Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:14 AM - Yk-52 on ski's (Rob Kent)
2. 04:32 AM - Re: Cedar Key (A. Dennis Savarese)
3. 05:22 AM - Re: Cedar Key (David McGirt)
4. 05:44 AM - Re: Airshow compensation (Valkyre1)
5. 06:01 AM - Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (Tim Gagnon)
6. 06:07 AM - Re: Commercial and Compensation (Tim Gagnon)
7. 06:54 AM - STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICE (viperdoc@mindspring.com)
8. 07:13 AM - Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (Brian Lloyd)
9. 07:14 AM - Re: Re: Commercial and Compensation (doug sapp)
10. 07:20 AM - Re: STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICE (Hans Oortman)
11. 07:34 AM - Re: Cedar Key (cjpilot710@aol.com)
12. 07:34 AM - Re: STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICE (Kregg Victory)
13. 08:30 AM - Airshow compensation thinking out of the box (Drew Blahnick)
14. 09:26 AM - Re: Cedar Key (David McGirt)
15. 12:43 PM - Insurance - Yet More Options (Scooter)
16. 03:40 PM - Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (Tim Gagnon)
17. 04:03 PM - Re: Commercial and Compensation (Tim Gagnon)
18. 04:46 PM - Re: Re: Commercial and Compensation (Roger Kemp)
19. 05:28 PM - Re: Re: Commercial and Compensation (A. Dennis Savarese)
20. 05:47 PM - Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (MajorGoofinoff@aol.com)
21. 06:13 PM - Re: Commercial and Compensation (Tim Gagnon)
22. 06:18 PM - Re: Re: [INFO] ACM possible issues (Bitterlich GS11 Mark G)
23. 06:19 PM - Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (A. Dennis Savarese)
24. 06:21 PM - Re: Re: Commercial and Compensation (Bitterlich GS11 Mark G)
25. 06:37 PM - Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (Tim Gagnon)
26. 06:41 PM - Re: Commercial and Compensation (Tim Gagnon)
27. 08:58 PM - Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (Roger Kemp)
28. 09:21 PM - Re: Re: Commercial and Compensation (Brian Lloyd)
29. 09:26 PM - Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (Brian Lloyd)
30. 09:57 PM - Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (DaBear)
31. 10:01 PM - Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (DaBear)
32. 10:02 PM - Yak parts (DaBear)
33. 11:05 PM - Re: Re: Commercial and Compensation (Roger Kemp)
34. 11:08 PM - Re: Yak parts (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: "Rob Kent" <rkent@wlacrussianeng.co.uk>
This is the best quality picture I've seen yet.
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0989336/M/
Anyone want to try this? I've got one set of ski's available if anyone is
interested. I recently had a quote to ship to the NY area. Door to door but
excluding any applicable import duties/taxes was around 350 (approx
US$650). I would be open to reasonable offers!
Regards
Rob Kent
Stores Manager
WLAC - Russian Engineering
www.wlacrussianeng.co.uk
Tel: +44 1628 829 165
Fax: +44 1628 828 961
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 |
|
Here are some links to Cedar Key, FL
http://www.cedarkey.org/
http://www.cedarkeybandb.com/
http://islandhotel-cedarkey.com/
http://www.dockside-cedarkey.com/ (We've stayed here on a couple of occasions)
http://www.castaways-resort.net/
The runway is 2300' and there is no fuel at the airport. A local taxi (a Checker
cab) monitors the unicom frequency and will pick you up and drive you into
town. Very quaint and relaxing.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: forrest johnson
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:04 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Cedar Key
What is Cedar key? where is it? what is happening? I am coming to S&F might come
early, Please advise.
----- Original Message -----
From: David McGirt
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 11:57 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Cedar Key
All,
The list of people coming to Cedar Key the weekend before Sun-n-Fun seems
to be growing even more.. Looks like we will have ~ 9-10 airplanes there now.
If you are definitely coming to Cedar Key, could you please email me off list,
so we can make sure we know about everyone. We are hoping to get some better
fuel prices over that was if possible if we know how many we have..
The list I have so far: (excluding better half's)
Robert Langford
Bill Walker
David McGirt
Tim Williams
BJ Kennamore
Shane Golden?
Terry Callaway
Terry's wingman
Jimmy Fordham
Who am I missing?
David
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 |
|
Forest,
It is a little bit of a mini-flyin and practice before Sun-n-Fun..
Bascially, everyone is heading in on Friday , will fly on Saturday and
Sunday, then head to LakeLand on Monday.. Just relaxing fun and flying..
_____
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 7:30 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Cedar Key
Here are some links to Cedar Key, FL
http://www.cedarkey.org/
http://www.cedarkeybandb.com/
http://islandhotel-cedarkey.com/
http://www.dockside-cedarkey.com/ (We've stayed here on a couple of
occasions)
http://www.castaways-resort.net/
The runway is 2300' and there is no fuel at the airport. A local taxi (a
Checker cab) monitors the unicom frequency and will pick you up and drive
you into town. Very quaint and relaxing.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: forrest <mailto:flushjohnson@charter.net> johnson
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 9:04 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Cedar Key
What is Cedar key? where is it? what is happening? I am coming to S&F might
come early, Please advise.
----- Original Message -----
From: David McGirt <mailto:david@mcgirt.net>
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 11:57 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Cedar Key
All,
The list of people coming to Cedar Key the weekend before Sun-n-Fun seems
to be growing even more.. Looks like we will have ~ 9-10 airplanes there
now. If you are definitely coming to Cedar Key, could you please email me
off list, so we can make sure we know about everyone. We are hoping to get
some better fuel prices over that was if possible if we know how many we
have..
The list I have so far: (excluding better half's)
Robert Langford
Bill Walker
David McGirt
Tim Williams
BJ Kennamore
Shane Golden?
