Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:33 AM - Re: Re: ignition (A. Dennis Savarese)
2. 04:42 AM - Re: ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents (A. Dennis Savarese)
3. 04:42 AM - Re: ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents (A. Dennis Savarese)
4. 04:45 AM - Re: RPA Newsletter (Rob Mortara)
5. 05:13 AM - ACM Possible Issues (Richard Goode)
6. 05:16 AM - Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (Steve Dalton)
7. 05:17 AM - Re: Re: ignition (cgalley)
8. 05:20 AM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (DaBear)
9. 05:31 AM - Auto Wires into the Mags (Jeff Linebaugh)
10. 05:40 AM - Re: ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents (Fraser, Gus)
11. 05:45 AM - Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (A. Dennis Savarese)
12. 05:47 AM - Re: Re: ignition (A. Dennis Savarese)
13. 06:00 AM - Re: ACM Possible Issues (Fraser, Gus)
14. 06:00 AM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (forrest johnson)
15. 06:01 AM - Re: Re: ignition (Fraser, Gus)
16. 06:07 AM - Re: Auto Wires into the Mags (A. Dennis Savarese)
17. 06:20 AM - Re: Auto Wires into the Mags (Fraser, Gus)
18. 06:56 AM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (Brian Lloyd)
19. 07:03 AM - Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (fish@aviation-tech.com)
20. 07:06 AM - G Limits and Lifetime (Richard Goode)
21. 07:22 AM - Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (Brian Lloyd)
22. 07:23 AM - Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues (A. Dennis Savarese)
23. 07:37 AM - Stress testing (Fraser, Gus)
24. 07:37 AM - Re: STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES (Valkyre1)
25. 07:37 AM - Re: [Comment]Commercial and CompensationCommercial and CompensationCommercial and (Valkyre1)
26. 07:37 AM - Re: [Comment]Commercial and Compensation (Valkyre1)
27. 07:37 AM - Re: ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents (Valkyre1)
28. 08:09 AM - Re: ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents (Tim Gagnon)
29. 08:11 AM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (cjpilot710@aol.com)
30. 09:43 AM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (Roger Kemp)
31. 09:50 AM - Re: Auto Wires into the Mags (Roger Kemp)
32. 09:53 AM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (Fraser, Gus)
33. 09:55 AM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (DaBear)
34. 09:57 AM - Re: STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES (Roger Kemp)
35. 10:04 AM - Re: STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DU RING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES (Fraser, Gus)
36. 10:15 AM - [Humor]Val you should get a kick out of this. (Fraser, Gus)
37. 10:29 AM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (DaBear)
38. 11:21 AM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (A. Dennis Savarese)
39. 12:08 PM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (Brian Lloyd)
40. 01:05 PM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (A. Dennis Savarese)
41. 03:44 PM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (forrest johnson)
42. 08:13 PM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (Cliff Umscheid)
43. 08:17 PM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (cjpilot710@aol.com)
44. 08:57 PM - Who needs ACM?? (Barry Hancock)
45. 10:15 PM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (Brian Lloyd)
46. 10:46 PM - Re: Commercial/ 2nd class (Brian Lloyd)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Many people refer to the high voltage lead that fits into the hole at the rear
of the magneto cap (where all the spark plug wires go into) as the "cigarette".
It is about the size of a pencil.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: david stroud
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: ignition
Giday, Craig. I haven't had time to dig into my mags yet...just got my Housai
today from VAM
and I'm curious what the cigarette is. I'll definitely go auto on the ignition
stuff. Thanks..
David Stroud Ottawa, Canada
C-FDWS Christavia
Fairchild 51 early construction
----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Payne
To: yak-list
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:27 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: ignition
SOB wrote:
>
>As far as sealing the mag, I agree with Dennis on this, no need.
>
>
Unhh, I beg to differ here, moisture anywhere near the distributor cap sparkies
is not good. Like Gus, I used silicone seal plus self-bonding tape around
the wires. Problems inside the distributor cap and rotor are often mis-attributed
to mag timing, mag coil breakdown or high voltage leaks in the harness. What
happens is that excess carbon builds up "downwind" of each individual spark
contact and timing advance is skewed. A little moisture and there are new paths
for high voltage to find it's way to ground.
Take care of the HV side of your system: points, "cigarette", rotor, distributor
cap, leads and spark plugs. Your reward will be smooth runnings, dude.
Craig Payne
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: ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
Thank you Joe for your excellent post. It should make us all think.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Enzminger" <panchoandlefty2002@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 6:34 PM
Subject: Yak-List: ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Joe Enzminger"
> <panchoandlefty2002@yahoo.com>
>
> This is my first post to this list - go easy on me. I'd like to provide a
> little perspective on this issue because we (I also own a CJ-6) are PRIME
> candidates for ending up in the same boat as we (I'm a T-34 owner, too)
> did. The bad news is we (the Yak crowd) are actually in a worse position
> because the FAA's remedy wouldn't be an AD, they simply would stop issuing
> Experimental/Exhibition Airworthiness Certificates to us. For some
> background I'm a relatively low time pilot (about 800 hours), aerospace
> engineer, T-34 Association Board Member, and my sum knowledge of ACM comes
> from my experience working as a computer programmer on an online game
> called "Warbirds". Not that it is worth much, but I probably have more
> time applying Bob Shaw's "Fighter Combat" in a virtual world than most.
