Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:19 AM - fuel in a 50 (Mark Jefferies YAK UK Ltd)
2. 04:39 AM - Re: CJ power settings (Brian Lloyd)
3. 06:49 AM - Re: speaking of fuel (Yakjock)
4. 07:21 AM - Electric boost pump (Barry Hancock)
5. 07:21 AM - CJ6A 285HP Alternator (Dave Laird)
6. 08:55 AM - THE IAK-52 STORY (Stuart Mackereth)
7. 09:40 AM - Re: CJ power settings (Walt Lannon)
8. 02:09 PM - AD Horizontal stabilizer CJ6 (michael.beach@ps.ge.com)
9. 03:24 PM - Re: CJ power settings (Brian Lloyd)
10. 03:26 PM - Re: AD Horizontal stabilizer CJ6 (Brian Lloyd)
11. 04:18 PM - Re: AD Horizontal stabilizer CJ6 (michael.beach@ps.ge.com)
12. 07:46 PM - Yak Sources et cetera (cpayne@joimail.com)
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: "Mark Jefferies YAK UK Ltd" <mark@yakuk.com>
Dean, as a standard YAK 50 with the second tank you already have 129 lts that's
32.25 US galls. All you need to do is add a second filler point. As you will
see the second fuselage fuel tank is higher than the filler point on the side
of the fuselage, using a top fill point you can get an extra 15 lts in, that's
25 mins at economic. It also aids quick filling rather than waiting for the cross
feed pipe to do its "stuff"!
The mod takes about 4 hours to do when you have the tools.
You could also go to the wet wing option and get another 40 or 60 lts per side!!!
also use the smoke tank on long cross countries, that will hold 1 hrs of fuel.
cheers, MJ.
Yakers,
As a Yak 50 pilot, Hell I'd love to have 31 gallons! We Americans are never
satisfied. :)
Dean Courtney
Yak 50 84-2805
deancourtney696@hotmail.com
Best regards
Mark Jefferies
: Managing director YAK UK Ltd
Little Gransden Airfield, Sandy, Beds SG19 3BP, England.
( +44 (0)1767 651156 Office + 651157 fax
( +44 (0)7785 538 317 Mobile
: Conditions/ terms of business
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: CJ power settings |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
Jon Boede wrote:
> At what point (in mmHg) is it reasonable to pull the prop back to
> 1,950rpm?
If the fuel has a high enough octane rating that it won't detonate under high BMEPs
(BMEP is usually proportional to MAP) then you can run high MAPs and low
RPM. Since the engine was designed for 70 octane fuel and the lowest octane fuel
you can get in the US is 87 octane mogas (equivalent to 82 octane avgas) you
have ample margin. From the point of view of detonation you can run any combination
of MAP and RPM that suits your fancy.
> Is there really some benefit to getting back to 1,900 or 1,850 rpm?
Here are a couple of things that come to mind:
1. reduced frictional losses in the engine -- more of the power goes to the prop
and less goes in to must moving the parts around;
2. cooler exhaust gasses which reduce the chance of burning a valve;
3. the prop may be more efficient at a lower RPM (but this depends on prop design).
> The net of the lower fuel burn and the slower speed seems to be that
> I always burn about the same amount of gas, but get there later -- so
> I gain nada but lose time.
Well, it depends on wind also. I have flown 450 nm legs in my CJ with stock fuel
by getting up high, pulling the RPM back (1,850 RPM), using the altitude to
keep my TAS up, and a tailwind to keep my groundspeed up. Doing this at 11,500
I was able to get fuel burn as low as 10.2 GPH. My TAS was only about 125
kts but a 25 kt tailwind got my range way up.
> I've never seen a good table of manifold, prop, and expected fuel
> burn for the CJ.
I don't think anyone has seen a table. There are some engine fuel specifics formulae
in the docs but turning that into a power chart or a TAS vs. power setting
chart hasn't happened (that I know of). No one I know has wanted to spend
the time to do the flight testing to create one. For most people it just isn't
that meaningful since most people aren't trying to eke the last mile out of
a cross-country.
> And to ask a long-standing question I've had, is there some reason or
> benefit to pulling the throttle back from "full" when you're high
> enough that you're seeing around 600mm of manifold pressure? This is
> to say, if moving the throttle back an inch or so off the forward
> stop doesn't seem to affect manifold pressure, is it better to keep
> it all the way forward or to pull it back a bit?
