Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:47 AM - Portable Air Conditioning (Tom Quinn)
2. 06:40 AM - Re: Cost of annual (flyv35b)
3. 10:02 AM - Re: Re: Cost of annual (Gary Vogt)
4. 10:45 AM - Re: Portable Air Conditioning (Gary Vogt)
5. 11:06 AM - Re: Cost of annual (Gary Vogt)
6. 12:03 PM - Re: Portable Air Conditioning (Tom Quinn)
7. 12:07 PM - Re: Cost of annual (Rick Pollack)
8. 12:44 PM - Re: Portable Air Conditioning (Gary Vogt)
9. 01:07 PM - Interior plastic (Gary Vogt)
10. 01:09 PM - Fuel leak (Gary Vogt)
11. 02:02 PM - Re: Portable Air Conditioning (Tom Quinn)
12. 04:21 PM - Re: Windshield (grumpyparts)
13. 04:36 PM - Re: Interior plastic (Garner Rice)
14. 08:49 PM - Re: Re: Windshield (Gary Vogt)
15. 08:51 PM - Re: Interior plastic (Gary Vogt)
16. 08:58 PM - Re: Oh, the sacrilege (Gary Vogt)
17. 09:07 PM - Canopy headliner, plastic (Gary Vogt)
18. 09:45 PM - Re: Oh, the sacrilege (James Courtney)
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 |
|
| Subject: | Portable Air Conditioning |
Has anyone heard of a successful installation of a portable air conditioner
in an AA5? I use my plane to fly to business meetings but in the summer time
the heat and humidity can be pretty brutal and flying in a suit is not
really practical. I've made an portable air conditioner by converting an ice
cooler (see attached) and it works okay for about an hour but after that the
cockpit heats up quickly. Arctic
<http://www.arcticaircooler.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&Itemid>
Air
(http://www.arcticaircooler.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&Itemid)
offers real air conditioner that they claim is portable, has anyone heard of
installing this system in an AA5 or other aircraft? They claim that the unit
momentarily draws 40 amps at start up and 27 amps at high and 19 amps at
low, can a standard AA5 electrical system handle this or would you have to
upgrade the alternator? The exhaust would be routed through the rear
bulkhead, can this be done without any major problems. The more I compare my
Tiger to other aircraft the more I like it when you compare speed,
reliability, simplicity (fixed gear/prop), and costs. The biggest gripe I
have is the need for air conditioning during the summer to meet my business
mission needs. Appreciate any insight that anyone may have.
Tom Quinn
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cost of annual |
I live on an airpark too, and I agree that it is a lot cheaper that
renting a hangar and much more convenient. As an A&P/IA I also work out
of my hangar so I am getting double the benefit. I do some owner
assisted annuals but I am not willing to work for essentially nothing as
your IA is. He obviously is not relying on that income alone to
survive.
Cliff
----- Original Message -----
From: allenc3@bellsouth.net
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 7:40 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Cost of annual
When I see the cost of annual inspections here and on the Gang, I
cringe. No way could I afford my airplane if I had to cough up 4-5 G
every year just for an annual. My annuals run about $200 for the AI (he
also drinks a lot of my beer) but I live on an airpark, have my own
hanger and do most of the work. I buy all my parts from Fletcher unless
it is something I need in a hurry and I get it locally.
There are 2 or 3 AI's on the field, retired guys mostly who just like
to fool with airplanes. I have all of the manuals, and I use the
Checklist from the manual. I take my time taking the airplane apart, my
AI comes and inspects the plane, does the compression check, etc, and
then gives me a gig list to work off, If I have any upgrades to do, I
usually do them while the airplane is open. My AI then comes back,
inspects my work and then ok's my putting the plane back together.
Again, I take my time, clean and paint what needs cleaning and painting.
Also, I NEVER do an annual in he summertime. Keep it in March / April.
Living on an airpark makes owning and operating an airplane a lot
easer on your wallet then keeping an airplane at the airport. No tie
down or hanger fees, no driving back and forth to the airport and living
around many other talented folks who are willing to help out..
Claude Allen
Haller Field
Green Cove Springs, Fl
From: Gary Vogt
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 1:31 PM
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Cost of annual
Those are some pretty cheap annuals. Linn, I think he said "He
charges me $300 for 10 hours of inspection time." My Pre-Purchase
inspection runs $450.
When I started AuCountry Aviation in 1997, I was charging $50 an hour.
At the time, the local avionics shop was $50/hr.
I use a 14 page checklist that keeps 5 years of inspections in view.
I can tell you when and why a wire was changed, a light was changed, how
many hours on the brakes at each annual, when the last fuel selector
valve overhaul was done last, notes as to serial numbers on major parts,
times on mags, vacuum pumps, and hundreds of other items, all at a
glance. When I get a plane for the first time, I may spend up to 6
hours going through the logs verifying dates and times. The data on my
annuals is about as correct as can be made. I've seen logbooks so
fucked up that the plane actually had over 200 hrs less than what showed
due to transposing numbers. If I'm doing a plane for the first time, it
takes about 24 hours to thoroughly go through the plane; I charge for 18
hrs. I make it up over the next few years since I now know the plane.
Maybe no one really gives a shit that all that information is tracked
and readily available at a glance. I mean, really, just how important
is it to be able to look at just two pages and see 10 years worth of
compression tests to look for trends? Based on a few of the logbooks
I've reviewed, some don't even show compression checks (10 years of
annuals with no compression checks).
I raised my rates in 1999 to $60/hr (following the avionics shops
rates). I went to $75/hr in 2001 (again following his rates). Then to
$85/hr in 2003; all the time, I had 8 planes in progress. $90/hr in
2005. Returning customers were getting a 20% break on their bill. Last
year I went to a flat rate of $1500 for the annual. My annuals
typically take 16 to 18 hours.
After reading what I just wrote, it occurred to me that I'm doing this
whole maintenance thing wrong. I've been treating these planes like
they were my own. I've been treating these planes as if the owners were
involved and concerned about the quality of maintenance. Perhaps if I
just expanded my Pre-Purchase inspection a bit I could use it for
annuals. I could easily do a basic annual in 8 hours for $650. Why
bother with details like how many hours there are on vacuum filters and
rudder springs or repacking wheel bearings every other year?
Owner assisted annuals: I charge for the hours I spend working on the
plane. Some owners think standing around and asking, "Why are you doing
that?" constitutes owner assisting. An owner assisted annual that uses
up 24 hours of my time gets charged for 24 hours. At the other end of
the spectrum is Bobby: He maintains his plane throughout the year.
