Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:29 AM - Status... (Matt Dralle)
2. 04:48 AM - Re: Flight soft data (Robert Mortara)
3. 04:49 AM - Re: Phase II Flight restrictions (Brian Lloyd)
4. 04:55 AM - Re: Wagers (Brian Lloyd)
5. 04:59 AM - Re: Wagers (Brian Lloyd)
6. 05:24 AM - Re: Phase II Flight restrictions (Gus Fraser)
7. 05:52 AM - Re: Phase II Flight restrictions (Ernie)
8. 06:03 AM - Re: Phase II Flight restrictions (Walt Fricke)
9. 06:05 AM - Re: Wagers (Walt Fricke)
10. 06:10 AM - Re: YAK 52 Flight Data Recorder (Deon Esterhuizen)
11. 06:10 AM - CJ6 external power connector (jay reiter)
12. 06:42 AM - Re: Phase II Flight restrictions (Brian Lloyd)
13. 06:45 AM - Re: Wagers (Brian Lloyd)
14. 06:47 AM - Re: CJ6 external power connector (Brian Lloyd)
15. 06:51 AM - Re: Wagers (Terry Calloway)
16. 07:55 AM - external power (jay reiter)
17. 09:15 AM - Re: CJ6 external power connector (Doug)
18. 09:28 AM - Re: Phase II Flight restrictions (Michael Di Marco)
19. 01:15 PM - Yak-52 tip tanks (Roy O. Wright)
20. 05:27 PM - Exact wording of Flight restrictions (Frank Haertlein)
21. 05:34 PM - Re: CJ6 external power connector (Frank Haertlein)
22. 05:45 PM - Re: Exact wording of Flight restrictions (Brian Lloyd)
23. 07:52 PM - Re: Yak-52 tip tanks (A. Dennis Savarese)
24. 08:11 PM - Re: Phase II Flight restrictions (A. Dennis Savarese)
25. 08:53 PM - Re: Exact wording of Flight restrictions (Michael Di Marco)
26. 09:27 PM - Re: external power (Frank Haertlein)
27. 10:27 PM - Re: Phase II Flight restrictions (Jon Boede)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: Matt Dralle <dralle@matronics.com>
Dear Listers,
As promised, here's an update on this year's List Support Gift shipping
status! Wednesday 12/11 all of the CDROM-Only and all but 12 of the
CDROM+Flight Bag Gifts were shipped out via US Parcel Post. Maximum
delivery will be 8 days to the most remote areas.
For those receiving a CDROM+Flight Bag, note that the CDROM is tucked
inside one of the pouches in the Flight Bag so don't miss it!!
The remaining Flight-Bag+CDROM, Flight Bag-Only and A&P Book Sets will go
out as soon as the next shipments arrive, hopefully in the next few days.
Once again, I want to thank everyone that made a Contribution to this
year's Email List Fund Raiser! The email and web systems are now running
on brand new APC 2.2kva UPS systems thanks to the support of List members
this year. Additionally, the Email System will be upgraded later this
month with a new, Dual Processor 2.8Ghz Linux system due to arrive any
day! Your generosity has made these upgrades possible and nothing
else! Thank you so much!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Email List Contribution Web Site: http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle@matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
DNA: do not archive
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: | Flight soft data |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Robert Mortara" <robmortara@robinhill.com>
Does any one have aircraft data on a CJ-6 for RMS Flightsoft?
rob
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: Phase II Flight restrictions |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
Jon Boede wrote:
>
> Then perhaps you can "assist" them in correcting their typo... or if that
> doesn't work you might nudge them to show you the order that has the
> wording in it that they used. You probably want to avoid getting fully
> uppity with them and pointing out that they can't just go making things
> up; and shooting at them just seems to make them mad. :-)
>
> I get (30) for my L-39, which is even worse... *600* NM with "one
> alternate" per flight. Although that's not so bad -- I can fly somewhere,
> eat, get gas, and come home.
Yeah, I forgot about the 600 nm radius for turbine-powered aircraft.
> If they stick to their wording on your special version of (29) ... you
> might try faxing them a "goin' somewhere" letter every day until they get
> tired of it. :-)
>
> Brian... when you say "fight" -- what exactly did you do, and what worked
> in the end?
I used that word figuratively. I did not get into an altercation since that is
counterproductive. The natural reaction of the confronted bureaucrat is to say
no and kick you out. I was firm and I did not yield. The FAA has helped
because they have standardized this and left it less to the discretion of the
local FSDO, i.e. the FSDO is *NOT* supposed to make up their own LoL anymore.
