Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:48 AM - Re: Shipping 18Ts (Brian Lloyd)
2. 05:52 AM - Ahhh (Janet Davidson)
3. 07:11 AM - Re: Ahhh (Brian Lloyd)
4. 08:02 AM - Re: ?????? (Gus Fraser)
5. 08:24 AM - Re: Shipping 18Ts (Ron Davis)
6. 08:49 AM - Torque Values (Ernie)
7. 09:08 AM - Re: Ahhh (Ron Davis)
8. 09:09 AM - Re: Torque Values (cjpilot710@aol.com)
9. 09:44 AM - Re: Torque Values (Kevin Pilling)
10. 11:40 AM - Re: Torque Values (Ernie)
11. 04:24 PM - Re: Ahhh (Gus Fraser)
12. 05:02 PM - Re: Ahhh (Ernie)
13. 05:30 PM - Ahhh (Frank Haertlein)
14. 05:42 PM - Re: Ahhh (cjpilot710@aol.com)
15. 05:47 PM - Thank God it's over! (cjpilot710@aol.com)
16. 06:10 PM - Re: Thank God it's over! (Terry Calloway)
17. 08:30 PM - Re:Thank God it's over! (D Zeman)
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: | Re: Shipping 18Ts |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Nov 2, 2004, at 11:22 AM, Ron Davis wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
>
> Do you have a handheld HF? What is the frequency range and
> brand/model?
> I'm looking for one.
Well, my HF radio fits in my hand but it is not a hand-held model. I
am not familiar with any handheld HF radios. The antenna systems don't
lend themselves to that mode of operation.
I use an Icom IC-706mkII with an SGC-231 automatic tuner. The radio is
a ham rig with full 100W RF power output and normally tunes the amateur
radio bands. A minor modification allows it to operate over the entire
HF spectrum from 1.8MHz to 30MHz which covers all the aviation
frequencies. It also will tune the VHF aviation frequencies thus
giving you a backup receiver.
If you have the room and weight budget I would seriously consider a
marine HF radio. These are already configured for general coverage.
Some have detachable front panels so the guts may be placed in a more
convenient location. You program in your frequencies ahead of time and
then just switch between them.
The tuner will automatically adjust to match most any antenna. For
temporary mounting I find that a wire run from the top of the cockpit
to the VS and then out to one of the wingtips does pretty well. Some
people like to use a weighted wire that drops out the floor. In my
Comanche I have a 100' trailing wire antenna that I can crank out to
trail behind the airplane.
If you have either of these wire antennas don't forget to add something
like "trailing wire antenna -- retracted" to your landing checklist. I
guarantee you will feel really stupid if you park the airplane and then
discover the antenna wrapped around all the taxi lights on the airport.
;-)
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Janet Davidson" <gbvfx@hotmail.com>
Brian
Well, the CAA are not the easiest in the world, I don't dispute that, altho'
my initial dealings with the FAA in WI were far from pleasant and my final
dealings with the CAA were more than helpful. I guess its often down to the
individual.
Regards
Janet
ps...I think you'll find that Scotland & the UK are all one and the same,
and both are covered by the same CAA...
Time: 07:11:21 AM PST US
From: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Ferrying across the Atlantic
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Nov 2, 2004, at 10:33 AM, Janet Davidson wrote:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Janet Davidson" <gbvfx@hotmail.com>
>
>"Only the UK/Scotland would concern me"
>Just out of interest, why? Do you have a criminal record there or
>something
>;)
No. It is just that one has to deal with the CAA which is even more
hide-bound than the FAA. There are some issues having to do with
flying from there.
But that is just my experience from relatively few visits and flying
there and I could very well be wrong.
OTOH the French seem to be an order of magnitude easier to deal with.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
Ph: 920 232 9238
email: gbvfx@hotmail.com
Express yourself with cool new emoticons http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/myemo
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Nov 3, 2004, at 9:48 AM, Janet Davidson wrote:
> Well, the CAA are not the easiest in the world, I don't dispute that,
> altho'
> my initial dealings with the FAA in WI were far from pleasant and my
> final
> dealings with the CAA were more than helpful. I guess its often down
> to the
> individual.
No doubt. I have certainly suffered at the hands of overzealous,
small-minded FAA officials.