Terry Callaway
Terry's wingman
Jimmy Fordham
Who am I missing?
David
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 |
Forrest; Unfortunately, the American Heritage dictionary defines "compensate"
as 1. to make up for 2.counterbalance 3.to make payment to 4.to "reimburse".
They define "reimburse" as 1. to pay back.
The two terms seem to be somewhat interchangeable. I know, it's idiotic because
we all seem to know that they really don't mean the same thing, but I'm afraid
that the legal system may use the dictionary correlation. (You got me all excited
here because it looked like a very good point, so I looked it up.) - Val
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: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
I find it odd that while ACM is discouraged, low level aerobatics is promoted and
people pay money to see it!! I have seen two fatal accidents while low level
aerobatics were being peformed. In fact, I was the second to the scene (the
first was the dead pilot) and then I had to assist the womans husband!
I dont go to too many airshows any more because of this. I honestly dont see the
fun in seeing someone pull out from a loop 4 inches above the ground. I will
agree that it takes extraordinary talent to do what they do...but it just does
not make sense to me. The crowd does not truly understand the training and risk
involved, they just want to see someone pushing the edge.
What is the RPA's stand on this?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23398#23398
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commercial and Compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
Medical aside, how about just going out and getting the training. There is more
to the commercial than pylon eights. I thought any training was a good thing?
I have an ATP with two type ratings...and I have learned from every certificate
or rating I have gotten. All apply to when I fly the -50.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23400#23400
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: | STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICE |
--> Yak-List message posted by: viperdoc@mindspring.com
This Story has been sent to you by : viperdoc@mindspring.com
STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICEAfter spending a morning rehearsing dramatic air
show maneuvers, stunt pilot Nick Nilmeyer was killed Monday while attempting
to land a single-seat plane in a private airfield near Greenfield.
The full article will be available on the Web for a limited time:
http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/local/14157834.htm
(c) 2006 Monterey County Herald and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
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: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Tim Gagnon wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
>
> I find it odd that while ACM is discouraged, low level aerobatics is promoted
and people pay money to see it!! I have seen two fatal accidents while low level
aerobatics were being peformed. In fact, I was the second to the scene (the
first was the dead pilot) and then I had to assist the womans husband!
>
> I dont go to too many airshows any more because of this.
I understand. I like participatory sports, not spectator sports. Acro is
something you do, not something you watch (unless you are trying to
understand a maneuver).
> I honestly dont see the fun in seeing someone pull out from a loop 4 inches above
the ground. I will agree that it takes extraordinary talent to do what they
do...but it just does not make sense to me. The crowd does not truly understand
the training and risk involved, they just want to see someone pushing the
edge.
You are certainly right on that.
> What is the RPA's stand on this?
Well, it should be that it is legal and therefore RPA has no comment.
The desire to tell others what they can and cannot do "for their own
good" is a powerful one. Still, people should be allowed to do what they
want to do even if they risk their own life in the process.
RPA should stay out of this completely and provide services to its
membership to help them be as safe as they can be. RPA should not be in
the habit of telling people how they should fly their airplane or
attempting to enforce same.
--
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 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: Commercial and Compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "doug sapp" <rvfltd@televar.com>
Tim,
It's not about not wanting to get the rating, hell that's easy. It's about
the necessity to have BOTH the rating AND a 2nd class phy before you can
accept compensation and the fact that as us boomers get older there will be
less and less of you (and me) who are able to pass the phy so you will start
to see less "collectable" aircraft at the airshows as this situation take
it's toll. This is a detriment to us, the airshow business, and aviation as
a whole. Less "exhibition" aircraft could well be interpreted by the powers
to be in many different ways. The problems this poorly written reg can
cause us as a group are many and most will not as obvious as the ones
listed.
Always Yakin,
Doug Sapp
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tim Gagnon
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:07 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Commercial and Compensation
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
Medical aside, how about just going out and getting the training. There is
more to the commercial than pylon eights. I thought any training was a good
thing?
I have an ATP with two type ratings...and I have learned from every
certificate or rating I have gotten. All apply to when I fly the -50.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23400#23400
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: | STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICE |
Damm!
I hate the word "stunt pilot", it gives the impression that he was doing
something irresponsible and we all know he wasn't, he was practicing
aerobatics.it makes a difference..
Hans
Just a Yak pilot from Holland
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
viperdoc@mindspring.com
Sent: woensdag 22 maart 2006 15:52
Subject: Yak-List: STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICE
--> Yak-List message posted by: viperdoc@mindspring.com This Story has been
sent to you by : viperdoc@mindspring.com
STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICEAfter spending a morning rehearsing dramatic
air show maneuvers, stunt pilot Nick Nilmeyer was killed Monday while
attempting to land a single-seat plane in a private airfield near
Greenfield.
The full article will be available on the Web for a limited time:
http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/local/14157834.htm
(c) 2006 Monterey County Herald and wire service sources. All Rights
Reserved.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3Dto
and much
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D-Matt
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
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 |
|
I'll try to meet up with you guys.
Jim "Pappy"Goosby
-----Original Message-----
From: David McGirt <david@mcgirt.net>
Sent: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 12:57:46 -0500
Subject: Yak-List: Cedar Key
All,
The list of people coming to Cedar Key the weekend before Sun-n-Fun seems to
be growing even more.. Looks like we will have ~ 9-10 airplanes there now. If
you are definitely coming to Cedar Key, could you please email me off list,
so we can make sure we know about everyone. We are hoping to get some better
fuel prices over that was if possible if we know how many we have..
The list I have so far: (excluding better half?s)
Robert Langford
Bill Walker
David McGirt
Tim Williams
BJ Kennamore
Shane Golden?
Terry Callaway
Terry?s wingman
Jimmy Fordham
Who am I missing?