When he brings his plane in for an owner assisted annual, the wheel
pants are off, the seats (except pilot's) are out, and the oil is
changed. His annuals take less than 8 hours and we go though the whole
plane.
The 'other' maintenance shop here in Auburn charges $120/hr. Bob,
Cliff, Garner, what do you charge per hour?
Thanks for your input, Team.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature database 5218 (20100622) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature database 5218 (20100622) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cost of annual |
Thanks Mark
________________________________
From: "mmacdonald@wi.rr.com" <mmacdonald@wi.rr.com>
Sent: Tue, June 22, 2010 1:46:47 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Cost of annual
Gary, it sounds like your numbers are in the ball park for annual inspections.
I take my Tiger to a shop similar ot yours. There hourly rate is a little lower
probably because they are in low overhead country. They track all the maintenance
just like you do. My average cost over the last few years is about $1,800
which includes fixing a few squaks too (afterall the plane is 35 years old.
Seems to be a fair price and I have never found any safety issue after they
were finished. I could tell you a few stories about discoveries after an annual
inspection.
The guys that work on my plane deserve to make a decent living, though they probably
won't get rich doing what they do.
Keep doing the work you do to keep the Grummans in the air.
Mark MacDonald
N74052
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Portable Air Conditioning |
Tom, where are you based? A couple of years ago it was really hot here in
Auburn. I would climb above 7,000 feet to get to cooler air. One of my cu
stomers has a small cooler that plugs into a cigarette lighter. He puts it
on the floor of the right seat and directs air with 3 inch SCAT to blow th
rough the cooler to his side. It's crude but works. =0A=0AThe Grumman alt
ernator is good for 60 amps. For the most part, you'll only use a fraction
of that. So, the simple answer is, "The electrical capacity is there." T
he web site you provided says it needs 5 amps so I don't know where you got
27 amps. Your climb performance will be affected by the additional weight
. =0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Tom Quinn <quinn_to
m@tqiinc.com>=0ATo: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Wed, June 23, 20
10 2:46:04 AM=0ASubject: TeamGrumman-List: Portable Air Conditioning=0A=0A
=0AHas=0Aanyone heard of a successful installation of a portable air condit
ioner in an=0AAA5? I use my plane to fly to business meetings but in the su
mmer time the heat=0Aand humidity can be pretty brutal and flying in a suit
is not really practical.=0AI=99ve made an portable air conditioner b
y converting an ice cooler (see=0Aattached) and it works okay for about an
hour but after that the cockpit heats=0Aup quickly. Arctic=0AAir(http://www
.arcticaircooler.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&Itemid)=0Aoffer
s real air conditioner that they claim is portable, has anyone heard of=0Ai
nstalling this system in an AA5 or other aircraft? They claim that the unit
momentarily=0Adraws 40 amps at start up and 27 amps at high and 19 amps at
low, can a=0Astandard AA5 electrical system handle this or would you have
to upgrade the=0Aalternator? The exhaust would be routed through the rear b
ulkhead, can this be=0Adone without any major problems. The more I compare
my Tiger to other aircraft=0Athe more I like it when you compare speed, rel
iability, simplicity (fixed=0Agear/prop), and costs. The biggest gripe I ha
ve is the need for air=0Aconditioning during the summer to meet my business
mission needs. Appreciate=0Aany insight that anyone may have.=0A =0ATom=0A
Quinn=0A=0A=0A
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cost of annual |
"I think you've hit the biggest problem. We treat our own equipment better than
others will ..... but they don't have to worry about the pride or reputation
of a job well done."
This is a big issue for me. There are times when I think about cutting corners
and then I remind myself of all the mechanics I slam for doing shitty work.
Then I swear. Then I do it the way it should be done.
The only mechanic to call me about my work is Bill Scott. To his credit, I've
worked on his planes and his workmanship is obsessive compulsive when it comes
to having each and every piece that came with the plane from the factory exactly
where it should be. His issue with me is not replacing the scraper on the
wheel pant when installing the fiberglass wheel pants. I don't like them. He
also called and gave me hell for signing off a Cheetah 10 years ago (this was
a recent call) that had had a larger oil cooler installed and the owner didn't
have an STC or Field Approval on the installation. To be honest, I don't even
remember the plane. HOWEVER, if I did recognize it had a larger oil cooler
and the installation was up to my standards, I would have signed it off anyway,
paperwork or no paperwork. The plane never should have left the factory with
that tiny oil cooler.
=======================
"I'm not so sure. I developed a scenario when I was brokering airplanes .....
you see two guys on the ramp (buyer and seller), and they're looking at the
SAME airplane."
About my inspection checklist . . . have you ever gone through logbooks?
Reading poor hand writing, vague entries, spending hours upon hours looking for
when the such and such an AD was done or a part was changed/overhauled is a pain-in-the-ass.
The person that buys my plane will have a permanent record of
every item ever done to the plane in an easy to read format. I bought my plane
in 2004. I have filled two (5) year records. Every hour of work is documented.
Modifications, repairs, and maintenance done between overhauls are also
recorded. Bill Kelly also has a very complete record of maintenance and repair.
Trust me, when it comes time to sell, the buyer won't need more than 15 minutes
to see the results of 10 years of compression tests and make up his mind
for himself what condition the engine is in. The same goes for the rest of
plane
. . . . but then, I'm sure there are those owners out there that just don't care
one way or the other. As long as the cost of ownership is cheap, that's all
that matters.
=======================
Claude wrote: "When I see the cost of annual inspections here and on the Gang,
I cringe. No way could I afford my airplane if I had to cough up 4-5 G every year
just for an annual. " I had to smile. First, I don't think I could afford
$4,000-$5,000 annuals is I had to pay that every year. Second, the annuals
I do on worst case scenarios, planes that have been ignored for many years, are
more like on particular example I have, $10,000 the first year, $7,000 the
second, $3,000 the third, and $1500 to $2000 since then. Corl's plane, the $80,000
Cheetah, gets by with a minimum amount of work during an annual. It will
need to have the wheel bearing packed this year, but that's about it.
=======================
Bob, I need to raise my rates!
=======================
Thanks for all your input, Team. This economy is affecting us all. I've thought
about moving to Lake Almanor, writing action novels, and say I've had enough.
Maybe next year. Until then, I'm going to think about the whole annuals thing.
I want to find away to include those who are used to $300 annuals and not
scare them away with $1500 annuals.