>
> I've read the ACM thread and you could go back and read the T-34 group's
> archive from 1999 and people were making the same points:
>
> 1) Any idiot can pull the wings off an airplane
> 2) Metal has memory
> 3) Rolling G's are the culprit
> 4) Ban ACM and next they'll ban aerobatics
> 5) There are more, but I won't bore you with them...you've read them
> already anyway. If you haven't go look at the T-34 group's archive.
>
> I'll leave the primer on metal fatigue for another time (although I have
> learned more about it in the past 4 years than I care to know...I wish I
> had paid more attention in college). I will say that the fatigue process
> is at work in any aluminum airplane. When you fly, you are using a
> limited resource. How you fly determines how fast that resource gets used
> up. When it is gone, something on your airplane breaks. George Braly
> (who lurks on this list, I think), has done some interesting studies that
> indicate that ACM uses up airframe life something like 6-10 times faster
> than if you just use your airplane for flying around the patch (George
> will surely correct me if I've missed quoted the figure).
>
> So the central question - should we be using airplanes for ACM? For the
> Yak owner as an individual I think the answer is clear - as long as you
> understand that you are using up your airplane faster than if you didn't
> do ACM, you've convinced yourself that your airplane fits your mission,
> and you conduct yourself in a safe manner, by all means. It's your
> choice - it is your life and your airplane.
>
> I would mention, however, that it would be a good idea to know where you
> stood from a fatigue life perspective. In other words, not all Yaks and
> CJ's are the same. A high time airplane is not the best for the ACM
> mission because there just isn't enough data on the airframe for us to
> know where we stand on the fatigue life spectrum. You wouldn't start a
> flight knowing you only have enough gas to get airborne (or for that
> matter not knowing how much gas you have at all!) - you also shouldn't be
> doing ACM without enough fatigue life to provide a margin of safety. And
> since fatigue life, unlike gas, is impossible to measure accurately, it is
> much better to err on the safe side.
>
> Reading this thread, I've seen a lot of traffic about providing "safe" ACM
> training. The argument is that training is a good thing and that it
> leaves the trainee with the knowledge required to safely go forth and
> aviate. The one part of this that I see left out in this argument is the
> necessity of "training" people to make sure their airplane matches their
> mission. You wouldn't go train someone to fly aerobatics in their 172
> Skyhawk. Along the same lines, no "instructor" in good conscience should
> train someone in ACM in an airplane that doesn't fit the mission. Does
> the CJ-6 fit the mission? I won't take a position but I would offer some
> things to consider when making the determination:
>
> 1) Aircraft operational history (known or unknown)
> 2) Airframe total time
> 3) Margin of safety (load limits, etc.).
> 4) Aircraft condition
>
> I would suggest that if you don't know your airplane's operational
> history, or if you know it's history and the story isn't good, or it is a
> high time airframe, then you shouldn't be using it for ACM. I would also
> offer the opinion that there isn't enough data to determine if the CJ-6
> has an adequate margin of safety for load limits, but I'm not going to
> force anyone to agree with me. Just for information, the T-34 has a +6 G
> load limit, but some studies we have done indicate that you get localized
> yielding in some high stress areas at just above 6Gs. This means that the
> metal is permanently deformed and the overall structural strength of the
> airplane is compromised if you exceed the load limit by as little at 5%.
> Sure, the airplane will hold together if you do this once (it is required
> to hold together up to 9Gs), but it is not likely to survive too many
> excursions to "just above" load limit. So while the airplane has a 1.5
> safety factor, the truth of the matter is th!
> e "margin of safety" is something much, much less. You can only count on
> the safety factor ONE TIME. After that, all bets are off from an
> engineering perspective.
>
> I'm a big individual rights type of guy, but the "good of the group"
> should also be considered. If someone does break an airplane in ACM, it
> will likely ground every airplane who's history is in question. In other
> words, only the guys with new or single owner airplanes will likely be
> spared the misery. Not to mention the negative impact that such an
> accident will have on the reputation of the airplane and it's value. So
> in some ways we owners are all tied together. When "you" fly ACM, you are
> actually costing "me" some money. Generally this is true regardless, but
> it is something to consider when you are looking at this issue from an
> Association point of view.
>
> ACM, by definition, is a "max performance" flight condition. To "win" you
> have to operate the airplane at it's limits. You are also putting the
> airplane in a flight condition that is subject to buffet and vibration
> (which causes something called high-cycle fatigue) and you put yourself in
> a position to exceed the load limit of your airplane, which on some
> airplanes can cause permanent damage to the airframe. This damage may not
> be apparent immediately, but it will greatly accelerate the fatigue
> process and dramatically reduce the life of your airframe.
>
> As I write this I am realizing that I could probably write a book on this
> subject, so I'll shut up now and hope I did so soon enough :). Moral of
> the story is don't ignore the lesson's of history. I'd hate for us to
> have to deal with this issue in a non-hypothetical way, but I will also
> warn that the similarities between where we were with the T-34 7 years ago
> and where we are with the CJ-6 and Yak community now are strikingly
> similar.
>
> My two cents, for what it is worth.
>
> Joe Enzminger
> 700YK (CJ-6)
> N520HT (T-34A)
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23817#23817
>
>
>
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: ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
I agree.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "forrest johnson" <flushjohnson@charter.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "forrest johnson"
> <flushjohnson@charter.net>
>
> This is the best info I have seen in a long time.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joe Enzminger" <panchoandlefty2002@yahoo.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 6:34 PM
> Subject: Yak-List: ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents
>
>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Joe Enzminger"
>> <panchoandlefty2002@yahoo.com>
>>
>> This is my first post to this list - go easy on me. I'd like to provide
>> a little perspective on this issue because we (I also own a CJ-6) are
>> PRIME candidates for ending up in the same boat as we (I'm a T-34 owner,
>> too) did. The bad news is we (the Yak crowd) are actually in a worse
>> position because the FAA's remedy wouldn't be an AD, they simply would
>> stop issuing Experimental/Exhibition Airworthiness Certificates to us.