To be honest, it shouldn't make a difference but I noticed what appeared to be
a difference in fuel burn when I pulled the MAP back about 1" at cruise that seemed
to be out-of-proportion to the actual decrease in MAP. Still, it was not
a scientific test and I suspect that if analyzed under controlled circumstances,
the perceived advantage would disappear.
In a spam can with something like a Marvel Schebler carb moving the throttle plate
slightly can make a big difference in mixture distribution and may be an advantage
in some airplanes. In my experience it makes things worse and I am better
off running the throttle wide open but your mileage may vary.
As for the CJ and M-14 engines, they have a supercharger that helps stir the air
and vaporize the fuel leading to more uniform mixture distribution. In that
case moving the throttle plate a little won't really help. OTOH, if your carb
is not properly adjusted changing the position of the throttle can make a substantial
difference in mixture. This will affect your fuel burn without making
a big difference in power. The only way to know for sure is an EGT gauge.
If you don't have one, install one. It is the only way to know what the mixture
is doing. (Well you can install an oxygen sensor if you like.)
--
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
GMT-4
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: speaking of fuel |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Yakjock" <Yakjock@msn.com>
Bill Nicholson installed an aircraft electric standby fuel pump in "8" for me when
he installed Doug's aux tanks. It has always worked perfectly. While the
wobble pump is still installed it has no practical use for me.
In the new plane I have both primary and standby electric fuel pumps as the carb
is a Performance Airflow injection carb and requires a much higher operating
pressure than the standard M14P carb. Bill Blackwell installed the system.
Jim, for your needs I'd suggest you chat with Nicholson
Hal Morley
CJ-6A "8"
(503) 704-6559 cell
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: | Electric boost pump |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Barry Hancock <radialpower@cox.net>
I have replaced the wobble pump in my project. It also replaces the
primer. There is a solenoid that diverts to the primer line. It is set
up on a 3 way switch with up being a momentary switch for the primer and
down being the boost pump.
It took (still taking?) me a little while to figure out how long to run
the primer to make the engine happy for start, but other than that I
love it as it gives the right side panel a LOT of extra space for things
like my map box and oxygen system...
Barry Hancock
Director of Operations
Red Stars, Inc.
949.300.5510
www.allredstar.com
"Communism - Lousy Politics, Great Airplanes"
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: | CJ6A 285HP Alternator |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Dave Laird <dave@davelaird.com>
So...It looks like my Alternator tanked the other day.
It came on line fine during run-up...but half way through a local
flight, it seemed to have gone away.
We are going to look at it this weekend... Any tips for
trouble-shooting? If it is truly dead, any suggestions for a
replacement?
This Alternator is some 28v GM truck alternator and is apparently
INTERNALLY regulated. I don't know if
there is ANY external voltage regulator or over-voltage relay in this
particular installation.
I understand that B&C makes one the the M-14P, but think it needs some
special mounting plate for
installation on the Housai...
Dave "feeling powerless in Dallas" Laird
N63536 "Betty"
off topic: They have deep-fried twinkies at the State Fair of Texas!
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: | THE IAK-52 STORY |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Stuart Mackereth" <stuart@bramptonyork.com>
Not sure if everyone has already found this on the net, or not. I've got
most stuff, but this was new, and had a few interesting facts I didn't
know before. Perhaps others might find it interesting too..
http://www.deltawing.go.ro/iak52story.htm
THE IAK-52 STORY
Following the exchange of letters held between the governments of
Romania and USSR on July 15, it was decided to manufacture the Yak-52 in
Romania in large series. It was decided the investment in a new plant,
intended to be used exclusively for the series production of Yak-52.
Here, in what was later called FCAv- Fabrica de Avioane Usoare (Light
Airplanes Factory) in Bacau, the Romanian prototype (s/n 780102) was
finished and rolled out on April 28,1978.
Among the aircraft manufacturers from the former USSR, the OKB A.S.
Yakovlev developed a wide range of types, from small light trainers
(UT-2, Yak-18, Yak-50,-52,-53,-54,-55), to fighters equipped with piston
engines (Yak-1,-3,-7,-9) or jet engines (Yak-15,-17, -19,
-21,-23,-25,-28 ), including VTOL fighters (Yak-36,-38,-141) and to
business/regional transport aircraft (Yak-40, Yak-42).
