Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:36 AM - Re: Insurance (Ron Davis)
2. 04:47 AM - Re: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. (Ron Davis)
3. 05:03 AM - Re: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. (Ron Davis)
4. 05:08 AM - Re: Re: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. (Ron Davis)
5. 05:39 AM - Re: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. (cjpilot710@aol.com)
6. 05:59 AM - Yak 52 Auxiliary Fuel Tanks (Jill Gernetzke)
7. 06:13 AM - Re: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. (Michael Bolton)
8. 06:56 AM - Re: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. (Roger Kemp)
9. 07:29 AM - Re: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. (Brian Lloyd)
10. 07:32 AM - Re: Insurance - It pays to shop around (Valkyre1)
11. 07:56 AM - Re: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. (Scooter)
12. 07:56 AM - Re: Insurance - It pays to shop around (Brian Lloyd)
13. 08:07 AM - Yak-18T air regulation (yakbird)
14. 10:16 AM - Re: Yak 50 for sale (Sarah Tobin)
15. 10:50 AM - Re: Insurance - It pays to shop around (Roger Kemp)
16. 10:57 AM - Not Delivered Messages (Matt Dralle)
17. 02:21 PM - Re: Yak 50 for sale (John W. Hilterman Jr.)
18. 02:22 PM - Re: Yak 50 for sale (John W. Hilterman Jr.)
19. 06:36 PM - Re: Yak 50 for sale (Roger Kemp)
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <L39parts@hotmail.com>
1) That seems like a lot of projects.
2) You do know that insurance, like most things in life, is optional? If
it's worth what it costs, buy it. If it isn't, don't.
3) Have you heard of gliders?
4) AOPA and EAA are in the insurance business, as salesmen, on commission.
The higher the price, the higher the commission. See 2) above.
----- Original Message -----
From: <fish@aviation-tech.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Insurance
> --> Yak-List message posted by: fish@aviation-tech.com
>
> Group,
>
> Currently I see the two biggest obsticales to aviation as fuel and
> insurance
> prices.
>
> Why is it that with the power of AOPA/EAA that they have not started their
> own
> insurance sections, that sell insurance to aircraft owners at a reasonable
> rates?
>
>
> Are the foxes in the henhouse?
>
> Fly Safe
> John Fischer
> Yak-52, N213YA
> PT-19A, Project
> L-5E, Project
> BT-13A, Project
>
>
>>
>>
>>I can give you some valuable advice here that comes from the experience
>> >of
> a personal tragedy in my own family: Use a GAS oven.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Sarah Tobin
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 1:55 PM
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Insurance
>>
>>
>> I did go to TJ but it was *after* getting the crappy quotes from other
>> >people.
> (Falcon/AOPA/Avemco). He couldn't do any better than Avemco. >I used the
> existing N # and went thru the previous owners insurance >(Falcon)
> expecting
> a decent quote, perhaps a bit higher due to my 0 time >in type, but wasn't
> expecting
> double what he was paying!
>>
>> Okay, I think I am going to go stick my head in an oven now...you guys
>> >are
> killing me! How did I get the big screw? UGH
>>
>> Smash
>>
>> Scott Kirk <pilot8kcab@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Scott Kirk"
>>
>> I have a Yak-55 and am insured thru Tom Johnson's agency as he is
>> >quite
>
>> familiar with the Yaks and own a Yak-50. Try TomJohnson@cox.net and
>> >see
> if
>> he can help, his websi te link is below. My policy is in the $1500
>> >range
> if
>> memory serves. Last year it was $1700 with no time in type! If >you've
>
>> checked several insurance companies within a short period its quite
>> >likely
>
>> you've been locked out of getting a better quote (unless you've used
>> >an
>
>> artificial N number).
>>
>> www.airpowerinsurance.com
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> ----Original Message Follows----
>> From: Sarah Tobin
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Insurance
>> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 07:43:30 -0800 (PST)
>>
>> I sure did try them, tried them first and they wanted 3200 bucks.
>> Apparently females are higher risk these days. This was all in the
>> >last
>
>> month, so I don't know if they just went up, but you guys are making
>> >me
>
>> think I am getting the big screw job here.
>>
>> Smash
>>
>> Scott Poehlmann wrote:
>> Did you try Falcon? I'm a CPL with about 1500 hours, but 0 in
>> type and they only hit me for $2200 for my -55.
>>
>> BTW, you'll LOVE the 55!
>>
>> Scott
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Sarah Tobin
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Sent: Monday, 13 March, 2006 11:16
>> Subject: Yak-List: Insurance
>>
>>
>> Okay, not sure what happened with my previous post, but what I said
>> >was
>
>> that I found the cheapest insurance with Avemco for my Yak 55.
>>
>> I have an ATP and a bunch of hours, but 0 time in type, so they
>> >hammered
>
>> me for about 2600/year. But they still beat everyone else's quote,
>> >and
> I
>> bugged everyone!
>>
>> Smash
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Brings words and photos together (easily) with
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on h
>> >ow
> to
>
>> Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. |
My comments do seem a bit harsh in the bright light of day. There are other possible
explanations for Drew quoting 91.500 and 91.501. Several times I've been
to high level government problem-solving summits when one of the strippers
knocked over a bottle and got beer on the napkin I was taking notes on. A lot
of times you don't even notice until next day and then it's difficult to relate
the exact details of the meeting.
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Kemp
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req.