>> For some background I'm a relatively low time pilot (about 800 hours),
>> aerospace engineer, T-34 Association Board Member, and my sum knowledge
>> of ACM comes from my experience working as a computer programmer on an
>> online game called "Warbirds". Not that it is worth much, but I probably
>> have more time applying Bob Shaw's "Fighter Combat" in a virtual world
>> than most.
>>
>> I've read the ACM thread and you could go back and read the T-34 group's
>> archive from 1999 and people were making the same points:
>>
>> 1) Any idiot can pull the wings off an airplane
>> 2) Metal has memory
>> 3) Rolling G's are the culprit
>> 4) Ban ACM and next they'll ban aerobatics
>> 5) There are more, but I won't bore you with them...you've read them
>> already anyway. If you haven't go look at the T-34 group's archive.
>>
>> I'll leave the primer on metal fatigue for another time (although I have
>> learned more about it in the past 4 years than I care to know...I wish I
>> had paid more attention in college). I will say that the fatigue process
>> is at work in any aluminum airplane. When you fly, you are using a
>> limited resource. How you fly determines how fast that resource gets
>> used up. When it is gone, something on your airplane breaks. George
>> Braly (who lurks on this list, I think), has done some interesting
>> studies that indicate that ACM uses up airframe life something like 6-10
>> times faster than if you just use your airplane for flying around the
>> patch (George will surely correct me if I've missed quoted the figure).
>>
>> So the central question - should we be using airplanes for ACM? For the
>> Yak owner as an individual I think the answer is clear - as long as you
>> understand that you are using up your airplane faster than if you didn't
>> do ACM, you've convinced yourself that your airplane fits your mission,
>> and you conduct yourself in a safe manner, by all means. It's your
>> choice - it is your life and your airplane.
>>
>> I would mention, however, that it would be a good idea to know where you
>> stood from a fatigue life perspective. In other words, not all Yaks and
>> CJ's are the same. A high time airplane is not the best for the ACM
>> mission because there just isn't enough data on the airframe for us to
>> know where we stand on the fatigue life spectrum. You wouldn't start a
>> flight knowing you only have enough gas to get airborne (or for that
>> matter not knowing how much gas you have at all!) - you also shouldn't be
>> doing ACM without enough fatigue life to provide a margin of safety. And
>> since fatigue life, unlike gas, is impossible to measure accurately, it
>> is much better to err on the safe side.
>>
>> Reading this thread, I've seen a lot of traffic about providing "safe"
>> ACM training. The argument is that training is a good thing and that it
>> leaves the trainee with the knowledge required to safely go forth and
>> aviate. The one part of this that I see left out in this argument is the
>> necessity of "training" people to make sure their airplane matches their
>> mission. You wouldn't go train someone to fly aerobatics in their 172
>> Skyhawk. Along the same lines, no "instructor" in good conscience should
>> train someone in ACM in an airplane that doesn't fit the mission. Does
>> the CJ-6 fit the mission? I won't take a position but I would offer some
>> things to consider when making the determination:
>>
>> 1) Aircraft operational history (known or unknown)
>> 2) Airframe total time
>> 3) Margin of safety (load limits, etc.).
>> 4) Aircraft condition
>>
>> I would suggest that if you don't know your airplane's operational
>> history, or if you know it's history and the story isn't good, or it is
>> a high time airframe, then you shouldn't be using it for ACM. I would
>> also offer the opinion that there isn't enough data to determine if the
>> CJ-6 has an adequate margin of safety for load limits, but I'm not going
>> to force anyone to agree with me. Just for information, the T-34 has a
>> +6 G load limit, but some studies we have done indicate that you get
>> localized yielding in some high stress areas at just above 6Gs. This
>> means that the metal is permanently deformed and the overall structural
>> strength of the airplane is compromised if you exceed the load limit by
>> as little at 5%. Sure, the airplane will hold together if you do this
>> once (it is required to hold together up to 9Gs), but it is not likely to
>> survive too many excursions to "just above" load limit. So while the
>> airplane has a 1.5 safety factor, the truth of the matter is th!
>> e "margin of safety" is something much, much less. You can only count on
>> the safety factor ONE TIME. After that, all bets are off from an
>> engineering perspective.
>>
>> I'm a big individual rights type of guy, but the "good of the group"
>> should also be considered. If someone does break an airplane in ACM, it
>> will likely ground every airplane who's history is in question. In other
>> words, only the guys with new or single owner airplanes will likely be
>> spared the misery. Not to mention the negative impact that such an
>> accident will have on the reputation of the airplane and it's value. So
>> in some ways we owners are all tied together. When "you" fly ACM, you
>> are actually costing "me" some money. Generally this is true regardless,
>> but it is something to consider when you are looking at this issue from
>> an Association point of view.
>>
>> ACM, by definition, is a "max performance" flight condition. To "win"
>> you have to operate the airplane at it's limits. You are also putting
>> the airplane in a flight condition that is subject to buffet and
>> vibration (which causes something called high-cycle fatigue) and you put
>> yourself in a position to exceed the load limit of your airplane, which
>> on some airplanes can cause permanent damage to the airframe. This
>> damage may not be apparent immediately, but it will greatly accelerate
>> the fatigue process and dramatically reduce the life of your airframe.