At the time I was flying in the UK it struck me that, from the
regulatory point of view, the CAA would be happier if no one was flying
in their airspace. The Irish just plain didn't care and were
obliviously unhelpful (not unkind but just unknowing). Crossing the
St. George's Channel into Wales and then on into England brought a
change in handling. Later, upon crossing the English Channel into
France I felt as if I was flying in the US again, modulo the
controllers speaking French to the French pilots. My only difficulty
then lay in hearing a name spoken in French and then trying to
reconcile that with what was written on the chart. Spanish is ever so
much easier.
One of my experiences came when we were clearing out of the UK to fly
to France. It was discovered that the Irish Customs and Immigration
person failed to stamp our passports. (I believe he was late getting to
the pub the night we came in and was in a bit of a hurry to get out of
there.) The English official at Gatwick was nonplussed and was on the
verge of making a point when an African refugee flight arrived full of
people sans paperwork of any kind. The official sighed, handed me the
passports, looked me in the eye, and said, "If you will get out of our
country right now I will pretend you were never here." A short IFR hop
later the French Customs and Immigration officers greeted us with open
arms, shook hands, stamped passports, and waved us on with friendly
smiles. Seems they didn't much care what was in our passports. :-)
> Regards
>
> Janet
>
> ps...I think you'll find that Scotland & the UK are all one and the
> same,
> and both are covered by the same CAA...
Yes, you are, of course, correct and I stand corrected. OTOH, I find
that my English friends tend to refer to themselves as being from the
UK while the Scots refer to being from Scotland. Roger to the same
annoying CAA.
But this is not my only recent British geographic faux-pas. The other
day at our local pub someone was talking about the Isle of Wight at
which point I made a comment that I had never been to any of the
channel islands. Conversation stopped as I was silently regarded from
all sides. The British woman next to me then stated in a quiet voice
that the Isle of Wight is *not* one of the Channel Islands; that
appellation being reserved for Jersey and Guernsey. I apologized and
thanked her for the correction. I imagined them thinking, "bloody
uneducated colonials." :-)
That phrase was actually used in front of me in a pub once. Upon
realizing his gaffe, the speaker turned to me, patted my shoulder, and
said, "not you, of course, old man." I was gracious and then thankful
for the pint he brought me. We should be so civilized.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
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: Gus Fraser <fraseg@comcast.net>
Jim I use the FS 450 on the Yak 52 there is automatic mixture so anything
more complex would just be frustrating as I cannot adjust for peak EGT.
That said the unit does a bang up job of letting me know when to expect to
stop flying. It is VERY acurate when calibrated. Also, just for fun, when I
hooked it up to my GPS it will give miles per gallon, I get about the same
as my Dodge truck in cruise. Personally, on an engine that has a
consumption range between 10 and 24 gals per hour I consider this kit
essential. Hope this helps
Gus
www.gusfraser.com
...... Original Message .......
On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:07:49 EST cjpilot710@aol.com wrote:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: cjpilot710@aol.com
>
>Troops,
>
>Many know I'm up grading my CJ cockpit. Looking to buy a fuel flow
computer
>system. Would like to hear recomendation of which to buy.
>
>Jim Goolsby
>
>"Flush the Johns! Four more year!"
>JEG 2004
>
>"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety,
deserve
>neither liberty nor safety"
>Benjamin Franklin 1759
>
>"The reason older men are like fine wine: when young, they are like grapes
>until some woman stomps all over them."
>Unknown older man.
>
>"Kill them all. Let God sort them out"
>Crusaders 900 AD
>
>"With my shield, or on it."
>Trojan Warriors, BC
>
>
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: Shipping 18Ts |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
Thanks for the info. I was thinking Ham (and Icom) but figured you would
know if there was a better way to go.
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
Well, I got the engine back toether with a new stud and nut, thanks to Doug Sapp
for his assitance.
The torque value I used was 35ft/lbs. How did I derive that number you may ask...Well
I'm glad you did.
