
fits in well with the other indicator lights on the panel. They offer many
differnt ones including portable ones that plug into a lighter adapter.
They also offer ones with digital display to show PPM in case you want to
see just how bad the leak is.
Aaron Marshall
Yak 52TW
N343DC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Payne" <cpayne(at)joimail.com> |
| Subject: | Formation Ramblings |
The kudos we received at Oshkosh were earned by all of us that participate, not
just at OSH, but in the cumulative training and practice that got all of us this
far. Each WB group has it's strengths that they exploit: The T-6's buzz the
crowd with prop noise and lots of mass to paint and gleam. They are what a "warbird"
should be. Yet at one time, the real warbirds didn't consider them worthy.
Time moves on. The T-34's have a wide speed range to use and their kiddie-toy
ground handling that let them do things like the Diamond Drop landing. They
too stood at the tent, waiting to get inside. T-28's earned their place during
Vietnam; their size and weight provide a steady platform in turbulent air
during the shows.
Now we have the Yaks, and CJ's. They are manuverable, yet solid for formation work.
Slowly, we have amassed pilots, trained and sweated to get where we are today.
Our edge? If anything it is that we learn from our mistakes and keep on
improving. Flying a bit more acute also makes for interesting formations that
other groups don't do. So are we in the tent yet? Well maybe not all the way but
there is no more denying our presence.
Where do we go from here? MOTS (more of the same). An airshow formation manual
would be helpful though since airshow flying is different that straight FAST.
We use non-standard procedures and "shortcuts" where prudent. However, I believe
that a workable manual MUST be the product of cumulative input, not the vision
of just a few, but input from all parts of the formation, tail-end Charlie
included.
Craig Payne
cpayne(at)joimail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bitterlich GS11 Mark G <BitterlichMG(at)cherrypoint.usmc.mil> |
| Subject: | YAK Exhaust Clamps |
Could I ask please that users of CLAMPCO and other T band clamp types to
please include the exact part number info of what they are using for each
clamp location on the exhaust tubes? I would like to have known good
numbers that I am sure are going to work on this application instead of
having to reinvent that particular wheel.
Information such as: "I used this part number, and it works, but was just a
tad bit narrow." or "It works but was almost too tight in diameter", etc.,
etc. would be a God Send.
Let's get this information, narrow it down to exactly what is needed to do
the job as best as possible and then post it.
Anyone else with experience using different types of seals would be nice to
hear from to. Such as the milspec heat shield tape mentioned by Craig,
Exhaust header tape (Tom), etc.
Mark Bitterlich
N50YK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | on to the bombers, |
Troops,
As most of you know I must tare myself away and take on the rather dubious
duty of flying the B-24J (now called "Witchcraft") for the Collings Foundation.
That I get to fly the B-17 a lot lately adds to the work load, but you know
me, I complain little about such chores. Honest guys its hard work! :-} (I
don't think they believe me).
To add to it all tomorrow at O Dark 30, I'll be catching an airliner to catch
up with the bombers. Woo is me. You can find where I'm at the foundation's
web (www.collingsfoundation.org). Look under the tour schedule pages. If you
really need to talk to me, I can sometimes be caught on my cell phone (Its an
old shitty one) 386-503-9820. Try to get me before the afternoons because
that's when we usually fly and by than my phone battery is usually dead.
Occasionally I'll be able to get on-line for e-mail but often.
Stay safe and up right when wheels are on the ground.
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
386-503-9820
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: YAK Exhaust Clamps |
About 5 years ago I worked directly with Clampco to manufacture custom SS
T-bolt clamps with SS bolt and nuts. Carl Hays now sells those clamps which
are 3 different sizes. Very reasonable too. Call Carl Hays 858-292-7222
for more info.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bitterlich GS11 Mark G" <BitterlichMG(at)cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
Subject: Yak-List: YAK Exhaust Clamps
>
>
>
> Could I ask please that users of CLAMPCO and other T band clamp types to
> please include the exact part number info of what they are using for each
> clamp location on the exhaust tubes? I would like to have known good
> numbers that I am sure are going to work on this application instead of
> having to reinvent that particular wheel.
>
> Information such as: "I used this part number, and it works, but was just
> a
> tad bit narrow." or "It works but was almost too tight in diameter", etc.,
> etc. would be a God Send.
>
> Let's get this information, narrow it down to exactly what is needed to do
> the job as best as possible and then post it.
>
> Anyone else with experience using different types of seals would be nice
> to
> hear from to. Such as the milspec heat shield tape mentioned by Craig,
> Exhaust header tape (Tom), etc.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
> N50YK
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walter Lannon" <wlannon(at)cablerocket.com> |
Hi Brian;
Re: Jim's and your comments on silicone sealant, pencil lead. etc.
The original silicone RTV sealants do contain acetic acid and are corrosive
to aluminum ALLOYS. Pencil lead is extremely corrosive as well and should
never be used as a marking device. Whether these are detrimental to pure
aluminum or not I don''t know but that is immaterial since we are concerned
only with alloys, mostly the 2000 series which use copper as the main
alloying element.
The newer silicone sealants do not have the acedic acid aroma and may or may
not be corrosive. I don't know but I make it standard practice to not use
ANY unknown product in direct contact with alumiminum alloy, I first prime
the material with De Soto Super Koropon to avoid such contact whether it is
sealer, contact cement or any similar product.
As to Simple Green or any similar high detergent cleaner if I have to use it
I make sure it is thouroghly rinsed with many gallons of clean water.
How is your project coming?
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: carbon
>
> Jim Bernier wrote:
>> A word of caution. I had been told that silicone sealer, with that
>> ammonia
>> smell, will eat at the aluminum. Pencil lead and Simple Green can damage
>> aluminum. Although the makers of Simple Green makes a good, safe product
>> to
>> wash our planes.
>
> I thought that the smell from silicone rubber caulking was acetic acid
> (vinegar). I also thought it was safe to use on aluminum. I know that
> pencil
> lead (carbon) causes embrittlement of stainless steel but I wasn't aware
> that
> it attacks aluminum.
>
> The place to look for sealing compounds might be the marine industry. I
> know
> that they tend to avoid stuff like RTV silicone in preference to other
> types
> of caulking. 3M 101, 4000, and 4200 are possibilities. Some of the
> polysulfide-based caulks (Boat Life) look like they might work OK as they
> are
> resistant to fuel and oil, bond to metals, yet remain flexible.
>
> --
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
> brian-yak(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
> http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
> +1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
>
> I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
> - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Barry Hancock <barry(at)flyredstar.org> |
| Subject: | Re: on to the bombers |
On Aug 9, 2005, at 11:58 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
> That I get to fly the B-17 a lot lately adds to the work load, but you
> know
> me, I complain little about such chores. Honest guys its hard work!
> :-} (I
> don't think they believe me).
Pappy,
Break a leg, ya old fart!
Geesh, I don't feel any less jealous, either. OK, I take it
back, don't break a leg.... ;)-
Barry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MFilucci(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Formation Ramblings |
In a message dated 8/9/2005 7:52:46 PM Central Standard Time,
cpayne(at)joimail.com writes:
Now we have the Yaks, and CJ's. They are manuverable, yet solid for formation
work. Slowly, we have amassed pilots, trained and sweated to get where we are
today. Our edge? If anything it is that we learn from our mistakes and keep
on improving. Flying a bit more acute also makes for interesting formations
that other groups don't do. So are we in the tent yet? Well maybe not all the way
but there is no more denying our presence.
Where do we go from here? MOTS (more of the same). An airshow formation
manual would be helpful though since airshow flying is different that straight
FAST. We use non-standard procedures and "shortcuts" where prudent. However, I
believe that a workable manual MUST be the product of cumulative input, not the
vision of just a few, but input from all parts of the formation, tail-end
Charlie included.
Craig is right, it is because of all the hard work and dedication all of you
have demonstrated that our group has been accepted into the warbird community.
Each year our mass formations continue to get better at S&F and OSH.
There is a "Chapter 7" to our formation manual, titled "Mass Formation," that
is in the works right now--if any of you have something to contribute to the
effort, please forward the material to me, off List, at mfilucci(at)aol.com
Regards,
Mike Filucci
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Kirk" <pilot8kcab(at)hotmail.com> |
Folks,
I think from past posts there was/is someone on the Yak list who was/is also
an insurance rep. and knowledgeable in Yak's and insurance and capable of
obtaining reasonable quotes. Insurance will be expiring in a few months
down the road and I would like to use an agent who is at least familiar with
the aircraft. Anybody have contact info for such a person? Also, anybody
willing to share (offline is fine) roughly what a Yak-55 insurance should
approximately cost?
Thanks,
Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark Schrick" <schrick(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Yak Insurance - Airpower Insurance (Tom Johnson) |
Only ONE person you should go to for your insurance: Yak 50 owner and mechanic
(good guy too!!!)
Thomas Johnson
Airpower Insurance, LLC
36 West Ocotillo Road
Phoenix, AZ 85013-1235
Tel: 602-628-2701
Fax: 623-321-5843Thomas Johnson
********************************************************************
Mark Schrick
966 Wallace Drive
San Jose, Ca 95120-1848
Hm/Fax 408-323-5150
Cell 408-391-6664
Email schrick(at)pacbell.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott Kirk
Subject: Yak-List: Yak Insurance
Folks,
I think from past posts there was/is someone on the Yak list who was/is also
an insurance rep. and knowledgeable in Yak's and insurance and capable of
obtaining reasonable quotes. Insurance will be expiring in a few months
down the road and I would like to use an agent who is at least familiar with
the aircraft. Anybody have contact info for such a person? Also, anybody
willing to share (offline is fine) roughly what a Yak-55 insurance should
approximately cost?
Thanks,
Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
Walter Lannon wrote:
> The original silicone RTV sealants do contain acetic acid and are corrosive
> to aluminum ALLOYS. Pencil lead is extremely corrosive as well and should
> never be used as a marking device. Whether these are detrimental to pure
> aluminum or not I don''t know but that is immaterial since we are concerned
> only with alloys, mostly the 2000 series which use copper as the main
> alloying element.
Ah, OK. So what does work safely? Again, I knew that graphite was detrimental
to stainless but thought it was safe on aluminum and its alloys.
> The newer silicone sealants do not have the acedic acid aroma and may or may
> not be corrosive. I don't know but I make it standard practice to not use
> ANY unknown product in direct contact with alumiminum alloy, I first prime
> the material with De Soto Super Koropon to avoid such contact whether it is
> sealer, contact cement or any similar product.
Well, that makes sense. Use the primer as a buffer.
> How is your project coming?
Not well. Money got very tight so I decided to sell the project about 10
months ago. I couldn't get any takers so I ended up selling the engine, prop,
louvers, SS exhaust, and mounting ring to Sean Carroll to use to do an M14P
upgrade to Joe Nygard's airplane. To make a long story short, Sean refuses to
pay the rest of the money he owes me (the deal was for 1/2 up front and 1/2 on
delivery) so I am screwed. The story is a long one but the bottom line is that
Sean got the engine and prop, Joe has a flying airplane, and I *don't* have my
money.
It turns out that I didn't find out that Sean has a history of not paying his
bills in a "timely fashion" until *after* I had shipped the stuff. If some
miracle occurs and I get paid I will certainly let you know. In the mean time,
I am not going to hold my breath.
Still, things are looking up for me financially and I hope to be able to
resurrect the project later this year. I am reducing the scope of the project
for obvious reasons.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brian-yak(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MFilucci(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | contact info Mike Walsh |
If anyone has email and/or phone number contact info for Mike Walsh, of
Chino, California, please forward it to me off List at Mfilucci(at)aol.com
Thanks,
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
The only answer to CO is a tight fitting aviators mask and 100% 02 or a
sealed rebreathing system with a C02 scruber (soda lime). Prolonged
breathing of 100% 02 can cause supurative otis. You just have to clear your
ears frequently after you land. If I were planning on spending 30-60
minutes with my head poked up in someone's slip stream breathing exhaust
gas, I would have an 02 system installed.
Might try contacting one of the spam can manufacturers for the name of the
black tar-like sealer they use on the wing roots and firewalls around
wiring to plug the holes. The wads that are on my Piper have been there for
20 years and have not caused corrosion.
As to the dead beat bill payer, send him a formal invoice for the engine,
prop, labor, and shipping. Send it for 3 months standing. When he does not
pay up after 3 months, turn it over to the credit beaura for collections.
If he does not pay up then, it goes on his credit report. You will
eventually get your money when he tries to buy a car,a TV, or a house.
Viperdoc
Brian wrote:
> It turns out that I didn't find out that Sean has a history of not paying
his
> bills in a "timely fashion" until *after* I had shipped the stuff. If
some
> miracle occurs and I get paid I will certainly let you know. In the mean
time,
> I am not going to hold my breath.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Ivey" <jim(at)jimivey.com> |
>
> Ah, OK. So what does work safely? Again, I knew that graphite
> was detrimental
> to stainless but thought it was safe on aluminum and its alloys.