David
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: | STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICE |
I just met him at the airport a few days ago at the airport while he was
having some work done on his plane. He seemed to be a really nice guy.
Kregg
_____
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hans Oortman
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 7:19 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICE
Damm!
I hate the word "stunt pilot", it gives the impression that he was doing
something irresponsible and we all know he wasn't, he was practicing
aerobatics.it makes a difference..
Hans
Just a Yak pilot from Holland
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
viperdoc@mindspring.com
Sent: woensdag 22 maart 2006 15:52
Subject: Yak-List: STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICE
--> Yak-List message posted by: viperdoc@mindspring.com This Story has been
sent to you by : viperdoc@mindspring.com
STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICEAfter spending a morning rehearsing dramatic
air show maneuvers, stunt pilot Nick Nilmeyer was killed Monday while
attempting to land a single-seat plane in a private airfield near
Greenfield.
The full article will be available on the Web for a limited time:
http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/local/14157834.htm
(c) 2006 Monterey County Herald and wire service sources. All Rights
Reserved.
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: | Airshow compensation thinking out of the box |
Folks,
I check the list only sparingly, so please cc this to me individually as well
if you have good ideas,
Guys, you know what I think of this regulation, but lets think out of the box
for a moment, dont throw darts, let the ideas tumble forth, here is the issue
and one concept:
goals:
1. All qualified and motivated Fast qualed members to fly on redstar teams in
waivered airspace
2. Have their gas expended at the event, hotel room and rental car covered as
a minimum of support.
Problem:
1. With no comm lic. they cant accept this "compensation" from the organizer.
Ideas:
What if the RPA could reimburse non comm lic. participants for their donated
efforts in supporting RPA public education?
What if the organizers didnt pay or compensate them? The "donations" whether
from BP, Spruce, AEROSHELL, or the event organizers go to the RPA.
If nationally all fast squadrons-local groups-folks pooled together when flying
8-16 ship formations as redstars in well led and displayed regional mass formation
teams and caught the eye of a national sponsor that was coordinated through
Stephen Fox (RPA corp sponsor chairman), the event organizers donations
would be a mute, the national sponsorship potential to help fund the RPA ops could
be significant (the newsletter by the way may go to 24 pages next qtr and
cost us over $3000 an issue) .
So...what if the RPA had a requirement/policy to promote our staff members attendance
at airshows and had a policy of reimbusing expenses provided for rooms
and fuel to those airman selected to attend as rpa volunteers. If the RPA asks
you to be there, and you agree, are we breaking this law if I authorize reimbursement
for your room, provide a 2 tank fuel stipend and provide a rental
van to the group as volunteer staffers? We reimburse folks rooms and car now
for events attendance.
Although I know many of you want the Comm ruling changed, this out of the box
thinking is strictly focused on the future success of redstars regional mass
formation program,
Let the darts be thrown, at least it will spur the neural nets and perhaps spawn
a good idea...please email me directly if you have a solution,
Drew
---------------------------------
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
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 |
|
Look forward to seeing you there..
_____
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of cjpilot710@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Cedar Key
I'll try to meet up with you guys.
Jim "Pappy"Goosby
-----Original Message-----
From: David McGirt <david@mcgirt.net>
Sent: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 12:57:46 -0500
Subject: Yak-List: Cedar Key
All,
The list of people coming to Cedar Key the weekend before Sun-n-Fun seems
to be growing even more.. Looks like we will have ~ 9-10 airplanes there
now. If you are definitely coming to Cedar Key, could you please email me
off list, so we can make sure we know about everyone. We are hoping to get
some better fuel prices over that was if possible if we know how many we
have..
The list I have so far: (excluding better half?s)
Robert Langford
Bill Walker
David McGirt
Tim Williams
BJ Kennamore
Shane Golden?
Terry Callaway
Terry?s wingman
Jimmy Fordham
Who am I missing?
David
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: | Insurance - Yet More Options |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Scooter" <yakk52@verizon.net>
Just got a quote from AUA. About $750 less than "the other guys" and half the
deductable. Wow.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23502#23502
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: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
I was not advocating (although it seems like I did imply that) that RPA be involved
in "regulating" low level aerobatics. They have taken a stand on the ACM
issue but to the best of my knowledge, have not addressed the low level aerobatic
issue.
I must preface the following statement by saying that I am not involved in either
activity,only by lack of training and education, not for lack of desire.
It seems to me that ACM done with proper training by those proficient in it, is
as safe as any other activity where you fly your airplane to its limits. I have
sat in on and participated (from a GIB view) on ACM hops and can tell you that
they were thoroughly briefed and specific ROE of were set and expected to
be adhered too. I have been involved in countless military crew briefings and
these were done as professionally as any of those. I understand the concerns of
the community but I think they are overstated without regards to the operation.
I do believe in and have seen the training that goes into getting some up
on ACM. It is not unlike any other training I have seen yet we are shying away
from it because of a couple of accidents. When the airshow season starts, so
do the obituaries for those that were at the top of thier game...well...until
one day when they made one mistake and got killed. It happens to the best out
there and there is not an effort to shut down airshows.
I just find it ironic, and a bit hypocritical, to lambast something that has suffered
few incidents while we pay for and praise those that operate at the very
ragged edge and sometimes beyond an airplanes envelope.
Maybe someone smarter than me can tell me where the difference exist between the
two activities when done by proficient and trained pilots.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23544#23544
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commercial and Compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
Doug,
I would agree that it is poorly written but allow me to play the devils advocate
here. I am not stating that I agree with current regs and think that those without
a Second Class should be prohibited from participating in airshows.
I think that the FAA wants those that are of adequate enough health to be able
to receive and maintain a Second Class before they can operate an airplane in
front of, with or, for the public. If you are not of said health, you may pose
an undue risk to a large public gathering or to passengers you may carry. Does
that make sense?