For some reason the Chinese didnt list any values in any manuals that I own so
I did a little research and found this page.
http://euler9.tripod.com/bolt-database/22.html
Towards the bottom you will find table 10 which lists the tensil strengths of different
size bolts of different hardnesses. I chose the
9.8 M1.6-M16 medium carbon steel, quenched and tempered 650 720 900 30N58
C27 C36 9.8
because I assumed that for a cylinder head bolt it would need to be at lease a
grade 8, (the first column lists the grade, the second is the size range) the
cylibder head nut is a 10x1.5 with a 14mm OD. The next 3 columns are Proof Load
Stress, MPa Tensile Yield Strength, MPa, Min. Tensile Ultimate Strength, MPa,
Min.
respectively. 650 720
900
I used the proof strength being the lowest of the 3. I then had to convert the
tensil strength to a torque value. So first I converted MPa to N/SQ.M which yielded
650,000,000 I then derived the Sq/rt ( to just give me newtons) of 25495.
Then using the following formula
Formulae Relating to Torque and Tension
Imperial
M torque lbf.ft
P bolt tension lbf
D bolt dia.ins M PxD
60
Metric
M torque N.m
P bolt tension Newtons
D bolt dia. mm M PxD
5000
P25495
D10
PxD254950/5000 51
Then using the following formula
Conversion Factors
Torque
lbf.ft x 1.36 N.m
N.m x 0.737 lbf.ft
Force
lbf x 4.45 N
N x 0.225 lbf
Pressure
lbf/in=B2 x 0.069 bar
bar x 14.504 lbf/in=B2
Flow
l/s x 2.119 cu.ft/min
cu.ft/min x 0.472 l/s
Power
hp x 0.746 kW kW N.m x rev/min
95555
I converted Torque in N/m into lb/ft
51 x .737 37.58 ft lbs
So that was easy wasnt it
Ernie
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
That whole Bitish/English/UK thing is confusing to us Yankees. As a New
Yorker, an American, and a US citizen, I'm glad we don't have to put up
those complexities.
Without trying to explain what Brian meant, I'll give my analysis: US FAA
regulations are more hospitable than any foreign FAA-equivalent has. This
remains true (but less so) in the wake of the (one day) terrorist attacks
that many in our government seem to think warrants the dismantling of 200
years of freedom.
The FAA people in the US fit into three general categories. Most are fat,
lazy bureacrats with no particular interest in, or knowlege of, aviation.
They could just as "competently" shuffle papers for the ATF, IRS, or SOA
(some other agency)- and they will if it there's a GS step up. Don't
disturb them and they won't bother you.
The second category, I believe, would give a dog indigestion, although I've
never actuall fed one to a dog. That anyone can prove.
The third category is the small, and shrinking, number of FAA personnel who
are pilots and love airplanes and/or aviation. You find these people
helpful and concerned, if you find them. The agressively stupid can however
provoke them.
BRIAN wrote:
>At the time I was flying in the UK it struck me that, from the
>regulatory point of view, the CAA would be happier if no one was flying
>in their airspace.
Two-thirds of the above FAA categories feel the same way. A popular vote of
FAA personnel would yeild similar results for you Gore fans
Ron
"Harmless, unless provoked"
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: Torque Values |
--> Yak-List message posted by: cjpilot710@aol.com
That sounds about right.
Jim Goolsby
"Flush the Johns! Four more year!"
JEG 2004
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety, deserve
neither liberty nor safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"The reason older men are like fine wine: when young, they are like grapes
until some woman stomps all over them."
Unknown older man.
"Kill them all. Let God sort them out"
Crusaders 900 AD
"With my shield, or on it."
Trojan Warriors, BC
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: Torque Values |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Kevin Pilling" <pilling.k@btconnect.com>
That's just what everybody was describing....about two grunts with a regular
wrench !
kp
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Torque Values
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
>
> Well, I got the engine back toether with a new stud and nut, thanks to
Doug Sapp for his assitance.
>
> The torque value I used was 35ft/lbs. How did I derive that number you may
ask...Well I'm glad you did.
>
> For some reason the Chinese didnt list any values in any manuals that I
own so I did a little research and found this page.
>
> http://euler9.tripod.com/bolt-database/22.html
>
> Towards the bottom you will find table 10 which lists the tensil strengths
of different size bolts of different hardnesses. I chose the
> 9.8 M1.6-M16 medium carbon steel, quenched and tempered 650 720 900
30N58 C27 C36 9.8
>
> because I assumed that for a cylinder head bolt it would need to be at
lease a grade 8, (the first column lists the grade, the second is the size
range) the cylibder head nut is a 10x1.5 with a 14mm OD. The next 3 columns
are Proof Load Stress, MPa Tensile Yield Strength, MPa, Min. Tensile
Ultimate Strength, MPa, Min.