>
>
Graphite and aluminum are spread apart far on the galvanic chart. A pencil
mark on an aluminum part can turn into a crack years down the road. Sharpie
permanent markers work great and are safe on Aluminum. Sharpie ink can be
cleaned off later with acetone, MEK or other such solvents (good, strong and
bad for you).
I always cringe when I see A&P's marking compression readings on aluminum
baffles with pencils. Not just because it's unsightly and unnecessary with
logbook entries but because of the galvanic incompatibility. I ban pencils
from my hangar.
Jim Ivey
N46YK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Ivey" <jim(at)jimivey.com> |
| Subject: | Oshkosh M14P seminar |
Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at OSH he
stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P. Apparently it
is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine pneumatic
compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently the pump piston
glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt respectfully). I
use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about things.
George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
compatible with the compressor without worries.
Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air pump.
The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the snot
bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board electric air
compressor I was able to complete the flight without wanting for air. It
pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine compressor, which is plenty fine
for topping off the system. Won't fly it until fixed now that it's in the
hangar.
Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to shear
it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or should I look
for clues to other problems?
Jim Ivey
N46YK
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bitterlich GS11 Mark G <BitterlichMG(at)cherrypoint.usmc.mil> |
| Subject: | Yak Insurance - Airpower Insurance (Tom Johnson) |
Concur....
After dealing with two other firms... Tom helped me out tremendously.
Mark Bitterlich
N50YK
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Schrick [mailto:schrick(at)pacbell.net]
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Yak Insurance - Airpower Insurance (Tom Johnson)
Only ONE person you should go to for your insurance: Yak 50 owner and
mechanic
(good guy too!!!)
Thomas Johnson
Airpower Insurance, LLC
36 West Ocotillo Road
Phoenix, AZ 85013-1235
Tel: 602-628-2701
Fax: 623-321-5843Thomas Johnson
********************************************************************
Mark Schrick
966 Wallace Drive
San Jose, Ca 95120-1848
Hm/Fax 408-323-5150
Cell 408-391-6664
Email schrick(at)pacbell.net
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott Kirk
Subject: Yak-List: Yak Insurance
Folks,
I think from past posts there was/is someone on the Yak list who was/is also
an insurance rep. and knowledgeable in Yak's and insurance and capable of
obtaining reasonable quotes. Insurance will be expiring in a few months
down the road and I would like to use an agent who is at least familiar with
the aircraft. Anybody have contact info for such a person? Also, anybody
willing to share (offline is fine) roughly what a Yak-55 insurance should
approximately cost?
Thanks,
Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Basiliere" <BasiliereR(at)ci.boulder.co.us> |
| Subject: | Oshkosh M14P seminar |
I had over 800 hours on my SU-29 before it went through it's first pump.
Not a common problem...I guess
Rick b
>>> jim(at)jimivey.com 8/10/2005 1:35:22 PM >>>
Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
OSH he
stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P. Apparently
it
is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine pneumatic
compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently the pump
piston
glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt
respectfully). I
use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about
things.
George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
compatible with the compressor without worries.
Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
pump.
The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
snot
bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board electric
air
compressor I was able to complete the flight without wanting for air.
It
pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine compressor, which is plenty
fine
for topping off the system. Won't fly it until fixed now that it's in
the
hangar.
Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
shear
it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or should I
look
for clues to other problems?
Jim Ivey
N46YK
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Yak Insurance |
Ah!!! You don't need no stinking insurance. Look at Drew, he didn't have
any!!
HAHAHA
>
> Folks,
>
> I think from past posts there was/is someone on the Yak list who was/is
> also
> an insurance rep. and knowledgeable in Yak's and insurance and capable of
> obtaining reasonable quotes. Insurance will be expiring in a few months
> down the road and I would like to use an agent who is at least familiar
> with
> the aircraft. Anybody have contact info for such a person? Also, anybody
> willing to share (offline is fine) roughly what a Yak-55 insurance should
> approximately cost?
>
> Thanks,
> Scott
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Martinez <erniel29(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Oshkosh M14P seminar |
A buddy of mine has had to disassemble his compressor twice in a year
due to the poppet valve on the top of the compressor sticking. The
only notable thing is that he uses aero shell 100w rather than the
phillips.
Ernie
On 8/10/05, Richard Basiliere wrote:
>
> I had over 800 hours on my SU-29 before it went through it's first pump.
> Not a common problem...I guess
> Rick b
>
> >>> jim(at)jimivey.com 8/10/2005 1:35:22 PM >>>
>
>
> Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
> OSH he
> stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P. Apparently
> it
> is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine pneumatic
> compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently the pump
> piston
> glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
> straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt
> respectfully). I
> use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about
> things.
> George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
> compatible with the compressor without worries.
>
> Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
> pump.
> The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
> snot
> bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board electric
> air
> compressor I was able to complete the flight without wanting for air.
> It
> pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine compressor, which is plenty
> fine
> for topping off the system. Won't fly it until fixed now that it's in
> the
> hangar.
>
> Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
> shear
> it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or should I
> look
> for clues to other problems?
>
> Jim Ivey
> N46YK
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Martinez <erniel29(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Oshkosh M14P seminar |
I should have said "Poppet valve on top of the "Piston""
Ernie
On 8/10/05, Ernest Martinez wrote:
> A buddy of mine has had to disassemble his compressor twice in a year
> due to the poppet valve on the top of the compressor sticking. The
> only notable thing is that he uses aero shell 100w rather than the
> phillips.
>
> Ernie
>
> On 8/10/05, Richard Basiliere wrote:
> >
> > I had over 800 hours on my SU-29 before it went through it's first pump.
> > Not a common problem...I guess
> > Rick b
> >
> > >>> jim(at)jimivey.com 8/10/2005 1:35:22 PM >>>
> >
> >
> > Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
> > OSH he
> > stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P. Apparently
> > it
> > is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine pneumatic
> > compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently the pump
> > piston
> > glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
> > straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt
> > respectfully). I
> > use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about
> > things.
> > George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
> > compatible with the compressor without worries.
> >
> > Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
> > pump.
> > The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
> > snot
> > bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board electric
> > air
> > compressor I was able to complete the flight without wanting for air.
> > It
> > pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine compressor, which is plenty
> > fine
> > for topping off the system. Won't fly it until fixed now that it's in
> > the
> > hangar.
> >
> > Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
> > shear
> > it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or should I
> > look
> > for clues to other problems?
> >
> > Jim Ivey
> > N46YK
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Basiliere <discrab(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Yak Insurance |
I pay about a grand a year for my -55 @60K hull through Falcon - the one advanced
by the IAC. Just FYI...is there any better $ out there?
Rick b
-----Original Message-----
From: belov(at)iac52.org
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak Insurance
Ah!!! You don't need no stinking insurance. Look at Drew, he didn't have
any!!
HAHAHA
>
> Folks,
>
> I think from past posts there was/is someone on the Yak list who was/is
> also
> an insurance rep. and knowledgeable in Yak's and insurance and capable of
> obtaining reasonable quotes. Insurance will be expiring in a few months
> down the road and I would like to use an agent who is at least familiar
> with
> the aircraft. Anybody have contact info for such a person? Also, anybody
> willing to share (offline is fine) roughly what a Yak-55 insurance should
> approximately cost?
>
> Thanks,
> Scott
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Sharpies are the homebuilders choice for marking aluminum. I buy em by the box.
Beware that they will bleed thru both primer and top coats so remove markings
with anything from denatured alcohol to MEK before painting.
I wouldn't sweat the acedic acid in RTV either. It will serve to etch the surface
to promote adhesion. We use it on RV's in the elevator trailing edge. No worse
that self etching primers which contain phosphoric acid.
Regards,
Greg Young
________________________________
Walter Lannon wrote:
> The original silicone RTV sealants do contain acetic acid and are corrosive
> to aluminum ALLOYS. Pencil lead is extremely corrosive as well and should
> never be used as a marking device. Whether these are detrimental to pure
> aluminum or not I don''t know but that is immaterial since we are concerned
> only with alloys, mostly the 2000 series which use copper as the main
> alloying element.
Ah, OK. So what does work safely? Again, I knew that graphite was detrimental
to stainless but thought it was safe on aluminum and its alloys.
> The newer silicone sealants do not have the acedic acid aroma and may or may
> not be corrosive. I don't know but I make it standard practice to not use
> ANY unknown product in direct contact with alumiminum alloy, I first prime
> the material with De Soto Super Koropon to avoid such contact whether it is
> sealer, contact cement or any similar product.
Well, that makes sense. Use the primer as a buffer.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Oshkosh M14P seminar |
Well....Just...POPPET it All!
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Ernest Martinez <erniel29(at)gmail.com>
> To:
> Date: 8/10/2005 4:01:50 PM
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>
>
> I should have said "Poppet valve on top of the "Piston""
>
> Ernie
>
> On 8/10/05, Ernest Martinez wrote:
> > A buddy of mine has had to disassemble his compressor twice in a year
> > due to the poppet valve on the top of the compressor sticking. The
> > only notable thing is that he uses aero shell 100w rather than the
> > phillips.
> >
> > Ernie
> >
> > On 8/10/05, Richard Basiliere wrote:
> > >
> > > I had over 800 hours on my SU-29 before it went through it's first
pump.
> > > Not a common problem...I guess
> > > Rick b
> > >
> > > >>> jim(at)jimivey.com 8/10/2005 1:35:22 PM >>>
> > >
> > >
> > > Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
> > > OSH he
> > > stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
Apparently
> > > it
> > > is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine pneumatic
> > > compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently the pump
> > > piston
> > > glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
> > > straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt
> > > respectfully). I
> > > use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about
> > > things.
> > > George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
> > > compatible with the compressor without worries.
> > >
> > > Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
> > > pump.
> > > The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
> > > snot
> > > bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board electric
> > > air
> > > compressor I was able to complete the flight without wanting for air.
> > > It
> > > pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine compressor, which is plenty
> > > fine
> > > for topping off the system. Won't fly it until fixed now that it's in
> > > the
> > > hangar.
> > >
> > > Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
> > > shear
> > > it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or should I
> > > look
> > > for clues to other problems?
> > >
> > > Jim Ivey
> > > N46YK
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Oshkosh M14P seminar |
Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the engine
running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not "scavaging"
the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30 sec.
and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to close
the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it the
push rod in the compressor?
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Jim Ivey <jim(at)jimivey.com>
> To:
> Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>
>
> Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at OSH
he
> stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P. Apparently it
> is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine pneumatic
> compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently the pump
piston
> glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
> straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt respectfully).
I
> use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about things.
> George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
> compatible with the compressor without worries.
>
> Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air pump.
> The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the snot
> bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board electric air
> compressor I was able to complete the flight without wanting for air. It
> pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine compressor, which is plenty fine
> for topping off the system. Won't fly it until fixed now that it's in the
> hangar.
>
> Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to shear
> it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or should I
look
> for clues to other problems?
>
> Jim Ivey
> N46YK
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bitterlich GS11 Mark G <BitterlichMG(at)cherrypoint.usmc.mil> |
That is a VERY good price.
When I had "zero" hours in my YAK-50 and only 100 in tail draggers total...
I paid $2600. YIKES.
I now have 600 hours in tail draggers and am still paying over $1600.
You're doing well.
Mark Bitterlich
N50YK
-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Basiliere [mailto:discrab(at)earthlink.net]
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak Insurance
I pay about a grand a year for my -55 @60K hull through Falcon - the one
advanced by the IAC. Just FYI...is there any better $ out there?
Rick b
-----Original Message-----
From: belov(at)iac52.org
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak Insurance
Ah!!! You don't need no stinking insurance. Look at Drew, he didn't have
any!!
HAHAHA
>
> Folks,
>
> I think from past posts there was/is someone on the Yak list who was/is
> also
> an insurance rep. and knowledgeable in Yak's and insurance and capable of
> obtaining reasonable quotes. Insurance will be expiring in a few months
> down the road and I would like to use an agent who is at least familiar
> with
> the aircraft. Anybody have contact info for such a person? Also, anybody
> willing to share (offline is fine) roughly what a Yak-55 insurance should
> approximately cost?
>
> Thanks,
> Scott
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Payne" <cpayne(at)joimail.com> |
Come on guys, share those great formation photos I saw at Oshkosh on the Matronics
Photoshare site for everyone to see.
Craig Payne
cpayne(at)joimail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
Craig,
I believe I have seen some 100 photos on the matronics photoshare of OSH.
Or maybe I was hallucinating. That is possible lately with the way my
schedule had degraded to dog shiza (sp)! The Burger King mentality in
Medicine is BS!
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Craig Payne <cpayne(at)joimail.com>
> To: yak-list
> Date: 8/10/2005 7:36:52 PM
> Subject: Yak-List: OSH Photos
>
>
> Come on guys, share those great formation photos I saw at Oshkosh on the
Matronics Photoshare site for everyone to see.