Ron,
I think your shooting the messenger here. The beaurearcrate (sp) that needs to
shot is Jeff...whoever he is! Sounds to me like "Jeff" just reached up the backside
and pulled one out knowing that the poor RPA pilot would not have a clue
at that time! Or he was just the usual beaureacrtatic idiot dazzling one and
all with Bull Shit!
Doc
----- Original Message -----
From: Ron Davis
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: 3/15/2006 9:40:40 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req.
Drew,
It is very illustrative that you returned with this advice from the NWOC.
There is no FAR 91.500 and 91.501 has nothing whatsoever to due with the issue
of compensation for display at airshows:
Sec. 91.501 Applicability.
(a) This subpart prescribes operating rules, in addition to those
prescribed in other subparts of this part, governing the operation of
large airplanes of U.S. registry, turbojet-powered multiengine civil
airplanes of U.S. registry, and fractional ownership program aircraft...
Was it a good party at least? Were all of the other technical issues handled
with smoke and mirrors too? You, and the feeble-minded bureaucrats in DC,
need to figure out that there are a few of us who know how to read. You go to
a high level summit with the ruling class and return with this crap! Was this
boondoggle at the expense of the association?
----- Original Message -----
From: Drew Blahnick
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 7:03 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req.
Folks,
I just got back from the National Warbird Operators Conference ('NWOC'),
where we had a FAST National BoD meeting (the RPA makes up one signatory and board
seat, all other warbird organizations who are FAST signatories make up the
rest), which was attended by Jeff Weller from the FAA in Wash DC. I spoke about
the compensation and commercial licensing issue with Jeff, who works in the
general av. and commercial division and is the FAA National Airshow Coordinator.
He is working closely with FAST National on several issues concerning formation
standardization (the national president is Mike Filucci by the way).
This issue of compensation effects every FAST pilot without a commercial ticket,
and effects the RPA (and volunteers who are setting up) RedStars mass formation
teams (see flyredstar.org 'airshow center'). I write the following with
the personal belief that this is strictly a compensation i ssue; the commercial
ticket does not reflect a qualitative differance in aviators holding the FAST
card, it is, in the end, simply a rule on the books dealing with commercial
services/compensation and thus having an appropriate commercial rating - and
it's my belief it is overly restrictive and has a negative effect on the ability
of FAST, and other approved formation certification bodies, to support the
airshow industry and the general public interest.
The following are his statements in response to my questions:
Q: Where do we find what is defined as compensation or catagories that may
not apply?
A: There are some compensation catagories that do not require a commercial
license, they are quite limited, they can be researched through FAR 91.500
(or) 501.
Q: How do we petition to gain a waiver/exemption/change to this regulation/rule?
A: No easy task, this would have to be taken up with general counsel (FAA
legal dept. chock full of Lawyers) in Washington DC.
Please note that Jeff is close to the puzzle palace and a good source of
information, but we are dealing with compensation issues, we have no idea if the
FAA rule is impacted by IRS regulations/rulings requiring their involvement!
I have no idea, and it shouldn't stop citizens from taking action regardless...
It wasn't a hopeful discussion, however, you have to start somewhere - now,
our current volunteers in the assoc. are loaded up, if someone effected by
this ruling would like to help, here is my suggestion.
1. Research the regulation and rule extensively, the best way to argue the
merits of your position is to have an equal command of that regulation a s the
does the enforcer/interpreter. Jeff mentioned the details could be found in
91.500 or 501 which should be online - warning, I've never met a FSDO who could
remember every regulation, but take a look.
2. In requesting a waiver or rule change, be extremely specific, if its contractually
provided hotel rooms on the dates that FAST pilots performing formation
in waivered airspace and/or replacement of used aviation fuel in the process
of operating a US registered aircraft in waivered airspace during the airshow
or aerial event, then that should be clear, with clear limits; No other
form of compensation in lieu of ...can or will be accepted...you get the idea.
3. Author a letter to the FAST National Board of Directors through the RPA
that professionally lays out the issues and requests/proposed action (#2).
The RPA is an equal signatory to FAST National and a member of the Board and the
letter can be p resented to all other board members for consideration and endorsement
- the idea being if their membership is negatively effected, we want
the endorsement of the entire FAST formation community that serves the US Airshow
Industry. If this had even a snowballs chance in hell, in my opinion it
has even less if it just shows up as a request from 60 pilots who fly imported
eastern block aircraft.
4. A waiver package/request for rule change (don't ask for more than they
can give, a waiver is an FAA word, a rule change is probably not in their vocabulary)
with the letter then heads to the FAA (General Counsel, Airshow Coordinator
and other parties in the FAA).
Of course, thats just presenting the issue and solution with some backing
and in a format the Legal Department (and other parties) would at least be pressed
to read/review - no doubt, someone would need to face to face or via phon
e meeting emphasize the numbers of professionally FAST trained-qualified pilots,
and airshows, negatively effected by the current regulation/ruling and the
merits of such a waiver/rule change suggestion, etc.
These steps are just a suggestion, and I did not address this to the static
displays. I suspect someone has a very differant view on approaching the subject,
if you would like to contact the FAA in DC that's certainly your right;here's
the address:
800 Independance Ave. S.W.
Washington DC 20591
Hope this helps,
Drew
Drew Blahnick
President
RedStar Pilots Association
Time: 07:26:57 PM PST US
From: "Ron Davis" <L39parts@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: compensation issue, my second last try.