>
>
> respectively. 650
720
900
>
> I used the proof strength being the lowest of the 3. I then had to
convert the tensil strength to a torque value. So first I converted MPa to
N/SQ.M which yielded
>
> 650,000,000 I then derived the Sq/rt ( to just give me newtons) of 25495.
>
> Then using the following formula
> Formulae Relating to Torque and Tension
> Imperial
>
> M torque lbf.ft
> P bolt tension lbf
> D bolt dia.ins M PxD
>
> 60
>
>
> Metric
>
> M torque N.m
> P bolt tension Newtons
> D bolt dia. mm M PxD
>
> 5000
>
>
> P25495
>
> D10
>
> PxD254950/5000 51
>
>
> Then using the following formula
>
> Conversion Factors
>
> Torque
> lbf.ft x 1.36 N.m
> N.m x 0.737 lbf.ft
> Force
> lbf x 4.45 N
> N x 0.225 lbf
>
> Pressure
> lbf/in=B2 x 0.069 bar
> bar x 14.504 lbf/in=B2
> Flow
> l/s x 2.119 cu.ft/min
> cu.ft/min x 0.472 l/s
> Power
> hp x 0.746 kW kW N.m x rev/min
> 95555
>
>
> I converted Torque in N/m into lb/ft
>
> 51 x .737 37.58 ft lbs
>
>
> So that was easy wasnt it
>
>
> Ernie
>
>
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: Torque Values |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
Sorry about the mess, it was very nicely formatted in tabls when I composed
the email, but looks like (*&$ now.
But yes 2 good grunts worth is what it came out to be.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Torque Values
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
>
> Well, I got the engine back toether with a new stud and nut, thanks to
Doug Sapp for his assitance.
>
> The torque value I used was 35ft/lbs. How did I derive that number you may
ask...Well I'm glad you did.
>
> For some reason the Chinese didnt list any values in any manuals that I
own so I did a little research and found this page.
>
> http://euler9.tripod.com/bolt-database/22.html
>
> Towards the bottom you will find table 10 which lists the tensil strengths
of different size bolts of different hardnesses. I chose the
> 9.8 M1.6-M16 medium carbon steel, quenched and tempered 650 720 900
30N58 C27 C36 9.8
>
> because I assumed that for a cylinder head bolt it would need to be at
lease a grade 8, (the first column lists the grade, the second is the size
range) the cylibder head nut is a 10x1.5 with a 14mm OD. The next 3 columns
are Proof Load Stress, MPa Tensile Yield Strength, MPa, Min. Tensile
Ultimate Strength, MPa, Min.
>
>
> respectively. 650
720
900
>
> I used the proof strength being the lowest of the 3. I then had to
convert the tensil strength to a torque value. So first I converted MPa to
N/SQ.M which yielded
>
> 650,000,000 I then derived the Sq/rt ( to just give me newtons) of 25495.
>
> Then using the following formula
> Formulae Relating to Torque and Tension
> Imperial
>
> M torque lbf.ft
> P bolt tension lbf
> D bolt dia.ins M PxD
>
> 60
>
>
> Metric
>
> M torque N.m
> P bolt tension Newtons
> D bolt dia. mm M PxD
>
> 5000
>
>
> P25495
>
> D10
>
> PxD254950/5000 51
>
>
> Then using the following formula
>
> Conversion Factors
>
> Torque
> lbf.ft x 1.36 N.m
> N.m x 0.737 lbf.ft
> Force
> lbf x 4.45 N
> N x 0.225 lbf
>
> Pressure
> lbf/in=B2 x 0.069 bar
> bar x 14.504 lbf/in=B2
> Flow
> l/s x 2.119 cu.ft/min
> cu.ft/min x 0.472 l/s
> Power
> hp x 0.746 kW kW N.m x rev/min
> 95555
>
>
> I converted Torque in N/m into lb/ft
>
> 51 x .737 37.58 ft lbs
>
>
> So that was easy wasnt it
>
>
> Ernie
>
>
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Gus Fraser" <fraseg@comcast.net>
Strike a light me old mucka ! Sounds like a bunch of bloody bollocks to me
:))))))
I will say this for us British. If cursing was an Olympic sport we would get
gold every time, at the same time we are renowned around the world for our
good manners and sense of fair play, this is the dualistic nature of the
British.