>
>
> Craig Payne
> cpayne(at)joimail.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Goode" <richard.goode(at)russianaeros.com> |
I am amazed at Rick only paying US$1,000 a year for Yak-55 insurance. In Europe
it would be three times as much, and that is without the threat of huge awards
in US courts!
Richard Goode
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Mob: +44 (0) 7768 610389
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
dangerous content by the http://www.invictawiz.com
MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | "Bandits due North" |
For all those not going to Reno,
The first annual Bandits due North fly-in will be held from September 15th
to 18th 2005 at Lachute airport (CSE4 25nm NW of Montreal). It will consist
of your standard formation oriented fly-in with the addition of a few
overdue CRUD games and some of that famous Canadian BEER. So far I have 2
confirmed airplanes. If you want more info, email me off list at
fougapilot(at)hotmail.com
Cheers,
Dan Fortin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Painter" <wild.blue(at)verizon.net> |
I suppose it goes without saying, but pencils shouldn't go anywhere near
steel, either.
Jerry Painter
Wild Blue Aviation
360-435-8431425-876-0865
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0cs5r/index.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | "Bandits due North" |
It's gonna be a short Crud game with just 2 players!
Sorry Dan,
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Daniel Fortin <fougapilot(at)hotmail.com>
> To: ;
> Date: 8/11/2005 7:01:40 AM
> Subject: Yak-List: "Bandits due North"
>
>
> For all those not going to Reno,
>
> The first annual Bandits due North fly-in will be held from September
15th
> to 18th 2005 at Lachute airport (CSE4 25nm NW of Montreal). It will
consist
> of your standard formation oriented fly-in with the addition of a few
> overdue CRUD games and some of that famous Canadian BEER. So far I have 2
> confirmed airplanes. If you want more info, email me off list at
> fougapilot(at)hotmail.com
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dan Fortin
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com |
| From: | "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser(at)gs.com> |
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off with
the engine running ???
An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that NEVER
should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
Gus
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc Kemp
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
-->
Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the engine
running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not "scavaging"
the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30 sec.
and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to close
the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it the
push rod in the compressor?
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Jim Ivey <jim(at)jimivey.com>
> To:
> Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>
>
> Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
> OSH
he
> stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
> Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine
> pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
> the pump
piston
> glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
> straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt respectfully).
I
> use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about things.
> George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
> compatible with the compressor without worries.
>
> Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air pump.
> The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
> snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
> electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
> wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
> compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
> fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
>
> Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
> shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
> should I
look
> for clues to other problems?
>
> Jim Ivey
> N46YK
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wendy Jenks <godsbreath75(at)yahoo.com> |
and if the russians say so than that must be the Gods honest truth.
From: "Fraser, Gus"
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off with
the engine running ???
An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that NEVER
should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
Gus
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc Kemp
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
-->
Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the engine
running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not "scavaging"
the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30 sec.
and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to close
the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it the
push rod in the compressor?
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Jim Ivey
> To:
> Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>
>
> Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
> OSH
he
> stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
> Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine
> pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
> the pump
piston
> glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
> straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt respectfully).
I
> use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about things.
> George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
> compatible with the compressor without worries.
>
> Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air pump.
> The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
> snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
> electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
> wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
> compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
> fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
>
> Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
> shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
> should I
look
> for clues to other problems?
>
> Jim Ivey
> N46YK
>
>
Blessings,
Wendy
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wendy Jenks <godsbreath75(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | great now i am part of this fricking yak list just what i always |
wanted
nothing like a spam to make your day oh so perfect
and if the russians say so than that must be the Gods honest truth.
From: "Fraser, Gus"
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off with
the engine running ???
An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that NEVER
should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
Gus
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc Kemp
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
-->
Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the engine
running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not "scavaging"
the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30 sec.
and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to close
the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it the
push rod in the compressor?
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Jim Ivey
> To:
> Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>
>
> Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
> OSH
he
> stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
> Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine
> pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
> the pump
piston
> glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
> straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt respectfully).
I
> use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about things.
> George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
> compatible with the compressor without worries.
>
> Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air pump.
> The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
> snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
> electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
> wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
> compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
> fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
>
> Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
> shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
> should I
look
> for clues to other problems?
>
> Jim Ivey
> N46YK
>
>
Blessings,
Wendy
---------------------------------
Blessings,
Wendy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
My mistake, I did leave off the turn mags to 0 then pull the fuel cutoff to
full aft. It is in the type written original Russian translation of the
Pilots Manuel the I got a copy of from Scott Patterson (one of the original
US YAK owners). Where it says cool little things like " advance " for
manifold pressure and gives a 10 or so page disortation on flying the
landing pattern.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Wendy Jenks <godsbreath75(at)yahoo.com>
> To:
> Date: 8/11/2005 9:33:33 AM
> Subject: Yak-List: Re:
>
>
> and if the russians say so than that must be the Gods honest truth.
>
>
> From: "Fraser, Gus"
> To: "'yak-list(at)matronics.com'"
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
>
> Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off
with
> the engine running ???
>
> An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
> switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that NEVER
> should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
>
> Gus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc Kemp
> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>
> -->
>
> Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the engine
> running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not "scavaging"
> the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30
sec.
> and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to close
> the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
> Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it the
> push rod in the compressor?
> Doc
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Jim Ivey
> > To:
> > Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> >
> >
> > Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
> > OSH
> he
> > stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
> > Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine
> > pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
> > the pump
> piston
> > glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
> > straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt respectfully).
> I
> > use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about things.
> > George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
> > compatible with the compressor without worries.
> >
> > Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
pump.
> > The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
> > snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
> > electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
> > wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
> > compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
> > fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
> >
> > Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
> > shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
> > should I
> look
> > for clues to other problems?
> >
> > Jim Ivey
> > N46YK
> >
> >
>
>
> Blessings,
> Wendy
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Bernier" <JBernier(at)dart.org> |
The question begs to be asked, "Why not use the fuel cut off valve?", "What harm
would be caused?"
Not that anyone would attempt this avenue, but understanding "Why" would lead us
to further understanding the workings of our engines. At first thought I would
assume that the engine itself would not be affected, but maybe the carburetor
diaphragm would. Closer to the shut off valve is the fuel pump. Would this
have enough fuel, acting as a lubricant, to ensure it longevity?
Jim B
>>> viperdoc(at)mindspring.com 08/11/05 10:12 AM >>>
My mistake, I did leave off the turn mags to 0 then pull the fuel cutoff to
full aft. It is in the type written original Russian translation of the
Pilots Manuel the I got a copy of from Scott Patterson (one of the original
US YAK owners). Where it says cool little things like " advance " for
manifold pressure and gives a 10 or so page disortation on flying the
landing pattern.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Wendy Jenks <godsbreath75(at)yahoo.com>
> To:
> Date: 8/11/2005 9:33:33 AM
> Subject: Yak-List: Re:
>
>
> and if the russians say so than that must be the Gods honest truth.
>
>
> From: "Fraser, Gus"
> To: "'yak-list(at)matronics.com'"
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
>
> Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off
with
> the engine running ???
>
> An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
> switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that NEVER
> should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
>
> Gus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc Kemp
> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>
> -->
>
> Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the engine
> running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not "scavaging"
> the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30
sec.
> and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to close
> the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
> Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it the
> push rod in the compressor?
> Doc
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Jim Ivey
> > To:
> > Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> >
> >
> > Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
> > OSH
> he
> > stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
> > Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine
> > pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
> > the pump
> piston
> > glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
> > straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt respectfully).
> I
> > use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about things.
> > George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
> > compatible with the compressor without worries.
> >
> > Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
pump.
> > The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
> > snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
> > electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
> > wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
> > compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
> > fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
> >
> > Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
> > shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
> > should I
> look
> > for clues to other problems?
> >
> > Jim Ivey
> > N46YK
> >
> >
>
>
> Blessings,
> Wendy
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Yak-List Digest: 21 Msgs - 08/10/05 |
In a message dated 8/11/2005 1:02:40 AM Mountain Standard Time,
yak-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
>
>
> If anyone has email and/or phone number contact info for Mike Walsh, of
> Chino, California, please forward it to me off List at Mfilucci(at)aol.com
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>
Me too,
Skip Slyfield
cj6sly(at)cs.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
What it does do is cause you to have to prime like crazy to repressurize
the fuel system after doing that. If the motor is still trying to run.
Never thought about lubing the fuel pump. And after doing it the way this
original translated version said, I decided to go back to scavaging the
engine at 70% x 30 sec, throttle idle and aft to cutoff, MAGS to 0 and not
pull the fuel cutoff to full aft.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Jim Bernier <JBernier(at)dart.org>
> To:
> Date: 8/11/2005 10:38:48 AM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re:
>
>
> The question begs to be asked, "Why not use the fuel cut off valve?",
"What harm would be caused?"
> Not that anyone would attempt this avenue, but understanding "Why" would
lead us to further understanding the workings of our engines. At first
thought I would assume that the engine itself would not be affected, but
maybe the carburetor diaphragm would. Closer to the shut off valve is the
fuel pump. Would this have enough fuel, acting as a lubricant, to ensure it
longevity?
> Jim B
>
> >>> viperdoc(at)mindspring.com 08/11/05 10:12 AM >>>
>
> My mistake, I did leave off the turn mags to 0 then pull the fuel cutoff
to
> full aft. It is in the type written original Russian translation of the
> Pilots Manuel the I got a copy of from Scott Patterson (one of the
original
> US YAK owners). Where it says cool little things like " advance " for
> manifold pressure and gives a 10 or so page disortation on flying the
> landing pattern.
> Doc
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Wendy Jenks <godsbreath75(at)yahoo.com>
> > To:
> > Date: 8/11/2005 9:33:33 AM
> > Subject: Yak-List: Re:
> >
> >
> > and if the russians say so than that must be the Gods honest truth.
> >
> > owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com wrote:--> Yak-List message posted
by:
> >
> > From: "Fraser, Gus"
> > To: "'yak-list(at)matronics.com'"
> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> > Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
> >
> > Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off
> with
> > the engine running ???
> >
> > An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
> > switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that
NEVER
> > should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
> >
> > Gus
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc Kemp
> > To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> >
> > -->
> >
> > Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the engine
> > running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not "scavaging"
> > the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30
> sec.
> > and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to
close
> > the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
> > Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it the
> > push rod in the compressor?
> > Doc
> >
> >
> > > [Original Message]
> > > From: Jim Ivey
> > > To:
> > > Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
> > > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> > >
> > >
> > > Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
> > > OSH
> > he
> > > stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
> > > Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the
engine
> > > pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
> > > the pump
> > piston
> > > glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
> > > straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt
respectfully).
> > I
> > > use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about
things.
> > > George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were
also
> > > compatible with the compressor without worries.
> > >
> > > Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
> pump.
> > > The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
> > > snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
> > > electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
> > > wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
> > > compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
> > > fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
> > >
> > > Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
> > > shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
> > > should I
> > look
> > > for clues to other problems?
> > >
> > > Jim Ivey
> > > N46YK
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Blessings,
> > Wendy
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | South Central Clinic |
p2driver(at)earthlink.net, david.petri(at)earthlink.net, Yak52Driver(at)aol.com,
aviat0r(at)msn.com
To all RPA members:
The latest news on the south central clinic;
I have arranged with Cannon Aviation Insurance a 10% renewal discount
towards your annual premium for all those who attend the entire event and who
participate in training. Cannon is also providing a substantial donation to the
event to help offset our costs. We hope to be able to offer a first class
opportunity for you to renew your FAST status or participate in first time
training.
Details will be available in the next few weeks. I will be posting
information here when new developments occur.
Register now on the RPA Website. Again the dates are September 21-25, 2005
KLAA.
Scott McMillan
RPA SC Coordinator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | great now i am part of this fricking yak list just what |
i always wanted
So, uhhh, Wendy....What possed ya to get on the "fricking" Yak-List?
Momentary lapse in judgement needing something else to clutter up your
already cluttered day? Bad case of aaa Dragon's Breath or just love the
smell of YAK's in the morning?
Sorry it took so long to pitch back into the fight...seems a case got in
the way.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Wendy Jenks <godsbreath75(at)yahoo.com>
> To:
> Date: 8/11/2005 9:57:24 AM
> Subject: Yak-List: great now i am part of this fricking yak list just
what i always wanted
>
>
> nothing like a spam to make your day oh so perfect
> Wendy Jenks wrote:--> Yak-List message posted
by: Wendy Jenks
>
> and if the russians say so than that must be the Gods honest truth.
>
>
> From: "Fraser, Gus"
> To: "'yak-list(at)matronics.com'"
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
>
> Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off
with
> the engine running ???
>
> An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
> switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that NEVER
> should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
>
> Gus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc Kemp
> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>
> -->
>
> Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the engine
> running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not "scavaging"
> the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30
sec.
> and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to close
> the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
> Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it the
> push rod in the compressor?