Grumman owners like Ric, who can get an annual done for $650 including new brakes
and muffler replacement, without flying 2 1/2 hours to Auburn, well, I could
never compete with that. Removing wheel pants, replacing brake linings, cleaning
up and lubricating the guide pins, bending the brake lines into the right
shape so as to not pre-load the pads at an angle, adding brake fluid, checking
the brakes, and putting the wheel pants on takes a good 3 1/2 to 4 hours.
Muffler: Removing the cowling is part of the annual. But, removing and replacing
the muffler, cleaning up the risers, R&R SCAT for cabin heat/carb heat as
required, possibly new gaskets, easily 2 hours. Even without doing anything but
R&R a muffler, that's an hour or two. So, going into the annual I'd be looking
at 2 to 3 hours or so (he said it was done in a day) for the annual. That's
not going to happen for $650.
Thanks again,
Gary
________________________________
From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
Sent: Tue, June 22, 2010 1:15:15 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Cost of annual
Gary Vogt wrote:
>
>Those are some pretty cheap annuals. Linn, I think he said "He
>charges me $300 for 10 hours of inspection time." My Pre-Purchase
>inspection runs $450.
>
>
>When I started AuCountry Aviation in 1997, I was charging $50 an
>hour. At the time, the local avionics shop was $50/hr.
>
>
>I use a 14 page checklist that keeps 5 years of inspections in
>view. I can tell you when and why a wire was changed, a light was
>changed, how many hours on the brakes at each annual, when the last
>fuel selector valve overhaul was done last, notes as to serial numbers
>on major parts, times on mags, vacuum pumps, and hundreds of other
>items, all at a glance. When I get a plane for the first time, I may
>spend up to 6 hours going through the logs verifying dates and times.
> The data on my annuals is about as correct as can be made. I've seen
>logbooks so fucked up that the plane actually had over 200 hrs less
>than what showed due to transposing numbers. If I'm doing a plane for
>the first time, it takes about 24 hours to thoroughly go through the
>plane; I charge for 18 hrs. I make it up over the next few years since
>I now know the plane.
The first inspection was more ..... because he had to verify that all
the ADs had been complied with .... and annotated the entries with data
that was missing. That included looking at ALL the ADs. Now he just
looks for reecent ones.
Maybe no one really gives a shit that all that information is
>tracked and readily available at a glance. I mean, really, just how
>important is it to be able to look at just two pages and see 10 years
>worth of compression tests to look for trends? Based on a few of the
>logbooks I've reviewed, some don't even show compression checks (10
>years of annuals with no compression checks).
I keep all the 'notes' with squawks and the compression checks .....
and usually just compare data with last years. Keeping all the data
..... and keeping it current probably should be a extra charge .... you
can cut the hours of the inspection by that time spent pounding keys.
I raised my rates in 1999 to $60/hr (following the avionics
>shops rates). I went to $75/hr in 2001 (again following his rates).
> Then to $85/hr in 2003; all the time, I had 8 planes in progress.
>$90/hr in 2005. Returning customers were getting a 20% break on their
>bill. Last year I went to a flat rate of $1500 for the annual. My
>annuals typically take 16 to 18 hours.
With me removing all the stuff on the checklist, putting it all back,
and fixing squawks, I probably have that much time spent. But I spend
a lot of time looking for tools which you probably don't do. You're
probably more thorough.
After reading what I just wrote, it occurred to me that I'm
>doing this whole maintenance thing wrong. I've been treating these
>planes like they were my own.
I think you've hit the biggest problem. We treat our own equipment
better than others will ..... but they don't have to worry about the
pride or reputation of a job well done.
I've been treating these planes as if the owners were involved
>and concerned about the quality of maintenance.
Most owners would rather pay the minimum to keep the airplane airworthy
and, hopefully, keep their butt safe for a year. Only when they go to
sell it do they find out that it's still 'pay me now or pay me later'.
Perhaps if I just expanded my Pre-Purchase inspection a bit I
>could use it for annuals. I could easily do a basic annual in 8 hours
>for $650. Why bother with details like how many hours there are on
>vacuum filters and rudder springs or repacking wheel bearings every
>other year?
When the filter starts to turn brown and before it crumbles .... I
replace it. A quick tug tells me whether it needs it or not. I've
never replaced one that was dirty .... just aged. I do repack bearings
every other year, and replace oil filters every other change. Lately I
don't fly as much as I did, so it's usually one filter a year. I spend
a lot of time on corrosion control .... mostly the hardware ..... and
painting places that need it.
>
>Owner assisted annuals: I charge for the hours I spend working
>on the plane. Some owners think standing around and asking, "Why are
>you doing that?" constitutes owner assisting. An owner assisted annual
>that uses up 24 hours of my time gets charged for 24 hours. At the
>other end of the spectrum is Bobby: He maintains his plane throughout
>the year. When he brings his plane in for an owner assisted annual,
>the wheel pants are off, the seats (except pilot's) are out, and the
>oil is changed. His annuals take less than 8 hours and we go though
>the whole plane.
I'm pretty much like Bobby. Depending on whether the airplane is kept
hangared or tied down, I don't see much need to do a complete, maxed
out, inspection every year. I feel that removing every
cover/tip/interior .... does more damage than I find. But, I watch my
AI do the inspection, I fix the squawks, and he looks at the work I did
when he fills out the logs. Remember that I have the tools and
knowledge (mostly) from building airplanes.
The biggest difference between you and I is that he comes to my hangar
which I pay the rent on. I don't figure how much of the 'rent'
(overhead) goes toward the annual, and I'm not trying to make a living
wrenching. I work on MY stuff cheap!!! I don't know how you guys do
it. My AI works 2 or 3 jobs to make ends meet and support his family.
Other people pay $400 for an assisted annual, twice that (or more) for
one he does by himself.
Linn
>
>The 'other' maintenance shop here in Auburn charges $120/hr.
> Bob, Cliff, Garner, what do you charge per hour?
>
>
>Thanks for your input, Team.