The CAA guy can drive you to distraction but he will always do it in a calm,
well mannered fashion. You, on the other hand just want to go for gold !!!!!
I do agree though this, the USA, is by far the best place in the world to
fly. I live in NJ, my airport is 5nm from ground zero, in any other country
in the world the airport would have closed, the vfr corridor up the Hudson
would have shut down, and probably all planes would need top be stored with
the wings detached when not in use (joking with that one).
Although the FAA do not always get it right they do get it right the
majority of the time. When the TSA wanted to curtail your flying rights it
was the FAA, and the alphabet groups that stood up for your rights to fly.
I have to deal with the Teterboro FSDO, well known for being the second
worst in the US (after Long Island). I find that if you play the game, for
that is what it is, then things are just great. If the think for one second
that you are trying to pull the wool over their eyes (British idiom) then
watch out.
Hug an FAA person they are human too :))))))))
Gus
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ron Davis
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Ahhh
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
That whole Bitish/English/UK thing is confusing to us Yankees. As a New
Yorker, an American, and a US citizen, I'm glad we don't have to put up
those complexities.
Without trying to explain what Brian meant, I'll give my analysis: US FAA
regulations are more hospitable than any foreign FAA-equivalent has. This
remains true (but less so) in the wake of the (one day) terrorist attacks
that many in our government seem to think warrants the dismantling of 200
years of freedom.
The FAA people in the US fit into three general categories. Most are fat,
lazy bureacrats with no particular interest in, or knowlege of, aviation.
They could just as "competently" shuffle papers for the ATF, IRS, or SOA
(some other agency)- and they will if it there's a GS step up. Don't
disturb them and they won't bother you.
The second category, I believe, would give a dog indigestion, although I've
never actuall fed one to a dog. That anyone can prove.
The third category is the small, and shrinking, number of FAA personnel who
are pilots and love airplanes and/or aviation. You find these people
helpful and concerned, if you find them. The agressively stupid can however
provoke them.
BRIAN wrote:
>At the time I was flying in the UK it struck me that, from the
>regulatory point of view, the CAA would be happier if no one was flying
>in their airspace.
Two-thirds of the above FAA categories feel the same way. A popular vote of
FAA personnel would yeild similar results for you Gore fans
Ron
"Harmless, unless provoked"
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
5 miles from ground zero aye. I grew up in Union City NJ. Thats where all us
upper crust kids were brought up :)
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gus Fraser" <fraseg@comcast.net>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Ahhh
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Gus Fraser" <fraseg@comcast.net>
>
> Strike a light me old mucka ! Sounds like a bunch of bloody bollocks to me
> :))))))
>
> I will say this for us British. If cursing was an Olympic sport we would
get
> gold every time, at the same time we are renowned around the world for our
> good manners and sense of fair play, this is the dualistic nature of the
> British.
>
> The CAA guy can drive you to distraction but he will always do it in a
calm,
> well mannered fashion. You, on the other hand just want to go for gold
!!!!!
>
> I do agree though this, the USA, is by far the best place in the world to
> fly. I live in NJ, my airport is 5nm from ground zero, in any other
country
> in the world the airport would have closed, the vfr corridor up the Hudson
> would have shut down, and probably all planes would need top be stored
with
> the wings detached when not in use (joking with that one).
>
> Although the FAA do not always get it right they do get it right the
> majority of the time. When the TSA wanted to curtail your flying rights it
> was the FAA, and the alphabet groups that stood up for your rights to fly.
>
> I have to deal with the Teterboro FSDO, well known for being the second
> worst in the US (after Long Island). I find that if you play the game, for
> that is what it is, then things are just great. If the think for one
second
> that you are trying to pull the wool over their eyes (British idiom) then
> watch out.
>
> Hug an FAA person they are human too :))))))))
>
> Gus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ron Davis
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Ahhh
>
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <l39parts@hotmail.com>
>
> That whole Bitish/English/UK thing is confusing to us Yankees. As a New
> Yorker, an American, and a US citizen, I'm glad we don't have to put up
> those complexities.
>
> Without trying to explain what Brian meant, I'll give my analysis: US FAA
> regulations are more hospitable than any foreign FAA-equivalent has. This
> remains true (but less so) in the wake of the (one day) terrorist attacks
> that many in our government seem to think warrants the dismantling of 200
> years of freedom.