In 1972 was flown the prototype of Yak-50, a single-seater, aerobatics
aircraft, derived from the IAK-18 basic trainer, with an all metal
structure with duraluminium skin, except on the control surfaces fabric
covered; the wing central section as on Yak-18 series was eliminated,
the attachment of the wings being made directly to the sides of the
fuselage. The Yak-50 prototype had fixed undercarriage, but for the
production aircraft a semi-retractable landing gear was adopted, similar
to that on the Yak-18. The new aircraft was equipped with a Vedeneyev
M-14P, 9 cylinders radial air-cooled engine, rated at 360hp, a
supercharged version of AI-14. By the introduction of some elements from
Yak-18A (tandem cockpit, canopy, semi-retractable tricycle
undercarriage- which prevents the damage of the under side of the
fuselage and wings in case of "wheels-up" landing) in the new design of
Yak-50, resulted the design of Yak-52 trainer. The aircraft was intended
to replace the Yak-18 of the DOSAAF, a necessary of 1000 aircraft was
estimated for the following 10 years.
For the production of the aircraft was selected I.R. Av. Bacau (I.Av.
Bacau from 1978 and Aerostar S.A. since 1991). This company had already
a long experience in the overhaul of military jets (Yak-17, -23, MiG-15,
-17, -19, -21, IL-28) and was main contractor in the construction and
testing of the prototype of the IAR-93 ground attack aircraft - the
first major military aircraft program in Romania after the end of the
WW2, under a joint program with Yugoslavia. The detailed design started
in URSS in 1975 and the technical documentation started to arrive in
1976 and it was translated. The factory began also the construction of
the assembly jigs. The initial design featured stringers spot-welded to
the wing cover panels, as well as rivets with countersink. Because these
two technologies proved to be non-economical, their use in the
production process was abandoned. The Soviet prototype was brought from
USSR in the deck of an AN-12. The aircraft was never flown in Bacau,
being used only as a mockup.
The manufacturing of the first Romanian prototype started in 1977 within
the airframes overhaul facility of I.R.Av., while in the plant
specialized in the production of landing gears, hydraulic& pneumatic
equipment of I.R.Av. started the production of the landing gear for
Yak-52 , as well as of the components of the aircraft pneumatic system.
The Romanian prototype( c/n 780102) was finished and rolled out on April
28,1978. After several ground tests, the first engine runs were made on
May 9,1978 and around May 20 performed its first unofficial flight with
the pilot Teodor Coman at controls. At that time the aircraft was not
painted and was provisionally registered to the Romanian Air Force as
Red 0102. It was later painted in the colors of DOSAAF and registered as
Yellow 01. It was handed-over to the Soviets after the official
reception flight performed on July 22,1978 by Dmitri Mitikov, test pilot
of Yakovlev OKB. After the manufacturing of a first batch of 2 aircraft
till the end of 1978 (c/n 780102 - "01" and 780103 - "02"), plus an
airframe for static tests (c/n780101), and another for dynamic tests
(c/n 780104) in the following year was started the series production,at
first with aircraft c/n 790105 (01) followed by 2 batches of 5 aircraft,
5 batches of 10 aircraft, and all the following batches had 15 aircraft.
Although the intergovernmental agreement provisions allowed deliveries
of the aircraft to Eastern Block countries, after completing the
deliveries to the USSR, due to the huge quantity order by the Soviets,
they were the only customers of the aircraft during that period.
In USSR the aircraft were used within the airclubs of DOSAAF
paramilitary sport flying organization and was used as basic trainer for
students often not older than 14-15. The official entry in DOSAAF
service took place on May 8,1979 on Tushino airfield. The first DOSAAF
pilots to fly the Yak-52 were Kasum Najmutdinov - the trainer of the
aerobatics team of USSR and Yuri Komitzin - the Chief of the Central
Airclub.
In the '80s the only customer for Yak-52, except USSR, was the Romanian
Air Force, which introduced the aircraft at the beginning of 1986 as
IAK-52 in the inventory along the IAR-823 basic trainer within Air
Liaison Group, based on Focsani airfield, at that time part of the
Scoala Militara de Ofiteri de Aviatie "Aurel Vlaicu" (The Military
Aviation School) of Bobocu-Buzau, 23 aircraft being delivered in the
following years. Today, the unit is subordinated to the Romanian Air
Force Academy "Henri Coanda", which took over all the assets of the
former military school during the reorganization process held in 1995.
During the manufacturing process , the aircraft was subject to certain
upgrades, as follows:
- the rounded wingtip, made from welded metal sheet was removed,
starting with the 16th aircraft (c/n 790301). So, the wingspan was
reduced from 9.5m to 9.3 m.