The exemption is for passengers to share expenses. IMHO the FAA is on
shaky legal
ground as far as compensation for static display. You don't need any
license
to own a plane and all of the FARs on commercial operations refer to
carrying
passengers or cargo for hire or a flight for hire (delivering a plane,
towing
a glider, etc).
Museums charge people to look at their planes. Does the person selling
the tickets
have commercial license? Does the guy who owns the museum? It started
out
to be a policy of not giving fuel to Private pilots who flew in the
show and
spiraled out of control to include sandwiches.
Sadly, my opinion doesn't count. You need to find a judge that feels
this way.
----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Craft
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 8:05 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: compensation issue, my second last try.
I think I am missing something here. Isn't there an exemption for
"sharing expenses"?
How they can think that a sandwich and some gas is compensation is
beyond me. What do the airshow organizers put on your W-1099 form?
Three sandwiches,
two cokes, one room with a queen bed, thirty gallons of gas, use of one
lawn chair with shade, etc. Heck if the FAA is taking it that far, why
isn't
free admittance to an airsh ow compensation? Uh Oh, I probably shouldn't
have
typed that out loud. Did the FAA get into the airshow for free? Well
along
that line of reason, couldn't that be construed as accepting a bribe?
. Could
a properly informed administrator reverse the interpretation of the
regs?
Yak-List Digest Server <yak-list-digest@matronics.com> wrote:
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
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: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. |
Seriously, although the prior post was an exageration rather than a fabrication,
my BS meter started trending upscale when I read the numbers 91.500 and 91.501.
It took less than a minute to look them up. Even if Drew isn't familiar enough
with the FARs to know those were bad numbers when he first heard them, it
wouldn't have been much trouble for him to look up the references. He could
have then announced on the list that the FAA sent clueless buffoons to NWOC and
maintained his own prestige. Instead, he tried to pursuade us that he was
a party to a serious discussion of our problems and was working to find solutions.
Give a guy enough rope...
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Kemp
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req.
Ron,
I think your shooting the messenger here. The beaurearcrate (sp) that needs to
shot is Jeff...whoever he is! Sounds to me like "Jeff" just reached up the backside
and pulled one out knowing that the poor RPA pilot would not have a clue
at that time! Or he was just the usual beaureacrtatic idiot dazzling one and
all with Bull Shit!
Doc
----- Original Message -----
From: Ron Davis
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: 3/15/2006 9:40:40 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req.
Drew,
It is very illustrative that you returned with this advice from the NWOC.
There is no FAR 91.500 and 91.501 has nothing whatsoever to due with the issue
of compensation for display at airshows:
Sec. 91.501 Applicability.
(a) This subpart prescribes operating rules, in addition to those
prescribed in other subparts of this part, governing the operation of
large airplanes of U.S. registry, turbojet-powered multiengine civil
airplanes of U.S. registry, and fractional ownership program aircraft...
Was it a good party at least? Were all of the other technical issues handled
with smoke and mirrors too? You, and the feeble-minded bureaucrats in DC,
need to figure out that there are a few of us who know how to read. You go to
a high level summit with the ruling class and return with this crap! Was this
boondoggle at the expense of the association?
----- Original Message -----
From: Drew Blahnick
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 7:03 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req.
Folks,
I just got back from the National Warbird Operators Conference ('NWOC'),
where we had a FAST National BoD meeting (the RPA makes up one signatory and board
seat, all other warbird organizations who are FAST signatories make up the
rest), which was attended by Jeff Weller from the FAA in Wash DC. I spoke about
the compensation and commercial licensing issue with Jeff, who works in the
general av. and commercial division and is the FAA National Airshow Coordinator.
He is working closely with FAST National on several issues concerning formation
standardization (the national president is Mike Filucci by the way).
This issue of compensation effects every FAST pilot without a commercial ticket,
and effects the RPA (and volunteers who are setting up) RedStars mass formation
teams (see flyredstar.org 'airshow center'). I write the following with
the personal belief that this is strictly a compensation i ssue; the commercial
ticket does not reflect a qualitative differance in aviators holding the FAST
card, it is, in the end, simply a rule on the books dealing with commercial
services/compensation and thus having an appropriate commercial rating - and
it's my belief it is overly restrictive and has a negative effect on the ability
of FAST, and other approved formation certification bodies, to support the
airshow industry and the general public interest.
The following are his statements in response to my questions:
Q: Where do we find what is defined as compensation or catagories that may
not apply?
A: There are some compensation catagories that do not require a commercial
license, they are quite limited, they can be researched through FAR 91.500
(or) 501.
Q: How do we petition to gain a waiver/exemption/change to this regulation/rule?
A: No easy task, this would have to be taken up with general counsel (FAA
legal dept. chock full of Lawyers) in Washington DC.
Please note that Jeff is close to the puzzle palace and a good source of
information, but we are dealing with compensation issues, we have no idea if the
FAA rule is impacted by IRS regulations/rulings requiring their involvement!
I have no idea, and it shouldn't stop citizens from taking action regardless...
It wasn't a hopeful discussion, however, you have to start somewhere - now,
our current volunteers in the assoc. are loaded up, if someone effected by
this ruling would like to help, here is my suggestion.
1. Research the regulation and rule extensively, the best way to argue the
merits of your position is to have an equal command of that regulation a s the
does the enforcer/interpreter. Jeff mentioned the details could be found in
91.500 or 501 which should be online - warning, I've never met a FSDO who could
remember every regulation, but take a look.
