Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:35 AM - Re: Emailing: Vals Valkyrie Logo rights reserved (Valkyre1)
2. 07:43 AM - Re: Yak 52 Bad Habits? (Valkyre1)
3. 08:48 AM - Interesting article (Barry Hancock)
4. 12:01 PM - Re: Interesting article (Craig Payne)
5. 12:32 PM - hard starting (Jerry Painter)
6. 04:22 PM - flight suits -- a non-emotional approach (Brian Lloyd)
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: Emailing: Vals Valkyrie Logo rights reserved |
I'm glad that I asked Kevin, These are good sites for the leather flying jackets.
The logo will look great on them. - Val
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: Yak 52 Bad Habits? |
Excellent article Scooter. That should about wrap up the issue scientifically.
Now about all that's left are our "Iwannas and the Idonwannas". Thank You. - Val
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: | Interesting article |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Barry Hancock <barry@flyredstar.org>
Gang,
There was an interesting, if not timely, article in Sport Aerobatics
magazine this month about the protective qualities against different
flame retardant materials worn by aviators and race car drivers. All
debate aside is was a good read.
Also, Steve Culp's rendition of the Sopwith Pup, complete with M14P, is
in there. He's a talented guy. Wonder what the cowl on that airplane
adapted to the CJ would do for in increase in speed....
Barry
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interesting article |
Barry wrote:
>
> Wonder what the cowl on that airplane adapted to the CJ would do for in increase
in speed....
>
Depends on what you mean by "adapted". I saw the Pup last year and talked to Steve
about it. IMHO, the standard CJ cowl merely needs some tweeking. This is something
I'm working on but it won't be ready for SNF. I still need a left hand
lower cowl mount with or without a bushing.
Craig Payne
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: "Jerry Painter" <wild.blue@verizon.net>
Hey Val--
When I was a kid, a lucky friend had an Austin Healey. Fun! One day he
came by and said it had developed a misfire--what could be The Problem?
Being highly experienced know-it-alls who read all the magazines, after
driving it really fast and blipping the throttle about 10,000 times, we
concluded it needed an engine overhaul. So, we tore the engine down,
replaced rings, bearings, points, condenser, rotor, cap, seals (and the
clutch, too, I seem to recall), ground the valves, rebuilt the carburetors
etc. Everything we could think of. New battery and muffler (no doubt a
$500 Italian after-market go-fast variety), too, I think. Started her up
and guess what--it still had the misfire! Crikey! Took it down to the
local gas station where they put it on the scope and immediately found a bad
spark plug--impossible! It was equipped with brand new $500 per Golden
Lodge spark plugs my friend had installed just before the misfire
developed--that couldn't possibly be The Problem! Five minutes and two
bucks later it ran great--just like it did before he installed the $500
Golden Lodge plugs.
Don't recall, but in retrospect I suspect my friend (not me--no way!)
dropped the offending plug during installation.
OTOH, one of the primary problems we've seen with hard starting/misfiring
-52's and CJ's isn't the plugs--it's that they're mostly still equipped with
their original issue and now shot ignition harnesses. Both the Russian and
Chinese wires have comparatively short service lives because of the
materials they use(d). Over There They have calendar service life limits on
most consumables, but We just rely on Condition and ignore the TIS limits.
So, while we ignore--and exceed--the TIS limits, oil, water, fuel etc
collect in the ring, cause the wires to deteriorate (as in turn to goo) and
finally, fail.
If you're experiencing hard starting or misfires, one of the first things to
do is check the wires. If they're bad (very likely if OEM) replace them
with high quality 5mm US wire. Not surprised at all that your conversion
kit makes a big improvement, Dennis.
There is no question that auto plugs (and wire) are way cheaper than the
aviation variety. OTOH aviation plugs and wires don't look like auto stuff
and cost more for some very good reasons. Aviation plugs last a very long
time and are a relatively minor cost item. But if you drop a plug it is
ruined (cracked or broken porcelain), regardless of brand. Don't work so
well in Austin Healeys or airplanes. A harness that has turned to goo isn't
much good, either.
Do some diagnostics before you overhaul. I'll give you my buddy's phone
number if you need advice--I might even still have some magazines laying
around. A nomex flight suit and helmet might help, too. Just kidding.
Jerry Painter
Wild Blue Aviation
425-876-0865
wild.blue@verizon.net
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0cs5r/index.html
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: | flight suits -- a non-emotional approach |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
You know, it is interesting. There are a lot of people trying to prove
to me that a nomex flight suit or something very much like it will help
me in case of a fire. No doubt. I don't disagree at all. What people
seem to be missing in this "discussion" that includes a great deal of
heat and not a whole heck of a lot of light, is that there are two other
issues at work and are the ones that seem more significant to me. They are:
1. Is fire really enough of a threat to justify spending money on a
Nomex flight suit?
2. If I am not hurting anyone, what gives someone else the right to tell
me I have to wear anything?
The questions are somewhat orthogonal. I suspect people are pretty
darned tired of the second question. I have made my point there and some
of you understand and even agree with me. This is the one that generates
lots of heat. We don't need anymore heat.
But the first one is valid and apropos to this list. It is about where
to spend time and money to optimize safety in our aircraft. It is just
as valid as talking about CO detectors, changing hoses, learning to fly
our aircraft safely, etc.
Let me state for the record loudly and clearly:
"A nomex flight suit or something like it, when properly cared for and
worn, will help protect you from fire in the cockpit and will give you
more time to exit the cockpit without becoming well-done should a fire
occur in your aircraft."
No argument from me on that. OK? We can stop with the proof of how the
nomex suit can help. It is not worth discussing (in my opinion) as I
don't know anyone who wouldn't agree that a fire-resistant suit is
resistant to fire.
Now, let's think about all the threats we have to our flying. It would
probably be a good idea to look at the accident statistics. I know, we
are not your average spam-can drivers as we don't drive your average
spam-can. (No, we drive your sorta-cool foreign spam-can.) Regardless,
what do the accident stats tell us? I suspect Tom Johnson can give us
more information as the underwriters really care about what causes them
to have to pay out insurance claims. I wonder just how many GA pilots
have been involved in fires? After that question is answered, we can
then ask the question as to whether a nomex suit or even a
specially-designed fire-resistant suit would have made a difference? I
don't know the answers but I would bet money that the answer is that it
wouldn't really make much of a difference.
So where should we spend our time and money to make a difference in the
safety and longevity of our aircraft and pilots?
Here are some things that I think rank higher on the list of threats:
1. improper decision making;
2. improper or insufficient training;
3. improper or insufficient maintenance on an aircraft;
4. continued VFR into IFR conditions;
5. human physiology, e.g. CO, hyperthermia, dehydration, hypoxia,
fatigue, etc.
If money were an issue and I were to have to choose between a
fire-resistant suit and a CO detector, I suspect that my life would be
much better served by the CO detector.
(And, of course, if it isn't going to really add to my safety, why do
you insist I wear one. :-)
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
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! --
|