There has to be some medical requirement for commercial operations or their would
be some folks out there flying airplanes that probably should not even be
driving a car!
Maybe there is a situation where a person could hold a commercial ticket while
maintaining only a Third Class medical with the understanding that that person
will only exercise the priviledges of that rating while engaged in airshow activities.
As far as not seeing collectible airplanes due to lack of qualified and trainined
pilots, I do see this as a growing issue and see it big time in the CAF. There
is a lack of trust placed in the younger generation to handle these airplanes.
I have faced that since I have been in the CAF. I am 38 and considered a
"whipper snapper" and have been told that too my face. This will ultimately
lead to the demise of the CAF and like organizations.
With the proper training and mentoring, an 18 year old can handle a P-51 or B-17.
They have proven that! Now, I understand they were making them as fast as some
were crashing them, the "kids" today would do ok. We have 23 year olds flying
Vipers! Give them "us" a shot...we might make you proud!!
Just my thoughts...
tim
rvfltd(at)televar.com wrote:
> Tim,
> It's not about not wanting to get the rating, hell that's easy. It's about
> the necessity to have BOTH the rating AND a 2nd class phy before you can
> accept compensation and the fact that as us boomers get older there will be
> less and less of you (and me) who are able to pass the phy so you will start
> to see less "collectable" aircraft at the airshows as this situation take
> it's toll. This is a detriment to us, the airshow business, and aviation as
> a whole. Less "exhibition" aircraft could well be interpreted by the powers
> to be in many different ways. The problems this poorly written reg can
> cause us as a group are many and most will not as obvious as the ones
> listed.
>
> Always Yakin,
> Doug Sapp
>
> --
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23550#23550
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commercial and Compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Well said for a "Whipper Snapper".
Since I'm now considered a Fossil.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Tim Gagnon <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Date: 3/22/2006 6:08:46 PM
> Subject: Yak-List: Re: Commercial and Compensation
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
>
> Doug,
>
> I would agree that it is poorly written but allow me to play the devils
advocate here. I am not stating that I agree with current regs and think
that those without a Second Class should be prohibited from participating
in airshows.
>
> I think that the FAA wants those that are of adequate enough health to be
able to receive and maintain a Second Class before they can operate an
airplane in front of, with or, for the public. If you are not of said
health, you may pose an undue risk to a large public gathering or to
passengers you may carry. Does that make sense?
>
> There has to be some medical requirement for commercial operations or
their would be some folks out there flying airplanes that probably should
not even be driving a car!
>
>
> Maybe there is a situation where a person could hold a commercial ticket
while maintaining only a Third Class medical with the understanding that
that person will only exercise the priviledges of that rating while engaged
in airshow activities.
>
> As far as not seeing collectible airplanes due to lack of qualified and
trainined pilots, I do see this as a growing issue and see it big time in
the CAF. There is a lack of trust placed in the younger generation to
handle these airplanes. I have faced that since I have been in the CAF. I
am 38 and considered a "whipper snapper" and have been told that too my
face. This will ultimately lead to the demise of the CAF and like
organizations.
>
> With the proper training and mentoring, an 18 year old can handle a P-51
or B-17. They have proven that! Now, I understand they were making them as
fast as some were crashing them, the "kids" today would do ok. We have 23
year olds flying Vipers! Give them "us" a shot...we might make you proud!!
>
> Just my thoughts...
>
> tim
>
>
> rvfltd(at)televar.com wrote:
> > Tim,
> > It's not about not wanting to get the rating, hell that's easy. It's
about
> > the necessity to have BOTH the rating AND a 2nd class phy before you can
> > accept compensation and the fact that as us boomers get older there
will be
> > less and less of you (and me) who are able to pass the phy so you will
start
> > to see less "collectable" aircraft at the airshows as this situation
take
> > it's toll. This is a detriment to us, the airshow business, and
aviation as
> > a whole. Less "exhibition" aircraft could well be interpreted by the
powers
> > to be in many different ways. The problems this poorly written reg can
> > cause us as a group are many and most will not as obvious as the ones
> > listed.
> >
> > Always Yakin,
> > Doug Sapp
> >
> > --
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23550#23550
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commercial and Compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
Tim,
If you put your airplane only on display at an airshow, you are in no way
endangering any spectators, regardless of whether you have a 3rd class or
2nd class medical. If you receive fuel for the flight home, that in no way
endangers the lives of the spectators. If you receive a cup of coffee and
donut when you arrive, you should not be required to have a commercial
certificate to accept a cup of coffee.
I have always wondered if an FAA employee assigned to an airshow (read
waivered airspace) were to accept a sandwich and drink or even a cup of
coffee from the airshow people, if it could be construed as receiving
"gratuities" which as we all know is taboo for a government employee.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:02 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Commercial and Compensation
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
>
> Doug,
>
> I would agree that it is poorly written but allow me to play the devils
> advocate here. I am not stating that I agree with current regs and think
> that those without a Second Class should be prohibited from participating
> in airshows.
>
> I think that the FAA wants those that are of adequate enough health to be
> able to receive and maintain a Second Class before they can operate an
> airplane in front of, with or, for the public. If you are not of said
> health, you may pose an undue risk to a large public gathering or to
> passengers you may carry. Does that make sense?
>
> There has to be some medical requirement for commercial operations or
> their would be some folks out there flying airplanes that probably should
> not even be driving a car!
>
>
> Maybe there is a situation where a person could hold a commercial ticket
> while maintaining only a Third Class medical with the understanding that
> that person will only exercise the priviledges of that rating while
> engaged in airshow activities.
