Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:26 PM - Re: values (yourtcfg@aol.com)
2. 05:45 PM - FULL CIRCLE (yourtcfg@aol.com)
3. 06:45 PM - Re: FULL CIRCLE (John Vormbaum)
4. 08:19 PM - Re: HHO (Don)
5. 08:22 PM - Re: HHO (Don)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
HELLO DON.
I am a NAAA certified appriaser.=C2- Contact me at n700pf@aol.com.=C2- J
im Metzger (capt jimbob)
Don,
=C2-
If you've never had your plane appraised, (for insurance purposes or for sal
e) then you will likely need one.=C2- they aren't cheap, but are worth the
effort. I presume you're working on either personal property taxes or sales
taxes, both are dependent on professional opinions.
-----Original Message-----
From: willis robison <drwer2@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wed, 8 Oct 2008 11:16 am
Subject: RE: Commander-List: values
Don,
=C2-
If you've never had your plane appraised, (for insurance purposes or for sal
e) then you will likely need one.=C2- they aren't cheap, but are worth the
effort. I presume you're working on either personal property taxes or sales
taxes, both are dependent on professional opinions.=C2-
=C2-
there is not a single organization that regulates all AC appraisers, but NAA
A is a good place to start.=C2- http://www.plane-values.com/index.php
=C2-
Look around, If you dont need a full blown appraisal then the AOPA=C2- "Va
lue" may work.=C2- Keep in mind that the reason they are often LOW is that
they make you LUMP together all those mods youve done over the years.=C2
- The checkboxes for standard or commercially available equipment is easy
enough for a web-page, but the detail modifications can only be judged by yo
u or an experienced appraiser.
=C2-
good luck.
=C2-
Willis
--- On Wed,2010/8/08, Robert S. Randazzo <rsrandazzo@precisionmanuals.com> w
rote:
From: Robert S. Randazzo <rsrandazzo@precisionmanuals.com>
Subject: RE: Commander-List: values
Donnie-
=C2-
Then I take it all back.=C2- It=99s the perfect tool.=C2- J
=C2-
Robert S. Randazzo
N414C
=C2-
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list
-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Donnie Rose
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 9:01 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: values
=C2-
Thanks Robert, I'm trying to combat the taxman...
=C2-
Donnie Rose
205/492-8444
=C2-
=C2-
=C2-
----- Original Message ----
From: Robert S. Randazzo <rsrandazzo@precisionmanuals.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2008 12:06:02 AM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: values
Donnie-
=C2-
Only place I=99ve ever seen was Vref on the AOPA site-=C2- but I fin
d it to be incredibly under-valued for any airplane I=99ve ever plugge
d in
=C2-
So much so that I think it=99s a disservice
=C2-
Robert S. Randazzo
N414C
=C2-
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list
-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Donnie Rose
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 7:18 PM
Subject: Commander-List: values
=C2-
Hey everyone, does anyone know the=C2-official place to get same on Comman
der aircraft values such as the "Blue book".
Thanks,
=C2-
Donnie Rose
205/492-8444
=C2-
=C2-
=C2-=C2-
=C2-
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=C2-
=C2-
http://for=C2-=C2-; -->
=C2-
=C2-
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=C2-
" target=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commande
r-List
nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com
lank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=C2-
" target=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commande
r-List
nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com
lank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-= - The Commander-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-= -
-> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
-========================
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-========================
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
HI KIDS.
I just had a neat experience.? I flew 680 (CONVERTED TO A 680e) from a small private
strip on the banks of the Columbia River, to my home airport.? The new owners
will be changing an engine there.?I have delivered lots of Commanders over
the years and even several 680s, so what makes this one different??? Well,
it is the very first Aero Commander?I ever actually touched!!? I had dreamed of
owning a Commander for a couple of years and was crop dusting in the Parlous
area of Washington state, south of Spokane.? I was finally in a position to buy
my first Commander and really wanted to see on up close and personal.? I was
told that a old (even then it was considered old) Commander in a hangar at Spokane's
Felts Field.? The first rainy day off?I had I drove to the airport to
look and sure enough, there it was.? It was parked in an open hangar with several
other, lessor, airplanes.? It was BEAUTIFUL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!? It was painted
with yellow and black?trim and had?sweringen main la
nding gear doors.? I thought they were stock and for a while thought other Commander
owners must have removed theirs!!? I spent a couple of hours just looking
and dreaming of the day when I would have my own.