The FAA has produced an internal advisory document that is supposed to
standardize all LoLs for experimental/exhibition aircraft. The circular
provides a whole bunch of paragraphs and the FSDO wants to pick-and-choose from
the list, usually producing something very restrictive. Someplace else they
give the list of applicable paragraphs for each type of aircraft, i.e. recip
with less than 800 hp, recip with more than 800 hp, and turbine aircraft. It
would have been so much easier to just produce the three different LoLs and then
just say, "use this one for this type of aircraft," but that would have been too
easy.
So *you* get the AC, go through the list of paragraphs for your type of
aircraft, and point it out to the appropriate person at the FSDO. If they are
still recalcitrant you probably need to hook up with the MIDO.
> I have a whacky restriction on my 39 that's supposed to read
> "Class C, D, E, and G airports unless a declared emergency or directed by
> ATC" and mine just says "prohibited from entering Class B" (no "unless by
> ATC", not even "in case of a declared emergency") -- which is frankly
> unsafe since all the good IFR alternates for my home airport are under the
> DFW Class B. I'm looking to gently persuade them to make my program
> letter safer, but I haven't started that process yet.
It doesn't matter because once you declare an emergency, everything else goes
out the window. Once you declare an emergency, the airspace is yours.
Case in point, my father tells a story about leading a flight of two F-11F's
from Memphis to Pax River. The weather was not as forecast and they ended up at
about 45,000' to stay above the WX all the way to DC. They had to climb
through heavy rain and, unbeknownced to them, both aircraft had leaky hatches in
their avionics bays. By the time they got to the Pax River area his wingman had
lost all comm and nav and my father was down to a single comm. ATC directed him
to change frequencies and he refused on the basis that he might lose all comm
which would require them to punch out of both aircraft. He asked for ATC to
bring Pax River's GCA controller up on the current frequency and ATC refused.
He then pointed out to ATC that their other choice was for him to declare an
emergency and to remember that he was above *all* their other traffic. The next
voice on his receiver? "Navy Speedee flight, this is the Pax River final
approach controller. Please turn to heading ..."
The moral of this story is, once you declare an emergency you own all the
airspace you need, including the class-B airspace. Don't worry about what your
LoL says. Just get your aircraft safely on the ground and then worry about the
other crap.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza, Suite 201
brian@lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 - voice +1.360.838.9669 - fax
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
Barry Hancock wrote:
> House has the odds at 5:2 that the baby comes before the plane flies.
That is a sucker bet. Of course the baby will come before the plane flies. It
only takes 9 months to make a baby and there are no A&Ps involved.
> Side bets:
> 2:1 that I get a call to come home when I'm out at Chino
Again, sucker bet. Of course you will be out at Chino unless it happens at
night. Therefore, if you sleep 8 hours and are awake 16 hours, odds are 2:1
that you will be out at Chino. That goes up if you have a cot in the hangar.
> 3:1 that he ends up with the initials C.J.
Only if that is what Deborah wants. Somehow I give her more credit than that.
:
)
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza, Suite 201
brian@lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 - voice +1.360.838.9669 - fax
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
cjpilot710@aol.com wrote:
> Hay I'd like the helmet bet. But I bet he comes on Christmas Day. Poor kid
> no matter what, he'll never know if he is getting presents for Christmas or
> his birthday.
Seth, my youngest son (the one you met at Spencer a couple of years back), was
born on Dec 26. He got so tired of not really getting anything for his birthday
that this year he changed his birthday celebration day to September 26. We
finally were forced to admit that we usually just took one of his Christmas
presents and rewrapped it in BD paper to give to him the next day. Poor kid.
> BTW, we just found out our daughter will have a GIRL (#3 grandchild), the
> first part of April.
Congrats G'pa!
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza, Suite 201
brian@lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 - voice +1.360.838.9669 - fax
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: | Re: Phase II Flight restrictions |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Gus Fraser <fraseg@comcast.net>
Also EAA govt department are very helful with these issues. Some FSDOs are
better than others at reading FAA docs. I all the experiences I have had the
EAA have been really helpful in getting resolution.