>
> As far as not seeing collectible airplanes due to lack of qualified and
> trainined pilots, I do see this as a growing issue and see it big time in
> the CAF. There is a lack of trust placed in the younger generation to
> handle these airplanes. I have faced that since I have been in the CAF. I
> am 38 and considered a "whipper snapper" and have been told that too my
> face. This will ultimately lead to the demise of the CAF and like
> organizations.
>
> With the proper training and mentoring, an 18 year old can handle a P-51
> or B-17. They have proven that! Now, I understand they were making them as
> fast as some were crashing them, the "kids" today would do ok. We have 23
> year olds flying Vipers! Give them "us" a shot...we might make you proud!!
>
> Just my thoughts...
>
> tim
>
>
> rvfltd(at)televar.com wrote:
>> Tim,
>> It's not about not wanting to get the rating, hell that's easy. It's
>> about
>> the necessity to have BOTH the rating AND a 2nd class phy before you can
>> accept compensation and the fact that as us boomers get older there will
>> be
>> less and less of you (and me) who are able to pass the phy so you will
>> start
>> to see less "collectable" aircraft at the airshows as this situation take
>> it's toll. This is a detriment to us, the airshow business, and aviation
>> as
>> a whole. Less "exhibition" aircraft could well be interpreted by the
>> powers
>> to be in many different ways. The problems this poorly written reg can
>> cause us as a group are many and most will not as obvious as the ones
>> listed.
>>
>> Always Yakin,
>> Doug Sapp
>>
>> --
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23550#23550
>
>
>
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
I think the reason to avoid ACM is the whole T-34 issues. No matter how good
your are you will pull more G's than you think, at least we have the HIGH G
light and tone. Let the Feds go after the T-34s and such. I don't want any
wings popping of the Yaks and then having to deal with the Feds who think are
airplanes are all going to shed a wing.
Scott.
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commercial and Compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co wrote:
> Tim,
> If you put your airplane only on display at an airshow, you are in no way
> endangering any spectators, regardless of whether you have a 3rd class or
> 2nd class medical. If you receive fuel for the flight home, that in no way
> endangers the lives of the spectators. If you receive a cup of coffee and
> donut when you arrive, you should not be required to have a commercial
> certificate to accept a cup of coffee.
>
> I have always wondered if an FAA employee assigned to an airshow (read
> waivered airspace) were to accept a sandwich and drink or even a cup of
> coffee from the airshow people, if it could be construed as receiving
> "gratuities" which as we all know is taboo for a government employee.
> Dennis
>
>
>
> ---
Excellent point! I have served a fed free beer until she was drunk, hitting on
an F-15 pilot half her age, and then jumped in a pool with a white shirt on. Our
show got better the next...as we knew it would after we got back from the one
hour photo store!
Maybe the rule should only apply to flight operations within the waivered airspace.
I would think that sitting static and the only flying involved is to and
from would not require more than what is needed for a normal flight.
I guess anything outside of waiver airspace, say arriving on Friday and departing
on Monday should be legal with a Third Class and valid ticket. If your not
required to be at the briefing, how would they know you are there. You could have
dropped your airplane off for the weekend!
Good point....would it hold up during a violation hearing? I agree that in your
scenario, you should be able to operate with nothing more than a Third Class.
Hell..even a Student Medical should suffice.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23582#23582
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: [INFO] ACM possible issues |
I think there is a HUGE difference between an organization that puts
non-pilots into aircraft and start yelling "FIGHTS ON" with cameras and
recorders going full speed, compared to two trained pilots that own their
own aircraft performing prebriefed and knowledgeable ACM.
I further believe that almost ANY aircraft could shed a wing if exposed to
too much of the same kind of nonsense that these idiots were pulling.
The reason I say this is because anyone who says that ALL ACM SHOULD BE
AVOIDED, will sooner or later possibly include Aerobatics in general into
that same category. (I am not saying you would say this Scott, but sooner
or later SOMEONE would).
My 2 cents.
Mark Bitterlich
N50YK
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
MajorGoofinoff@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:46 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues
I think the reason to avoid ACM is the whole T-34 issues. No matter how
good your are you will pull more G's than you think, at least we have the
HIGH G light and tone. Let the Feds go after the T-34s and such. I don't
want any wings popping of the Yaks and then having to deal with the Feds who
think are airplanes are all going to shed a wing.
Scott.
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
Excellent point Scott. One thing that always stands out in my mind is "metal has
memory".
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: MajorGoofinoff@aol.com
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 7:45 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues
I think the reason to avoid ACM is the whole T-34 issues. No matter how good
your are you will pull more G's than you think, at least we have the HIGH G light
and tone. Let the Feds go after the T-34s and such. I don't want any wings
popping of the Yaks and then having to deal with the Feds who think are airplanes
are all going to shed a wing.
Scott.
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commercial and Compensation |
The only real difference between 2md and 3rd class medicals is with your
eyesight. I could only get a 3rd ... changed my glasses, and POOF... got a
2nd. Your points makes sense Tim, but the reality of the differences
between 2nd and 3rd class do not seem to.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tim Gagnon
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 7:02 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Commercial and Compensation
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
Doug,
I would agree that it is poorly written but allow me to play the devils
advocate here. I am not stating that I agree with current regs and think
that those without a Second Class should be prohibited from participating in
airshows.
I think that the FAA wants those that are of adequate enough health to be
able to receive and maintain a Second Class before they can operate an
airplane in front of, with or, for the public. If you are not of said
health, you may pose an undue risk to a large public gathering or to
passengers you may carry. Does that make sense?
There has to be some medical requirement for commercial operations or their
would be some folks out there flying airplanes that probably should not even
be driving a car!
Maybe there is a situation where a person could hold a commercial ticket
while maintaining only a Third Class medical with the understanding that
that person will only exercise the priviledges of that rating while engaged
in airshow activities.