- the installation of a stall speed sensor and warning SSKUA-1A ,
starting with aircraft c/n 822801 and also for the aircraft already
delivered, starting with c/n 800901.
- the replacement of the Landis-5 radio station with Baklan-5, starting
with the 121st delivered aircraft (c/n 801101).
- the replacement of the Varley battery with 12ASAM-23 starting from c/n
822502 in production, as well as for all the aircraft already delivered.
- the reinforcement of the wing spar attachment joints to the fuselage
was introduced on aircraft c/n 866501 (rolled out in April 1986)
following the Service Bulletins 59R and 60R.
Some other less important upgrades were: the relocation of the
warning lights on the cockpit instrument panels, the modification of the
aileron hinges, the modification of the undercarriage axes, in order to
make them suitable for the installation of skis (in the Yak-52 delivery
set for the USSR a set of skis was provided for winter use; they could
be installed in the place of the wheels, but in this situation the
landing gear cannot be retracted).
The OKB also released in the '80s the preliminary design of a light
attack version Yak-52PSh, which was intended for use in Afganisthan.
Anyway, it was canceled in early design stage.
At the end of 1991, after the delivery of a last batch of 40 aircraft,
the long term contract with USSR expired and due to the political and
economical changes in the former USSR, it wasn't renewed.
Like a irony of fate, the first signs of interests were received from
Western countries (USA, Canada, UK). The first deliveries to private
customers in US were made in 1992 and continued in 1993. They were
attracted by the aerobatics performance of the aircraft, as well as by
its fame ("the aircraft on which the Red Army pilots were trained") and
its "warbird" look. Up to date, several Yak-52 were delivered from the
manufacturer to private users in UK, USA, Canada, Italy, Denmark, but
there are many Yak-52 users in other countries. In 1995 were reported
around 40 Yak-52s in UK and more than 200 in USA.
Between 1991 and 1993 there was an attempt to "westernize" the Yak-52 by
the installation of a 6-cylinder, boxer, 300 hp Lycoming engine and by
the refinement of the geometry (canopy, tail) and a new cockpit
accommodation. Two experimental models (functional mockups) named
"Condor" were made by the modification of two old Yak-52 airframes, some
ground engine runs were performed, but the program was canceled before
the first flight. Some British users installed a propeller spinner or a
Hoffman HO-V183K 3-blades propeller on their Yak-52s. The new propeller
reduced the vibration level and increased the rate of climb with 2 m/s.
The propeller is already certified by CAA for installation on Yak-50,
which is equipped with the same M-14P engine.
Although it was for more than 15 years in production, in the '90s the
Yak-52 was selected by air forces as basic trainer. As mentioned above,
Romania was the first country to use the Yak-52 as true basic military
trainer. Following the selection of Yak-52 by the economical office of
the Hungarian army to equip the Szolnok Replotiszti Foiskola (Szolnok
Military Flying School), belonging to the Magyar Honvdsg Replo
Csapatai (Hungarian Air Force), during the first quarter of 1994, 12
aircraft were delivered and started the training flights. The aircraft,
named in Hungarian spelling Jak-52 were registered Red 01 to Red 12 and
were equipped with GPS and transponder. Today the aircraft are in the
inventory of the 3. Kikpzoreplo-szzad (3rd Training Squadron) of the
MH-89 Szolnok Vegyes Szllitreplo - Ezred (MH-89 Szolnok Joint
Transport Regiment) along with An-2, An-26, Mi-2 and Mi-8.
In 1997, 12 aircraft were delivered to Vietnam. They are assigned to the
Trung Doan (Regiment) 910 based at Nha Trang - the unit used for primary
training within the Vietnamese People's Air Force.
After the disappearance of the former USSR, some Yak-52s left on the
former DOSAAF airfields in Lithuania were brought by the country into
military use within the two squadrons of SKAT (Voluntary Border Guards),
now KASP (Krasto Apsuagos Savanoriskos Pajegos - Voluntary State Defense
Service). Eskadrile I at Kyviskes has 4 Yak-52 in service (only 2
airworthy) plus one on a pole as gateguard and another 9 in storage ,
while Eskadrile II at Silute has 3 Yak-52s.
On October 9,1998, AEROSTAR S.A. has celebrated 20 years from the debut
of the manufacturing of Yak-52, the aircraft no. 1800 performed an
aerobatics display. Aerostar has set up an upgrade program for the
aircraft which has in view the replacement of the Russian instruments
with equivalent western ones, the increase of the fuel capacity and the
installation of a lighting system for night flying. The delivery
configuration is optional, depending on the customer's request.