Gus
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian@lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Phase II Flight restrictions
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
>
> Jon Boede wrote:
> >
> > Then perhaps you can "assist" them in correcting their typo... or if
that
> > doesn't work you might nudge them to show you the order that has the
> > wording in it that they used. You probably want to avoid getting fully
> > uppity with them and pointing out that they can't just go making things
> > up; and shooting at them just seems to make them mad. :-)
> >
> > I get (30) for my L-39, which is even worse... *600* NM with "one
> > alternate" per flight. Although that's not so bad -- I can fly
somewhere,
> > eat, get gas, and come home.
>
> Yeah, I forgot about the 600 nm radius for turbine-powered aircraft.
>
> > If they stick to their wording on your special version of (29) ... you
> > might try faxing them a "goin' somewhere" letter every day until they
get
> > tired of it. :-)
> >
> > Brian... when you say "fight" -- what exactly did you do, and what
worked
> > in the end?
>
> I used that word figuratively. I did not get into an altercation since
that is
> counterproductive. The natural reaction of the confronted bureaucrat is
to say
> no and kick you out. I was firm and I did not yield. The FAA has helped
> because they have standardized this and left it less to the discretion of
the
> local FSDO, i.e. the FSDO is *NOT* supposed to make up their own LoL
anymore.
>
> The FAA has produced an internal advisory document that is supposed to
> standardize all LoLs for experimental/exhibition aircraft. The circular
> provides a whole bunch of paragraphs and the FSDO wants to pick-and-choose
from
> the list, usually producing something very restrictive. Someplace else
they
> give the list of applicable paragraphs for each type of aircraft, i.e.
recip
> with less than 800 hp, recip with more than 800 hp, and turbine aircraft.
It
> would have been so much easier to just produce the three different LoLs
and then
> just say, "use this one for this type of aircraft," but that would have
been too
> easy.
>
> So *you* get the AC, go through the list of paragraphs for your type of
> aircraft, and point it out to the appropriate person at the FSDO. If they
are
> still recalcitrant you probably need to hook up with the MIDO.
>
> > I have a whacky restriction on my 39 that's supposed to read
> > "Class C, D, E, and G airports unless a declared emergency or directed
by
> > ATC" and mine just says "prohibited from entering Class B" (no "unless
by
> > ATC", not even "in case of a declared emergency") -- which is frankly
> > unsafe since all the good IFR alternates for my home airport are under
the
> > DFW Class B. I'm looking to gently persuade them to make my program
> > letter safer, but I haven't started that process yet.
>
> It doesn't matter because once you declare an emergency, everything else
goes
> out the window. Once you declare an emergency, the airspace is yours.
>
> Case in point, my father tells a story about leading a flight of two
F-11F's
> from Memphis to Pax River. The weather was not as forecast and they ended
up at
> about 45,000' to stay above the WX all the way to DC. They had to climb
> through heavy rain and, unbeknownced to them, both aircraft had leaky
hatches in
> their avionics bays. By the time they got to the Pax River area his
wingman had
> lost all comm and nav and my father was down to a single comm. ATC
directed him
> to change frequencies and he refused on the basis that he might lose all
comm
> which would require them to punch out of both aircraft. He asked for ATC
to
> bring Pax River's GCA controller up on the current frequency and ATC
refused.
> He then pointed out to ATC that their other choice was for him to declare
an
> emergency and to remember that he was above *all* their other traffic.
The next
> voice on his receiver? "Navy Speedee flight, this is the Pax River final
> approach controller. Please turn to heading ..."
>
> The moral of this story is, once you declare an emergency you own all the
> airspace you need, including the class-B airspace. Don't worry about what
your
> LoL says. Just get your aircraft safely on the ground and then worry
about the
> other crap.
>
> --
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza, Suite 201
> brian@lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
> +1.340.998.9447 - voice +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
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: Phase II Flight restrictions |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
My L-29 Program letter states
"This aircraft is restricted to airports that are within airspace classes
C,D,E, and G during proficiency flights, except in the case of a declared
emergency or when otherwise directed by Air Traffic Control."
Read "DURING PROFICENCY" which I read as if there is an airshow inside class
bravo then you're good to go. The more important line is "or when otherwise
directed by Air Traffic Control" which means that if you want to enter class
bravo, just get flight following into the airport.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian@lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Phase II Flight restrictions
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
>
> Jon Boede wrote:
> >
> > Then perhaps you can "assist" them in correcting their typo... or if
that
> > doesn't work you might nudge them to show you the order that has the
> > wording in it that they used. You probably want to avoid getting fully
> > uppity with them and pointing out that they can't just go making things
> > up; and shooting at them just seems to make them mad. :-)
> >
> > I get (30) for my L-39, which is even worse... *600* NM with "one
> > alternate" per flight. Although that's not so bad -- I can fly
somewhere,
> > eat, get gas, and come home.