>
>
________________________________
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
Message 6
| 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 |
|
| Subject: | Portable Air Conditioning |
Gary,
Somehow the link I sent didn't drill down to the Real A/C unit
that actually uses a compressor and 134A refrigerant so I cut and pasted
the unit I was talking about below. I think the unit you were looking at was
the unit that uses ice like the one I built in the picture I sent with the
original email. I live in the Norfolk Virginia area and the temps get to 100
degrees with 90% humidity and flying to a business meeting in business
attire is almost impossible. The unit I currently have is like the one you
described but it works okay for about an hour if you fill it with ice but
I'm looking for a solution that is more effective and convenient like the
RAC200-1-12D shown below
<http://www.arcticaircooler.com/components/com_virtuemart/shop_image/product
/200_CFM_with_1_f_4c1b9ce5e6b14.jpg> 200 CFM with 1 fan, 12 Volt with duct,
Real AC
200 CFM with 1 fan, 12 Volt with duct, Real AC
Price per Unit (piece): $4 600.00
Ask
<http://www.arcticaircooler.com/index.php?page=shop.ask&flypage=&product_id
35&category_id=7&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid> a question about this
product
_____
This is a completely portable self-contained A/C unit with compressor and
134A refrigerant.
Weight: 42 lbs.
Dimensions: 13"W x 19"H x 13"D
Power Source: works in a 12 volt aircraft
200 cfm (cubic ft/minute) (turns over air in 4 seat aircraft every 60
seconds.
Arctic Air can control the amps you draw at a low of 19 amps and a high of
27 amps. Start-up peaks at 40 amps for a split second and levels off at 25
amps.
If plane will give us 27 amps of power at 12 volts, the unit will put out
7,000 BTUs of a/c.
If plane will give us 19 amps of power, the unit will put out 5,000 BTUs of
A/C
Condensation is routed from inside the unit thru a condensation disposal
hose and collected in a reservoir of your choice placed on the outside of
the unit. The accumulated condensation can then be disposed of when the
aircraft is parked. Also, the condensation disposal hose can be routed
through a drain hole in the bottom of the aircraft allowing the condensation
to be removed continuously during flight.
Exhaust air is vented out rear of the aircraft using a flexible hose
attached to the rear of the unit and routed through the rear cargo wall..
1 year warranty - parts and labor, 30 day money back guarantee.
***Purchaser of this ARCTIC Air unit is responsible for the cost of
installation of the unit to include all materials and labor - should not
exceed $500.***
Tom Quinn
President
TQI Solutions
A SDVOSB Corporation
Tel (757) 204-4618
Cell (757) 573-6818
Fax (757) 204-4628
quinn_tom@tqiinc.com
www.tqiinc.com
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom Quinn
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 5:46 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Portable Air Conditioning
Has anyone heard of a successful installation of a portable air conditioner
in an AA5? I use my plane to fly to business meetings but in the summer time
the heat and humidity can be pretty brutal and flying in a suit is not
really practical. I've made an portable air conditioner by converting an ice
cooler (see attached) and it works okay for about an hour but after that the
cockpit heats up quickly. Arctic
<http://www.arcticaircooler.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&Itemid>
Air
(http://www.arcticaircooler.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&Itemid)
offers real air conditioner that they claim is portable, has anyone heard of
installing this system in an AA5 or other aircraft? They claim that the unit
momentarily draws 40 amps at start up and 27 amps at high and 19 amps at
low, can a standard AA5 electrical system handle this or would you have to
upgrade the alternator? The exhaust would be routed through the rear
bulkhead, can this be done without any major problems. The more I compare my
Tiger to other aircraft the more I like it when you compare speed,
reliability, simplicity (fixed gear/prop), and costs. The biggest gripe I
have is the need for air conditioning during the summer to meet my business
mission needs. Appreciate any insight that anyone may have.
Tom Quinn
Message 7
| 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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cost of annual |
Gary, you must remember like Cliff noted some of these mechanics are not
making a living from their work but are retired and just having fun
keeping occupied.
The guy that did my annual gets some hefty retirement money form is long
career in the aerospace industry.
He only works on one plane at a time and has no telephone in his hangar
and since Torrance a closed airport no visitors. Without any
distractions he is very efficient but will not take any big jobs. Then
we must fly to Auburn etc.
Rick
On Jun 23, 2010, at 11:05 AM, Gary Vogt wrote:
> "I think you've hit the biggest problem. We treat our own equipment
better than others will ..... but they don't have to worry about the
pride or reputation of a job well done."
>
> This is a big issue for me. There are times when I think about
cutting corners and then I remind myself of all the mechanics I slam for
doing shitty work. Then I swear. Then I do it the way it should be
done.
>
> The only mechanic to call me about my work is Bill Scott. To his
credit, I've worked on his planes and his workmanship is obsessive
compulsive when it comes to having each and every piece that came with
the plane from the factory exactly where it should be. His issue with
me is not replacing the scraper on the wheel pant when installing the
fiberglass wheel pants. I don't like them. He also called and gave me
hell for signing off a Cheetah 10 years ago (this was a recent call)
that had had a larger oil cooler installed and the owner didn't have an
STC or Field Approval on the installation. To be honest, I don't even
remember the plane. HOWEVER, if I did recognize it had a larger oil
cooler and the installation was up to my standards, I would have signed
it off anyway, paperwork or no paperwork. The plane never should have
left the factory with that tiny oil cooler.
> ========================
> "I'm not so sure. I developed a scenario when I was brokering
airplanes ..... you see two guys on the ramp (buyer and seller), and
they're looking at the SAME airplane."
> About my inspection checklist . . . have you ever gone through
logbooks?
>
> Reading poor hand writing, vague entries, spending hours upon hours
looking for when the such and such an AD was done or a part was
changed/overhauled is a pain-in-the-ass. The person that buys my plane
will have a permanent record of every item ever done to the plane in an
easy to read format. I bought my plane in 2004. I have filled two (5)
year records. Every hour of work is documented. Modifications,
repairs, and maintenance done between overhauls are also recorded. Bill
Kelly also has a very complete record of maintenance and repair. Trust
me, when it comes time to sell, the buyer won't need more than 15
minutes to see the results of 10 years of compression tests and make up
his mind for himself what condition the engine is in. The same goes for
the rest of plane
> . . . . but then, I'm sure there are those owners out there that
just don't care one way or the other. As long as the cost of ownership
is cheap, that's all that matters.
> ========================
> Claude wrote: "When I see the cost of annual inspections here and on
the Gang, I cringe. No way could I afford my airplane if I had to cough
up 4-5 G every year just for an annual. " I had to smile. First, I
don't think I could afford $4,000-$5,000 annuals is I had to pay that
every year. Second, the annuals I do on worst case scenarios, planes
that have been ignored for many years, are more like on particular
example I have, $10,000 the first year, $7,000 the second, $3,000 the
third, and $1500 to $2000 since then. Corl's plane, the $80,000
Cheetah, gets by with a minimum amount of work during an annual. It
will need to have the wheel bearing packed this year, but that's about
it.
> ========================
> Bob, I need to raise my rates!