As far as not seeing collectible airplanes due to lack of qualified and
trainined pilots, I do see this as a growing issue and see it big time in
the CAF. There is a lack of trust placed in the younger generation to handle
these airplanes. I have faced that since I have been in the CAF. I am 38 and
considered a "whipper snapper" and have been told that too my face. This
will ultimately lead to the demise of the CAF and like organizations.
With the proper training and mentoring, an 18 year old can handle a P-51 or
B-17. They have proven that! Now, I understand they were making them as fast
as some were crashing them, the "kids" today would do ok. We have 23 year
olds flying Vipers! Give them "us" a shot...we might make you proud!!
Just my thoughts...
tim
rvfltd(at)televar.com wrote:
> Tim,
> It's not about not wanting to get the rating, hell that's easy. It's
about
> the necessity to have BOTH the rating AND a 2nd class phy before you can
> accept compensation and the fact that as us boomers get older there will
be
> less and less of you (and me) who are able to pass the phy so you will
start
> to see less "collectable" aircraft at the airshows as this situation take
> it's toll. This is a detriment to us, the airshow business, and aviation
as
> a whole. Less "exhibition" aircraft could well be interpreted by the
powers
> to be in many different ways. The problems this poorly written reg can
> cause us as a group are many and most will not as obvious as the ones
> listed.
>
> Always Yakin,
> Doug Sapp
>
> --
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23550#23550
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
Does that metal know whether it is pulling G's from ACM or hard aerobatics? I think
both carry risk but my question is the risk that much different? Rolling
G's aside which limits even current fighters and the pilots know that, what is
different about ACM and an aerobatic routine? How long does a routine last compared
to a couple of engagements?
When you have a surface waiver and you screw something up, how much time or altitude
do you have to correct your mistake? If you have a wing failure at 200 feet
or 4000 feet (assuming you survive the actual failure), how much time do you
have to bail out at the respective altitudes?
I just dont see that ACM is more risky than aerobatics when done properly.
ACM guys....break the silence...I know you are out there!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23592#23592
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commercial and Compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
BitterlichMG(at)cherrypoi wrote:
> The only real difference between 2md and 3rd class medicals is with your eyesight.?
I could only get a 3rd ... changed my glasses, and POOF... got a 2nd.?
Your points makes sense Tim, but the reality of the differences between 2nd and
3rd class do not seem to.?
> Mark Bitterlich
>
> --
I have had all three and currently maintain a First Class because I have to, to
be a Captain. I have been through more stringent Third Class physicals than some
First Class. The biggest difference you will see between the physicals is
the cost!!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23593#23593
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Tim,
Honestly I have mixed emotions on having civilians doing ACM. Sure it is
nice to see what their military has trained for and get a taste of what it
is like to be a fighter pilot for a day. The problems have come from the
type aircraft chosen to present this taste in. It has brought a mirade of
headaches to the T-34 and T-6 communities. I really do not want to see that
come to our community.
As for Acro being no worse on the aircraft than ACM, I would have to
disagree. In the fighter training community, acro is a stepping stone to
something more. In acro, it is you and the airplane flying a set routine.
Your attention is on what your aircraft is doing (airspeed and attitudes
flown). ACM is a choreography balancing what your aircraft is doing, what
your adversary is doing, thinking far enough ahead of your jet to project
where you want to be in the airspace, the corner you are trying to paint
your opponent into, and oh by the way look inside for a snap shot of what
your instruments say your plane is doing. If you are pulling the fight and
not pushing, your trying to force your adversary to make a mistake so
he/she overshoots giving you an in (if you are defensive that is). The
entire time you are dividing you attention between your plane, your energy
state that is, and your opponent. Flying is second nature. The majority of
your attention is employing your jet as a weapons system to kill this
bandit, go to his bar and drink his beer. This is all taking place in a 1
v 1, it gets even more dicey in 2v2, 4v4, or you v many.
The whole process of minting a steely eyed young fighter pilot is a
building block process that takes place over a 18 mo. course of training.
He/She exits the B course are FNG wing man who is trying finish gulping
down the fire hose they stuck in it's mouth for the last 18 mo. The
building process is only beginning. It is not complete until he/she leaves
the cockpit at retirement.
We can't take a civilian YAK/CJ driver with nothing more than a FAST card
and turn them into a "safe" fighter pilot in weekend. We are asking for
major trouble if we start doing that. Some Bubba is going to go home
thinking that at the end of a 3 day ACM course he is kingkong and put
himself or his bud out of control turning themselves into a lawn dart. We
just do not need to do that in our community.
Tactical flying is one thing but full up ACM needs to stay where it is
now... the military where we train to that level of proficiency.
Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own dime
and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative. But do not do it in
the name of the PA and neither should the RPA try to legislate what two
consenting adults do on their on time. The problem will still come if the
intrepid YAK drivers (CJ for that matter) go an shuck a wing. Now we have
the undivided attention of the FAA in a light we do not want.
That is my 2 cents. Now do I fly ACM with some of my squadron
buds...truthfully yes. The ROE is so ingrained that the Knock It Off call
is almost automatic when a DLO(desired learning objective) is met.
Learning to fly tactical is allot of fun and does take energy management of
our aircraft to another level. It truly does introduce the 3 dimension to
flying, the vertical.
Doc
Message 28
| 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: Commercial and Compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
> There has to be some medical requirement for commercial operations or their
would be some folks out there flying airplanes that probably should not even be
driving a car!
>
That is a laudable goal but the fact is, it just doesn't work that way.
The problem with the system of medical examinations in use today is that
they do nothing to either determine the current medical status of the
pilot nor do they do anything to determine the future medical state of
the pilot.
Simply stated, the third and second class aviation flight physicals
determine that the pilot was alive on the date of the exam, not that the
pilot was in good health or would be in continuing good health.