Now, after over 20 years since the production started, the Romanian
manufacturer Aerostar S.A. has recorded more than 1800 Yak-52s
delivered, and due to the new economical conditions and to a good
management of the company, the production still continues.
Yak-52 Technical Data Sheet
Type: tandem two-seat trainer
Powerplant: 1 X Vedeneyev (VMKB) / Aerostar M-14P, 9 cylinders radial
air-cooled engine, rated at 268kW (360hp), driving a V-530TA-D35, two
blade, constant speed propeller;
Dimensions
Length Overall: 25ft 5in (7.745 m);
Wing Span: 30ft 6 1/4 in (9.3 m);
Height Overall: 8ft 10 1/4 in (2.70 m)
Weights
Empty Weight: 2,238 lb (1,015 kg);
Max T-O Weight: 2,877 lb (1,305 kg);
Max Fuel Load: 220 lb (100 kg, representing a total capacity of 122
liters);
Performance
Max Level Speed: at 3,280 ft (1,000 m):145 kts (270 km/h; 167 mph);
Never-exceed Speed: 194 knots (360 km/h; 223 mph)
Max Rate of Climb: at S/L: 23 ft/s (7 m/s);
Max Ceiling: 13,125 ft (4,000 m)
T-O Run: 558 ft (170m);
Landing Run: 985 ft (300m)
Range: 296 NM (550 km; 341 miles)
Max g loading: +7/- 5 g
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: CJ power settings |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Walt Lannon" <lannon@look.ca>
Brian, Jon;
Re; Jon's question "if there is any advantage to moving the throttle away
from the full open position"
The answer is yes. All aircraft carburettors (I am presuming the
Russian/Chinese one is no different??????) have a system to provide excess
fuel at the max. position for cylinder cooling. In most this is refered to
as the " econimizer valve" - something of a misnomer perhaps but when moved
away from the full throttle position does reduce fuel consumption.
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian@lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: CJ power settings
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
>
> Jon Boede wrote:
> > At what point (in mmHg) is it reasonable to pull the prop back to
> > 1,950rpm?
>
> If the fuel has a high enough octane rating that it won't detonate under
high BMEPs (BMEP is usually proportional to MAP) then you can run high MAPs
and low RPM. Since the engine was designed for 70 octane fuel and the
lowest octane fuel you can get in the US is 87 octane mogas (equivalent to
82 octane avgas) you have ample margin. From the point of view of
detonation you can run any combination of MAP and RPM that suits your fancy.
>
> > Is there really some benefit to getting back to 1,900 or 1,850 rpm?
>
> Here are a couple of things that come to mind:
>
> 1. reduced frictional losses in the engine -- more of the power goes to
the prop and less goes in to must moving the parts around;
>
> 2. cooler exhaust gasses which reduce the chance of burning a valve;
>
> 3. the prop may be more efficient at a lower RPM (but this depends on
prop design).
>
> > The net of the lower fuel burn and the slower speed seems to be that
> > I always burn about the same amount of gas, but get there later -- so
> > I gain nada but lose time.
>
> Well, it depends on wind also. I have flown 450 nm legs in my CJ with
stock fuel by getting up high, pulling the RPM back (1,850 RPM), using the
altitude to keep my TAS up, and a tailwind to keep my groundspeed up. Doing
this at 11,500 I was able to get fuel burn as low as 10.2 GPH. My TAS was
only about 125 kts but a 25 kt tailwind got my range way up.
>
> > I've never seen a good table of manifold, prop, and expected fuel
> > burn for the CJ.
>
> I don't think anyone has seen a table. There are some engine fuel
specifics formulae in the docs but turning that into a power chart or a TAS
vs. power setting chart hasn't happened (that I know of). No one I know has
wanted to spend the time to do the flight testing to create one. For most
people it just isn't that meaningful since most people aren't trying to eke
the last mile out of a cross-country.
>
> > And to ask a long-standing question I've had, is there some reason or
> > benefit to pulling the throttle back from "full" when you're high
> > enough that you're seeing around 600mm of manifold pressure? This is
> > to say, if moving the throttle back an inch or so off the forward
> > stop doesn't seem to affect manifold pressure, is it better to keep
> > it all the way forward or to pull it back a bit?
>
> To be honest, it shouldn't make a difference but I noticed what appeared
to be a difference in fuel burn when I pulled the MAP back about 1" at
cruise that seemed to be out-of-proportion to the actual decrease in MAP.