>
> The FAA people in the US fit into three general categories. Most are fat,
> lazy bureacrats with no particular interest in, or knowlege of, aviation.
> They could just as "competently" shuffle papers for the ATF, IRS, or SOA
> (some other agency)- and they will if it there's a GS step up. Don't
> disturb them and they won't bother you.
>
> The second category, I believe, would give a dog indigestion, although
I've
> never actuall fed one to a dog. That anyone can prove.
>
> The third category is the small, and shrinking, number of FAA personnel
who
> are pilots and love airplanes and/or aviation. You find these people
> helpful and concerned, if you find them. The agressively stupid can
however
> provoke them.
>
>
> BRIAN wrote:
>
> >At the time I was flying in the UK it struck me that, from the
> >regulatory point of view, the CAA would be happier if no one was flying
> >in their airspace.
>
> Two-thirds of the above FAA categories feel the same way. A popular vote
of
> FAA personnel would yeild similar results for you Gore fans
>
> Ron
>
>
> "Harmless, unless provoked"
>
>
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: "Frank Haertlein" <yak52driver@earthlink.net>
I know you all heard of the story of the DHL Plane that was hit by a
missile coming out of Baghdad last year, and returned safely - But did
you realize what a close thing it was??? I hadn't! What a story!! Capt.
Al Haynes is no longer the only guy to fly a transport category aircraft
by thrust alone - Perhaps they had Sioux City in mind as they quickly
RE-Learned how to fly! Al may have saved 3 more....
Here's the Story from Aero-News.net......
2003 Hugh Gordon-Burge Trophy Awarded to DHL Flight Crew Prestigious
award given to crew of Airbus hit by missile as they were leaving
Baghdad.
The Guild of Air Pilots and Air Navigators, a British organization
formed in 1929, promotes air safety by presenting trophies and other
awards for outstanding performance in aviation by individuals or
organizations. The text of the award is transcribed here, verbatim.
On 22nd November 2003, a DHL A300 B4 had been airborne from Baghdad
Airport for just over 3 minutes when the calm in the cockpit was
shattered by the sound of a loud bang. At about 8,000ft an explosion was
heard, followed by a cacophony of aural warnings and visual displays
showing a master warning on all flight controls.
Unbeknown to the crew at that time, the aircraft had been struck by a
missile. The Flight Engineer, Mario Rofail, called that the green and
yellow hydraulic systems were lost, and as he started preparing for the
double hydraulic loss emergency checklist procedure the Captain, Eric
Gennotte, announced that he was having difficulty controlling the
aircraft. The First Officer, Steve Michielsen, tried unsuccessfully to
assist the Captain to try and regain control. The F/E then announced
that the third hydraulic system was lost as well.
At that point the crew realized that there was little likelihood that
the flight controls would become functional again. There was no
emergency checklist or procedure to help them recover from this
scenario. The situation appeared hopeless and they were very much on
their own.
The aircraft was without conventional pilot input. The stick and rudder
were ineffective. The flight control surfaces deprived of their
hydraulic muscle, were aligned with the airflow (hinge moment zero).
The configuration was frozen:
1) Slats and flaps could not be extended
2) Spoilers were no longer controllable
3) The position of the horizontal stabilizer could not be
adjusted. It was and continued to remain at the trim position for 215
Knots with climb thrust. (This setting was to pose particular challenges
for the crew as they attempted to stabilize the aircraft for an approach
descent profile)
A state of emergency was declared by Steve to ATC. The crew was told
that the left engine was on fire. Mario advised his fellow crew members
that this was not possible since all engine indications and fire warning
systems were normal. However, with no hydraulics and a fire visible from
the left wing he knew the aircraft was seriously damaged.
The tension was extreme on the flight deck. The 'sense of disbelief' was
felt by all the crew members.
Eric announced that they could control the pitch attitude by adjusting
thrust. Then began a learning period during which Eric, Steve and Mario,
discovered how to control the pitch by modulating thrust. Initially the
thrust lever movements were large and essentially symmetrical, and the
aircraft thus continued a wide, unsteady, 360 degree turn to the left.
The crew found that they could effectively stop the climb by reducing
thrust, which caused an initial airspeed decrease whilst the nose
dropped, but then the airspeed started to increase.