Therefore, the *purpose* of the aviation flight physical is not served
by the aviation flight physical itself.
Case in point: my father got his aviation flight physical. Unbeknown to
him and to the medical examiner he had 90% occlusion of the coronary
arteries. He was issued a standard second-class medical certificate.
Shortly thereafter the problem was discovered and rectified. He also
lost his medical certificate. Problem exists -- certificate issued.
Problem corrected -- certificate revoked. Yes, he eventually got a
restricted third-class medical certificate but that isn't the point.
The point is, regardless of the *purpose* of requiring an aviation
flight physical, it serves no real purpose in that it does not stop
people from flying who are medically unfit to do so. All it does is make
it difficult for people who are fit to fly.
Your tax dollars at work.
--
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 29
| 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: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Tim Gagnon wrote:
> ACM guys....break the silence...I know you are out there!
In the "heat of battle" one is more likely to pull and roll at the same
time thus exceeding the load limit of the airframe without the
accelerometer indicating the fact. Straight acro doesn't usually do this.
--
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 30
| 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: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
--> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
Roger,
The problem is not *if* pilots will do it. They are doing it. Sticking
our collective heads in the sand and saying we don't support it, don't
want people to do it, and will not train them to do it, doesn't stop
that. Just like you, people are doing ACM in their aircraft.
Your comment is valid:
"Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own dime
and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative."
If two people want to brief it up on their own dime ... it is their
prerogative. Qualified? What is that? If we don't have a standard set
of qualifications, programs, etc. Then everyone is qualified, because
their is no agreed upon level of qualification. People flew formation
before FAST. People fly formation without going to FAST clinics and
getting instruction, solo "qual", and then wing/lead patches. Some do
it safe, many are just lucky. But they do it. Not having clinics
doesn't stop people from flying ACM, it just stops them from having the
opportunity to learn the "standards."
I agree, someone flying their Yak on a regular basis doing acro is
different than ACM. However, I don't agree that a metal fatigue is more
likely in ACM. Someone flying a 1985 Yak-52 or 1970 CJ6A, who has no
idea how much time their aircraft has spent at high G levels, is doing
acro on a regular basis. Even competing at IAC events. Eventually,
their aircraft could break. Heck, if they are doing airshows, or even
just practicing low level and mess something up, they could over G Their
aircraft multiple times and cause failure.
I see nothing wrong with teaching people a safe way to brief, fly (with
safety pilots), and debrief ACM hops. It is better to teach people the
safe way to do things, rather than ignore it. I also don't think it is
right for people to say, don't teach it, don't condone it, RPA doesn't
support it, and then for those same folks to go out and do it. That
includes multiple people in all levels of our RPA organization.
Some folks were lucky (and good) and were able to fly fighter jets.
Others would like a taste of that, with some guidance from local IPs and
people that can guide those that are new to this. It isn't that I can't
find people to do ACM with/against. I can find many just at my local
airport. However, what I don't have is a standards of flight profiles,
and standards for level of ability ala FAST. So, I'm not going to go
out and fly against people I don't know and trust just like I will not
fly formation without knowing someones ability and that they understand
the program.
I'd much rather our community pilots go to regular ACM clinics, with
appropriate level (ex-military) IPs, and learn to do it well, safely,
and with rules we all understand, than to have them doing it on their
own, without training, without good IPs in the back. No one is saying
go to one 3-day ACM clinic and you are going to be a SH ACM pilot. But
teaching some basic BFM 1 v 1 stuff over a series of clinics would be
fun, valuable, and safe. Having basic level requires before moving to
next level clinics would be great times for out community of pilots. We
have people that have their FAST cards for multiple years, 100+ hours of
formation including lots of grab-ass extended trail, and they want to
learn more, improve their skills, and have fun.
ACM clinics would prevent more accidents then they would ever cause.
DaBear
Roger Kemp wrote:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
>
>Tim,
>Honestly I have mixed emotions on having civilians doing ACM. Sure it is
>nice to see what their military has trained for and get a taste of what it
>is like to be a fighter pilot for a day. The problems have come from the
>type aircraft chosen to present this taste in. It has brought a mirade of
>headaches to the T-34 and T-6 communities. I really do not want to see that
>come to our community.
>As for Acro being no worse on the aircraft than ACM, I would have to
>disagree. In the fighter training community, acro is a stepping stone to
>something more. In acro, it is you and the airplane flying a set routine.
>Your attention is on what your aircraft is doing (airspeed and attitudes
>flown). ACM is a choreography balancing what your aircraft is doing, what
>your adversary is doing, thinking far enough ahead of your jet to project
>where you want to be in the airspace, the corner you are trying to paint
>your opponent into, and oh by the way look inside for a snap shot of what
>your instruments say your plane is doing. If you are pulling the fight and
>not pushing, your trying to force your adversary to make a mistake so
>he/she overshoots giving you an in (if you are defensive that is). The
>entire time you are dividing you attention between your plane, your energy
>state that is, and your opponent. Flying is second nature. The majority of
>your attention is employing your jet as a weapons system to kill this
>bandit, go to his bar and drink his beer. This is all taking place in a 1
>v 1, it gets even more dicey in 2v2, 4v4, or you v many.
>The whole process of minting a steely eyed young fighter pilot is a
>building block process that takes place over a 18 mo. course of training.
>He/She exits the B course are FNG wing man who is trying finish gulping
>down the fire hose they stuck in it's mouth for the last 18 mo. The
>building process is only beginning. It is not complete until he/she leaves
>the cockpit at retirement.
>We can't take a civilian YAK/CJ driver with nothing more than a FAST card
>and turn them into a "safe" fighter pilot in weekend. We are asking for
>major trouble if we start doing that. Some Bubba is going to go home
>thinking that at the end of a 3 day ACM course he is kingkong and put
>himself or his bud out of control turning themselves into a lawn dart. We
>just do not need to do that in our community.