2. In requesting a waiver or rule change, be extremely specific, if its contractually
provided hotel rooms on the dates that FAST pilots performing formation
in waivered airspace and/or replacement of used aviation fuel in the process
of operating a US registered aircraft in waivered airspace during the airshow
or aerial event, then that should be clear, with clear limits; No other
form of compensation in lieu of ...can or will be accepted...you get the idea.
3. Author a letter to the FAST National Board of Directors through the RPA
that professionally lays out the issues and requests/proposed action (#2).
The RPA is an equal signatory to FAST National and a member of the Board and the
letter can be p resented to all other board members for consideration and endorsement
- the idea being if their membership is negatively effected, we want
the endorsement of the entire FAST formation community that serves the US Airshow
Industry. If this had even a snowballs chance in hell, in my opinion it
has even less if it just shows up as a request from 60 pilots who fly imported
eastern block aircraft.
4. A waiver package/request for rule change (don't ask for more than they
can give, a waiver is an FAA word, a rule change is probably not in their vocabulary)
with the letter then heads to the FAA (General Counsel, Airshow Coordinator
and other parties in the FAA).
Of course, thats just presenting the issue and solution with some backing
and in a format the Legal Department (and other parties) would at least be pressed
to read/review - no doubt, someone would need to face to face or via phon
e meeting emphasize the numbers of professionally FAST trained-qualified pilots,
and airshows, negatively effected by the current regulation/ruling and the
merits of such a waiver/rule change suggestion, etc.
These steps are just a suggestion, and I did not address this to the static
displays. I suspect someone has a very differant view on approaching the subject,
if you would like to contact the FAA in DC that's certainly your right;here's
the address:
800 Independance Ave. S.W.
Washington DC 20591
Hope this helps,
Drew
Drew Blahnick
President
RedStar Pilots Association
Time: 07:26:57 PM PST US
From: "Ron Davis" <L39parts@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: compensation issue, my second last try.
The exemption is for passengers to share expenses. IMHO the FAA is on
shaky legal
ground as far as compensation for static display. You don't need any
license
to own a plane and all of the FARs on commercial operations refer to
carrying
passengers or cargo for hire or a flight for hire (delivering a plane,
towing
a glider, etc).
Museums charge people to look at their planes. Does the person selling
the tickets
have commercial license? Does the guy who owns the museum? It started
out
to be a policy of not giving fuel to Private pilots who flew in the
show and
spiraled out of control to include sandwiches.
Sadly, my opinion doesn't count. You need to find a judge that feels
this way.
----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Craft
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 8:05 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: compensation issue, my second last try.
I think I am missing something here. Isn't there an exemption for
"sharing expenses"?
How they can think that a sandwich and some gas is compensation is
beyond me. What do the airshow organizers put on your W-1099 form?
Three sandwiches,
two cokes, one room with a queen bed, thirty gallons of gas, use of one
lawn chair with shade, etc. Heck if the FAA is taking it that far, why
isn't
free admittance to an airsh ow compensation? Uh Oh, I probably shouldn't
have
typed that out loud. Did the FAA get into the airshow for free? Well
along
that line of reason, couldn't that be construed as accepting a bribe?
. Could
a properly informed administrator reverse the interpretation of the
regs?
Yak-List Digest Server <yak-list-digest@matronics.com> wrote:
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
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: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ron Davis" <L39parts@hotmail.com>
It's too bad DREW didn't follow that advice. Better at giving advice than
taking it...hmmm...it sounds like Drew missed his calling, should be with
the FAA.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scooter" <yakk52@verizon.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 10:58 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req.
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Scooter" <yakk52@verizon.net>
>
> This is from Drew's post:
>
> " 1. Research the regulation and rule extensively, the best way to argue
> the merits of your position is to have an equal command of that regulation
> a s the does the enforcer/interpreter. Jeff mentioned the details could be
> found in 91.500 or 501 which should be online - warning, I've never met a
> FSDO who could remember every regulation, but take a look. "
>
> Seems like he included a pretty clear disclaimer in there. He said to
> research it and understand it. You did, you do and it doesn't apply. Big
> deal.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22158#22158
>
>
>
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: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. |
"_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ the FAA sent clueless buffoons to NWOC "
Clueless buffoons they may be, BUT they are the clueless buffoons in charge.
Of course you can right the wrongs perceived by getting a job at the FAA
(pays very well, better job security than any airline, and you do get to fly a
lot) and start your crusade to right the wrongs in the most effective place
there.
It still comes to the fact that you need a commercial and a current 2nd
class physical to receive fuel, rooms, food, hooker, etc etc etc.
Pappy
----- Original Message -----
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: | Yak 52 Auxiliary Fuel Tanks |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Jill Gernetzke <jill@m-14p.com>
Group,
M-14P, Inc. is the U.S. Distributor for the Red Star Aviation auxiliary
fuel tanks for the Yak 52. We are happy to announce that Dennis
Savarese is a dealer / installer. He should have the first 2 sets of
tanks within the next week. If you would like additional information,
contact me off list.
Jill Gernetzke
M-14P, Inc.
4905 Flightline Drive
Kingman, AZ 86401
928-681-4400
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: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. |
Hookers!!??!! Nobody told me about the Hookers!
Now we are going to get my CJ back in the air this weekend, then I'm going for
my medical and checkride!! Let me know when the next show is Pappy!
(laughs)
And thanks for the information Pappy. Putting it to use today and FSDO is scheduled
for Sunday. Some of those guys are pretty good people to work on a Sunday
wouldn'y ya say.