> Doc
>
>
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Jim Ivey
> > To:
> > Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> >
> >
> > Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
> > OSH
> he
> > stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
> > Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine
> > pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
> > the pump
> piston
> > glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
> > straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt respectfully).
> I
> > use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about things.
> > George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
> > compatible with the compressor without worries.
> >
> > Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
pump.
> > The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
> > snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
> > electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
> > wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
> > compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
> > fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
> >
> > Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
> > shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
> > should I
> look
> > for clues to other problems?
> >
> > Jim Ivey
> > N46YK
> >
> >
>
>
> Blessings,
> Wendy
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
> Blessings,
> Wendy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walter Lannon" <wlannon(at)cablerocket.com> |
Hi Brian;
Really sorry to hear of your problems with a deadbeat buyer. Maybe a little
publicity will convince him to do whats right, I hope so.
On the materials marking question I note that Jerry Painter has quite
correctly advised that lead pencils should also not be used on steel.
So, going back about 40 years or so, in the halycon days of airline
operations we always had a Chemical Engineer on staff whose primary job was
to ensure that all chemical materials in use met acceptable standards. This
included cleaning, plating, heat treatment, paint stripping and a host of
other operations. One of the smaller items was marking devices. Each engine
and airframe manufacturer had specifications for all of these items. We had
Rolls Royce, P&W and G.E. engines in both Douglas and Boeing aircraft and in
many cases their specs. varied. To maintain some continuity and simplify
stocking, etc. our Engineering developed common specs. applicable to our
airline only but accepted by each OEM.
Had to dig back a little but here is what we had for markers:-------
Alum. Alloy - Mars Staedtler (German) permanent ink marker. I still use
these but the company is now just Staedtler and they have a whole range of
permanent and non-permanent markers. I use # 313-7 or 313-9 or, if these are
out of stock, the fine point Sharpie.
Alloy steels (4130, 4340, etc) - Eberhard Faber Colorbrite # 2101 Silver
pencil.
Cheers;
Walt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | brian olofsson <brian060901(at)yahoo.com> |
Planning on refinishing prop blades with this annual. Initially planned on sending
off to whirlwind but I understand a number of members have done it on their
own. any comment tips would be greatly appreciated. Blades have several tiny
cracks on front 1/2" long in the paint, approx. 1 inch apart these are really
hair line maybe 3 or four on each side. there's also the crack in the paint where
the wood goes in the steal hub. also some small cracks were the blade spreads
out form the neck. I've seen all these same cracks on other props at OSH
this year.Yes the guy with the magnifying glass on you prop was me. It would sure
be nice to have a book on what was acceptable and what was not. Any comments
on balancing.
Brian
Come on guys, share those great formation photos I saw at Oshkosh on the Matronics
Photoshare site for everyone to see.
Craig Payne
cpayne(at)joimail.com
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walter Lannon" <wlannon(at)cablerocket.com> |
Do you gentlemen ever read your manuals?
Shut down procedure for the Huosai and the M14 is the same (except for RPM
or % RPM).
It is essentially as follows:
1. Cooling and scavange run
2. Reduce to idle
3. Ignition off and throttle smoothly to full open
4. AFTER engine stopped, close throttle, close fuel valve.
Ref:
M14P manual, Sec 72.00.00 Task Card 203
Check caution note pg.2 - NEVER shut down by closing fuel shut-off valve.
Cheers;
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Bernier" <JBernier(at)dart.org>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re:
>
> The question begs to be asked, "Why not use the fuel cut off valve?",
> "What harm would be caused?"
> Not that anyone would attempt this avenue, but understanding "Why" would
> lead us to further understanding the workings of our engines. At first
> thought I would assume that the engine itself would not be affected, but
> maybe the carburetor diaphragm would. Closer to the shut off valve is the
> fuel pump. Would this have enough fuel, acting as a lubricant, to ensure
> it longevity?
> Jim B
>
>>>> viperdoc(at)mindspring.com 08/11/05 10:12 AM >>>
>
> My mistake, I did leave off the turn mags to 0 then pull the fuel cutoff
> to
> full aft. It is in the type written original Russian translation of the
> Pilots Manuel the I got a copy of from Scott Patterson (one of the
> original
> US YAK owners). Where it says cool little things like " advance " for
> manifold pressure and gives a 10 or so page disortation on flying the
> landing pattern.
> Doc
>
>
>> [Original Message]
>> From: Wendy Jenks <godsbreath75(at)yahoo.com>
>> To:
>> Date: 8/11/2005 9:33:33 AM
>> Subject: Yak-List: Re:
>>
>>
>> and if the russians say so than that must be the Gods honest truth.
>>
>>
>> From: "Fraser, Gus"
>> To: "'yak-list(at)matronics.com'"
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
>>
>> Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off
> with
>> the engine running ???
>>
>> An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
>> switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that NEVER
>> should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
>>
>> Gus
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc Kemp
>> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>>
>> -->
>>
>> Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the engine
>> running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not "scavaging"
>> the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30
> sec.
>> and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to
>> close
>> the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
>> Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it the
>> push rod in the compressor?
>> Doc
>>
>>
>> > [Original Message]
>> > From: Jim Ivey
>> > To:
>> > Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
>> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>> >
>> >
>> > Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
>> > OSH
>> he
>> > stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
>> > Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine
>> > pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
>> > the pump
>> piston
>> > glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
>> > straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt
>> > respectfully).
>> I
>> > use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about things.
>> > George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
>> > compatible with the compressor without worries.
>> >
>> > Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
> pump.
>> > The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
>> > snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
>> > electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
>> > wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
>> > compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
>> > fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
>> >
>> > Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
>> > shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
>> > should I
>> look
>> > for clues to other problems?
>> >
>> > Jim Ivey
>> > N46YK
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Blessings,
>> Wendy
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Fire Cock (fuel shut off lever) |
Gentlemen (& women),
To correct a statement I made earlier today. The early translated version of the
IAK-52 fligh manual states concerning the Fire Cock closing during engine operation:
Page 62 paragraph 4.5.2: After the cylinders heads cooling the pilot
stopps the engine.
- the engine speed is increased up to 65-68% for 28-30sec. for the ignition of
the spark plugs;
-the engine speed is decreased up to 28-34% by the actuation of the throttle handle;
- the magneto is uncoupled by setting the switch on "0" position.
- the throttle handle is gradually displaced forward (the drosel choke of the carburator
is opened).
4.5.3. After the engine stop the throttle handle is brought in the appropriate
position for minimal operating condition ( fully backward) and the fire cock is
closed when the airplane is in the park, after flights performance.
All other automatic safety devices of network and the circuit breakers from the
electric instruments panel are switched out.
ATTENTION! It is forbidden to stop the engine:
-immediately after cruising or high operation condition:
- by closing the fire cock, with fuel consumption within carburator ( to avoid
the flareback and the fire ).
I stand corrected and please do not use the fire cock to shut down the engine except
in case of an emergency where you have an engine fire.
Sometimes alittle knowledge can be deadly. That is why we always need to continue
to ask questions and seek answers.
Sorry,
Doc
Roger "Doc" Kemp
viperdoc(at)mindspring.com
If it don't sound Round...Why listen?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
Yes Walt I have read the manual cover to cover in the past but like all
great books, it was set aside for to long. I have operated for the past
year or so using only the checklist on my right knee. It helps to review
the actual text every now and then to shake the cobwebs off the old brain
bite.
Next question is: How many CJ and YAK drivers actually have a flight manual
to read? If you do not might I suggest you purchase one. If you already
have one, maybe like the Bible (for the Christians), passages from it
should be read at a minimum weekly. I intend to go back to doing just that.
At onetime, we had EPs for the day in our YAK squadron at 08A. We reviewed
the EPs each time we briefed for a sortie. But as all good things go,
disuse lead to apathy and the process was dropped. I just shook myself back
awake with this misstatement on the Fire Cock. Glad it was on the ground at
a computer and not on the ramp with the engine running or in the air.
I stand corrected.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Walter Lannon <wlannon(at)cablerocket.com>
> To:
> Date: 8/11/2005 10:35:56 PM
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:
>
>
> Do you gentlemen ever read your manuals?
>
> Shut down procedure for the Huosai and the M14 is the same (except for
RPM
> or % RPM).
> It is essentially as follows:
>
> 1. Cooling and scavange run
> 2. Reduce to idle
> 3. Ignition off and throttle smoothly to full open
> 4. AFTER engine stopped, close throttle, close fuel valve.
>
> Ref:
> M14P manual, Sec 72.00.00 Task Card 203
> Check caution note pg.2 - NEVER shut down by closing fuel shut-off valve.
>
> Cheers;
> Walt
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Bernier" <JBernier(at)dart.org>
> To:
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re:
>
>
> >
> > The question begs to be asked, "Why not use the fuel cut off valve?",
> > "What harm would be caused?"
> > Not that anyone would attempt this avenue, but understanding "Why"
would
> > lead us to further understanding the workings of our engines. At first
> > thought I would assume that the engine itself would not be affected,
but
> > maybe the carburetor diaphragm would. Closer to the shut off valve is
the
> > fuel pump. Would this have enough fuel, acting as a lubricant, to
ensure
> > it longevity?
> > Jim B
> >
> >>>> viperdoc(at)mindspring.com 08/11/05 10:12 AM >>>
> >
> > My mistake, I did leave off the turn mags to 0 then pull the fuel
cutoff
> > to
> > full aft. It is in the type written original Russian translation of the
> > Pilots Manuel the I got a copy of from Scott Patterson (one of the
> > original
> > US YAK owners). Where it says cool little things like " advance " for
> > manifold pressure and gives a 10 or so page disortation on flying the
> > landing pattern.
> > Doc
> >
> >
> >> [Original Message]
> >> From: Wendy Jenks <godsbreath75(at)yahoo.com>
> >> To:
> >> Date: 8/11/2005 9:33:33 AM
> >> Subject: Yak-List: Re:
> >>
> >>
> >> and if the russians say so than that must be the Gods honest truth.
> >>
> >> owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com wrote:--> Yak-List message posted
by:
> >>
> >> From: "Fraser, Gus"
> >> To: "'yak-list(at)matronics.com'"
> >> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> >> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
> >>
> >> Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off
> > with
> >> the engine running ???
> >>
> >> An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
> >> switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that
NEVER
> >> should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
> >>
> >> Gus
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
> >> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc
Kemp
> >> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> >> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> >>
> >> -->
> >>
> >> Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the
engine
> >> running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not
"scavaging"
> >> the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30
> > sec.
> >> and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to
> >> close
> >> the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
> >> Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it
the
> >> push rod in the compressor?
> >> Doc
> >>
> >>
> >> > [Original Message]
> >> > From: Jim Ivey
> >> > To:
> >> > Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
> >> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
> >> > OSH
> >> he
> >> > stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
> >> > Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the
engine
> >> > pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
> >> > the pump
> >> piston
> >> > glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
> >> > straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt
> >> > respectfully).
> >> I
> >> > use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about
things.
> >> > George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were
also
> >> > compatible with the compressor without worries.
> >> >
> >> > Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
> > pump.
> >> > The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
> >> > snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
> >> > electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
> >> > wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
> >> > compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
> >> > fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
> >> >
> >> > Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
> >> > shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
> >> > should I
> >> look
> >> > for clues to other problems?
> >> >
> >> > Jim Ivey
> >> > N46YK
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Blessings,
> >> Wendy
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian-yak(at)lloyd.com> |
Walter Lannon wrote:
>
> Hi Brian;
>
> Really sorry to hear of your problems with a deadbeat buyer. Maybe a little
> publicity will convince him to do whats right, I hope so.
After so many months, I doubt it. It looks like I am just good and screwed.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brian-yak(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Goode" <richard.goode(at)russianaeros.com> |
I suspect many aerobatic pilots are blissfully unaware of the incredible increases
in propeller loading that is caused by aerobatics, and particularly 'modern'
aerobatics with multiple-snaps and gyroscopics etc.
MT require props used for 'unlimited aerobatics' to be overhauled three times as
frequently - i.e. every 2 years rather than every 6 years.
I once suffered a potentially catastrophic propeller failure - a counter-weight
detached; went through the spinner and took about 1-foot off a blade tip. The
resulting vibration broke instruments, and I thought the engine would depart!
Since then I would not dream of using an uncertificated prop.=20
I am totally biased in favour of MT, but then so was every competitor at this year's
World Championship!!
Richard Goode
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Mob: +44 (0) 7768 610389
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
dangerous content by the http://www.invictawiz.com
MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | cjpilot710(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Yak-List Digest: 21 Msgs - 08/10/05 |
Mike Walch 562-425-0997 or Frank Varanacar 714-675-7595 (another FAST check
pilot out there)
-----Original Message-----
From: Cj6sly(at)cs.com
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Yak-List Digest: 21 Msgs - 08/10/05
In a message dated 8/11/2005 1:02:40 AM Mountain Standard Time,
yak-list-digest(at)matronics.com writes:
>
>
> If anyone has email and/or phone number contact info for Mike Walsh, of
> Chino, California, please forward it to me off List at Mfilucci(at)aol.com
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>
Me too,
Skip Slyfield
cj6sly(at)cs.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DaBear <dabear(at)damned.org> |
I had my 2 blade Russian prop refinished by Whirlwind. I was extremely
happy with the prop when it came back except that I had to re-balance
(static and dynamic) the blades. :-) Can't fault them for that.