>
> Yeah, I forgot about the 600 nm radius for turbine-powered aircraft.
>
> > If they stick to their wording on your special version of (29) ... you
> > might try faxing them a "goin' somewhere" letter every day until they
get
> > tired of it. :-)
> >
> > Brian... when you say "fight" -- what exactly did you do, and what
worked
> > in the end?
>
> I used that word figuratively. I did not get into an altercation since
that is
> counterproductive. The natural reaction of the confronted bureaucrat is
to say
> no and kick you out. I was firm and I did not yield. The FAA has helped
> because they have standardized this and left it less to the discretion of
the
> local FSDO, i.e. the FSDO is *NOT* supposed to make up their own LoL
anymore.
>
> The FAA has produced an internal advisory document that is supposed to
> standardize all LoLs for experimental/exhibition aircraft. The circular
> provides a whole bunch of paragraphs and the FSDO wants to pick-and-choose
from
> the list, usually producing something very restrictive. Someplace else
they
> give the list of applicable paragraphs for each type of aircraft, i.e.
recip
> with less than 800 hp, recip with more than 800 hp, and turbine aircraft.
It
> would have been so much easier to just produce the three different LoLs
and then
> just say, "use this one for this type of aircraft," but that would have
been too
> easy.
>
> So *you* get the AC, go through the list of paragraphs for your type of
> aircraft, and point it out to the appropriate person at the FSDO. If they
are
> still recalcitrant you probably need to hook up with the MIDO.
>
> > I have a whacky restriction on my 39 that's supposed to read
> > "Class C, D, E, and G airports unless a declared emergency or directed
by
> > ATC" and mine just says "prohibited from entering Class B" (no "unless
by
> > ATC", not even "in case of a declared emergency") -- which is frankly
> > unsafe since all the good IFR alternates for my home airport are under
the
> > DFW Class B. I'm looking to gently persuade them to make my program
> > letter safer, but I haven't started that process yet.
>
> It doesn't matter because once you declare an emergency, everything else
goes
> out the window. Once you declare an emergency, the airspace is yours.
>
> Case in point, my father tells a story about leading a flight of two
F-11F's
> from Memphis to Pax River. The weather was not as forecast and they ended
up at
> about 45,000' to stay above the WX all the way to DC. They had to climb
> through heavy rain and, unbeknownced to them, both aircraft had leaky
hatches in
> their avionics bays. By the time they got to the Pax River area his
wingman had
> lost all comm and nav and my father was down to a single comm. ATC
directed him
> to change frequencies and he refused on the basis that he might lose all
comm
> which would require them to punch out of both aircraft. He asked for ATC
to
> bring Pax River's GCA controller up on the current frequency and ATC
refused.
> He then pointed out to ATC that their other choice was for him to declare
an
> emergency and to remember that he was above *all* their other traffic.
The next
> voice on his receiver? "Navy Speedee flight, this is the Pax River final
> approach controller. Please turn to heading ..."
>
> The moral of this story is, once you declare an emergency you own all the
> airspace you need, including the class-B airspace. Don't worry about what
your
> LoL says. Just get your aircraft safely on the ground and then worry
about the
> other crap.
>
> --
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza, Suite 201
> brian@lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
> +1.340.998.9447 - voice +1.360.838.9669 - fax
>
>
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: Phase II Flight restrictions |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Walt Fricke <walterfricke@yahoo.com>
I'm looking to gently persuade them to
> make my program
> letter safer, but I haven't started that process
> yet.
>
> Jon
Jon,
My guess is that you may have better luck with an
individual personality than the system. We went all
the way to the top (Garvey?) with a "fully
documented,lawyer written,common sbrainerbrainrer" on
the AN-2 just asking for an alternate airport to use
for training. This, on the basis that the home field
is most likely oriented with runways into the
prevailing winds and it would be a good idea to
occasionally practice landings at another airport
rather than at an airshow where there might be oodles
of people wandering around next to the runway with a
20 knot crosswind and 12' Prop-sicle to contend with.
No Joy. I think in the case of the AN-2 there was
more political pressure as it has such utility if
allowed....even under the experimental category.