>>
>> As I write this I am realizing that I could probably write a book on this
>> subject, so I'll shut up now and hope I did so soon enough :). Moral of
>> the story is don't ignore the lesson's of history. I'd hate for us to
>> have to deal with this issue in a non-hypothetical way, but I will also
>> warn that the similarities between where we were with the T-34 7 years
>> ago and where we are with the CJ-6 and Yak community now are strikingly
>> similar.
>>
>> My two cents, for what it is worth.
>>
>> Joe Enzminger
>> 700YK (CJ-6)
>> N520HT (T-34A)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23817#23817
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Rob Mortara" <rob@robinhill.com>
If any RPA member or potential advertiser has not received the current
newsletter please contact me off list and I will mail you a copy.
Thanks
Rob Mortara
rob@robinhill.com
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: | ACM Possible Issues |
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: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
>>>Subject: Yak-List: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues
>>>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!
There have been several very good comments made here about metal
fatigue, pulling wings off (and the consequences for us all), and about
whether the RPA should be involved in BFM/ACM training. May I add my
two cents worth about risk and training for BFM/ACM?
Comparing the risk of Acro vs. ACM:
I flew the F-4, F-16 and T-38 (about 1,000 hours in each) and was an
IP/Evaluator in each. I remember sending T-38 solo students out to fly
all the acro they wanted. They had about 150 hours total time and they
were flying a plane that had a 500 KIAS entry speed for a loop and
needed almost 10,000' to split-s. I don't remember any of these rookies
killing themselves doing solo acro. They tended to kill themselves (and
their instructors) in the traffic pattern and during formation training
(hint, hint).
However, I remember far too many experienced fighter pilots killed in
BFM/ACM missions. I realize the planes we fly are much different, but
the concepts of BFM/ACM are the same. Doesn't matter if you're in a
Fokker or an F-22, if you make a small mistake, you're dead. And I
don't mean the other guy shot you down. These experienced, highly
trained and proficient pilots flew into each other or the ground, during
peacetime training. Few of us "Yakkers" are experienced, highly
trained, or proficient in BFM/ACM. So, IMHO, flying BFM/ACM is MUCH
riskier than doing loops and rolls by yourself.
ACM training clinics:
Based on experience, I must say, and I'm very serious, that this is no
different than teaching brain surgery to a pilot through the use of
weekend clinics. Yeah, after a couple clinics you could probably safely
cut someone's head open. But, would you really know what the heck
you're doing? Would you really know what to do when the "unexpected"
occurs? If you haven't cracked a skull open in several months, would
you feel proficient? Confident? Clueless perhaps? Would you want to
be the patient? Or in our case, the other pilot in the BFM engagement
flying against a clueless, non-proficient, hardly trained rookie. But,
hey, he did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night. :-)
A military fighter pilot flies all the time. He/she IS experienced,
highly trained and proficient. He/she HAS developed a good g-tolerance.
It took him/her YEARS of CONSTANT training to get there. And they STILL
have BFM/ACM accidents!!
Thanks for listening,
Steve Dalton
Yak-52TW
N52SD
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 |
|
Sorry, It is a WW2 term for the Sparkplug end that fits down inside the plug.
They were made of white porcelain so they looked like a cigarette butt.
Cy Galley - Chair,
Air Emergency Aircraft Repair
A Service Project of Chapter 75
EAA Safety Programs Editor - TC
EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: A. Dennis Savarese
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 6:31 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: ignition
Many people refer to the high voltage lead that fits into the hole at the rear
of the magneto cap (where all the spark plug wires go into) as the "cigarette".
It is about the size of a pencil.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: david stroud
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: ignition
Giday, Craig. I haven't had time to dig into my mags yet...just got my Housai
today from VAM
and I'm curious what the cigarette is. I'll definitely go auto on the ignition
stuff. Thanks..
David Stroud Ottawa, Canada
C-FDWS Christavia
Fairchild 51 early construction
----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Payne
To: yak-list
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:27 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: ignition
SOB wrote:
>
>As far as sealing the mag, I agree with Dennis on this, no need.
>
>
Unhh, I beg to differ here, moisture anywhere near the distributor cap sparkies
is not good. Like Gus, I used silicone seal plus self-bonding tape around
the wires. Problems inside the distributor cap and rotor are often mis-attributed
to mag timing, mag coil breakdown or high voltage leaks in the harness.
What happens is that excess carbon builds up "downwind" of each individual spark
contact and timing advance is skewed. A little moisture and there are new
paths for high voltage to find it's way to ground.
Take care of the HV side of your system: points, "cigarette", rotor, distributor
cap, leads and spark plugs. Your reward will be smooth runnings, dude.
Craig Payne
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: Commercial/ 2nd class |
--> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
A little different than below. You DO NOT need a FAST lead card to lead
a formation in waivered airspace, you only need a Wing card. You can
fly wing, lead, and even lead a mass formation in waivered airspace with
just a FAST wing card. A lead card allows you to sign annual formation
flight sheets, and recommendation forms for someone's wing and lead
card. Also, a lead is typically the level that represents the ability
to instruct folks in formation flying.