Al
brian olofsson wrote:
>
>Planning on refinishing prop blades with this annual. Initially planned on sending
off to whirlwind but I understand a number of members have done it on their
own. any comment tips would be greatly appreciated. Blades have several tiny
cracks on front 1/2" long in the paint, approx. 1 inch apart these are really
hair line maybe 3 or four on each side. there's also the crack in the paint
where the wood goes in the steal hub. also some small cracks were the blade spreads
out form the neck. I've seen all these same cracks on other props at OSH
this year.Yes the guy with the magnifying glass on you prop was me. It would
sure be nice to have a book on what was acceptable and what was not. Any comments
on balancing.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kevin Pilling" <pilling.k(at)btconnect.com> |
I think its more to do with not being able to reset the fuel shut off from
inside the cockpit than any engine parameters.
kp
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Bernier" <JBernier(at)dart.org>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re:
>
> The question begs to be asked, "Why not use the fuel cut off valve?",
> "What harm would be caused
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com> |
Maybe I'm missing something, but why would you not be able "to reset the
fuel shut off from inside the cockpit" if you shut it off from inside the
cockpit to begin with?
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Pilling" <pilling.k(at)btconnect.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:
>
> I think its more to do with not being able to reset the fuel shut off from
> inside the cockpit than any engine parameters.
>
> kp
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Bernier" <JBernier(at)dart.org>
> To:
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re:
>
>
>>
>> The question begs to be asked, "Why not use the fuel cut off valve?",
>> "What harm would be caused
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com |
| From: | "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser(at)gs.com> |
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Propellers
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:36:27 -0400
Richard,
Are you now sponsored by MT :))
Gus
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Goode
Subject: Yak-List: Propellers
-->
I suspect many aerobatic pilots are blissfully unaware of the incredible
increases in propeller loading that is caused by aerobatics, and
particularly 'modern' aerobatics with multiple-snaps and gyroscopics etc.
MT require props used for 'unlimited aerobatics' to be overhauled three
times as frequently - i.e. every 2 years rather than every 6 years.
I once suffered a potentially catastrophic propeller failure - a
counter-weight detached; went through the spinner and took about 1-foot off
a blade tip. The resulting vibration broke instruments, and I thought the
engine would depart!
Since then I would not dream of using an uncertificated prop.
I am totally biased in favour of MT, but then so was every competitor at
this year's World Championship!!
Richard Goode
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Mob: +44 (0) 7768 610389
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
dangerous content by the http://www.invictawiz.com MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bitterlich GS11 Mark G <BitterlichMG(at)cherrypoint.usmc.mil> |
There are probably many good reasons for pulling the emergency shutoff valve
after engine shutdown.
I have ignored all of them and have never shut off the fuel on my 50 since
the day I purchased it. I simply kill the engine with the mag after a
scavenge run, and letting the engine return to low idle (20% or so). I
guess that is bad ju'ju', but so far I have not had a problem doing that for
the last 5 years or so.
Mark
N50YK
-----Original Message-----
From: Walter Lannon [mailto:wlannon(at)cablerocket.com]
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:
Do you gentlemen ever read your manuals?
Shut down procedure for the Huosai and the M14 is the same (except for RPM
or % RPM).
It is essentially as follows:
1. Cooling and scavange run
2. Reduce to idle
3. Ignition off and throttle smoothly to full open
4. AFTER engine stopped, close throttle, close fuel valve.
Ref:
M14P manual, Sec 72.00.00 Task Card 203
Check caution note pg.2 - NEVER shut down by closing fuel shut-off valve.
Cheers;
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Bernier" <JBernier(at)dart.org>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re:
>
> The question begs to be asked, "Why not use the fuel cut off valve?",
> "What harm would be caused?"
> Not that anyone would attempt this avenue, but understanding "Why" would
> lead us to further understanding the workings of our engines. At first
> thought I would assume that the engine itself would not be affected, but
> maybe the carburetor diaphragm would. Closer to the shut off valve is the
> fuel pump. Would this have enough fuel, acting as a lubricant, to ensure
> it longevity?
> Jim B
>
>>>> viperdoc(at)mindspring.com 08/11/05 10:12 AM >>>
>
> My mistake, I did leave off the turn mags to 0 then pull the fuel cutoff
> to
> full aft. It is in the type written original Russian translation of the
> Pilots Manuel the I got a copy of from Scott Patterson (one of the
> original
> US YAK owners). Where it says cool little things like " advance " for
> manifold pressure and gives a 10 or so page disortation on flying the
> landing pattern.
> Doc
>
>
>> [Original Message]
>> From: Wendy Jenks <godsbreath75(at)yahoo.com>
>> To:
>> Date: 8/11/2005 9:33:33 AM
>> Subject: Yak-List: Re:
>>
>>
>> and if the russians say so than that must be the Gods honest truth.
>>
>>
>> From: "Fraser, Gus"
>> To: "'yak-list(at)matronics.com'"
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
>>
>> Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off
> with
>> the engine running ???
>>
>> An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
>> switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that NEVER
>> should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
>>
>> Gus
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc Kemp
>> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>>
>> -->
>>
>> Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the engine
>> running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not "scavaging"
>> the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30
> sec.
>> and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to
>> close
>> the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
>> Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it the
>> push rod in the compressor?
>> Doc
>>
>>
>> > [Original Message]
>> > From: Jim Ivey
>> > To:
>> > Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
>> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>> >
>> >
>> > Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
>> > OSH
>> he
>> > stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
>> > Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine
>> > pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
>> > the pump
>> piston
>> > glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
>> > straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt
>> > respectfully).
>> I
>> > use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about things.
>> > George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
>> > compatible with the compressor without worries.
>> >
>> > Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
> pump.
>> > The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
>> > snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
>> > electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
>> > wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
>> > compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
>> > fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
>> >
>> > Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
>> > shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
>> > should I
>> look
>> > for clues to other problems?
>> >
>> > Jim Ivey
>> > N46YK
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Blessings,
>> Wendy
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Martinez <erniel29(at)gmail.com> |
My CJ has the fuel shutoff valve safety wired with the break away
stuff. I always assumed it was for emergency use only.
Ernie
On 8/12/05, Bitterlich GS11 Mark G wrote:
>
>
> There are probably many good reasons for pulling the emergency shutoff valve
> after engine shutdown.
>
> I have ignored all of them and have never shut off the fuel on my 50 since
> the day I purchased it. I simply kill the engine with the mag after a
> scavenge run, and letting the engine return to low idle (20% or so). I
> guess that is bad ju'ju', but so far I have not had a problem doing that for
> the last 5 years or so.
>
> Mark
> N50YK
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Walter Lannon [mailto:wlannon(at)cablerocket.com]
> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:
>
>
>
> Do you gentlemen ever read your manuals?
>
> Shut down procedure for the Huosai and the M14 is the same (except for RPM
> or % RPM).
> It is essentially as follows:
>
> 1. Cooling and scavange run
> 2. Reduce to idle
> 3. Ignition off and throttle smoothly to full open
> 4. AFTER engine stopped, close throttle, close fuel valve.
>
> Ref:
> M14P manual, Sec 72.00.00 Task Card 203
> Check caution note pg.2 - NEVER shut down by closing fuel shut-off valve.
>
> Cheers;
> Walt
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Bernier" <JBernier(at)dart.org>
> To:
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re:
>
>
> >
> > The question begs to be asked, "Why not use the fuel cut off valve?",
> > "What harm would be caused?"
> > Not that anyone would attempt this avenue, but understanding "Why" would
> > lead us to further understanding the workings of our engines. At first
> > thought I would assume that the engine itself would not be affected, but
> > maybe the carburetor diaphragm would. Closer to the shut off valve is the
> > fuel pump. Would this have enough fuel, acting as a lubricant, to ensure
> > it longevity?
> > Jim B
> >
> >>>> viperdoc(at)mindspring.com 08/11/05 10:12 AM >>>
> >
> > My mistake, I did leave off the turn mags to 0 then pull the fuel cutoff
> > to
> > full aft. It is in the type written original Russian translation of the
> > Pilots Manuel the I got a copy of from Scott Patterson (one of the
> > original
> > US YAK owners). Where it says cool little things like " advance " for
> > manifold pressure and gives a 10 or so page disortation on flying the
> > landing pattern.
> > Doc
> >
> >
> >> [Original Message]
> >> From: Wendy Jenks <godsbreath75(at)yahoo.com>
> >> To:
> >> Date: 8/11/2005 9:33:33 AM
> >> Subject: Yak-List: Re:
> >>
> >>
> >> and if the russians say so than that must be the Gods honest truth.
> >>
> >>
> >> From: "Fraser, Gus"
> >> To: "'yak-list(at)matronics.com'"
> >> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> >> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
> >>
> >> Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off
> > with
> >> the engine running ???
> >>
> >> An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
> >> switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that NEVER
> >> should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
> >>
> >> Gus
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
> >> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc Kemp
> >> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> >> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> >>
> >> -->
> >>
> >> Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the engine
> >> running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not "scavaging"
> >> the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30
> > sec.
> >> and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to
> >> close
> >> the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
> >> Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it the
> >> push rod in the compressor?
> >> Doc
> >>
> >>
> >> > [Original Message]
> >> > From: Jim Ivey
> >> > To:
> >> > Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
> >> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
> >> > OSH
> >> he
> >> > stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
> >> > Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine
> >> > pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
> >> > the pump
> >> piston
> >> > glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
> >> > straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt
> >> > respectfully).
> >> I
> >> > use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about things.
> >> > George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
> >> > compatible with the compressor without worries.
> >> >
> >> > Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
> > pump.
> >> > The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
> >> > snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
> >> > electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
> >> > wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
> >> > compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
> >> > fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
> >> >
> >> > Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
> >> > shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
> >> > should I
> >> look
> >> > for clues to other problems?
> >> >
> >> > Jim Ivey
> >> > N46YK
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Blessings,
> >> Wendy
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com> |
I still haven't figured out what the benefit is to pulling the emergency
shutoff valve after engine shutdown. I, like you Mark, have been operating
without pulling the emergency shutoff valve for 6 years now without a
problem.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bitterlich GS11 Mark G" <BitterlichMG(at)cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re:
>
>
>
> There are probably many good reasons for pulling the emergency shutoff
> valve
> after engine shutdown.
>
> I have ignored all of them and have never shut off the fuel on my 50 since
> the day I purchased it. I simply kill the engine with the mag after a
> scavenge run, and letting the engine return to low idle (20% or so). I
> guess that is bad ju'ju', but so far I have not had a problem doing that
> for
> the last 5 years or so.
>
> Mark
> N50YK
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Walter Lannon [mailto:wlannon(at)cablerocket.com]
> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:
>
>
> Do you gentlemen ever read your manuals?
>
> Shut down procedure for the Huosai and the M14 is the same (except for RPM
> or % RPM).
> It is essentially as follows:
>
> 1. Cooling and scavange run
> 2. Reduce to idle
> 3. Ignition off and throttle smoothly to full open
> 4. AFTER engine stopped, close throttle, close fuel valve.
>
> Ref:
> M14P manual, Sec 72.00.00 Task Card 203
> Check caution note pg.2 - NEVER shut down by closing fuel shut-off valve.
>
> Cheers;
> Walt
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Bernier" <JBernier(at)dart.org>
> To:
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re:
>
>
>>
>> The question begs to be asked, "Why not use the fuel cut off valve?",
>> "What harm would be caused?"
>> Not that anyone would attempt this avenue, but understanding "Why" would
>> lead us to further understanding the workings of our engines. At first
>> thought I would assume that the engine itself would not be affected, but
>> maybe the carburetor diaphragm would. Closer to the shut off valve is the
>> fuel pump. Would this have enough fuel, acting as a lubricant, to ensure
>> it longevity?
>> Jim B
>>
>>>>> viperdoc(at)mindspring.com 08/11/05 10:12 AM >>>
>>
>>
>> My mistake, I did leave off the turn mags to 0 then pull the fuel cutoff
>> to
>> full aft. It is in the type written original Russian translation of the
>> Pilots Manuel the I got a copy of from Scott Patterson (one of the
>> original
>> US YAK owners). Where it says cool little things like " advance " for
>> manifold pressure and gives a 10 or so page disortation on flying the
>> landing pattern.
>> Doc
>>
>>
>>> [Original Message]
>>> From: Wendy Jenks <godsbreath75(at)yahoo.com>
>>> To:
>>> Date: 8/11/2005 9:33:33 AM
>>> Subject: Yak-List: Re:
>>>
>>>
>>> and if the russians say so than that must be the Gods honest truth.