My Yak 50 ops limitations got a new
twist..."interpretation"...from an individual....I can
fly to any airport within 300NM for training, but if I
plan to go there for a pancake breakfast, I have to
send them an updated program letter. (I always
thought within the 300 mile radius I could come and go
as I appearantly.appearantly they want the opportunity
to know in advance so they can look for us to say
hello.
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: Walt Fricke <walterfricke@yahoo.com>
I he was concieved in a CJ, with a flight suit and
helmet on, I'll take the last three with even odds.
--- Barry Hancock <radialpower@cox.net> wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Barry Hancock
> <radialpower@cox.net>
>
> Since you guys seem to like to wager on my life
> events (is that a
> compliment, or tragedy?:) here's one for you...
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | YAK 52 Flight Data Recorder |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Deon Esterhuizen" <desterhuizen@hyphos360.com>
Roger,
I removed my data recorder + mount about a week ago - will get you the
weight.
Deon.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rodger Modglin [mailto:rmodg@hotmail.com]
Subject: Yak-List: YAK 52 Flight Data Recorder
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Rodger Modglin" <rmodg@hotmail.com>
I am doing some inertia calculations and would like to have the weight
of
the original flight data recorder and mount that was located to the left
and
behind the rear cockpit seat on the YAK 52s. Does anyone have this data?
Rodger Modglin
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
=
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: | CJ6 external power connector |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "jay reiter" <jmreiter@adelphia.net>
I would like to use external power. I am in contact with a fellow at Burton Electric
and he does not recognize the description of the connector. They manufacture
most connectors including two different ones for the MIG's. Does anyone have
a receptacle removed for weight saving that I can use as a sample? Do other
type Yak's use the round three pin connector?.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Phase II Flight restrictions |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
Walt Fricke wrote:
> My guess is that you may have better luck with an
> individual personality than the system. We went all
> the way to the top (Garvey?) ...
>
> No Joy. I think in the case of the AN-2 there was
> more political pressure as it has such utility if
> allowed....even under the experimental category.
Once they say 'no' officially it is almost impossible to get them to reverse
themselves. To reverse themselves is to admit that they were wrong in the first
place and nothing is worse than that. So you have to get all the wrangling done
and/or withdraw everything before anything is committed to paper in order to
have the opportunity to come back later with a different spin on things. Ask
Bob Hoover how this works.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza, Suite 201
brian@lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 - voice +1.360.838.9669 - fax
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
Walt Fricke wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Walt Fricke <walterfricke@yahoo.com>
>
> I he was concieved in a CJ, with a flight suit and
> helmet on, I'll take the last three with even odds.
Now that I would like to see as I sure as heck wouldn't attempt it. You could
get hurt! The CJ6A cockpit may be larger than a Yak-52 but it ain't that large!
OTOH, considering the sizes of the egos it is expected to hold ... ;)
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza, Suite 201
brian@lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 - voice +1.360.838.9669 - fax
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: CJ6 external power connector |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
jay reiter wrote:
> I would like to use external power. I am in contact with a fellow at Burton
> Electric and he does not recognize the description of the connector. They
> manufacture most connectors including two different ones for the MIG's. Does
> anyone have a receptacle removed for weight saving that I can use as a
> sample? Do other type Yak's use the round three pin connector?.
This strikes me as a good place to modify the aircraft to use a standard US
3-pin in-line connector.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza, Suite 201
brian@lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 - voice +1.360.838.9669 - fax
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Terry Calloway" <TCalloway@datatechnique.com>
>>> radialpower@cox.net 12/11/02 11:27PM >>>
--> Yak-List message posted by: Barry Hancock <radialpower@cox.net>
House has the odds at 5:2 that the baby comes before the plane flies.
Side bets:
2:1 that I get a call to come home when I'm out at Chino
3:1 that he ends up with the initials C.J.
200:1 he's born in a flight suit
500:1 with a helmet on
Barry,
Here's my bet.
I'll bet that if its a natural child birth, Deborah will say it felt
like he was wearing a helmet and a parachute. And, the doctor says he
needed a chute to keep from hitting the floor. :)
Congratulations and good luck.
Pumper
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "jay reiter" <jmreiter@adelphia.net>
The Cole-Herse 11040 series as used by Piper is also available at lower cost.
I would like to power the aircraft in the condition as removed from the shipping
container. In any case, if I have a sample the best approach will be easier
to find.