DaBear
Brian Lloyd wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>
>
> forrest johnson wrote:
>
>> I did not intend for this to get to the point it has. I am a FAST
>> WING pilot. Understand the problems dealing with the FAA. I guess i
>> didn't make myself clear. According to what has been writtin Ihave to
>> have to have a Com/2nd to fly. I would like to fly weather I am
>> compensated or not. I love Tto fly! The rerequirements prevent me
>> from signing up. The question I have is why to be a LEAD PILOT should
>> have a Comm/2nd. I have over 30 yrs. flying and no need for a comm.
>> Over 2yrs Form, over 150hrs form , Would some one please enlighten
>> me why I cant get a FAST LEAD card. This requirement is stiffling the
>> FAST orgination. Iwill now SHUT-up and wait for the responces
>
>
> You can get a FAST lead card if you have the chops. You don't need a
> CSEL. You don't need a FAST lead card to lead a flight unless you want
> to do it in waivered airspace (during an actual air show).
>
> The only reason you need the CSEL is if the airshow offers you some
> compensation, like gas for your airplane. No CSEL, no gas -- unless
> you want to risk getting cited by the FAA.
>
> That is the whole thing in a nutshell.
>
> Want to get trained to be a lead pilot? I would be happy to help you.
> You in northern California?
>
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: | Auto Wires into the Mags |
Yakers,
I may be opening pandora's box here, sorry Dennis, but the Auto-spark plug
conversion kit that Bill Blackwell and all the DVT guys are using has a very
cool machined part with individual holes for each plug wire where they enter
the mag. Each plug wire then has a tight seal as it goes through this block
prior to entering the mag. This eliminates the possibility of water entering
the ignition system at that point.
I lost a good friend years ago flying a Beech 18 after he had a dual engine
failure flying through a heavy rain storm. The NTSB found that water
entered the ignition systems of both engines and forced him down. I was
supposed to be on that flight...after that, my CFI-Dad told me no more
flying night cargo...
Jeff Linebaugh
jefflinebaugh@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~jefflinebaugh/
Guarding Val's CJ-6P N621CJ
Memphis, TN
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: | ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser@gs.com>
Joe,
Great stuff. I agree as George Santayana said "those who ignore history are
destined to repeat it" Joe, you should speak up more often if this is a
taste of the quality you contribute.
Gus
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Joe Enzminger
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 7:35 PM
Subject: Yak-List: ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Joe Enzminger"
--> <panchoandlefty2002@yahoo.com>
This is my first post to this list - go easy on me. I'd like to provide a
little perspective on this issue because we (I also own a CJ-6) are PRIME
candidates for ending up in the same boat as we (I'm a T-34 owner, too) did.
The bad news is we (the Yak crowd) are actually in a worse position because
the FAA's remedy wouldn't be an AD, they simply would stop issuing
Experimental/Exhibition Airworthiness Certificates to us. For some
background I'm a relatively low time pilot (about 800 hours), aerospace
engineer, T-34 Association Board Member, and my sum knowledge of ACM comes
from my experience working as a computer programmer on an online game called
"Warbirds". Not that it is worth much, but I probably have more time
applying Bob Shaw's "Fighter Combat" in a virtual world than most.
I've read the ACM thread and you could go back and read the T-34 group's
archive from 1999 and people were making the same points:
1) Any idiot can pull the wings off an airplane
2) Metal has memory
3) Rolling G's are the culprit
4) Ban ACM and next they'll ban aerobatics
5) There are more, but I won't bore you with them...you've read them
already anyway. If you haven't go look at the T-34 group's archive.
I'll leave the primer on metal fatigue for another time (although I have
learned more about it in the past 4 years than I care to know...I wish I had
paid more attention in college). I will say that the fatigue process is at
work in any aluminum airplane. When you fly, you are using a limited
resource. How you fly determines how fast that resource gets used up. When
it is gone, something on your airplane breaks. George Braly (who lurks on
this list, I think), has done some interesting studies that indicate that
ACM uses up airframe life something like 6-10 times faster than if you just
use your airplane for flying around the patch (George will surely correct me
if I've missed quoted the figure).
So the central question - should we be using airplanes for ACM? For the Yak
owner as an individual I think the answer is clear - as long as you
understand that you are using up your airplane faster than if you didn't do
ACM, you've convinced yourself that your airplane fits your mission, and you
conduct yourself in a safe manner, by all means. It's your choice - it is
your life and your airplane.
I would mention, however, that it would be a good idea to know where you
stood from a fatigue life perspective. In other words, not all Yaks and
CJ's are the same. A high time airplane is not the best for the ACM mission
because there just isn't enough data on the airframe for us to know where we
stand on the fatigue life spectrum. You wouldn't start a flight knowing you
only have enough gas to get airborne (or for that matter not knowing how
much gas you have at all!) - you also shouldn't be doing ACM without enough
fatigue life to provide a margin of safety. And since fatigue life, unlike
gas, is impossible to measure accurately, it is much better to err on the
safe side.
Reading this thread, I've seen a lot of traffic about providing "safe" ACM
training. The argument is that training is a good thing and that it leaves
the trainee with the knowledge required to safely go forth and aviate. The
one part of this that I see left out in this argument is the necessity of
"training" people to make sure their airplane matches their mission. You
wouldn't go train someone to fly aerobatics in their 172 Skyhawk. Along the
same lines, no "instructor" in good conscience should train someone in ACM
in an airplane that doesn't fit the mission. Does the CJ-6 fit the mission?
I won't take a position but I would offer some things to consider when
making the determination:
1) Aircraft operational history (known or unknown)
2) Airframe total time
3) Margin of safety (load limits, etc.).