> ========================
> Thanks for all your input, Team. This economy is affecting us all.
I've thought about moving to Lake Almanor, writing action novels, and
say I've had enough. Maybe next year. Until then, I'm going to think
about the whole annuals thing. I want to find away to include those who
are used to $300 annuals and not scare them away with $1500 annuals.
>
> Grumman owners like Ric, who can get an annual done for $650 including
new brakes and muffler replacement, without flying 2 1/2 hours to
Auburn, well, I could never compete with that. Removing wheel pants,
replacing brake linings, cleaning up and lubricating the guide pins,
bending the brake lines into the right shape so as to not pre-load the
pads at an angle, adding brake fluid, checking the brakes, and putting
the wheel pants on takes a good 3 1/2 to 4 hours. Muffler: Removing the
cowling is part of the annual. But, removing and replacing the muffler,
cleaning up the risers, R&R SCAT for cabin heat/carb heat as required,
possibly new gaskets, easily 2 hours. Even without doing anything but
R&R a muffler, that's an hour or two. So, going into the annual I'd be
looking at 2 to 3 hours or so (he said it was done in a day) for the
annual. That's not going to happen for $650.
>
> Thanks again,
> Gary
> From: Linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Tue, June 22, 2010 1:15:15 PM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Cost of annual
>
> Gary Vogt wrote:
>>
>> Those are some pretty cheap annuals. Linn, I think he said "He
charges me $300 for 10 hours of inspection time." My Pre-Purchase
inspection runs $450.
>>
>> When I started AuCountry Aviation in 1997, I was charging $50 an
hour. At the time, the local avionics shop was $50/hr.
>>
>> I use a 14 page checklist that keeps 5 years of inspections in view.
I can tell you when and why a wire was changed, a light was changed, how
many hours on the brakes at each annual, when the last fuel selector
valve overhaul was done last, notes as to serial numbers on major parts,
times on mags, vacuum pumps, and hundreds of other items, all at a
glance. When I get a plane for the first time, I may spend up to 6
hours going through the logs verifying dates and times. The data on my
annuals is about as correct as can be made. I've seen logbooks so
fucked up that the plane actually had over 200 hrs less than what showed
due to transposing numbers. If I'm doing a plane for the first time, it
takes about 24 hours to thoroughly go through the plane; I charge for 18
hrs. I make it up over the next few years since I now know the plane.
> The first inspection was more ..... because he had to verify that all
the ADs had been complied with .... and annotated the entries with data
that was missing. That included looking at ALL the ADs. Now he just
looks for reecent ones.
>> Maybe no one really gives a shit that all that information is tracked
and readily available at a glance. I mean, really, just how important
is it to be able to look at just two pages and see 10 years worth of
compression tests to look for trends? Based on a few of the logbooks
I've reviewed, some don't even show compression checks (10 years of
annuals with no compression checks).
> I keep all the 'notes' with squawks and the compression checks .....
and usually just compare data with last years. Keeping all the data
..... and keeping it current probably should be a extra charge .... you
can cut the hours of the inspection by that time spent pounding keys.
>> I raised my rates in 1999 to $60/hr (following the avionics shops
rates). I went to $75/hr in 2001 (again following his rates). Then to
$85/hr in 2003; all the time, I had 8 planes in progress. $90/hr in
2005. Returning customers were getting a 20% break on their bill. Last
year I went to a flat rate of $1500 for the annual. My annuals
typically take 16 to 18 hours.
> With me removing all the stuff on the checklist, putting it all back,
and fixing squawks, I probably have that much time spent. But I spend a
lot of time looking for tools which you probably don't do. You're
probably more thorough.
>> After reading what I just wrote, it occurred to me that I'm doing
this whole maintenance thing wrong. I've been treating these planes
like they were my own.
> I think you've hit the biggest problem. We treat our own equipment
better than others will ..... but they don't have to worry about the
pride or reputation of a job well done.
>> I've been treating these planes as if the owners were involved and
concerned about the quality of maintenance.
> Most owners would rather pay the minimum to keep the airplane
airworthy and, hopefully, keep their butt safe for a year. Only when
they go to sell it do they find out that it's still 'pay me now or pay
me later'.
>> Perhaps if I just expanded my Pre-Purchase inspection a bit I could
use it for annuals. I could easily do a basic annual in 8 hours for
$650. Why bother with details like how many hours there are on vacuum
filters and rudder springs or repacking wheel bearings every other year?
> When the filter starts to turn brown and before it crumbles .... I
replace it. A quick tug tells me whether it needs it or not. I've
never replaced one that was dirty .... just aged. I do repack bearings
every other year, and replace oil filters every other change. Lately I
don't fly as much as I did, so it's usually one filter a year. I spend
a lot of time on corrosion control .... mostly the hardware ..... and
painting places that need it.
>>
>>
>> Owner assisted annuals: I charge for the hours I spend working on
the plane. Some owners think standing around and asking, "Why are you
doing that?" constitutes owner assisting. An owner assisted annual that
uses up 24 hours of my time gets charged for 24 hours. At the other end
of the spectrum is Bobby: He maintains his plane throughout the year.
When he brings his plane in for an owner assisted annual, the wheel
pants are off, the seats (except pilot's) are out, and the oil is
changed. His annuals take less than 8 hours and we go though the whole
plane.
> I'm pretty much like Bobby. Depending on whether the airplane is kept
hangared or tied down, I don't see much need to do a complete, maxed
out, inspection every year. I feel that removing every
cover/tip/interior .... does more damage than I find. But, I watch my
AI do the inspection, I fix the squawks, and he looks at the work I did
when he fills out the logs. Remember that I have the tools and
knowledge (mostly) from building airplanes.
>
> The biggest difference between you and I is that he comes to my hangar
which I pay the rent on. I don't figure how much of the 'rent'
(overhead) goes toward the annual, and I'm not trying to make a living
wrenching. I work on MY stuff cheap!!! I don't know how you guys do
it. My AI works 2 or 3 jobs to make ends meet and support his family.
Other people pay $400 for an assisted annual, twice that (or more) for
one he does by himself.
> Linn
>>
>> The 'other' maintenance shop here in Auburn charges $120/hr. Bob,
Cliff, Garner, what do you charge per hour?