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: | Re: CJ6 external power connector |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Doug" <rvfltd@televar.com>
Jay,
Or easier yet I could order you one from China. Give me a call @
509-826-4610 or drop me a e-mail.
Always yakin,
Doug Sapp
----- Original Message -----
From: "jay reiter" <jmreiter@adelphia.net>
Subject: Yak-List: CJ6 external power connector
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "jay reiter" <jmreiter@adelphia.net>
>
> I would like to use external power. I am in contact with a fellow at
Burton Electric and he does not recognize the description of the connector.
They manufacture most connectors including two different ones for the MIG's.
Does anyone have a receptacle removed for weight saving that I can use as a
sample? Do other type Yak's use the round three pin connector?.
>
>
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: | Re: Phase II Flight restrictions |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Michael Di Marco <mgdimarco@yahoo.com>
He goofed. Your Group II (under 800hp) and you should not have that restriction.
Before pissing up his rope, go to the Primary Maintenance Inspectors(PMI)
in area to get a copy of chapter and verse. Then approach the guy that goofed
with your info from the other FAA type in hand. Be nice. Be Patient. But get
it right.
Mike
China Blue
Frank Haertlein <yak52driver@earthlink.net> wrote:--> Yak-List message posted
by: "Frank Haertlein"
Just got my flight restrictions letter from a DAR out of Riverside, CA
FSDO. One line really bothers me and I wonder if anyone can tell me if
it's correct.
It says that I cannot land at any airport (except my home airport)
within my 300 NM radius unless I declare an emergency or it has been
listed as one of the airshows I'll be attending in my program letter. Is
this correct or did he misinterpret the regs?
Thanks in advance
Frank
Chino
---------------------------------
Message 19
| 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: | Yak-52 tip tanks |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roy O. Wright" <roy@wright.org>
Howdy,
I have a Yak-52 on order (it's crated awaiting shipment) with
the new factory tip tanks. I found out today that the tanks are
designed for quick removal and come with a set of standard tips.
The best of both worlds! <g>
Have fun,
Roy
',,'',,'',,',,'
Roy Wright 512.378.1234 mailto:royw@cisco.com
Cisco Systems #include <std-disclaimer>
"The gambling known as business looks with austere disfavor upon the
business known as gambling."
-- Ambrose Bierce.
Message 20
| 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: | Exact wording of Flight restrictions |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net>
Yakkers;
Here's the exact wording he gave me on Phase II flight
restrictions............
21. All proficiency flights shall be conducted within the geographic
area described in the applicant's program letter and any modifications
to that letter, but that area will not exceed 300 nautical miles of the
aircraft's home base airport. Proficiency flights are limited to
non-stop flight that begins and ends at the aircraft's home base
airport. An alternate selection is not permitted for this aircraft.
However, an exception is permitted for proficiency flights outside the
area stated above for organized formation flying, training, or checkout
in conjunction with a specific event listed in the aircraft's program
letter (or amendments). The program letter should indicate the location
and dates for this proficiency flying.
That's the exact wording of his restrictions.
Frank
Chino
Message 21
| 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: | CJ6 external power connector |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net>
Jay;
I bought one of the wood, electrical connectors listed with Aircraft
Spruce and Sspecialty. It fits my YAK-52 perfectly! Looks like there is
some commonality between Russian and US parts!
Frank
Chino
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of jay reiter
Subject: Yak-List: CJ6 external power connector
--> Yak-List message posted by: "jay reiter" <jmreiter@adelphia.net>
I would like to use external power. I am in contact with a fellow at
Burton Electric and he does not recognize the description of the
connector. They manufacture most connectors including two different ones
for the MIG's. Does anyone have a receptacle removed for weight saving
that I can use as a sample? Do other type Yak's use the round three pin
connector?.
=
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
Message 22
| 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: Exact wording of Flight restrictions |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
At 09:26 PM 12/12/2002, you wrote:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net>
>
>Yakkers;
>Here's the exact wording he gave me on Phase II flight
>restrictions............
Nasty. You need to get that changed.
Brian Lloyd
brian@lloyd.com
+1.340.998.9447
Message 23
| 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: Yak-52 tip tanks |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <adsavar@gte.net>
Yes that is precisely what my understanding is. Look on my web site on the
Aircraft For Sale page to see the tips on the airplane with the tanks
removed. REALLY nice! www.yak-52.com.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roy O. Wright" <roy@wright.org>
Subject: Yak-List: Yak-52 tip tanks
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Roy O. Wright" <roy@wright.org>
>
> Howdy,
>
> I have a Yak-52 on order (it's crated awaiting shipment) with
> the new factory tip tanks. I found out today that the tanks are
> designed for quick removal and come with a set of standard tips.