4) Aircraft condition
I would suggest that if you don't know your airplane's operational history,
or if you know it's history and the story isn't good, or it is a high time
airframe, then you shouldn't be using it for ACM. I would also offer the
opinion that there isn't enough data to determine if the CJ-6 has an
adequate margin of safety for load limits, but I'm not going to force anyone
to agree with me. Just for information, the T-34 has a +6 G load limit, but
some studies we have done indicate that you get localized yielding in some
high stress areas at just above 6Gs. This means that the metal is
permanently deformed and the overall structural strength of the airplane is
compromised if you exceed the load limit by as little at 5%. Sure, the
airplane will hold together if you do this once (it is required to hold
together up to 9Gs), but it is not likely to survive too many excursions to
"just above" load limit. So while the airplane has a 1.5 safety factor, the
truth of the matter is th!
e "margin of safety" is something much, much less. You can only count on
the safety factor ONE TIME. After that, all bets are off from an
engineering perspective.
I'm a big individual rights type of guy, but the "good of the group" should
also be considered. If someone does break an airplane in ACM, it will
likely ground every airplane who's history is in question. In other words,
only the guys with new or single owner airplanes will likely be spared the
misery. Not to mention the negative impact that such an accident will have
on the reputation of the airplane and it's value. So in some ways we owners
are all tied together. When "you" fly ACM, you are actually costing "me"
some money. Generally this is true regardless, but it is something to
consider when you are looking at this issue from an Association point of
view.
ACM, by definition, is a "max performance" flight condition. To "win" you
have to operate the airplane at it's limits. You are also putting the
airplane in a flight condition that is subject to buffet and vibration
(which causes something called high-cycle fatigue) and you put yourself in a
position to exceed the load limit of your airplane, which on some airplanes
can cause permanent damage to the airframe. This damage may not be apparent
immediately, but it will greatly accelerate the fatigue process and
dramatically reduce the life of your airframe.
As I write this I am realizing that I could probably write a book on this
subject, so I'll shut up now and hope I did so soon enough :). Moral of the
story is don't ignore the lesson's of history. I'd hate for us to have to
deal with this issue in a non-hypothetical way, but I will also warn that
the similarities between where we were with the T-34 7 years ago and where
we are with the CJ-6 and Yak community now are strikingly similar.
My two cents, for what it is worth.
Joe Enzminger
700YK (CJ-6)
N520HT (T-34A)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23817#23817
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: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
Another very good post Steve.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Dalton
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 7:15 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues
>>>Subject: Yak-List: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues
>>>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!
There have been several very good comments made here about metal fatigue, pulling
wings off (and the consequences for us all), and about whether the RPA should
be involved in BFM/ACM training. May I add my two cents worth about risk
and training for BFM/ACM?
Comparing the risk of Acro vs. ACM:
I flew the F-4, F-16 and T-38 (about 1,000 hours in each) and was an IP/Evaluator
in each. I remember sending T-38 solo students out to fly all the acro they
wanted. They had about 150 hours total time and they were flying a plane
that had a 500 KIAS entry speed for a loop and needed almost 10,000' to split-s.
I don't remember any of these rookies killing themselves doing solo acro.
They tended to kill themselves (and their instructors) in the traffic pattern
and during formation training (hint, hint).
However, I remember far too many experienced fighter pilots killed in BFM/ACM
missions. I realize the planes we fly are much different, but the concepts of
BFM/ACM are the same. Doesn't matter if you're in a Fokker or an F-22, if you
make a small mistake, you're dead. And I don't mean the other guy shot you
down. These experienced, highly trained and proficient pilots flew into each
other or the ground, during peacetime training. Few of us "Yakkers" are experienced,
highly trained, or proficient in BFM/ACM. So, IMHO, flying BFM/ACM is
MUCH riskier than doing loops and rolls by yourself.
ACM training clinics:
Based on experience, I must say, and I'm very serious, that this is no different
than teaching brain surgery to a pilot through the use of weekend clinics.
Yeah, after a couple clinics you could probably safely cut someone's head open.
But, would you really know what the heck you're doing? Would you really
know what to do when the "unexpected" occurs? If you haven't cracked a skull
open in several months, would you feel proficient? Confident? Clueless perhaps?
Would you want to be the patient? Or in our case, the other pilot in the
BFM engagement flying against a clueless, non-proficient, hardly trained rookie.
But, hey, he did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night. J
A military fighter pilot flies all the time. He/she IS experienced, highly trained
and proficient. He/she HAS developed a good g-tolerance. It took him/her
YEARS of CONSTANT training to get there. And they STILL have BFM/ACM accidents!!
Thanks for listening,
Steve Dalton
Yak-52TW
N52SD
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 |
|
That is also quite true Cy. But some folks use the term "cigarette" interchangeably
with the lead that goes into the spark plug with the high voltage lead that
inserts into the magneto cap.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: cgalley
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 7:16 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: ignition
Sorry, It is a WW2 term for the Sparkplug end that fits down inside the plug.
They were made of white porcelain so they looked like a cigarette butt.
Cy Galley - Chair,
Air Emergency Aircraft Repair
A Service Project of Chapter 75
EAA Safety Programs Editor - TC
EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: A. Dennis Savarese
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 6:31 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: ignition
Many people refer to the high voltage lead that fits into the hole at the rear
of the magneto cap (where all the spark plug wires go into) as the "cigarette".