>>>
>>> owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com wrote:--> Yak-List message posted
>>> by:
>>>
>>> From: "Fraser, Gus"
>>> To: "'yak-list(at)matronics.com'"
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>>> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
>>>
>>> Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off
>> with
>>> the engine running ???
>>>
>>> An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
>>> switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that
>>> NEVER
>>> should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
>>>
>>> Gus
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc Kemp
>>> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>>>
>>> -->
>>>
>>> Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the engine
>>> running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not "scavaging"
>>> the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30
>> sec.
>>> and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to
>>> close
>>> the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
>>> Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it the
>>> push rod in the compressor?
>>> Doc
>>>
>>>
>>> > [Original Message]
>>> > From: Jim Ivey
>>> > To:
>>> > Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
>>> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
>>> > OSH
>>> he
>>> > stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
>>> > Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the engine
>>> > pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
>>> > the pump
>>> piston
>>> > glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
>>> > straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt
>>> > respectfully).
>>> I
>>> > use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about
>>> > things.
>>> > George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were also
>>> > compatible with the compressor without worries.
>>> >
>>> > Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
>> pump.
>>> > The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
>>> > snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
>>> > electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
>>> > wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
>>> > compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
>>> > fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
>>> >
>>> > Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
>>> > shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
>>> > should I
>>> look
>>> > for clues to other problems?
>>> >
>>> > Jim Ivey
>>> > N46YK
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> Blessings,
>>> Wendy
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com> |
Wired or not, you are 100% correct Ernie. It is for emergency shut off of
the fuel supply to the engine. One can assume the most logical reason to
use it would be a fire under the cowling.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernest Martinez" <erniel29(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:
>
> My CJ has the fuel shutoff valve safety wired with the break away
> stuff. I always assumed it was for emergency use only.
>
> Ernie
>
> On 8/12/05, Bitterlich GS11 Mark G
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> There are probably many good reasons for pulling the emergency shutoff
>> valve
>> after engine shutdown.
>>
>> I have ignored all of them and have never shut off the fuel on my 50
>> since
>> the day I purchased it. I simply kill the engine with the mag after a
>> scavenge run, and letting the engine return to low idle (20% or so). I
>> guess that is bad ju'ju', but so far I have not had a problem doing that
>> for
>> the last 5 years or so.
>>
>> Mark
>> N50YK
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Walter Lannon [mailto:wlannon(at)cablerocket.com]
>> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:
>>
>>
>>
>> Do you gentlemen ever read your manuals?
>>
>> Shut down procedure for the Huosai and the M14 is the same (except for
>> RPM
>> or % RPM).
>> It is essentially as follows:
>>
>> 1. Cooling and scavange run
>> 2. Reduce to idle
>> 3. Ignition off and throttle smoothly to full open
>> 4. AFTER engine stopped, close throttle, close fuel valve.
>>
>> Ref:
>> M14P manual, Sec 72.00.00 Task Card 203
>> Check caution note pg.2 - NEVER shut down by closing fuel shut-off valve.
>>
>> Cheers;
>> Walt
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jim Bernier" <JBernier(at)dart.org>
>> To:
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re:
>>
>>
>> >
>> > The question begs to be asked, "Why not use the fuel cut off valve?",
>> > "What harm would be caused?"
>> > Not that anyone would attempt this avenue, but understanding "Why"
>> > would
>> > lead us to further understanding the workings of our engines. At first
>> > thought I would assume that the engine itself would not be affected,
>> > but
>> > maybe the carburetor diaphragm would. Closer to the shut off valve is
>> > the
>> > fuel pump. Would this have enough fuel, acting as a lubricant, to
>> > ensure
>> > it longevity?
>> > Jim B
>> >
>> >>>> viperdoc(at)mindspring.com 08/11/05 10:12 AM >>>
>> >
>> >
>> > My mistake, I did leave off the turn mags to 0 then pull the fuel
>> > cutoff
>> > to
>> > full aft. It is in the type written original Russian translation of the
>> > Pilots Manuel the I got a copy of from Scott Patterson (one of the
>> > original
>> > US YAK owners). Where it says cool little things like " advance " for
>> > manifold pressure and gives a 10 or so page disortation on flying the
>> > landing pattern.
>> > Doc
>> >
>> >
>> >> [Original Message]
>> >> From: Wendy Jenks <godsbreath75(at)yahoo.com>
>> >> To:
>> >> Date: 8/11/2005 9:33:33 AM
>> >> Subject: Yak-List: Re:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> and if the russians say so than that must be the Gods honest truth.
>> >>
>> >> owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com wrote:--> Yak-List message posted
>> >> by:
>> >>
>> >> From: "Fraser, Gus"
>> >> To: "'yak-list(at)matronics.com'"
>> >> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>> >> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
>> >>
>> >> Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off
>> > with
>> >> the engine running ???
>> >>
>> >> An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
>> >> switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that
>> >> NEVER
>> >> should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
>> >>
>> >> Gus
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> >> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc
>> >> Kemp
>> >> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
>> >> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>> >>
>> >> -->
>> >>
>> >> Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the
>> >> engine
>> >> running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not
>> >> "scavaging"
>> >> the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30
>> > sec.
>> >> and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to
>> >> close
>> >> the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
>> >> Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it
>> >> the
>> >> push rod in the compressor?
>> >> Doc
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > [Original Message]
>> >> > From: Jim Ivey
>> >> > To:
>> >> > Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
>> >> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
>> >> > OSH
>> >> he
>> >> > stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
>> >> > Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the
>> >> > engine
>> >> > pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
>> >> > the pump
>> >> piston
>> >> > glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
>> >> > straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt
>> >> > respectfully).
>> >> I
>> >> > use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about
>> >> > things.
>> >> > George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were
>> >> > also
>> >> > compatible with the compressor without worries.
>> >> >
>> >> > Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
>> > pump.
>> >> > The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
>> >> > snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
>> >> > electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
>> >> > wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
>> >> > compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
>> >> > fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
>> >> >
>> >> > Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
>> >> > shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
>> >> > should I
>> >> look
>> >> > for clues to other problems?
>> >> >
>> >> > Jim Ivey
>> >> > N46YK
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Blessings,
>> >> Wendy
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com |
| From: | "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser(at)gs.com> |
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re:
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 13:16:33 -0400
I think if I were coming in for an off field I would want to shut it before
impacting to reduce the risk of a post crash fire.
Gus
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:
-->
Wired or not, you are 100% correct Ernie. It is for emergency shut off of
the fuel supply to the engine. One can assume the most logical reason to
use it would be a fire under the cowling.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernest Martinez" <erniel29(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:
>
> My CJ has the fuel shutoff valve safety wired with the break away
> stuff. I always assumed it was for emergency use only.
>
> Ernie
>
> On 8/12/05, Bitterlich GS11 Mark G
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> There are probably many good reasons for pulling the emergency shutoff
>> valve
>> after engine shutdown.
>>
>> I have ignored all of them and have never shut off the fuel on my 50
>> since
>> the day I purchased it. I simply kill the engine with the mag after a
>> scavenge run, and letting the engine return to low idle (20% or so). I
>> guess that is bad ju'ju', but so far I have not had a problem doing that
>> for
>> the last 5 years or so.
>>
>> Mark
>> N50YK
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Walter Lannon [mailto:wlannon(at)cablerocket.com]
>> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:
>>
>>
>>
>> Do you gentlemen ever read your manuals?
>>
>> Shut down procedure for the Huosai and the M14 is the same (except for
>> RPM
>> or % RPM).
>> It is essentially as follows:
>>
>> 1. Cooling and scavange run
>> 2. Reduce to idle
>> 3. Ignition off and throttle smoothly to full open
>> 4. AFTER engine stopped, close throttle, close fuel valve.
>>
>> Ref:
>> M14P manual, Sec 72.00.00 Task Card 203
>> Check caution note pg.2 - NEVER shut down by closing fuel shut-off valve.
>>
>> Cheers;
>> Walt
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jim Bernier" <JBernier(at)dart.org>
>> To:
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re:
>>
>>
>> >
>> > The question begs to be asked, "Why not use the fuel cut off valve?",
>> > "What harm would be caused?"
>> > Not that anyone would attempt this avenue, but understanding "Why"
>> > would
>> > lead us to further understanding the workings of our engines. At first
>> > thought I would assume that the engine itself would not be affected,
>> > but
>> > maybe the carburetor diaphragm would. Closer to the shut off valve is
>> > the
>> > fuel pump. Would this have enough fuel, acting as a lubricant, to
>> > ensure
>> > it longevity?
>> > Jim B
>> >
>> >>>> viperdoc(at)mindspring.com 08/11/05 10:12 AM >>>
>> >
>> >
>> > My mistake, I did leave off the turn mags to 0 then pull the fuel
>> > cutoff
>> > to
>> > full aft. It is in the type written original Russian translation of the
>> > Pilots Manuel the I got a copy of from Scott Patterson (one of the
>> > original
>> > US YAK owners). Where it says cool little things like " advance " for
>> > manifold pressure and gives a 10 or so page disortation on flying the
>> > landing pattern.
>> > Doc
>> >
>> >
>> >> [Original Message]
>> >> From: Wendy Jenks <godsbreath75(at)yahoo.com>
>> >> To:
>> >> Date: 8/11/2005 9:33:33 AM
>> >> Subject: Yak-List: Re:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> and if the russians say so than that must be the Gods honest truth.
>> >>
>> >> owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com wrote:--> Yak-List message posted
>> >> by:
>> >>
>> >> From: "Fraser, Gus"
>> >> To: "'yak-list(at)matronics.com'"
>> >> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>> >> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:00:23 -0400
>> >>
>> >> Show me where in the Russian manual it says to close the fuel shut off
>> > with
>> >> the engine running ???
>> >>
>> >> An M14P should be stopped as you say but instead of shutting the valve
>> >> switch off the mags at idle. I have been told by many Russians that
>> >> NEVER
>> >> should the engine be stopped buy shutting the valve.
>> >>
>> >> Gus
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> >> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc
>> >> Kemp
>> >> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
>> >> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>> >>
>> >> -->
>> >>
>> >> Shearing of the compressor shaft is generally associated with the
>> >> engine
>> >> running backwards after shutdown. That is usually due to not
>> >> "scavaging"
>> >> the engine before shutting down. IE: running the %RPM up to 70% for 30
>> > sec.
>> >> and slowly pulling back to idle shut off. The Russian manual says to
>> >> close
>> >> the fuel shut off valve when the power is reduced to idle.
>> >> Next question? Was it the compressor shear pin that let go or was it
>> >> the
>> >> push rod in the compressor?
>> >> Doc
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > [Original Message]
>> >> > From: Jim Ivey
>> >> > To:
>> >> > Date: 8/10/2005 2:35:55 PM
>> >> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Oshkosh M14P seminar
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Talk about coincidence. Upon attending George Coy's M14P seminar at
>> >> > OSH
>> >> he
>> >> > stated that Aeroshell 15W-50 is incompatible with the M14P.
>> >> > Apparently it is the only oil he has encountered that ruins the
>> >> > engine
>> >> > pneumatic compressor within about 2 hours of flight time. Apparently
>> >> > the pump
>> >> piston
>> >> > glazes against the cylinder when in contact with 15W-50. George uses
>> >> > straight-weight AD Aeroshell (W100 or W160, 50wt and 60wt
>> >> > respectfully).
>> >> I
>> >> > use the same stuff he does and so was feeling pretty good about
>> >> > things.
>> >> > George said most other types of oils being used by M14 folks were
>> >> > also
>> >> > compatible with the compressor without worries.
>> >> >
>> >> > Wouldn't you know over Kansas on the way home from OSH I lost my air
>> > pump.
>> >> > The engine only has 200 hours on it but no more air charging and the
>> >> > snot bottle is completely depressurized. Thanks to my on-board
>> >> > electric air compressor I was able to complete the flight without
>> >> > wanting for air. It pumps at about 60% the rate of the engine
>> >> > compressor, which is plenty fine for topping off the system. Won't
>> >> > fly it until fixed now that it's in the hangar.
>> >> >
>> >> > Anybody know what typically causes the engine-driven compressor to
>> >> > shear it's shaft? Is this just a common part of M14P operations or
>> >> > should I
>> >> look
>> >> > for clues to other problems?
>> >> >
>> >> > Jim Ivey
>> >> > N46YK
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Blessings,
>> >> Wendy
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DaBear <dabear(at)damned.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Yak Air Bottles |
Doug,
Stupid question, but how about going the reverse route for air
bottles. Having someone modify brackets/system to use standard
scuba/air bottles. That makes the modification easy and replacing
standard bottles later very cheap.
Al
Doug Sapp wrote:
>
>Yakers,
>I'm on it! I have 3 companies looking at the task and will be getting back
>to me with bids, However I do not have a set of Yak 52 tanks to use as a
>pattern. Anyone out there have a set of junk Yak 52 tanks to donate to the
>cause??