Michael "Mighty" Bolton
"if it doesn't sound round, WHY LOOK?"
----- Original Message -----
From: cjpilot710@aol.com
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 8:35 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req.
"_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ the FAA sent clueless buffoons to NWOC "
Clueless buffoons they may be, BUT they are the clueless buffoons in charge.
Of course you can right the wrongs perceived by getting a job at the FAA (pays
very well, better job security than any airline, and you do get to fly a lot)
and start your crusade to right the wrongs in the most effective place there.
It still comes to the fact that you need a commercial and a current 2nd class
physical to receive fuel, rooms, food, hooker, etc etc etc.
Pappy
----- Original Message -----
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: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. |
OK, I agree one should research the data you publish for public educification.
Truthfully, my hard copy of the FARs is a 2000 edition and sits on a remote shelf
in my study. Yeh, I could go to the web to FAA.Gov to find them. But as things
go, I don't unless it has a direct impact on me. This issue really does
not affect me, others yes. The bottomline as an old Chief told me once as a young
pup..."If you don't look out for yourself, Lt., nobody else will." Research
and know your regs before picking your fight.
So Drew, 20 lashes with a wet noodle and next time protect that napkin from the
stripper and your beer so those notes are not faded and running. Besides, there
are social diseases not even discribed in medical literature yet found in strippers
these days!
Doc
----- Original Message -----
From: Ron Davis
Sent: 3/17/2006 6:52:17 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req.
My comments do seem a bit harsh in the bright light of day. There are other possible
explanations for Drew quoting 91.500 and 91.501. Several times I've been
to high level government problem-solving summits when one of the strippers
knocked over a bottle and got beer on the napkin I was taking notes on. A lot
of times you don't even notice until next day and then it's difficult to relate
the exact details of the meeting.
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Kemp
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req.
Ron,
I think your shooting the messenger here. The beaurearcrate (sp) that needs to
shot is Jeff...whoever he is! Sounds to me like "Jeff" just reached up the backside
and pulled one out knowing that the poor RPA pilot would not have a clue
at that time! Or he was just the usual beaureacrtatic idiot dazzling one and
all with Bull Shit!
Doc
----- Original Message -----
From: Ron Davis
Sent: 3/15/2006 9:40:40 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req.
Drew,
It is very illustrative that you returned with this advice from the NWOC. There
is no FAR 91.500 and 91.501 has nothing whatsoever to due with the issue of
compensation for display at airshows:
Sec. 91.501 Applicability.
(a) This subpart prescribes operating rules, in addition to those
prescribed in other subparts of this part, governing the operation of
large airplanes of U.S. registry, turbojet-powered multiengine civil
airplanes of U.S. registry, and fractional ownership program aircraft...
Was it a good party at least? Were all of the other technical issues handled with
smoke and mirrors too? You, and the feeble-minded bureaucrats in DC, need
to figure out that there are a few of us who know how to read. You go to a high
level summit with the ruling class and return with this crap! Was this boondoggle
at the expense of the association?
----- Original Message -----
From: Drew Blahnick
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 7:03 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req.
Folks,
I just got back from the National Warbird Operators Conference ('NWOC'), where
we had a FAST National BoD meeting (the RPA makes up one signatory and board seat,
all other warbird organizations who are FAST signatories make up the rest),
which was attended by Jeff Weller from the FAA in Wash DC. I spoke about the
compensation and commercial licensing issue with Jeff, who works in the general
av. and commercial division and is the FAA National Airshow Coordinator.
He is working closely with FAST National on several issues concerning formation
standardization (the national president is Mike Filucci by the way). This
issue of compensation effects every FAST pilot without a commercial ticket, and
effects the RPA (and volunteers who are setting up) RedStars mass formation
teams (see flyredstar.org 'airshow center'). I write the following with the personal
belief that this is strictly a compensation i ssue; the commercial ticket
does not reflect a qualitative differance in avia
tors holding the FAST card, it is, in the end, simply a rule on the books dealing
with commercial services/compensation and thus having an appropriate commercial
rating - and it's my belief it is overly restrictive and has a negative
effect on the ability of FAST, and other approved formation certification bodies,
to support the airshow industry and the general public interest.
The following are his statements in response to my questions:
Q: Where do we find what is defined as compensation or catagories that may not
apply?
A: There are some compensation catagories that do not require a commercial license,
they are quite limited, they can be researched through FAR 91.500 (or) 501.
Q: How do we petition to gain a waiver/exemption/change to this regulation/rule?
A: No easy task, this would have to be taken up with general counsel (FAA legal
dept. chock full of Lawyers) in Washington DC.
Please note that Jeff is close to the puzzle palace and a good source of information,
but we are dealing with compensation issues, we have no idea if the FAA
rule is impacted by IRS regulations/rulings requiring their involvement! I have
no idea, and it shouldn't stop citizens from taking action regardless...
It wasn't a hopeful discussion, however, you have to start somewhere - now, our
current volunteers in the assoc. are loaded up, if someone effected by this ruling
would like to help, here is my suggestion.
1. Research the regulation and rule extensively, the best way to argue the merits
of your position is to have an equal command of that regulation a s the does
the enforcer/interpreter. Jeff mentioned the details could be found in 91.500
or 501 which should be online - warning, I've never met a FSDO who could remember
every regulation, but take a look.