Amazingly, we would cross paths again.? Many years later and after I had owner
a couple of Commanders (a 720 and a 560A), I took a job for just a few weeks flying
ag for an operator in western Washington State.? I owned a Beech Duke (sorry)
at the time and it would not operate from the short ag strip where the Commander
lived.? That owner sold it to a really nice guy named Jody Maddox and
after many years, Jody sold it to the new, current owners.? Since neither of
them have ANY Commander time, they hired me to move the airplane.? It was really
cool to actually fly the airplane that really started it all for me.? I got
to occupied the pilot seat I had longingly looked through the window at so many
years ago.? It went "Full Circle"? jb
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Jimbob,
Great story. Obviously you were meant to be a Commander person...the
airplanes still follow you around!
/J
yourtcfg@aol.com wrote:
> HI KIDS.
> I just had a neat experience. I flew 680 (CONVERTED TO A 680e) from a
> small private strip on the banks of the Columbia River, to my home
> airport. The new owners will be changing an engine there. I have
> delivered lots of Commanders over the years and even several 680s, so
> what makes this one different?? Well, it is the very first Aero
> Commander I ever actually touched!! I had dreamed of owning a
> Commander for a couple of years and was crop dusting in the Parlous
> area of Washington state, south of Spokane. I was finally in a
> position to buy my first Commander and really wanted to see on up
> close and personal. I was told that a old (even then it was
> considered old) Commander in a hangar at Spokane's Felts Field. The
> first rainy day off I had I drove to the airport to look and sure
> enough, there it was. It was parked in an open hangar with several
> other, lessor, airplanes. It was BEAUTIFUL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It was
> painted with yellow and black trim and had sweringen main landing gear
> doors. I thought they were stock and for a while thought other
> Commander owners must have removed theirs!! I spent a couple of hours
> just looking and dreaming of the day when I would have my own.
> Amazingly, we would cross paths again. Many years later and after I
> had owner a couple of Commanders (a 720 and a 560A), I took a job for
> just a few weeks flying ag for an operator in western Washington
> State. I owned a Beech Duke (sorry) at the time and it would not
> operate from the short ag strip where the Commander lived. That owner
> sold it to a really nice guy named Jody Maddox and after many years,
> Jody sold it to the new, current owners. Since neither of them have
> ANY Commander time, they hired me to move the airplane. It was really
> cool to actually fly the airplane that really started it all for me.
> I got to occupied the pilot seat I had longingly looked through the
> window at so many years ago. It went "Full Circle" jb
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> McCain or Obama? Stay updated on coverage of the Pres idential race
> while you browse - Download Now
> <http://toolbar.aol.com/elections/download.html?ncid=emlweusdown00000001>!
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Bill.
Did I do the math right, that is almost 100 mpg?
Don
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Hamilton
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 11:24 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: HHO
Folks,
A friend of mine is involved in development testing with Mercedes.
Their new engine lines with direct petrol injection are producing
efficiencies that that translate into big sedans with plenty of
performance, ie the same power/weight ration as now, but reducing fuel
consumption from 12/16 lt:100km, down to 5/8 lt.:100km, ie fuel
consumption in already reasonably efficient engines reduced by half.
It's all about increasing compression ratios, but chamber/injector
design reducing/eliminating pre ignition or detonation.
These engines will equal or better automotive diesels.
Regards,
Bill Hamilton.
If you want to do the maths, approx. 4 lt= 1 US Gallon, 1 km approx.
Equals 5/8 of a statute mile.
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of willis
robison
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 7:44 AM
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO
From an engineering and Thermodynamics standpoint, the internal
combustion engine (at least the Otto Cycle) is pretty maxed out. For
regular piston-gasoline pushrod or overhead cam engines the total
efficiency is dictated by the maximum pressure you can obtain. Lately,
higher compression and higher temperatures have pushed the efficiency to
the limits obtainable with current materials (aluminum blocks, nitrided
steel cylinders etc). computer control of the mixture took it to
another level, but noone will allow a micro controller on an AC without
going through an extensive Qual process.
Newer High Temperature materials may increase this but absolute
"e" is still = [T(high) - T(low)]/T(low).