> The best of both worlds! <g>
>
> Have fun,
> Roy
>
> ',,'',,'',,',,'
> Roy Wright 512.378.1234 mailto:royw@cisco.com
> Cisco Systems #include <std-disclaimer>
>
> "The gambling known as business looks with austere disfavor upon the
> business known as gambling."
> -- Ambrose Bierce.
>
>
Message 24
| 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: Phase II Flight restrictions |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <adsavar@gte.net>
If I'm not mistaken, Group II is for turbine powered aircraft and we are in
Group III, piston powered, under 800 horsepower.
From 8120.2d
142. ISSUANCE OF EXPERIMENTAL EXHIBITION AND AIR RACING OPERATING
LIMITATIONS.
a. OPERATING LIMITATIONS SHALL BE DESIGNED TO FIT THE SPECIFIC SITUATION
ENCOUNTERED. THE FAA INSPECTOR MAY IMPOSE ANY ADDITIONAL LIMITATIONS DEEMED
NECESSARY IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY. The FAA inspector and/or designee shall
review each operating limitation imposed, with the applicant, to ensure that
the operating limitations are understood by the applicant.
NOTE: Operating limitations are available electronically via the AIR-200
WebSite at http://www.faa.gov/avr/air200/200home.htm and the Designee
WebSite at http://av-info.faa.gov/dst/reference.htm#JobAids.
b. The following operating limitations shall be prescribed as applicable.
NOTE: The Group applicability (I-IV) is identified in bolded parenthesis at
the end of each limitation.
---------------------------------------------------
(29) All proficiency/practice flights shall be conducted within the
geographical area described in the applicant's program letter and any
amendments to that letter, but that area will not exceed 300 nautical miles
of the aircraft's home base airport. An exception is permitted for
proficiency flying outside of the area stated above for organized formation
flying, training, or checkout in conjunction with a specific event listed in
the applicant's program letter (or amendments). The program letter should
indicate the location and dates for this proficiency flying.
(Applicability: Group I, Group III under 800 hp)
Dennis Savarese
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Di Marco" <mgdimarco@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Phase II Flight restrictions
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Michael Di Marco <mgdimarco@yahoo.com>
>
>
> He goofed. Your Group II (under 800hp) and you should not have that
restriction. Before pissing up his rope, go to the Primary Maintenance
Inspectors(PMI) in area to get a copy of chapter and verse. Then approach
the guy that goofed with your info from the other FAA type in hand. Be
nice. Be Patient. But get it right.
>
> Mike
> China Blue
>
>
> Frank Haertlein <yak52driver@earthlink.net> wrote:--> Yak-List message
posted by: "Frank Haertlein"
>
>
> Just got my flight restrictions letter from a DAR out of Riverside, CA
> FSDO. One line really bothers me and I wonder if anyone can tell me if
> it's correct.
>
> It says that I cannot land at any airport (except my home airport)
> within my 300 NM radius unless I declare an emergency or it has been
> listed as one of the airshows I'll be attending in my program letter. Is
> this correct or did he misinterpret the regs?
>
> Thanks in advance
> Frank
> Chino
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
Message 25
| 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: Exact wording of Flight restrictions |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Michael Di Marco <mgdimarco@yahoo.com>
If it is a prop bird under 800HP, this is all wrong.
Mike
Frank Haertlein <yak52driver@earthlink.net> wrote:--> Yak-List message posted
by: "Frank Haertlein"
Yakkers;
Here's the exact wording he gave me on Phase II flight
restrictions............
21. All proficiency flights shall be conducted within the geographic
area described in the applicant's program letter and any modifications
to that letter, but that area will not exceed 300 nautical miles of the
aircraft's home base airport. Proficiency flights are limited to
non-stop flight that begins and ends at the aircraft's home base
airport. An alternate selection is not permitted for this aircraft.
However, an exception is permitted for proficiency flights outside the
area stated above for organized formation flying, training, or checkout
in conjunction with a specific event listed in the aircraft's program
letter (or amendments). The program letter should indicate the location
and dates for this proficiency flying.
That's the exact wording of his restrictions.