>>
>> Thanks for your input, Team.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/co
ntribution
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 8
| 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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Portable Air Conditioning |
for $4,600, I'd go commercial. Seriously, for an AC that size, there is to
o much of a weight penalty. I'd find another solution.=0A=0A=0A=0A________
________________________=0AFrom: Tom Quinn <quinn_tom@tqiinc.com>=0ATo: tea
mgrumman-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Wed, June 23, 2010 12:02:25 PM=0ASubjec
t: RE: TeamGrumman-List: Portable Air Conditioning=0A=0A =0A =0AGary,=0A
=0ASomehow the link I sent didn=99t drill down to the Real A/C
unit that=0Aactually uses a compressor and 134A refrigerant so I cut and p
asted the=0Aunit I was talking about below. I think the unit you were looki
ng at was the=0Aunit that uses ice like the one I built in the picture I se
nt with the original=0Aemail. I live in the Norfolk Virginia area and the t
emps get to 100 degrees=0Awith 90% humidity and flying to a business meetin
g in business attire is almost=0Aimpossible. The unit I currently have is l
ike the one you described but it=0Aworks okay for about an hour if you fill
it with ice but I=99m looking for=0Aa solution that is more effectiv
e and convenient like the RAC200-1-12D shown=0Abelow=0A =0A =0A =0A =0A =0A
200 CFM with 1 fan, 12 Volt with duct, Real AC =0APrice per Unit (piece):$
4 600.00 =0AAsk a question about this product =0A=0A_____________________
___________=0A =0AThis is a completely portable self-contained A/C unit wit
h compressor and 134A refrigerant.=0AWeight: 42 lbs.=0ADimensions: 13"W x
19"H x 13"D=0APower Source: works in a 12 volt aircraft=0A200 cfm (cubic
ft/minute) (turns over air in 4 seat aircraft every 60 seconds.=0AArctic Ai
r can control the amps you draw at a low of 19 amps and a high of 27 amps.
Start-up peaks at 40 amps for a split second and levels off at 25 amps.=0A
If plane will give us 27 amps of power at 12 volts, the unit will put out 7
,000 BTUs of a/c.=0AIf plane will give us 19 amps of power, the unit will p
ut out 5,000 BTUs of A/C=0ACondensation is routed from inside the unit thru
a condensation disposal hose and collected in a reservoir of your choice p
laced on the outside of the unit. The accumulated condensation can then be
disposed of when the aircraft is parked. Also, the condensation disposal
hose can be routed through a drain hole in the bottom of the aircraft allow
ing the condensation to be removed continuously during flight.=0AExhaust ai
r is vented out rear of the aircraft using a flexible hose attached to the
rear of the unit and routed through the rear cargo wall..=0A1 year warranty
- parts and labor, 30 day money back guarantee.=0A***Purchaser of this ARC
TIC Air unit is responsible for the cost of installation of the unit to inc
lude all materials and labor - should not exceed $500.*** =0A =0A =0ATom=0A
Quinn=0APresident=0ATQI Solutions=0AA=0ASDVOSB Corporation=0ATel (757) 204-
4618=0ACell (757) 573-6818=0AFax (757) 204-4628=0Aquinn_tom@tqiinc.com=0Aww
w.tqiinc.com=0A =0AFrom:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com=0A[mail
to:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom=0AQuinn=0A
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 5:46 AM=0ATo: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
=0ASubject: TeamGrumman-List: Portable Air Conditioning=0A =0AHas=0Aanyone
heard of a successful installation of a portable air conditioner in an=0AAA
5? I use my plane to fly to business meetings but in the summer time the he
at=0Aand humidity can be pretty brutal and flying in a suit is not really p
ractical.=0AI=99ve made an portable air conditioner by converting an
ice cooler (see=0Aattached) and it works okay for about an hour but after t
hat the cockpit heats=0Aup quickly. Arctic=0AAir(http://www.arcticaircooler
.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&Itemid)=0Aoffers real air condi
tioner that they claim is portable, has anyone heard of=0Ainstalling this s
ystem in an AA5 or other aircraft? They claim that the unit=0Amomentarily d
raws 40 amps at start up and 27 amps at high and 19 amps at low,=0Acan a st
andard AA5 electrical system handle this or would you have to upgrade=0Athe
alternator? The exhaust would be routed through the rear bulkhead, can thi
s=0Abe done without any major problems. The more I compare my Tiger to othe
r=0Aaircraft the more I like it when you compare speed, reliability, simpli
city=0A(fixed gear/prop), and costs. The biggest gripe I have is the need f
or air=0Aconditioning during the summer to meet my business mission needs.
Appreciate=0Aany insight that anyone may have.=0A =0ATom=0AQuinn=0A=0A=0A
Message 9
| 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 |
|
| Subject: | Interior plastic |
I'm installing windows and new plastic in a Cheetah. New headliner in the cabin
and canopy too.
The new stuff is semi-trimmed to fit as it comes. That saves a lot of time. I've
mentioned to Garner before about the poor fitting of the plastic. I know
it isn't his fault. I would have thought by now, with planes as recent as 2005,
that the tooling would have been corrected. The added time to install stuff
that doesn't fit surely must add to the time it takes to build the plane.
Canopy plastic:
Garner, get both pieces and lay them side-by-side. Compare the back of each
piece to each other. You'll notice the shape of the right piece, at the aft edge,
is molded quite differently from the left. The left is correct. The right
side is also about 1/4 inch too short. It's impossible to rivet it to the
trailing edge as was done at the factory. Now, compare the height of the piece
that goes across the front, the area that rivets to the canopy. The right side
is .1 inches shorter.
Rear side moldings:
These seem to fit pretty well. I was surprised. The contour on both pieces,
however, at the rear, is not the same shape as the window. This requires trim-to-fit
distance to the window to be shallow in the middle of the molding. The
left piece is not molded correctly at the top front corner. It's actually curved
too much. I had to heat it with a heat gun and reshape so the corner fit.
I'm sure a lot of you have not had any trouble installing this plastic. My objection
is, too much time is spent 'trim-to-fit' on nearly all parts for planes.
It doesn't need to be this way. Including, holding the little butterfly clips
in place on some of the instruments with one hand and putting a screw in with
the other. How difficult would it be to change the drawing to include a threaded
hole?
If Kevin wanted to really make some money on these, he should consider items that
should be changed to make assembly the plane as straight forward and efficient
as possible. Suggestion: Headliners on cars are a molded piece of cardboard
with the headliner material on it. That piece could me made to incorporate
the rear window moldings as well. Imagine, installing the complete cabin interior
by popping in preformed panels that include the window moldings and headliner.
Save about 10 hours. It would weigh about the same too. Plus, it would
add sound deadening with no extra weight penalty.