>
>Always Yakin,
>Doug Sapp
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DaBear <dabear(at)damned.org> |
Anyone know what the cost of the conversion from a Yak-52 to a Yak-52TD
is? I wonder if it could be done to a CJ?
Al
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Dalton" <sdalton(at)goeaston.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Fire Cock (fuel shut off lever) |
Do you gentlemen ever read your manuals?
Shut down procedure for the Huosai and the M14 is the same (except for
RPM
or % RPM).
It is essentially as follows:
1. Cooling and scavange run
2. Reduce to idle
3. Ignition off and throttle smoothly to full open
4. AFTER engine stopped, close throttle, close fuel valve.
Y'all, just FYI,
I agree that's what the manual says. Many engines I've flown behind
have similar procedures. And that's what I did when my plane and engine
where both brand new. But, several times I had nice big flaming fires
in the intake because pushing the throttle up dumped fuel into the
intake (via the accelerator pump), which did not get completely sucked
into the engine before it quit spinning. This fuel ran down into the
bottom of the intake and ignited. Luckily, someone was there the first
time to yell to me and I restarted the engine to put out the fire.
However, on the next, and last fire, I was alone and had climbed out of
the plane and walked away. Then wondered, "What's that smell"? It was
the paint burning off the bottom of the intake!! Amazing how fast one
can climb in and hit the start button to suck in the flames! :-)
Soooo, for the last 4 years/400 hours I have stopped pushing the
throttle up after mags off, with no problems. And I have a nice Halon
extinguisher ready in my hanger.
Cheers,
Steve Dalton
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
Bear,
Go on the Termikus website. He is polite enough to tell you.
www.Termikus.com.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: DaBear <dabear(at)damned.org>
> To:
> Date: 8/12/2005 6:50:39 PM
> Subject: Yak-List: Yak TD
>
>
> Anyone know what the cost of the conversion from a Yak-52 to a Yak-52TD
> is? I wonder if it could be done to a CJ?
>
> Al
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Fire Cock (fuel shut off lever) |
Well it certainly looks like I started a fire storm with that last brain
fart on fuel cut offs.
For FYI...I really do shut down my M-14 by pushing the power up to 70% for
30 potatoes, pull the "advance" back to about 30% for about 5 potatoes,
mags 0, and I neither slowly open the manifold pressure nor do I close the
"fire cock". Takes to long to reprime the blank engine if I were to pull
the fuel cut off. So far no fire in the intake and the prop has not run
backwards. And Yepper, we have fire exstinguishers all around the hanger.
So, that's the rest of the story...take it away Paul.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Steve Dalton <sdalton(at)goeaston.net>
> To:
> Date: 8/12/2005 8:17:57 PM
> Subject: Yak-List: RE: Fire Cock (fuel shut off lever)
>
>
>
>
> Do you gentlemen ever read your manuals?
>
> Shut down procedure for the Huosai and the M14 is the same (except for
> RPM
> or % RPM).
> It is essentially as follows:
>
> 1. Cooling and scavange run
> 2. Reduce to idle
> 3. Ignition off and throttle smoothly to full open
> 4. AFTER engine stopped, close throttle, close fuel valve.
>
> Y'all, just FYI,
>
> I agree that's what the manual says. Many engines I've flown behind
> have similar procedures. And that's what I did when my plane and engine
> where both brand new. But, several times I had nice big flaming fires
> in the intake because pushing the throttle up dumped fuel into the
> intake (via the accelerator pump), which did not get completely sucked
> into the engine before it quit spinning. This fuel ran down into the
> bottom of the intake and ignited. Luckily, someone was there the first
> time to yell to me and I restarted the engine to put out the fire.
>
> However, on the next, and last fire, I was alone and had climbed out of
> the plane and walked away. Then wondered, "What's that smell"? It was
> the paint burning off the bottom of the intake!! Amazing how fast one
> can climb in and hit the start button to suck in the flames! :-)
>
> Soooo, for the last 4 years/400 hours I have stopped pushing the
> throttle up after mags off, with no problems. And I have a nice Halon
> extinguisher ready in my hanger.
>
> Cheers,
> Steve Dalton
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walter Lannon" <wlannon(at)cablerocket.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Fire Cock (fuel shut off lever) |
Steve, et al-----
I probably should have noted that I do not precisely follow the manual shut
down procedure either. I fly 5 different CJ's occasionally (Huosai and
M14P) and have never yet had to open the throttle at shut-down. I would do
that VERY slowly only if the engine wanted to run on but have not yet seen
any tendancy for that. Also agree with other comments that there is no real
need to close the fuel shut-off valve other than to confirm it does operate.
The point of my post was simply to remind pilots of the manual procedure
since some of the methods mentioned were not correct.
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Dalton" <sdalton(at)goeaston.net>
Subject: Yak-List: RE: Fire Cock (fuel shut off lever)
>
>
>
>
> Do you gentlemen ever read your manuals?
>
> Shut down procedure for the Huosai and the M14 is the same (except for
> RPM
> or % RPM).
> It is essentially as follows:
>
> 1. Cooling and scavange run
> 2. Reduce to idle
> 3. Ignition off and throttle smoothly to full open
> 4. AFTER engine stopped, close throttle, close fuel valve.
>
> Y'all, just FYI,
>
> I agree that's what the manual says. Many engines I've flown behind
> have similar procedures. And that's what I did when my plane and engine
> where both brand new. But, several times I had nice big flaming fires
> in the intake because pushing the throttle up dumped fuel into the
> intake (via the accelerator pump), which did not get completely sucked
> into the engine before it quit spinning. This fuel ran down into the
> bottom of the intake and ignited. Luckily, someone was there the first
> time to yell to me and I restarted the engine to put out the fire.
>
> However, on the next, and last fire, I was alone and had climbed out of
> the plane and walked away. Then wondered, "What's that smell"? It was
> the paint burning off the bottom of the intake!! Amazing how fast one
> can climb in and hit the start button to suck in the flames! :-)
>
> Soooo, for the last 4 years/400 hours I have stopped pushing the
> throttle up after mags off, with no problems. And I have a nice Halon
> extinguisher ready in my hanger.
>
> Cheers,
> Steve Dalton
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Jefferies YAK UK Ltd <mark.j(at)yakuk.com> |
and more info at www.yakuk.com/yak52TD.asp
It was done to the CJ, in fact it was a tail dragger first, the CJ5. Get one of
those and up engine it and you have what your looking for. Simple as that. I
belive there are some in USA with big engines.
A couple of CJ5 being offered in china at pressent at 250,000USD. hardly an investment!!
Just the seller has expectations that the buyers in the west have pockets
full of gold.
br, mj
Anyone know what the cost of the conversion from a Yak-52 to a Yak-52TD
is? I wonder if it could be done to a CJ?
Al
Best regards, Mark
www.yakuk.com
+44 (0)1767 651156 office +44 (0)7785 538 317 mobile
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel Fortin" <fougapilot(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Fire Cock (fuel shut off lever) |
Ever since we put the 14P in our CJ, we have been opening the throttle
slowly at shut down. Never did have any problems because of it. As for the
fire cock, the only time I close it is when I land for my annual inspection.
Just want to check it still work.
D
>From: "Walter Lannon" <wlannon(at)cablerocket.com>
>Reply-To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: Re: Yak-List: RE: Fire Cock (fuel shut off lever)
>Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 21:42:07 -0700
>
>
>Steve, et al-----
>
>I probably should have noted that I do not precisely follow the manual
>shut
>down procedure either. I fly 5 different CJ's occasionally (Huosai and
>M14P) and have never yet had to open the throttle at shut-down. I would do
>that VERY slowly only if the engine wanted to run on but have not yet seen
>any tendancy for that. Also agree with other comments that there is no real
>need to close the fuel shut-off valve other than to confirm it does
>operate.
>
>The point of my post was simply to remind pilots of the manual procedure
>since some of the methods mentioned were not correct.
>
>Walt
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Steve Dalton" <sdalton(at)goeaston.net>
>To:
>Subject: Yak-List: RE: Fire Cock (fuel shut off lever)
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Do you gentlemen ever read your manuals?
> >
> > Shut down procedure for the Huosai and the M14 is the same (except for
> > RPM
> > or % RPM).
> > It is essentially as follows:
> >
> > 1. Cooling and scavange run
> > 2. Reduce to idle
> > 3. Ignition off and throttle smoothly to full open
> > 4. AFTER engine stopped, close throttle, close fuel valve.
> >
> > Y'all, just FYI,
> >
> > I agree that's what the manual says. Many engines I've flown behind
> > have similar procedures. And that's what I did when my plane and engine
> > where both brand new. But, several times I had nice big flaming fires
> > in the intake because pushing the throttle up dumped fuel into the
> > intake (via the accelerator pump), which did not get completely sucked
> > into the engine before it quit spinning. This fuel ran down into the
> > bottom of the intake and ignited. Luckily, someone was there the first
> > time to yell to me and I restarted the engine to put out the fire.
> >
> > However, on the next, and last fire, I was alone and had climbed out of
> > the plane and walked away. Then wondered, "What's that smell"? It was
> > the paint burning off the bottom of the intake!! Amazing how fast one
> > can climb in and hit the start button to suck in the flames! :-)
> >
> > Soooo, for the last 4 years/400 hours I have stopped pushing the
> > throttle up after mags off, with no problems. And I have a nice Halon
> > extinguisher ready in my hanger.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Steve Dalton
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver(at)earthlink.net> |
DOC
It's http://www.termikas.com/
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Doc Kemp
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Yak TD
-->
Bear,
Go on the Termikus website. He is polite enough to tell you.
www.Termikus.com. Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: DaBear <dabear(at)damned.org>
> To:
> Date: 8/12/2005 6:50:39 PM
> Subject: Yak-List: Yak TD
>
>
> Anyone know what the cost of the conversion from a Yak-52 to a Yak-52TD
> is? I wonder if it could be done to a CJ?
>
> Al
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ADE <coolade(at)cox.net> |
Inquired about 6 months ago--kit was $50,000, they modify your wings or
exchange, they said it could be installed in 125 man/hrs.
On Aug 12, 2005, at 6:52 PM, DaBear wrote:
>
> Anyone know what the cost of the conversion from a Yak-52 to a Yak-52TD
> is? I wonder if it could be done to a CJ?
>
> Al
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver(at)earthlink.net> |
"Inquired about 6 months ago--kit was $50,000"
50K for a freakin' taildragger kit? 50K will buy me an fastbuild F1 Rocket
kit. I can cruise at 250MPH with that. Why would an idiot put that much into
a YAK TD conversion? Better yet, how about that Radial Rocket kit? 44K for
that kit and then you really have something. I can use the engine out of my
52 and then junk the rest and still be ahead. But 50K for just a TD
conversion? Somebody ain't pricing things right.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ADE
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak TD
Inquired about 6 months ago--kit was $50,000, they modify your wings or
exchange, they said it could be installed in 125 man/hrs.
On Aug 12, 2005, at 6:52 PM, DaBear wrote:
>
> Anyone know what the cost of the conversion from a Yak-52 to a Yak-52TD
> is? I wonder if it could be done to a CJ?
>
> Al
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Payne" <cpayne(at)joimail.com> |
Red Air Fling Attendees to Be,
There is a proud tradition of Unit Dinners in combat and combat close support
units throughout U.S. military history, unlike rather dignified affairs such as
Captain's Mess on-board big carriers or Regimental Dinners in the UK; what I'm
talking about are those raucous Animal House affairs of yesteryear where no
one was spared the jibe...well almost, lighten up on the Skipper, else one could
pull extra duty at Dawn. No damage to the facilities please but we MUST have
a Sat. night "Awards" banquet.
Awards? Yep. The obvious are:
Chairman's Choice for Best CJ (Sorry but Mao can't be present, he's laid up for
awhile)
Comrade's Choice for Best Yak (Stalin just left the house, with Elvis of course)
Glorious Hero of the RedStars (Best formation pilot)
Order of the RedStar (Most Improved formation pilot)
Siberian Gulag Award (Worst screwup, if earned, otherwise filed)
Help, I need a few more suggestions please. Bear in mind that Red is our color
here not Blue so forgo the Whisky Delta jokes and Longest Pitot Tube awards here.
Craig Payne
cpayne(at)joimail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver(at)earthlink.net> |
Just got a price quote on the taildragger kit from Termikas. 45,000.00
($81,661.54) for the kit. 10,000.00 ($18,147.01) is refunded when they get
your old wings back. That comes to $63514. I think that is for a turnkey
conversion.
Couldn't determine from the quote if you can buy the kit and do the
installation yourself. Been wanting to do this conversion for awhile now but
at that price I can design and build my own composite wings.