>Tactical flying is one thing but full up ACM needs to stay where it is
>now... the military where we train to that level of proficiency.
>Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own dime
>and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative. But do not do it in
>the name of the PA and neither should the RPA try to legislate what two
>consenting adults do on their on time. The problem will still come if the
>intrepid YAK drivers (CJ for that matter) go an shuck a wing. Now we have
>the undivided attention of the FAA in a light we do not want.
>That is my 2 cents. Now do I fly ACM with some of my squadron
>buds...truthfully yes. The ROE is so ingrained that the Knock It Off call
>is almost automatic when a DLO(desired learning objective) is met.
>Learning to fly tactical is allot of fun and does take energy management of
>our aircraft to another level. It truly does introduce the 3 dimension to
>flying, the vertical.
>Doc
>
>
>
Message 31
| 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: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
--> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
Brian Lloyd wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>
> Tim Gagnon wrote:
>
>> ACM guys....break the silence...I know you are out there!
>
>
> In the "heat of battle" one is more likely to pull and roll at the
> same time thus exceeding the load limit of the airframe without the
> accelerometer indicating the fact. Straight acro doesn't usually do this.
>
So teach people what rolling G is, the consequences, and how to do ACM
without rolling G. Sorry Brian, but people (qualified and not yet
instructed) are doing it today. Hiding behind the illusion that lack of
ACM training and clinics will prevent someone from doing ACM is in the
same vein of if we outlaw guns, we will not have any gun crime. Sorry,
we have airplanes, we have pilots, people want to do it. If ACM wasn't
fun, challenging, etc, then the former military guys wouldn't be doing
it, the non-military people wouldn't want to, and this wouldn't be an
issue But the folks in WWI opened the box, and we can't close it again.
DaBear
Message 32
| 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: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
Anyone have or know someone who has a Oil Pressure Sensor for a M14P?
DaBear
Message 33
| 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: Commercial and Compensation |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
> That is a laudable goal but the fact is, it just doesn't work that way.
> The problem with the system of medical examinations in use today is that
> they do nothing to either determine the current medical status of the
> pilot nor do they do anything to determine the future medical state of
> the pilot.
Brian,
Tell that to the coorperate left seater that was in my office two weeks
ago. Found a precancerous rectal polpy with- in 1 inch of his anus on the
finger waive. It was removed the following Monday. He also was having
premature atrial contractions on his EKG that were caused by excess coffee
consumption. Left unchecked it could have lead to proxsymal atrial
tachycardia which carries a risk of syncopy. He was worked into the
Cardiologist office the following Tuesday for farther workup.
Feel like grabbing the yolk from this guy when he momentarily passes out?
Off caffiene for a week, and his 24 hour Holter monitor was back to normal.
He was returned to flying status even healther in two weeks time! Left
unchecked the colon polyp would have been poised to kill him 2 to 4 years.
This was a guy that rides his bike on average 20 miles a day on the
weekends participating in marithons. He was a healthy appearing 59 year old
(slim and inshape). Could have easily ignored the fact that he had not had
a complete exam for two years from his family MD. This was his first visit
to my office. He had had a colonoscopy 2 years before that was negative, so
according to the GI guys he was good for 5 years.
Granted some IME's are not the same, nor are some CF I's either. You get
what you ask for. Tell your IME you have not had a complete physical by
your family MD in the past 2-3 years and/or he has never done a prostate
exam or rectal exam and see what begrudingly happens. In my office, you
will get a finger stuck up your but. If you say you had a normal
colonoscopy in the last 2 years or your family doc does that annually, I
will give you the choice to be nice unless the review of sytems was
positive for something that really needs to be looked into. Your physical
exam is only as good as the answers you give on your review of systems part
of the exam sheet. It is a subjective and objective exam.
The last time I checked, no one can predict the future. Your dad's coronary
stenosis could have been found on that exam. All that it would have taken
was a graded exercise treadmill (GXT). Which is not indicated in someone
without complaints or a history of none insulin dependent diabetes,
Hypertension, or symptomatic coronary arterty disease. Did your dad have
complains of chest pain symptoms at the time of his exam? If he did and the
IME ignored them then he screwed up. If he knew he was having funny chest
symptoms but was denying them which is what 85% of heart attach victims do,
there was nothing anyone could do. Short of doing a treadmill or the newer
more expensive CT Directed Coronary Artery Calcium assay, the pending heart
attach was not going to be diagnosed by a simple physical exam. An EKG is
on a snap shot of what your heart is doing at the 3 minutes it took to run
the analysis. True some things are found on the EKG but alot is missed
also. Does a photograph catch everything has happened in your life up to
that point?
Nothing in life is guarrenteed except death. I have not met anyone that got
out of this world alive. Sorry your dad had a heart attach, but it sounds
like you are blaming the IME for not finding it. Maybe the IME was a dumb
shit and missed it. Or maybe your dad was in denial and said nothing to
anyone about it until it happened. We pilots tend to be that way for fear
of losing something dear to us, flying. Problem is, we may lose something
even more dear to us, our lives by being in denial. In my humble opinion,
find the IME that is also an aviator. He understands how special the gift
of flying is. I want nothing to do with a flight doc that is a keewee. He
has never controlled an aircraft with his own fate in his hands so he has
no empathy for what maybe lost. Look for the one that really loves to fly
not the one who has never set foot in an aircraft except to go to a
convention sitting in the back of the bus reading a newspaper.
Doc
Message 34
| 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: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
check with Rob Kent.
doc
> [Original Message]
> From: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Date: 3/23/2006 12:13:04 AM
> Subject: Yak-List: Yak parts
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
>
> Anyone have or know someone who has a Oil Pressure Sensor for a M14P?
>
> DaBear
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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! --
|