They had to cope with this apparent paradox, due to the change in
pitching moment that could not be corrected by the jammed horizontal
stabilizer. The initial climb at 215 knots was changed into a shallow
controlled descent by reducing thrust, leading to an unavoidable speed
increase: Between 10,000 and 5,000 feet, IAS varied between 270 and 290
knots.
At that time Eric ordered the extension of the landing gear by the
emergency gravity extension procedure, even though the speed exceeded
the maximum allowed for landing gear extension.
Mario successfully manually extended the gear. It made a lot of noise
since the gear doors remained open. The extended gear provided
additional drag, which helped stabilize the aircraft. This was the only
means to bring the speed back towards 210 knots. The decision to extend
the gear so early on proved to be a vital decision.
With the aircraft controllable in pitch around level flight and at a
speed compatible with landing, Eric, supported by Steve and Mario, set
about learning to control the direction of flight.
Asymmetric handling of the throttles could control bank.
When the left engine alone was accelerated, the wings returned to the
horizontal, similarly when the right engine only was retarded the same
leveling effect could be achieved.
This was a very difficult procedure to perform, especially when trying
simultaneously to maintain horizontal flight and follow a heading:
1) The response to thrust change appeared rapidly in pitch, but roll
response was delayed, since the roll resulted from the sideslip induced
by the asymmetric thrust, and there was a lag before this took effect
2) Since the left wing was damaged, the degree of asymmetric thrust had
to be found which was sufficient to compensate for the asymmetry of
lift, and it had to be maintained while the thrust was adjusted to
control the slope; easier said than done
Eric was effectively flying an experimental aircraft and was continually
gaining experience in manipulating the aircraft by the throttles. Steve
provided close assistance making some corrective inputs. There were a
few rather alarming roll excursions beyond 30 degrees during that time.
The aircraft remained very difficult to control, however confidence was
gained as the flight progressed.
Eventually, they could consider navigation back to the field which had
been lost from sight during the "training maneuvers". Steve took on the
navigation. He suggested that a long final of at least 20 nautical miles
was needed. The aircraft started a second 360 degree orbit, this time
under more control. Eric started a right turn to come back towards
runway 33R, the longer of the two runways at Baghdad.
The descent flight path then had to be established. That was not simple
either: the descent angle selected by the average value of thrust was
not easy to assess, since the whole process was subject to oscillation.
It was thus an average descent angle that had to be judged, all the
while maintaining the heading by asymmetric adjustment of the engines.
To complicate matters further, the turbulence associated with a wind of
20 knots from 290 degrees (left crosswind component tended to excite
natural oscillations, and in addition GPWS warnings associated with the
abnormal landing configuration sounded repeatedly on short final.
Eric concentrated on the essential, keeping the aircraft under control
and reaching the airfield where the fire services could fight the fire
on the left wing.
Steve assisted with efficient and timely call-outs, announcing distances
and altitudes. He stressed the point that the power must not be
completely reduced on touch-down; otherwise, the symmetrical thrust
would induce a turn to the left, particularly undesirable just before
ground contact.
Mario, who, in addition to a close watch on all the systems, monitored
the fuel remaining in the damaged left wing. It was vital that both
engines were kept running by ensuring a positive supply of fuel and
ignition. If one of the engines had lost power or failed, the aircraft
and crew would have certainly been lost. He was therefore prepared to
open the cross feed in case the left main tank emptied, but not too soon
because the fuel in the right wing would then be lost through the leak
on the left side. Furthermore, he was able to relieve both pilots by
taking over all radio communication and made sure the aircraft was
depressurized before touchdown to guarantee a successful emergency
evacuation.
Mario contacted ATC for an updated visual assessment to request if the
aircraft was still on fire. A military helicopter replied that the left
wing was on fire and that the flame was the length of the aircraft (50
meters). In spite of the extreme stress
Mario had the courtesy to say "thank you" to the controller. He also
requested that both runways 33L and 33R be kept free and that all
emergency services be ready.
The tension again increased as the ground approached. At
250ft, the pitch attitude, still slowly oscillating, dropped towards a
negative value, which was most alarming so close to the ground. It was
restored nose-up by a large increase in the thrust on both engines.
Towards 100ft, the aircraft was tracking to the runway threshold, but
with a heading ten degrees less than the orientation of the runway. Eric
made his final lateral control correction, reducing the right engine
only. The aircraft banked to the right and the angle of convergence
began to diminish.
