---------------------------------------------------------- Commander-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 08/23/11: 5 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 01:06 PM - Flying "On the Step" (Andrew & Bridget Watson) 2. 08:31 PM - Re: Pressure regulator (Donald Falik) 3. 09:05 PM - Re: Pressure regulator (Ray Mansfield) 4. 09:36 PM - Re: Flying "On the Step" (John Vormbaum) 5. 09:40 PM - Our Facebook Page (cybersuperstore) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 01:06:37 PM PST US From: "Andrew & Bridget Watson" Subject: Commander-List: Flying "On the Step" Hello everybody, I read the earlier emails--some questions on "Flying on the Step". Out on the Internet there appears to be violent disagreement on whether such a thing exists or not. Note: I'm not trying to brew up a storm, just trying to understand. My father taught me there was such a thing. I believed and still believe there is; that flying on the step is not a myth. The way I rationalised it then is as below, I appreciate folks setting me straight, either on-list or off-list. 1.. There are 4 forces that act upon an aircraft: 1.. Thrust, which is directly forward 2.. Drag, which is directly rearward 3.. Weight, which is vertical down 4.. Lift, which is perpendicular to the aircraft wings, 'upward". 2.. As speed increases, so does lift. 3.. If the aircraft is in a nose down attitude, speed will increase because: 1.. it is in a shallow dive 2.. lift, being perpendicular to the wings, will be assisting in drawing the aircraft forward 4.. Altitude "lost" in the nose down attitude will be compensated by the increased lift associated with the increased speed. Is this simple logic valid or should I go and hide my head in shame somewhere? Thanks all in advance for your help in my understanding of this. Andrew ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 08:31:04 PM PST US From: Donald Falik Subject: Re: Commander-List: Pressure regulator Good luck on the presure regulator.=C2-=C2- I needed one for my 500S a couple years =0Aago.=C2- They are out of production and only one company refurbishes them.=C2- I found =0Aone at Eagle Creek in Indianapolis.=C2 - It was $5,000.00+ =C2-plus a $2500.00 core =0Acharge in case yours is not refurbishable.=C2- Then they charged an additional 3% =0Afee on the total when I used my credit card.=0A=0AThe rebuild has to be done by an exc lusive company due to some special brass =0A"seats".=C2- The fun never en ds in aviation.=0A=0ADon=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AF rom: Ray Mansfield =0ATo: Commander List =0ASent: Sun, August 21, 2011 7:04:48 PM=0ASubject: Commander -List: Pressure regulator=0A=0A=0ATwo items:=0A=0A1 =93 Need to find out where the hydraulic pressure regulator is located in an =0AAC680 FLP Mr RPM Conversion.=C2- It=99s not in the same place as prior to the M R RPM =0AConversion, and am not sure otherewise.=C2- We thought it was pa rt of the=C2-=C2- =0A=0A=C2-=C2-=C2-=C2-=C2- hydraulic accumu lator, but that appears not to be the case.=C2- =0A=0A2.=C2- Does anyon e have a pressure regulator for this airplane?=C2-=C2- What about =0Are building such an item.=C2- =0A=0A=0AThe plane has not flown in a year, an d owner is interested in getting it back in =0Athe air.=C2- The hydraulic pressure regulator needs attention we think, as when the =0Aplane last fle w there was a spike in hyd pressure at one point.=C2- The engines =0Ahave been run every month on the ground but the plane has not acutally flown. ==================== =0A ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 09:05:08 PM PST US From: "Ray Mansfield" Subject: Re: Commander-List: Pressure regulator Hi Don, Wow...that doesn=99t sound good. I=99ve just recently found out where the part is located but we haven=99t made any inquiries about getting it check as of now. Thanks for the email. Ray M. From: Donald Falik Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 10:28 PM Subject: Re: Commander-List: Pressure regulator Good luck on the presure regulator. I needed one for my 500S a couple years ago. They are out of production and only one company refurbishes them. I found one at Eagle Creek in Indianapolis. It was $5,000.00+ plus a $2500.00 core charge in case yours is not refurbishable. Then they charged an additional 3% fee on the total when I used my credit card. The rebuild has to be done by an exclusive company due to some special brass "seats". The fun never ends in aviation. Don ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- From: Ray Mansfield Sent: Sun, August 21, 2011 7:04:48 PM Subject: Commander-List: Pressure regulator Two items: 1 =93 Need to find out where the hydraulic pressure regulator is located in an AC680 FLP Mr RPM Conversion. It=99s not in the same place as prior to the MR RPM Conversion, and am not sure otherewise. We thought it was part of the hydraulic accumulator, but that appears not to be the case. 2. Does anyone have a pressure regulator for this airplane? What about rebuilding such an item. The plane has not flown in a year, and owner is interested in getting it back in the air. The hydraulic pressure regulator needs attention we think, as when the plane last flew there was a spike in hyd pressure at one point. The engines have been run every month on the ground but the plane has not acutally flown. < B> ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 09:36:47 PM PST US From: "John Vormbaum" Subject: RE: Commander-List: Flying "On the Step" Andrew, This is purely an empirical observation, but in my 500B I've found that the wing seems to become most efficient at an IAS of ~135kts+. There are huge arguments for & against the 'step', but the benefit I've found is quicker trimming. Those smarter than me might be correct about flying it to the altitude, and trimming from that point being no less efficient than overflying your altitude by a couple hundred feet and dropping back down, but in my 500B it seems to trim up much quicker, and at a higher airspeed sooner, if I fly it a little higher and get on the step. If I DON'T do that, there are numerous power/pitch/trim changes that need to be made before the airplane wants to settle down. Think 15 minutes. If I fly it onto the step, when I'm ~200ft above my target altitude, I can point her downhill, close cowl flaps, pull the props back, set power, and do the first big mixture grab. At that point the airplane is at its target altitude and I only need about 60 seconds to get the trim where I want it. Then I can focus on setting LOP and/or turbo boost, and the airplane will stay rock-steady at the altitude. A slight trim adjustment over the next minute or two is usually all it takes after that, and then I can settle in for my hours of boredom at cruise. Again, just anecdotal, but I sure seem to mess with the trim wheel a lot less this way. /J From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Andrew & Bridget Watson Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 1:03 PM Subject: Commander-List: Flying "On the Step" Hello everybody, I read the earlier emails--some questions on "Flying on the Step". Out on the Internet there appears to be violent disagreement on whether such a thing exists or not. Note: I'm not trying to brew up a storm, just trying to understand. My father taught me there was such a thing. I believed and still believe there is; that flying on the step is not a myth. The way I rationalised it then is as below, I appreciate folks setting me straight, either on-list or off-list. 1. There are 4 forces that act upon an aircraft: 1. Thrust, which is directly forward 2. Drag, which is directly rearward 3. Weight, which is vertical down 4. Lift, which is perpendicular to the aircraft wings, 'upward". 2. As speed increases, so does lift. 3. If the aircraft is in a nose down attitude, speed will increase because: 1. it is in a shallow dive 2. lift, being perpendicular to the wings, will be assisting in drawing the aircraft forward 4. Altitude "lost" in the nose down attitude will be compensated by the increased lift associated with the increased speed. Is this simple logic valid or should I go and hide my head in shame somewhere? Thanks all in advance for your help in my understanding of this. Andrew ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 09:40:31 PM PST US From: "cybersuperstore" Subject: Commander-List: Our Facebook Page I posted some of the comments on the mail-list to our FaceBook Page. See if you like it: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Aero-Commander/144424762275884 Nico ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message commander-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Commander-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/commander-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/commander-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.