It is about the size of a pencil.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: david stroud
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: ignition
Giday, Craig. I haven't had time to dig into my mags yet...just got my Housai
today from VAM
and I'm curious what the cigarette is. I'll definitely go auto on the ignition
stuff. Thanks..
David Stroud Ottawa, Canada
C-FDWS Christavia
Fairchild 51 early construction
----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Payne
To: yak-list
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:27 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: ignition
SOB wrote:
>
>As far as sealing the mag, I agree with Dennis on this, no need.
>
>
Unhh, I beg to differ here, moisture anywhere near the distributor cap
sparkies is not good. Like Gus, I used silicone seal plus self-bonding tape around
the wires. Problems inside the distributor cap and rotor are often mis-attributed
to mag timing, mag coil breakdown or high voltage leaks in the harness.
What happens is that excess carbon builds up "downwind" of each individual
spark contact and timing advance is skewed. A little moisture and there are new
paths for high voltage to find it's way to ground.
Take care of the HV side of your system: points, "cigarette", rotor, distributor
cap, leads and spark plugs. Your reward will be smooth runnings, dude.
Craig Payne
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: | ACM Possible Issues |
Sergey Esayan was the source for this I will ask him for the test data, lets
see what he sends me. But basically the point of my post was that the
Russian, better than anyone else period, actually test the aircraft that
they sell.
Last summer I was looking around at alternative aerobatic types, and I have
to say that I did (shame on me) consider the flat six variety as well).
There are composite aircraft out there that claim ridiculous G loadings.
BUT, when you ask to see the testing that was done to determine these
figures the answer is always, oh we did not test the wing that is just a
calculation. Well the fact of the matter is this, you may very well be able
to determine with a great deal of accuracy that a wing may fail at a given
load. I am not a structural engineer I don't know one end of a stress
calculation from another. I do however understand big rigs and sand bags. I
have a physics back ground and I always have problems with those theoretical
guys, give me a particle accelerator any day of the week.
To fly an aircraft to these levels of performance you need to have 100%
trust in the airframe otherwise you would never leave the ground. I really
have difficulty in just "taking someone else's word" that things are going
to be fine.
I think that there is a market for the Russians making these test facilities
available to US manufactures, especially the experimental crowd, to test
provided samples to the standard Russian criteria. If they did that I would
take the limit claims more seriously. These results would be respected,
especially by the aerobatics community, I mean who would doubt the strength
of a Sukhoi ?
Gus
_____
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Goode
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 8:13 AM
Subject: Yak-List: ACM Possible Issues
Gus, the SP-91 is a strong aeroplane, but 60G - absolutely no way!
I know the two designers well (Slava Kondratiev and Sergey Esayan), and I
can't believe either would have made that claim.
I would suspect that serious deformation would occur before 15G. However
more than enough for most people.
Sukhoi wings (carbon of course) are operational to 12G, with a 1.75 factor 21G.
Six wings have been broken and the lowest figure one broke at was 25G.
(Of course the Massagee Su-31 wing was a production fault, but even then
failed at 12.4G).
It is also worth saying that Sukhoi put all the wings that they subsequently
broke through a 50,000 cycle of +10G and -10G, including torsional twisting.
I saw this in a rig the size of a small size house, and it was most
impressive!
Richard Goode
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Mob: +44 (0) 7768 610389
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com>
-
dangerous content by http://www.invictawiz.com
and is believed to be clean.
-
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Sergey Esayanwas the source for this I will ask him
for the test data, lets see what he sends me. But basically the point of my post
was that the Russian, better than anyone else period, actually test the aircraft
that they sell.
<FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>
<FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Last summer I was looking around at alternative aerobatic
types, and I have to say that I did (shame on me) consider the flat six variety
as well). There are composite aircraft out there that claim ridiculous G
loadings. BUT, when you ask to see the testing that was done to determine these
figures the answer is always, oh we did not test the wing that is just a
calculation. Well the fact of the matter is this, you may very well be able to
determine with a great deal of accuracy that a wing may fail at a given load. I
am not a structural engineer I don't know one end of a stress calculation from
another. I do however understand big rigs and sand bags. I have a physics back
ground and I always have problems with those theoretical guys, give me a
particle accelerator any day of the week.
<FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>
<FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>To fly an aircraft to these levels of performance
youneed to have 100% trust in the airframe otherwise you would never leave
the ground. I really have difficulty in just "taking someone else's word" that
things are going to be fine.
<FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>
<FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>I think that there is a market for the Russians making
these test facilities available to US manufactures, especially the experimental
crowd, to test provided samples to the standard Russian criteria. If they did
that I would take the limit claims more seriously. These results would be
respected, especially by the aerobatics community, I mean who would doubt the
strength of a Sukhoi ?
<FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>
<FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Gus
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard
Goode
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 8:13 AM
LIST
Subject: Yak-List: ACM Possible Issues
Gus, the SP-91 is a strong
aeroplane, but 60G - absolutely no way!
I know the two designers
well (Slava Kondratiev and Sergey Esayan), and I can't believe either would
have made that claim.
I would suspect that serious
deformation would occur before 15G. However more than enough for most
people.
Sukhoi wings (carbon of
course) are operational to 12G, with a 1.75 factor = 21G. Six wings have
been broken and the lowest figure one broke at was 25G. (Of course the
Massagee Su-31 wing was a production fault, but even then failed at
12.4G).
It is also worth saying that
Sukhoi put all the wings that they subsequently broke through a 50,000 cycle
of +10G and -10G, including torsional twisting. I saw this in a rig the
size of a small size house, and it was most impressive!