Hmmmmm? That Radial Rocket is looking better all the time.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Frank Haertlein
Subject: Yak-List: Yak TD
-->
"Inquired about 6 months ago--kit was $50,000"
50K for a freakin' taildragger kit? 50K will buy me an fastbuild F1 Rocket
kit. I can cruise at 250MPH with that. Why would an idiot put that much into
a YAK TD conversion? Better yet, how about that Radial Rocket kit? 44K for
that kit and then you really have something. I can use the engine out of my
52 and then junk the rest and still be ahead. But 50K for just a TD
conversion? Somebody ain't pricing things right. Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ADE
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak TD
Inquired about 6 months ago--kit was $50,000, they modify your wings or
exchange, they said it could be installed in 125 man/hrs.
On Aug 12, 2005, at 6:52 PM, DaBear wrote:
>
> Anyone know what the cost of the conversion from a Yak-52 to a Yak-52TD
> is? I wonder if it could be done to a CJ?
>
> Al
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Stephen Fox <jsfox(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Selma Buffonery |
Definitely need a Hangar Queen award - CJ or Yak
Steve "SOB" Fox
Yak 52
N3043R
http://homepage.mac.com/steve.fox/PhotoAlbum5.html
On Aug 14, 2005, at 6:44 AM, Craig Payne wrote:
>
> Red Air Fling Attendees to Be,
>
> There is a proud tradition of Unit Dinners in combat and combat
> close support units throughout U.S. military history, unlike
> rather dignified affairs such as Captain's Mess on-board big
> carriers or Regimental Dinners in the UK; what I'm talking about
> are those raucous Animal House affairs of yesteryear where no one
> was spared the jibe...well almost, lighten up on the Skipper, else
> one could pull extra duty at Dawn. No damage to the facilities
> please but we MUST have a Sat. night "Awards" banquet.
>
> Awards? Yep. The obvious are:
>
> Chairman's Choice for Best CJ (Sorry but Mao can't be present, he's
> laid up for awhile)
> Comrade's Choice for Best Yak (Stalin just left the house, with
> Elvis of course)
> Glorious Hero of the RedStars (Best formation pilot)
> Order of the RedStar (Most Improved formation pilot)
> Siberian Gulag Award (Worst screwup, if earned, otherwise filed)
>
> Help, I need a few more suggestions please. Bear in mind that Red
> is our color here not Blue so forgo the Whisky Delta jokes and
> Longest Pitot Tube awards here.
>
>
> Craig Payne
> cpayne(at)joimail.com
>
>
Steve "SOB" Fox
Yak 52
N3043R
http://homepage.mac.com/steve.fox/PhotoAlbum5.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com> |
Frank,
I am pretty sure the 45000 EURO's ($56,000 US as of today) is the kit price,
not including installation. Then add another $10K US for repainting your
airplane AFTER you do the conversion. Don't forget the cost of the shipment
in the container both ways. Figure another $8-9K US round trip.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Yak-List: Yak TD
>
>
> Just got a price quote on the taildragger kit from Termikas. 45,000.00
> ($81,661.54) for the kit. 10,000.00 ($18,147.01) is refunded when they
> get
> your old wings back. That comes to $63514. I think that is for a turnkey
> conversion.
>
> Couldn't determine from the quote if you can buy the kit and do the
> installation yourself. Been wanting to do this conversion for awhile now
> but
> at that price I can design and build my own composite wings.
>
> Hmmmmm? That Radial Rocket is looking better all the time.
>
> Frank
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Frank Haertlein
> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: Yak TD
>
>
> -->
>
> "Inquired about 6 months ago--kit was $50,000"
>
> 50K for a freakin' taildragger kit? 50K will buy me an fastbuild F1 Rocket
> kit. I can cruise at 250MPH with that. Why would an idiot put that much
> into
> a YAK TD conversion? Better yet, how about that Radial Rocket kit? 44K for
> that kit and then you really have something. I can use the engine out of
> my
> 52 and then junk the rest and still be ahead. But 50K for just a TD
> conversion? Somebody ain't pricing things right. Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ADE
> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak TD
>
>
> Inquired about 6 months ago--kit was $50,000, they modify your wings or
> exchange, they said it could be installed in 125 man/hrs.
> On Aug 12, 2005, at 6:52 PM, DaBear wrote:
>
>>
>> Anyone know what the cost of the conversion from a Yak-52 to a Yak-52TD
>> is? I wonder if it could be done to a CJ?
>>
>> Al
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Sapp" <rvfltd(at)televar.com> |
| Subject: | powered up CJ5's |
As many of you know I am in the process (have been for 2 years now) of
completely rebuilding a CJ5 / Yak 18 down to the last nut bolt and screw.
In doing so we have decided to re engine it with a M14B, and thanks to
Batman, a three bladed Whirlwind. The Mini yak, or as Bill Shepard calls it
my Yak 10 1/2, will hopefully fly in the spring.
As to the availability and pricing of good solid rebuildable projects, I
have brought in 3 additional aircraft, with two placed in CA and one in
Australia. We have just acquired a fourth aircraft and have made offers on
another. Both are in China at his time and will be offered at about 30K
each once the deal is firmed on the second aircraft.
If my research is correct there are only 6 flying examples in the world
today, with another 4 or 5 in rebuild. Spares are ample to support the
aircraft and many components are the same as used on the CJ6. For photos
and more information please contact me off list.
One note, at this time there is only one powered up CJ5 / yak 18 in
existence in the US that I know of. It belonged to Bob Kantner of CA. I am
told that it is wearing a 220 or 260 hp Cont. radial and is a great
performer. I am told it recently sold to a gentleman in NV. I was hoping
to see it at ARS this year, but he did not show. Tom Elliott do you know
the name of the new owner?? Hopefully we will be successful in recruiting
him into our ranks and that the aircraft will be at ARS 06.
Always Yakin,
Doug Sapp
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Mark Jefferies
YAK UK Ltd
Subject: Yak-List: YAK52TD
and more info at www.yakuk.com/yak52TD.asp
It was done to the CJ, in fact it was a tail dragger first, the CJ5. Get one
of those and up engine it and you have what your looking for. Simple as
that. I belive there are some in USA with big engines.
A couple of CJ5 being offered in china at pressent at 250,000USD. hardly an
investment!! Just the seller has expectations that the buyers in the west
have pockets full of gold.
br, mj
Anyone know what the cost of the conversion from a Yak-52 to a
Yak-52TD
is? I wonder if it could be done to a CJ?
Al
Best regards, Mark
www.yakuk.com
+44 (0)1767 651156 office +44 (0)7785 538 317 mobile
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver(at)earthlink.net> |
OOOPPS, I used English "pounds" in my conversion. Now that you mention it
maybe that quote was in Euros. No wonder the price seemed way, way outta
line. Sorry 'bout that.
Still, 56K seems a little steep when you can get near any high performance
kit aircraft for that price.....and these are fastbuild kits with way more
work put into them than what has to be done with the TD conversion. Somebody
thinks we all have pockets lined with gold.
There's two and a half things that have made CJ's and YAK's popular here in
the US, inexpensive acquisition costs coupled with great airplanes. What's
the 1/2? Probly RedStars :)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak TD
-->
Frank,
I am pretty sure the 45000 EURO's ($56,000 US as of today) is the kit price,
not including installation. Then add another $10K US for repainting your
airplane AFTER you do the conversion. Don't forget the cost of the shipment
in the container both ways. Figure another $8-9K US round trip. Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Yak-List: Yak TD
>
>
> Just got a price quote on the taildragger kit from Termikas. 45,000.00
> ($81,661.54) for the kit. 10,000.00 ($18,147.01) is refunded when
> they
> get
> your old wings back. That comes to $63514. I think that is for a turnkey
> conversion.
>
> Couldn't determine from the quote if you can buy the kit and do the
> installation yourself. Been wanting to do this conversion for awhile
> now but at that price I can design and build my own composite wings.
>
> Hmmmmm? That Radial Rocket is looking better all the time.
>
> Frank
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Frank
> Haertlein
> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: Yak TD
>
>
> -->
>
> "Inquired about 6 months ago--kit was $50,000"
>
> 50K for a freakin' taildragger kit? 50K will buy me an fastbuild F1
> Rocket kit. I can cruise at 250MPH with that. Why would an idiot put
> that much into a YAK TD conversion? Better yet, how about that Radial
> Rocket kit? 44K for that kit and then you really have something. I can
> use the engine out of my
> 52 and then junk the rest and still be ahead. But 50K for just a TD
> conversion? Somebody ain't pricing things right. Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of ADE
> To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak TD
>
>
> Inquired about 6 months ago--kit was $50,000, they modify your wings
> or exchange, they said it could be installed in 125 man/hrs. On Aug
> 12, 2005, at 6:52 PM, DaBear wrote:
>
>>
>> Anyone know what the cost of the conversion from a Yak-52 to a Yak-52TD
>> is? I wonder if it could be done to a CJ?
>>
>> Al
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com> |
Frank,
I had thought about a TD at one time same as I thought about a L-39. It all came
down to cost benefit ratios. The benefit of the TD was: 1) It looks cool 2)
It cost less than a TW 3)It supposedly flies faster than the 52. The L-39 also
looks cool, does fly a hell of a lot faster, and cost about the same as a TW.
The cost in this deal is why I have not purchased either of the 3, TD, TW, or
39.
For all the above cost, I can operate my "Nose Dragging 52" for a looooonnnnnggggg
time. The idea here is to have fun economically. And we all know....Economics
are relative. Just depends on how much you want to pay for the fun you have.
For me, I'm keeping the "nose dragging 52" and having economical fun! After
all, the grass is just as green in this pasture as it is on the otherside of
the fence.
Doc
Roger "Doc" Kemp
viperdoc(at)mindspring.com
If it don't sound Round...Why listen?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com> |
According to Tim Williams (52TW) who flew along side of Bill Walker's TD at
OSH, they are definitely NOT any faster. It's the Clark Y airfoil. Can't
make it go much faster than it already is.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Doc Kemp" <viperdoc(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Yak-List: YAK-52 TD
>
> Frank,
> I had thought about a TD at one time same as I thought about a L-39. It
> all came down to cost benefit ratios. The benefit of the TD was: 1) It
> looks cool 2) It cost less than a TW 3)It supposedly flies faster than the
> 52. The L-39 also looks cool, does fly a hell of a lot faster, and cost
> about the same as a TW. The cost in this deal is why I have not purchased
> either of the 3, TD, TW, or 39.
> For all the above cost, I can operate my "Nose Dragging 52" for a
> looooonnnnnggggg time. The idea here is to have fun economically. And we
> all know....Economics are relative. Just depends on how much you want to
> pay for the fun you have. For me, I'm keeping the "nose dragging 52" and
> having economical fun! After all, the grass is just as green in this
> pasture as it is on the otherside of the fence.
> Doc
>
>
> Roger "Doc" Kemp
> viperdoc(at)mindspring.com
> If it don't sound Round...Why listen?
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Craig Payne" <cpayne(at)joimail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Radial Rocket |
Speaking of the Radial Rocket, I saw it at OSH again this year. No retract version
planned but being of the engineer's bent, I'm afraid I insulted the designer
when I pointed out that it performs like the F-1 Rocket but requires almost
another 100HP to do so.
I think that drag through the engine is the biggest issue. Looking at the cowling
exit area on the RR, I'm amazed at how small it is. Designer reports normal
temps in cruise but I wonder about extended taxi.
Craig Payne
cpayne(at)joimail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KJKimball(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Radial Rocket |
Craig,
The nose bowl of the RR is similar to that which I designed for the Pitts
Model 12. The shape of the bowl, the opening and the double reflex inner cuff
really work well to provide excellent cooling flow. The outlet area at the
lower firewall of the model 12 is small also at 7.25"x 19" wide. We have
excellent cooling even during acro with the 12.
The McCullocoupe is another design of ours with the same cowl and exit areas.
It's 400hp M14PF runs very cool and verges on too cool. Oil temps have
never exceeded 170f even when the engine was new and during acro. The head temps
have never gone over 370f.
Sincerely,
Kevin Kimball, VP Engineering
Jim Kimball Enterprises, Inc.
PO Box 849, 5354 Cemetery Rd.
Zellwood, FL 32798
407-889-3451 phone
407-889-7168 fax
http://www.jimkimballenterprises.com/
http://www.pittsmodel12.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Walker" <bwalker11(at)charter.net> |
Hi gang,
Guess I've lurked long enough, time for a response.
Dennis is correct to a degree. The clark Y airfoil on these aircraft was
not designed for speed. However, some mods to the plane have made it a
little faster.
The flush enclosed landing gear must help as there is considerably less drag
to it. Enroute to Oshkosh I indicated 240 kmh at 6500 ft with a 65/65 pwr
setting for the entire trip. I've flown regular Yaks and TWs for several
years and at an equal power setting, temperature, and altitude, the TD is a
little faster.
The real benefit to the TD is not cruise speed, (my Viking is made for that)
it is the extra fuel (68 gallons), over all balance, and excellent
workmanship that Termikas does on the rebuilding of these planes. Anyone
who saw this plane a Oshkosh will attest to the workmanship. As to the
balance, Termikas has done their homework with the elimination of the nose
gear and addition o