Message 10
| 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 |
|
I tried Linn's suggestion with the Green Loctite. I couldn't see it being pulled
into the hole with an inch or so of vacuum on it. I think if the wing were
upside down, it would be easier. Anyway, resealed with Pro-Seal. We'll see
now.
Message 11
| 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 |
|
| Subject: | Portable Air Conditioning |
Actually compared to A/C upgrades of other aircraft being $18,000 to
$21,000 or buying a 2006 182 with A/C at around $250K I think $4,600 is
a good deal (if the system works). Also a loaded ice chest cooler air
conditioner weighs around 60 lbs. I=99m trying to weigh options
based on my business mission needs. If I can=99t find a solution
for my Tiger I may have to sell it and purchase another air craft with
A/C
Tom Quinn
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary
Vogt
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Portable Air Conditioning
for $4,600, I'd go commercial. Seriously, for an AC that size, there is
too much of a weight penalty. I'd find another solution.
_____
From: Tom Quinn <quinn_tom@tqiinc.com>
Sent: Wed, June 23, 2010 12:02:25 PM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: Portable Air Conditioning
Gary,
Somehow the link I sent didn=99t drill down to the Real
A/C unit that actually uses a compressor and 134A refrigerant so I cut
and pasted the unit I was talking about below. I think the unit you were
looking at was the unit that uses ice like the one I built in the
picture I sent with the original email. I live in the Norfolk Virginia
area and the temps get to 100 degrees with 90% humidity and flying to a
business meeting in business attire is almost impossible. The unit I
currently have is like the one you described but it works okay for about
an hour if you fill it with ice but I=99m looking for a solution
that is more effective and convenient like the RAC200-1-12D shown below
<http://www.arcticaircooler.com/components/com_virtuemart/shop_image/prod
uct/200_CFM_with_1_f_4c1b9ce5e6b14.jpg> Error! Filename not specified.
200 CFM with 1 fan, 12 Volt with duct, Real AC
Price per Unit (piece): $4 600.00
Ask a question about this product
<http://www.arcticaircooler.com/index.php?page=shop.ask&flypage=&prod
uct_id=35&category_id=7&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid>
_____
This is a completely portable self-contained A/C unit with compressor
and 134A refrigerant.
Weight: 42 lbs.
Dimensions: 13"W x 19"H x 13"D
Power Source: works in a 12 volt aircraft
200 cfm (cubic ft/minute) (turns over air in 4 seat aircraft every 60
seconds.
Arctic Air can control the amps you draw at a low of 19 amps and a high
of 27 amps. Start-up peaks at 40 amps for a split second and levels off
at 25 amps.
If plane will give us 27 amps of power at 12 volts, the unit will put
out 7,000 BTUs of a/c.
If plane will give us 19 amps of power, the unit will put out 5,000 BTUs
of A/C
Condensation is routed from inside the unit thru a condensation disposal
hose and collected in a reservoir of your choice placed on the outside
of the unit. The accumulated condensation can then be disposed of when
the aircraft is parked. Also, the condensation disposal hose can be
routed through a drain hole in the bottom of the aircraft allowing the
condensation to be removed continuously during flight.
Exhaust air is vented out rear of the aircraft using a flexible hose
attached to the rear of the unit and routed through the rear cargo
wall..
1 year warranty - parts and labor, 30 day money back guarantee.
***Purchaser of this ARCTIC Air unit is responsible for the cost of
installation of the unit to include all materials and labor - should not
exceed $500.***
Tom Quinn
President
Error! Filename not specified.TQI Solutions
A SDVOSB Corporation
Tel (757) 204-4618
Cell (757) 573-6818
Fax (757) 204-4628
quinn_tom@tqiinc.com
www.tqiinc.com
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom
Quinn
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 5:46 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Portable Air Conditioning
Has anyone heard of a successful installation of a portable air
conditioner in an AA5? I use my plane to fly to business meetings but in
the summer time the heat and humidity can be pretty brutal and flying in
a suit is not really practical. I=99ve made an portable air
conditioner by converting an ice cooler (see attached) and it works okay
for about an hour but after that the cockpit heats up quickly. Arctic
Air
<http://www.arcticaircooler.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=
80> (http://www.arcticaircooler.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart
<http://www.arcticaircooler.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=
80> &Itemid) offers real air conditioner that they claim is
portable, has anyone heard of installing this system in an AA5 or other
aircraft? They claim that the unit momentarily draws 40 amps at start up
and 27 amps at high and 19 amps at low, can a standard AA5 electrical
system handle this or would you have to upgrade the alternator? The
exhaust would be routed through the rear bulkhead, can this be done
without any major problems. The more I compare my Tiger to other
aircraft the more I like it when you compare speed, reliability,
simplicity (fixed gear/prop), and costs. The biggest gripe I have is the
need for air conditioning during the summer to meet my business mission
needs. Appreciate any insight that anyone may have.
Tom Quinn
Message 12
| 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 |
|
Gary said
"I built my jig in 1984 in an attempt to simulate the location and shape of
the windshield as installed. At the time, I was trying too imagine how they
were done at the factory. I figured they had some sort of jig to put the
windshield on the bow."
Yes they did, check out the picture of it on this thread on the TeamGrumman Forum
site
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=71876
Assume that may be the email listing doesn't attach the pictures posted on the
forum.
Ian
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=302298#302298
Message 13
| 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 |
|
| Subject: | Interior plastic |
Garyly
The pastics are from Vantage Plane Plastics in Oklahoma. It's not factory o
r mine=2C so changing things up woudl be the responsibility of the producti
on holder. If you look at the PMA tag on the parts=2C it will show what is
required per part 45.
I know that someday you will be happy when you get some new trifocals. You
old fart :)
I have an extra walker for you at the convention.
Garner
From: teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Interior plastic
I'm installing windows and new plastic in a Cheetah. New headliner in the
cabin and canopy too.
The new stuff is semi-trimmed to fit as it comes. That saves a lot of time
. I've mentioned to Garner before about the poor fitting of the plastic.
I know it isn't his fault. I would have thought by now=2C with planes as r
ecent as 2005=2C that the tooling would have been corrected. The added tim
e to install stuff that doesn't fit surely must add to the time it takes to
build the plane.
Canopy plastic:
Garner=2C get both pieces and lay them side-by-side. Compare the back of
each piece to each other. You'll notice the shape of the right piece=2C a
t the aft edge=2C is molded quite differently from the left. The left is c
orrect. The right side is also about 1/4 inch too short. It's impossible
to rivet it to the trailing edge as was done at the factory. Now=2C compar
e the height of the piece that goes across the front=2C the area that rivet
s to the canopy. The right side is .1 inches shorter.