Twenty-five long minutes after impact of the missile, the
A300 B4 finally landed on runway 33L, without further damage:
1) At a positive pitch attitude
2) With a moderate sink rate (less than 10ft/sec, far below the
tolerances for the landing gear)
3) At an angle of bank of ten degrees to the right, and heading
diverging about eight degrees to the left of the runway axis
Without any direct means of directional control, however, the aircraft
rapidly went off the side of the runway. The throttles were retarded and
selected to full reverse by Mario. The sandy ground provided a
significant extra braking force and the aircraft, in spite of the high
speed at touchdown, stopped after a landing run of the order of one
kilometer, raising an impressive cloud of sand behind it.
After engine shutdown the crew evacuated the aircraft from the right,
inches away from a coil of razor wire. They ran a safe distance from the
aircraft as the wing was still on fire only to be intercepted by some
military emergency services personnel who warned them that they were
standing in a possible mine field. Their incredible feat was almost
spoiled after taking their first steps back on the ground.
For their amazing and momentous actions in the saving of their aircraft,
the Hugh Gordon-Burge Memorial Award is presented to each crewmember of
the DHL flight.
Aero-News Networks would like add our congratulations to
Captain Gennotte, FO Michielsen and FE Rofail for winning this
prestigious award.
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: cjpilot710@aol.com
Truly a demonstration of superior airmenship.
Jim Goolsby
"Flush the Johns! Four more year!"
JEG 2004
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety, deserve
neither liberty nor safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"The reason older men are like fine wine: when young, they are like grapes
until some woman stomps all over them."
Unknown older man.
"Kill them all. Let God sort them out"
Crusaders 900 AD
"With my shield, or on it."
Trojan Warriors, BC
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: | Thank God it's over! |
MDSHELLEY@aol.com, yakjock@msn.com, walterfricke@yahoo.com,
Rdorsey777@cs.com, dabear@damned.org, TCalloway@hangar-d.com,
mason.t@worldnet.att.net, wpairprt@tdstelme.net, radialpower@cox.net,
KILOUSMC@aol.com, FamilyGage@aol.com, rvfltd@televar.com,
cd001633@mindspring.com, ernest.martinez@oracle.com, FOUGAPILOT@hotmail.com,
N23GD@yahoo.com, jtobul@tobul.com, tormentor34@netzero.net,
JandEFinley@comcast.net, davedris@cavtel.net, pino1@compuserve.com,
RAre406906@aol.com, JGoolsby@umaryland.edu, artziggy6@yahoo.com,
vicky@shippei.com, paraisoam@surfbest.net, EdrisDee@aol.com,
Ckelso17@earthlink.net, yak-list@matronics.com
--> Yak-List message posted by: cjpilot710@aol.com
Now my life can get back to normal. All is right with the world and I can
once again make love and be nice to everyone. :)
Jim Goolsby
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety, deserve
neither liberty nor safety"
Benjamin Franklin 1759
"The reason older men are like fine wine: when young, they are like grapes
until some woman stomps all over them."
Unknown older man.
"Kill them all. Let God sort them out"
Crusaders 900 AD
"With my shield, or on it."
Trojan Warriors, BC
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: Thank God it's over! |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Terry Calloway" <tcalloway@datatechnique.com>
That's a lot of people to make love to. :/
tc
>>> cjpilot710@aol.com 11/3/2004 7:43:31 PM >>>
--> Yak-List message posted by: cjpilot710@aol.com
Now my life can get back to normal. All is right with the world and I
can
once again make love and be nice to everyone. :)
Jim Goolsby
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 |
|
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
b=UvkYzdl30hz6+b1ICUOYwNlLmT18Rix5cUZwPHNiL6Q02MEKwKgv5nCz7hPRW6eZdspziwK9gv1f6SdLPyklBmudyN2hSoswUIB9VLQQl7WiLbbM8jx4z9ExnYqtnPrI/ZF3IDWo+S8pAUB1KWENH2ad9L/9TX32MnD+bhVXLZs=
;
| Subject: | Re:Thank God it's over! |
--> Yak-List message posted by: D Zeman <curious_wings@yahoo.com>
Yea, and god wanted him as president - pleeeease!
As Matt has indicated - KEEP THIS CRAP OFF THE LIST!!!
Any Yak related posts??
__________________________________
www.yahoo.com
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! --
|