Frank
Chino
---------------------------------
Message 26
| 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: external power |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net>
Jay;
Goto http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catmain.php?dest=cathome.php and
click on SEARCH.
Enter part number 11-00400.
That is the plug that fits the YAK-52 exactly.
Frank
Chino
-----Original Message-----
From: jay reiter [mailto:jmreiter@adelphia.net]
Subject: external power
Frank which connector is the wood one? Is it the "oval" three pin with
two power pins and one interlock pin in a straight line? Or is it a two
inch round connector with two power pins side by side and the interlock
pin below?
Thank You for your help
Jay
Message 27
| 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: Phase II Flight restrictions |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Jon Boede" <jon@zoso.email.net>
Ewww!! 300 miles with no alternates... the worst of both worlds!
Does somebody have an explanation for this??
I mean... are we (you know, us wild and wooly warbird folk) some kind of
danger to the public? An annoyance to the FAA?
Why do we keep getting put in smaller and smaller boxes?
I have a friend with a 1947 Cessna with an engine that's like 4 billion
hours past TBO -- but since he's Part 91 he can fly it to failure. But
that's *no problem*. On my 1987 L-39 they're proposing that I have to
overhaul my engine every 750 hours... which, by the way, is approximately
15,250 hours before it really needs an overhaul. I feel like I swallowed
the wrong pill and wound up in an alternate universe. :-)
Do you get the feeling that the FAA would like to shut down everything in
the sky but Part 121 carriers?
Sigh.
Jon
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <adsavar@gte.net>
>
> If I'm not mistaken, Group II is for turbine powered aircraft and we are
> in Group III, piston powered, under 800 horsepower.
>
>>From 8120.2d
>
> 142. ISSUANCE OF EXPERIMENTAL EXHIBITION AND AIR RACING OPERATING
> LIMITATIONS.
> a. OPERATING LIMITATIONS SHALL BE DESIGNED TO FIT THE SPECIFIC SITUATION
> ENCOUNTERED. THE FAA INSPECTOR MAY IMPOSE ANY ADDITIONAL LIMITATIONS
> DEEMED NECESSARY IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY. The FAA inspector and/or
> designee shall review each operating limitation imposed, with the
> applicant, to ensure that the operating limitations are understood by
> the applicant.
> NOTE: Operating limitations are available electronically via the AIR-200
> WebSite at http://www.faa.gov/avr/air200/200home.htm and the Designee
> WebSite at http://av-info.faa.gov/dst/reference.htm#JobAids.
> b. The following operating limitations shall be prescribed as
> applicable. NOTE: The Group applicability (I-IV) is identified in bolded
> parenthesis at the end of each limitation.
> ---------------------------------------------------
> (29) All proficiency/practice flights shall be conducted within the
> geographical area described in the applicant's program letter and any
> amendments to that letter, but that area will not exceed 300 nautical
> miles of the aircraft's home base airport. An exception is permitted for
> proficiency flying outside of the area stated above for organized
> formation flying, training, or checkout in conjunction with a specific
> event listed in the applicant's program letter (or amendments). The
> program letter should indicate the location and dates for this
> proficiency flying.
> (Applicability: Group I, Group III under 800 hp)
>
> Dennis Savarese
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Di Marco" <mgdimarco@yahoo.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Phase II Flight restrictions
>
>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Michael Di Marco <mgdimarco@yahoo.com>
>>
>>
>> He goofed. Your Group II (under 800hp) and you should not have that
> restriction. Before pissing up his rope, go to the Primary Maintenance
> Inspectors(PMI) in area to get a copy of chapter and verse. Then
> approach the guy that goofed with your info from the other FAA type in
> hand. Be nice. Be Patient. But get it right.
>>
>> Mike
>> China Blue
>>
>>
>> Frank Haertlein <yak52driver@earthlink.net> wrote:--> Yak-List
>> message
> posted by: "Frank Haertlein"
>>
>>
>> Just got my flight restrictions letter from a DAR out of Riverside, CA
>> FSDO. One line really bothers me and I wonder if anyone can tell me if
>> it's correct.
>>
>> It says that I cannot land at any airport (except my home airport)
>> within my 300 NM radius unless I declare an emergency or it has been
>> listed as one of the airshows I'll be attending in my program letter.
>> Is this correct or did he misinterpret the regs?
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>> Frank
>> Chino
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>>
>>
>
>
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! --
|