2. In requesting a waiver or rule change, be extremely specific, if its contractually
provided hotel rooms on the dates that FAST pilots performing formation
in waivered airspace and/or replacement of used aviation fuel in the process
of operating a US registered aircraft in waivered airspace during the airshow
or aerial event, then that should be clear, with clear limits; No other form of
compensation in lieu of ...can or will be accepted...you get the idea.
3. Author a letter to the FAST National Board of Directors through the RPA that
professionally lays out the issues and requests/proposed action (#2). The RPA
is an equal signatory to FAST National and a member of the Board and the letter
can be p resented to all other board members for consideration and endorsement
- the idea being if their membership is negatively effected, we want the
endorsement of the entire FAST formation community that serves the US Airshow
Industry. If this had even a snowballs chance in hell, in my opinion it has even
less if it just shows up as a request from 60 pilots who fly imported eastern
block aircraft.
4. A waiver package/request for rule change (don't ask for more than they can give,
a waiver is an FAA word, a rule change is probably not in their vocabulary)
with the letter then heads to the FAA (General Counsel, Airshow Coordinator
and other parties in the FAA).
Of course, thats just presenting the issue and solution with some backing and in
a format the Legal Department (and other parties) would at least be pressed
to read/review - no doubt, someone would need to face to face or via phon e meeting
emphasize the numbers of professionally FAST trained-qualified pilots, and
airshows, negatively effected by the current regulation/ruling and the merits
of such a waiver/rule change suggestion, etc.
These steps are just a suggestion, and I did not address this to the static displays.
I suspect someone has a very differant view on approaching the subject,
if you would like to contact the FAA in DC that's certainly your right;here's
the address:
800 Independance Ave. S.W.
Washington DC 20591
Hope this helps,
Drew
Drew Blahnick
President
RedStar Pilots Association
Time: 07:26:57 PM PST US
From: "Ron Davis" <L39parts@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: compensation issue, my second last try.
The exemption is for passengers to share expenses. IMHO the FAA is on
shaky legal
ground as far as compensation for static display. You don't need any
license
to own a plane and all of the FARs on commercial operations refer to
carrying
passengers or cargo for hire or a flight for hire (delivering a plane,
towing
a glider, etc).
Museums charge people to look at their planes. Does the person selling
the tickets
have commercial license? Does the guy who owns the museum? It started
out
to be a policy of not giving fuel to Private pilots who flew in the
show and
spiraled out of control to include sandwiches.
Sadly, my opinion doesn't count. You need to find a judge that feels
this way.
----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Craft
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 8:05 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: compensation issue, my second last try.
I think I am missing something here. Isn't there an exemption for
"sharing expenses"?
How they can think that a sandwich and some gas is compensation is
beyond me. What do the airshow organizers put on your W-1099 form?
Three sandwiches,
two cokes, one room with a queen bed, thirty gallons of gas, use of one
lawn chair with shade, etc. Heck if the FAA is taking it that far, why
isn't
free admittance to an airsh ow compensation? Uh Oh, I probably shouldn't
have
typed that out loud. Did the FAA get into the airshow for free? Well
along
that line of reason, couldn't that be construed as accepting a bribe?
. Could
a properly informed administrator reverse the interpretation of the
regs?
Yak-List Digest Server <yak-list-digest@matronics.com> wrote:
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
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: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Ron Davis wrote:
> Seriously, although the prior post was an exageration rather than a
> fabrication, my BS meter started trending upscale when I read the
> numbers 91.500 and 91.501. It took less than a minute to look them up.
> Even if Drew isn't familiar enough with the FARs to know those were bad
> numbers when he first heard them, it wouldn't have been much trouble for
> him to look up the references. He could have then announced on the list
> that the FAA sent clueless buffoons to NWOC and maintained his own
> prestige. Instead, he tried to pursuade us that he was a party to a
> serious discussion of our problems and was working to find solutions.
> Give a guy enough rope...
God knows, Drew and I have our differences. But I don't think that Drew
does anything with malice of forethought. As I see it, the most likely
scenarios are:
1. the FAA boneheads transcribed the citation incorrectly and Drew
accurately wrote down what they said;
2. Drew mis-heard what they said and transcribed it incorrectly.
Give him a chance to get the correct information.
Something to think about: has anyone thought to exclude FAA personnel
from the "pilots lounge" at a show? I doubt many FAA personnel have
pilot's licenses. That would make it difficult for them to find out that
someone with only a PPSEL has committed the most heinous crime of eating
a vendor-provided hot dog.
And if, heaven forbid, some PPSEL has inadvertently received fuel in his
airplane because it was sitting on the ramp, it is pretty hard to prove
if everyone just keeps their fool mouths shut. You think the FAA is
going to demand an audit of all fuel and how it was paid for? I doubt
that the FAA is going to go to the trouble to get a subpoena for the
information. And even if they do it is possible that somehow the records
can't be located.
And, yes, I am a malcontent who is advocating civil disobedience.
--
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
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: Insurance - It pays to shop around |
I agree Ira. When I almost purchased the original CJ I was looking at the rates
were considerably lower than when I purchased Linedog's for almost twice that
price. I still don't have the hull value fully insured for what's in it to keep
rates lower.
I have over 27000 hours ATP DC-3, 737,727,757,765 rotorcraft, seaplane, CFI, and
flew all kinds of typical civilian aircraft. My rates are somewhere up there
around Smash's until I get more CJ time.
Although it helped...it didn't do me that much good. EAA/Red Star/ FAST/ Warbird
membership etc. seem to count for more.