Still, it was not a scientific test and I suspect that if analyzed under
controlled circumstances, the perceived advantage would disappear.
>
> In a spam can with something like a Marvel Schebler carb moving the
throttle plate slightly can make a big difference in mixture distribution
and may be an advantage in some airplanes. In my experience it makes things
worse and I am better off running the throttle wide open but your mileage
may vary.
>
> As for the CJ and M-14 engines, they have a supercharger that helps stir
the air and vaporize the fuel leading to more uniform mixture distribution.
In that case moving the throttle plate a little won't really help. OTOH, if
your carb is not properly adjusted changing the position of the throttle can
make a substantial difference in mixture. This will affect your fuel burn
without making a big difference in power. The only way to know for sure is
an EGT gauge. If you don't have one, install one. It is the only way to
know what the mixture is doing. (Well you can install an oxygen sensor if
you like.)
>
> --
>
> 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
> GMT-4
>
>
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: | AD Horizontal stabilizer CJ6 |
--> Yak-List message posted by: michael.beach@ps.ge.com
Hi all dose any body know of, or have a copy of an AD to install a
doubler plate to the main spar of the horizontal stabilizer
of the CJ6. I have seen some air frames fitted with the doubler but
have not been able to locate the specific AD, if any one
has a copy it would be appreciated.
Mike
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: | Re: CJ power settings |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
Walt Lannon wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Walt Lannon" <lannon@look.ca>
>
> Brian, Jon;
> Re; Jon's question "if there is any advantage to moving the throttle away
> from the full open position"
> The answer is yes. All aircraft carburettors (I am presuming the
> Russian/Chinese one is no different??????) have a system to provide excess
> fuel at the max. position for cylinder cooling. In most this is refered to
> as the " econimizer valve" - something of a misnomer perhaps but when moved
> away from the full throttle position does reduce fuel consumption.
I don't believe that the pressure carb has the equivalent of the economizer valve
as do the standard float-type carbs used in spam cans. I make a point of leaning
using the EGT in cruise regardless of throttle position. OTOH, I have
found that most CJ carbs (in the CJs I have flown that are equipped with EGTs)
get progressively richer as the throttle is retarded. I have attributed that
to an excessively rich setting of the idle mixture screw and the midrange needle
adjustment.
Adjust idle mixture first and then adjust the mid-range needle setting.
--
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
GMT-4
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: | Re: AD Horizontal stabilizer CJ6 |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
michael.beach@ps.ge.com wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: michael.beach@ps.ge.com
>
>
> Hi all dose any body know of, or have a copy of an AD to install a
> doubler plate to the main spar of the horizontal stabilizer
> of the CJ6. I have seen some air frames fitted with the doubler but
> have not been able to locate the specific AD, if any one
> has a copy it would be appreciated.
There is no AD per se since the airplane is experimental. There have been a couple
of beef-up kits. I recommend coming up with a tapered doubler plate to distribute
the stresses rather than push them to the end of the doubler.
--
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
GMT-4
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: | AD Horizontal stabilizer CJ6 |
--> Yak-List message posted by: michael.beach@ps.ge.com
Thanks Brian
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Lloyd [mailto:brian@lloyd.com]
Subject: Re: Yak-List: AD Horizontal stabilizer CJ6
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian@lloyd.com>
michael.beach@ps.ge.com wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: michael.beach@ps.ge.com
>
>
> Hi all dose any body know of, or have a copy of an AD to install a
> doubler plate to the main spar of the horizontal stabilizer
> of the CJ6. I have seen some air frames fitted with the doubler
but
> have not been able to locate the specific AD, if any one
> has a copy it would be appreciated.
There is no AD per se since the airplane is experimental. There have been a
couple of beef-up kits. I recommend coming up with a tapered doubler plate
to distribute the stresses rather than push them to the end of the doubler.
--
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
GMT-4
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: | Yak Sources et cetera |
--> Yak-List message posted by: cpayne@joimail.com
Mr. Richard Goode,
Thanks for the informative post about Who's Who in the
"native" Yak world. There is so much self-serving "advice"
and partial information that a Po'-Boy-On-A-Budget can get
lost in the clouds.
The part of the picture left undrawn are the connections
between the Sources and Dealers. Here the picture is hazy; I
suspect that many of our U.S. dealers obtain their stock
from multiple "native" sources. If this is the case, then
the reputation of whom we deal with becomes more important
than the source of the equipment when problems arise.
Craig Payne
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! --
|