Rear side moldings:
These seem to fit pretty well. I was surprised. The contour on both piec
es=2C however=2C at the rear=2C is not the same shape as the window. This
requires trim-to-fit distance to the window to be shallow in the middle of
the molding. The left piece is not molded correctly at the top front corne
r. It's actually curved too much. I had to heat it with a heat gun and re
shape so the corner fit.
I'm sure a lot of you have not had any trouble installing this plastic. My
objection is=2C too much time is spent 'trim-to-fit' on nearly all parts f
or planes. It doesn't need to be this way. Including=2C holding the littl
e butterfly clips in place on some of the instruments with one hand and put
ting a screw in with the other. How difficult would it be to change the dr
awing to include a threaded hole?
If Kevin wanted to really make some money on these=2C he should consider it
ems that should be changed to make assembly the plane as straight forward a
nd efficient as possible. Suggestion: Headliners on cars are a molded pie
ce of cardboard with the headliner material on it. That piece could me mad
e to incorporate the rear window moldings as well. Imagine=2C installing t
he complete cabin interior by popping in preformed panels that include the
window moldings and headliner. Save about 10 hours. It would weigh about
the same too. Plus=2C it would add sound deadening with no extra weight pe
nalty.
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with H
otmail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid=
PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5
Message 14
| 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 |
|
Look at the fixture in the foreground. That looks very similar to the piece I
made to space the windshield. Maybe I gave up on that too early.
________________________________
From: grumpyparts <i.r.m@btinternet.com>
Sent: Wed, June 23, 2010 4:20:47 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Windshield
Gary said
"I built my jig in 1984 in an attempt to simulate the location and shape of
the windshield as installed. At the time, I was trying too imagine how they
were done at the factory. I figured they had some sort of jig to put the
windshield on the bow."
Yes they did, check out the picture of it on this thread on the TeamGrumman Forum
site
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=71876
Assume that may be the email listing doesn't attach the pictures posted on the
forum.
Ian
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=302298#302298
Message 15
| 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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interior plastic |
I wish I had the spare time and money to make plastic parts that actually fit.
I still haven't made the tooling for the cup holder.
________________________________
From: Garner Rice <garnerrice@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wed, June 23, 2010 4:30:36 PM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: Interior plastic
Garyly
The pastics are from Vantage Plane Plastics in Oklahoma. It's not factory or mine,
so changing things up woudl be the responsibility of the production holder.
If you look at the PMA tag on the parts, it will show what is required per part
45.
I know that someday you will be happy when you get some new trifocals. You old
fart :)
I have an extra walker for you at the convention.
Garner
________________________________
From: teamgrumman@YAHOO.COM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Interior plastic
I'm installing windows and new plastic in a Cheetah. New headliner in the cabin
and canopy too.
The new stuff is semi-trimmed to fit as it comes. That saves a lot of time. I've
mentioned to Garner before about the poor fitting of the plastic. I know
it isn't his fault. I would have thought by now, with planes as recent as 2005,
that the tooling would have been corrected. The added time to install stuff
that doesn't fit surely must add to the time it takes to build the plane.
Canopy plastic:
Garner, get both pieces and lay them side-by-side. Compare the back of each
piece to each other. You'll notice the shape of the right piece, at the aft edge,
is molded quite differently from the left. The left is correct. The right
side is also about 1/4 inch too short. It's impossible to rivet it to the
trailing edge as was done at the factory. Now, compare the height of the piece
that goes across the front, the area that rivets to the canopy. The right side
is .1 inches shorter.
Rear side moldings:
These seem to fit pretty well. I was surprised. The contour on both pieces,
however, at the rear, is not the same shape as the window. This requires trim-to-fit
distance to the window to be shallow in the middle of the molding. The
left piece is not molded correctly at the top front corner. It's actually curved
too much. I had to heat it with a heat gun and reshape so the corner fit.
I'm sure a lot of you have not had any trouble installing this plastic. My objection
is, too much time is spent 'trim-to-fit' on nearly all parts for planes.
It doesn't need to be this way. Including, holding the little butterfly clips
in place on some of the instruments with one hand and putting a screw in with
the other. How difficult would it be to change the drawing to include a threaded
hole?
If Kevin wanted to really make some money on these, he should consider items that
should be changed to make assembly the plane as straight forward and efficient
as possible. Suggestion: Headliners on cars are a molded piece of cardboard
with the headliner material on it. That piece could me made to incorporate
the rear window moldings as well. Imagine, installing the complete cabin interior
by popping in preformed panels that include the window moldings and headliner.
Save about 10 hours. It would weigh about the same too. Plus, it would
add sound deadening with no extra weight penalty.
List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List ronics.com ww.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________
The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with Hotmail.
Get busy.
Message 16
| 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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Oh, the sacrilege |
Jamey,
not sure why your email went to spam.
The owner is a Tiger owner also, and a friend. I did him a favor and installed
the engine analyzer.
Gary
________________________________
From: James Courtney <jamey@jamescourtney.net>
Sent: Tue, June 8, 2010 11:19:51 PM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: Oh, the sacrilege
Hey, it's one of those retractable Grummans like Cliff has.
Who sweet-talked you in to servicing that thing?
;-)
Jamey
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 9:22 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Oh, the sacrilege
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
11:35:00
Message 17
| 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 |
|
| Subject: | Canopy headliner, plastic |
1379: Canopy headliner and windows, and window moldings by Vogt. Often imitated,
never duplicated.
1383: Detail of canopy latch cover. With very little effort, the canopy plastic
could be modified to fit to the latch cover.
1385: Cabin ready for rear seats.
Message 18
| 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 |
|
| Subject: | Oh, the sacrilege |
Cool. Hope it didn't give you too much trouble. Did you tie in to the
factory fuel flow transducer or add a second?
Jamey
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 8:58 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Oh, the sacrilege
Jamey,
not sure why your email went to spam.
The owner is a Tiger owner also, and a friend. I did him a favor and
installed the engine analyzer.
Gary
_____
From: James Courtney <jamey@jamescourtney.net>
Sent: Tue, June 8, 2010 11:19:51 PM
Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: Oh, the sacrilege
<jamey@jamescourtney.net>
Hey, it's one of those retractable Grummans like Cliff has.
Who sweet-talked you in to servicing that thing?
;-)
Jamey
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 9:22 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Oh, the sacrilege
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
11:35:00
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! --
|