Let's just kid ourselves Smash and imagine that the premiums are higher for female
"jet jockettes" because of supply and demand. "We are a rare and precious
commodity and therefore more difficult to replace". ( Hah! - Right. Dream on.
Well, it beats sticking your head in a oven and tossing things through windows.)
You did the right thing Sarah. Go fly, have fun, enjoy a beer on the guys and
the rates will eventually come down.
- Valkyre
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: | Re: Airshow Compensation and comm lic req. |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Scooter" <yakk52@verizon.net>
Wow, you guys are tough on each other. Are you a Yak or a CJ guy Ron? I couldn't
find you on the red star roster.
L39parts(at)hotmail.com wrote:
> It's too bad DREW didn't follow that advice. Better at giving advice than
> taking it...hmmm...it sounds like Drew missed his calling, should be with
> the FAA.
>
> ---
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22352#22352
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: Insurance - It pays to shop around |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
And the issue of going "bare" is a real and good one. Insurance is a
bet. You are betting you will wreck the airplane and they are betting
you won't. If you figure that your airplane is worth $100K and they are
charging you $2.5K then they are giving you 40:1 odds but they keep
winning since you are doing everything in your power to avoid getting
paid. You are on their side.
So what *are* the odds of wrecking your airplane? What can you do to
skew the odds in your favor. Remember, when you reduce the accident rate
you skew the odds in the insurance company's favor. They *may* reward
you with lower premiums next time.
So, what happens if you decide to self-insure? You then carry the cost
of a potential loss yourself. Take the insurance premium you would have
paid and invest it (just what the insurance company does). Hopefully you
will have enough set aside to offset any losses you might incur.
But you probably want to protect yourself from catastrophic loss. There
are two ways to do this:
1. carry liability only to protect yourself from a suit extending from
someone else's losses;
2. carry a very high deductible ($10K-$20K) so that you only make a
claim in the case of the total loss of the airplane. (Tom -- what
happens with very-high-deductible policies? Got any "for instance"
numbers you can toss out here?)
At something like $2,500/yr it doesn't take many years to save the cost
of even a pretty severe "incident". I have been flying for 37
accident-and-incident-free years. I would have been *much* better off
self-insuring for all that time.
--
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
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Yak-18T air regulation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "yakbird" <tim@stokegoldingairfield.co.uk>
On my '52 the air system pressure was crudely regulated. The compressor keeps on
pumping till the system pressure overcame a 'blow-off valve' a simple affair
with a spring-loaded piston pressing a rubber seal against a seat. A big puff
of air, lot of noise (not normally heard in flight) and pressure dropped back
until valve spring pressure reseated. Easy to adjust to ensure you always had
sufficient pressure in the system.
On the 18T it is a bit more refined (apparently) with the pressure detection valve
operating in a 'flip-flop' manner. When it reaches pre-set maximum system
pressure the unit 'vents' the output from the compressor which now 'freewheels'.
As the system pressure drops slowly (through small leakage) there comes a point
when the valve 'switches' the compressor output back on line.
Problem is that the hysteresis and set points are too wide. Pressure builds up
to about 55 kg/cm, valve triggers and system has to drop to around 25 kg/cm before
it comes on line again.
Guess at which point in this cycle I tend to be landing, needing flaps, U/C and
brakes??
Do any of you have any experience with this valve/sensor and its adjustment. Its
safe to tell me, I am an engineer...honestly [Wink]
--------
The only time you have too much fuel on board is when you are on fire
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=22359#22359
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/fatmax_opt_125.jpg
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: Yak 50 for sale |
Selling your round motor....for shame!! What are you going to fly this year?
"John W. Hilterman Jr." <johnhilterman1@cox.net> wrote: --> Yak-List message posted
by: "John W. Hilterman Jr."
1984 Yak-50 For Sale
TTAF 365, M14P TTSN 303, dynamically balanced MTV-9-29 TTSN 142.
Skytronics alternator, ADC oil filter, intake manifold drain kit, cockpit
"snot" valve, new US hoses on engine/landing gear/brakes, hobbs meter, US
paint and fabric, new LP Aero glass all around, round wingtips with
nav/strobes, landing light, new McFarlane elevator/rudder cables, custom
built baggage compartment, tail FOD barrier, Comant combo VHF/GPS antenna,
Garmin GPS-196 hard wired, Aux fuel tank with quantity gauge, US altimeter
and airspeed with Knots and KPH, UMA interior lighting, smoke system, Hooker
harness, 2 Russian tool kits, US A/C manuals, custom canopy cover, Softie
seatpack parachute included. You won't find a nicer Yak-50 for sale.
References on the quality of this aircraft available. Contact John
Hilterman: Home 405-285-6717 Cell 405-826-1725
---------------------------------
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Insurance - It pays to shop around |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Brian,
You make absolute perfect sense! Self insurance is the way to go, but carry
the liability coverage. Wish I had been doing that with my $10,000 BC/BS
premium by investing in a medical savings account for the last 30 years!
Granted, only in the past 3 years has the health insurance premiums
increased. Wonder why, could it be that my wife developed diabetes and has
incurred an increased cost in medication? Nah, the actuaries would not do
that now would they?!!!
Same applies for airplanes!
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Date: 3/17/2006 10:06:15 AM
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Insurance - It pays to shop around
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>
> And the issue of going "bare" is a real and good one. Insurance is a
> bet. You are betting you will wreck the airplane and they are betting
> you won't. If you figure that your airplane is worth $100K and they are
> charging you $2.5K then they are giving you 40:1 odds but they keep
> winning since you are doing everything in your power to avoid getting
> paid. You are on their side.