Diesel's are less dependent on T(high) but are still dependent
on the Max pressure. Thats why they are so good at being turbocharged
at high altitude. Same goes for Brayton cycle engines (jets). in that
case the limits are [P(high) - P(low)]P(low).
Now you know why those old---GSO-480's are still popular. Lots
of juice and still efficient at high altitude if you roll back on the
throttles. (but who would?)
bud
--- On Fri, 10/10/08, Chris <cschuerm@cox.net> wrote:
From: Chris <cschuerm@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Date: Friday, October 10, 2008, 12:18 PM
wrote:> I try and keep and open mind, one day I firmly believe, a >
revolutionary change will happen to greatly improve our internal >
combustions engine. Well Don, I applaud your positive outlook. From a
purely scientific perspective, there are very few areas to improve a
traditional Otto cycle engine. Even if some new miracle material were
to arrive that would allow unlimited temperature operation, basic
physics still apply. Small efficiency gains could be had, but there is
simply no room for huge improvement. Energy out equals energy in minus
losses. As long as the "energy in" part involves oxidation of petroleum
products, youare limited by that reaction. Most likely, someone will
eventually come up with an efficient means of directly generating
electricity from a chemical reaction and the next "great advancement" in
transportation will involve electric motors. I'm not aware of any
ground-breaking technology in that arena currently under development
though. cheers,Chris
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Listhttp://forums.matronics.
comhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
10/8/2008 7:19 PM
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Bill
Did you mean 5/8 liter or was it 5 to 8 liters per 100 km?
I think that was my error.
Don
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Hamilton
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 11:24 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: HHO
Folks,
A friend of mine is involved in development testing with Mercedes.
Their new engine lines with direct petrol injection are producing
efficiencies that that translate into big sedans with plenty of
performance, ie the same power/weight ration as now, but reducing fuel
consumption from 12/16 lt:100km, down to 5/8 lt.:100km, ie fuel
consumption in already reasonably efficient engines reduced by half.
It's all about increasing compression ratios, but chamber/injector
design reducing/eliminating pre ignition or detonation.
These engines will equal or better automotive diesels.
Regards,
Bill Hamilton.
If you want to do the maths, approx. 4 lt= 1 US Gallon, 1 km approx.
Equals 5/8 of a statute mile.
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of willis
robison
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 7:44 AM
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO
From an engineering and Thermodynamics standpoint, the internal
combustion engine (at least the Otto Cycle) is pretty maxed out. For
regular piston-gasoline pushrod or overhead cam engines the total
efficiency is dictated by the maximum pressure you can obtain. Lately,
higher compression and higher temperatures have pushed the efficiency to
the limits obtainable with current materials (aluminum blocks, nitrided
steel cylinders etc). computer control of the mixture took it to
another level, but noone will allow a micro controller on an AC without
going through an extensive Qual process.
Newer High Temperature materials may increase this but absolute
"e" is still = [T(high) - T(low)]/T(low).
Diesel's are less dependent on T(high) but are still dependent
on the Max pressure. Thats why they are so good at being turbocharged
at high altitude. Same goes for Brayton cycle engines (jets). in that
case the limits are [P(high) - P(low)]P(low).
Now you know why those old---GSO-480's are still popular. Lots
of juice and still efficient at high altitude if you roll back on the
throttles. (but who would?)
bud
--- On Fri, 10/10/08, Chris <cschuerm@cox.net> wrote:
From: Chris <cschuerm@cox.net>
Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Date: Friday, October 10, 2008, 12:18 PM
wrote:> I try and keep and open mind, one day I firmly believe, a >
revolutionary change will happen to greatly improve our internal >
combustions engine. Well Don, I applaud your positive outlook. From a
purely scientific perspective, there are very few areas to improve a
traditional Otto cycle engine. Even if some new miracle material were
to arrive that would allow unlimited temperature operation, basic
physics still apply. Small efficiency gains could be had, but there is
simply no room for huge improvement. Energy out equals energy in minus
losses. As long as the "energy in" part involves oxidation of petroleum
products, youare limited by that reaction. Most likely, someone will
eventually come up with an efficient means of directly generating
electricity from a chemical reaction and the next "great advancement" in
transportation will involve electric motors. I'm not aware of any
ground-breaking technology in that arena currently under development
though. cheers,Chris
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Listhttp://forums.matronics.
comhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
10/8/2008 7:19 PM
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|