>
> So what *are* the odds of wrecking your airplane? What can you do to
> skew the odds in your favor. Remember, when you reduce the accident rate
> you skew the odds in the insurance company's favor. They *may* reward
> you with lower premiums next time.
>
> So, what happens if you decide to self-insure? You then carry the cost
> of a potential loss yourself. Take the insurance premium you would have
> paid and invest it (just what the insurance company does). Hopefully you
> will have enough set aside to offset any losses you might incur.
>
> But you probably want to protect yourself from catastrophic loss. There
> are two ways to do this:
>
> 1. carry liability only to protect yourself from a suit extending from
> someone else's losses;
>
> 2. carry a very high deductible ($10K-$20K) so that you only make a
> claim in the case of the total loss of the airplane. (Tom -- what
> happens with very-high-deductible policies? Got any "for instance"
> numbers you can toss out here?)
>
> At something like $2,500/yr it doesn't take many years to save the cost
> of even a pretty severe "incident". I have been flying for 37
> accident-and-incident-free years. I would have been *much* better off
> self-insuring for all that time.
>
> --
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Not Delivered Messages |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Matt Dralle <dralle@matronics.com>
All,
Those Not Delivered 'cause its Spam messages aren't coming from Matronics and messages
are in fact being delivered to the List distribution. Someone on the
Lists is returning those messages. The return messages themselves don't seem
to have the actual email address of the person sending them. I'm running my Email
Weasel right now, which should hopefully "weasel" out who the person is and
unsubscribe them.
Matt
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
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 |
|
I know, I know..I'll be picking up my Extra in April. What did you decide
to do hangar wise?
Hitman
_____
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sarah Tobin
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak 50 for sale
Selling your round motor....for shame!! What are you going to fly this
year?
"John W. Hilterman Jr." <johnhilterman1@cox.net> wrote:
--> Yak-List message posted by: "John W. Hilterman Jr."
1984 Yak-50 For Sale
TTAF 365, M14P TTSN 303, dynamically balanced MTV-9-29 TTSN 142.
Skytronics alternator, ADC oil filter, intake manifold drain kit, cockpit
"snot" valve, new US hoses on engine/landing gear/brakes, hobbs meter, US
paint and fabric, new LP Aero glass all around, round wingtips with
nav/strobes, landing light, new McFarlane elevator/rudder cables, custom
built baggage compartment, tail FOD barrier, Comant combo VHF/GPS antenna,
Garmin GPS-196 hard wired, Aux fuel tank with quantity gauge, US altimeter
and airspeed with Knots and KPH, UMA interior lighting, smoke system,
_____
Bring photos to life! New
<http://pa.yahoo.com/*http:/us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39174/*http:/photomail.mail.
yahoo.com> PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "John W. Hilterman Jr." <johnhilterman1@cox.net>
Oh by the way....whoever buys my Yak-50 will get a brand new NOMEX flight
suit in the size of their choice!!! Couldn't resist.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Hilterman
Jr.
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 6:52 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Yak 50 for sale
--> Yak-List message posted by: "John W. Hilterman Jr."
<johnhilterman1@cox.net>
1984 Yak-50 For Sale
TTAF 365, M14P TTSN 303, dynamically balanced MTV-9-29 TTSN 142.
Skytronics alternator, ADC oil filter, intake manifold drain kit, cockpit
"snot" valve, new US hoses on engine/landing gear/brakes, hobbs meter, US
paint and fabric, new LP Aero glass all around, round wingtips with
nav/strobes, landing light, new McFarlane elevator/rudder cables, custom
built baggage compartment, tail FOD barrier, Comant combo VHF/GPS antenna,
Garmin GPS-196 hard wired, Aux fuel tank with quantity gauge, US altimeter
and airspeed with Knots and KPH, UMA interior lighting, smoke system, Hooker
harness, 2 Russian tool kits, US A/C manuals, custom canopy cover, Softie
seatpack parachute included. You won't find a nicer Yak-50 for sale.
References on the quality of this aircraft available. Contact John
Hilterman: Home 405-285-6717 Cell 405-826-1725
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 |
|
Hitman,
Deserting us for a flat 6! Oh man, what's a YAKKER to do?
Doc
----- Original Message -----
From: John W. Hilterman Jr.
Sent: 3/17/2006 4:31:59 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Yak 50 for sale
I know, I know.Ill be picking up my Extra in April. What did you decide to do
hangar wise?
Hitman
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sarah Tobin
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak 50 for sale
Selling your round motor....for shame!! What are you going to fly this year?
"John W. Hilterman Jr." <johnhilterman1@cox.net> wrote:
--> Yak-List message posted by: "John W. Hilterman Jr."
1984 Yak-50 For Sale
TTAF 365, M14P TTSN 303, dynamically balanced MTV-9-29 TTSN 142.
Skytronics alternator, ADC oil filter, intake manifold drain kit, cockpit
"snot" valve, new US hoses on engine/landing gear/brakes, hobbs meter, US
paint and fabric, new LP Aero glass all around, round wingtips with
nav/strobes, landing light, new McFarlane elevator/rudder cables, custom
built baggage compartment, tail FOD barrier, Comant combo VHF/GPS antenna,
Garmin GPS-196 hard wired, Aux fuel tank with quantity gauge, US altimeter
and airspeed with Knots and KPH, UMA interior lighting, smoke system,
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
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! --
|