Richard
Goode
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds
Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Mob:
+44 (0) 7768 610389
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
<A
">www.russianaeros.com
dangerous content by
http://www.invictawiz.com
and is believed to be clean.
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: Commercial/ 2nd class |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "forrest johnson" <flushjohnson@charter.net>
Thanks for the offer but I am in Fort Worth Tx. I could be wrong but I think
the RPA Fast Manual requires 1 yr. wing and Com/2nd to get a
FAST lead. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks Forrest
flushjohnson@charter.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 10:27 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>
>
> forrest johnson wrote:
>> I did not intend for this to get to the point it has. I am a FAST WING
>> pilot. Understand the problems dealing with the FAA. I guess i didn't
>> make myself clear. According to what has been writtin Ihave to have to
>> have a Com/2nd to fly. I would like to fly weather I am compensated or
>> not. I love Tto fly! The rerequirements prevent me from signing up. The
>> question I have is why to be a LEAD PILOT should have a Comm/2nd. I have
>> over 30 yrs. flying and no need for a comm. Over 2yrs Form, over 150hrs
>> form , Would some one please enlighten me why I cant get a FAST LEAD
>> card. This requirement is stiffling the FAST orgination. Iwill now
>> SHUT-up and wait for the responces
>
> You can get a FAST lead card if you have the chops. You don't need a CSEL.
> You don't need a FAST lead card to lead a flight unless you want to do it
> in waivered airspace (during an actual air show).
>
> The only reason you need the CSEL is if the airshow offers you some
> compensation, like gas for your airplane. No CSEL, no gas -- unless you
> want to risk getting cited by the FAA.
>
> That is the whole thing in a nutshell.
>
> Want to get trained to be a lead pilot? I would be happy to help you. You
> in northern California?
>
> --
> 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
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
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 |
|
And the Russians call spark plugs candles !
Gus
_____
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of cgalley
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 8:17 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: ignition
Sorry, It is a WW2 term for the Sparkplug end that fits down inside the
plug. They were made of white porcelain so they looked like a cigarette
butt.
Cy Galley - Chair,
Air Emergency Aircraft Repair
A Service Project of Chapter 75
EAA Safety Programs Editor - TC
EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: A. <mailto:dsavarese@elmore.rr.com> Dennis Savarese
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 6:31 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: ignition
Many people refer to the high voltage lead that fits into the hole at the
rear of the magneto cap (where all the spark plug wires go into) as the
"cigarette". It is about the size of a pencil.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: david stroud <mailto:dstroud@storm.ca>
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: ignition
Giday, Craig. I haven't had time to dig into my mags yet...just got my
Housai today from VAM
and I'm curious what the cigarette is. I'll definitely go auto on the
ignition stuff. Thanks..
David Stroud Ottawa, Canada
C-FDWS Christavia
Fairchild 51 early construction
----- Original Message -----
From: Craig <mailto:cpayne@joimail.com> Payne
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:27 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: ignition
SOB wrote:
>
>As far as sealing the mag, I agree with Dennis on this, no need.
>
>
Unhh, I beg to differ here, moisture anywhere near the distributor cap
sparkies is not good. Like Gus, I used silicone seal plus self-bonding tape
around the wires. Problems inside the distributor cap and rotor are often
mis-attributed to mag timing, mag coil breakdown or high voltage leaks in
the harness. What happens is that excess carbon builds up "downwind" of
each individual spark contact and timing advance is skewed. A little
moisture and there are new paths for high voltage to find it's way to
ground.
Take care of the HV side of your system: points, "cigarette", rotor,
distributor cap, leads and spark plugs. Your reward will be smooth runnings,
dude.
Craig Payne
_____
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff>And the Russians call spark plugs candles !
<FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff>
<FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff>Gus
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
cgalley
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 8:17 AM
yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:
ignition
Sorry, It is a WW2 term for the Sparkplug end
that fits down inside the plug. They were made of white porcelain so
they looked like a cigarette butt.
Cy Galley - Chair,
Air Emergency Aircraft
Repair
A Service Project of Chapter 75
EAA Safety Programs Editor -
TC
EAA Sport Pilot
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT:
#000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
<A title=dsavarese@elmore.rr.com ">A.
Dennis Savarese
To: <A title=yak-list@matronics.com
">yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 6:31
AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:
ignition
Many people refer to the high voltage lead that fits
into the hole at the rear of the magneto cap (where all the spark plug wires
go into) as the "cigarette". It is about the size of a
pencil.
Dennis
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT:
#000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
<A title=dstroud@storm.ca ">david stroud
To: <A title=yak-list@matronics.com
">yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 6:15
PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:
ignition
Giday, Craig. I haven't had time to
dig into my mags yet...just got my Housai today from VAM
and I'm curious what the cigarette is.
I'll definitely go auto on the ignition stuff. Thanks..
David Stroud Ottawa, Canada
C-FDWS Christavia
Fairchild 51 early construction
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT:
#0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
<A title=cpayne@joimail.com ">Craig
Payne
To: <A title=yak-list@matronics.com
">yak-list
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:27
PM
Subject: Yak-List: Re:
ignition
SOB wrote:
As far as sealing the mag, I agree with Dennis on this,
no need.
Unhh, I beg to differ here, moisture anywhere near the distributor
cap sparkies is not good. Like Gus, I used silicone seal plus
self-bonding tape around the wires.Problems inside the distributor
cap and rotorare often mis-attributed to mag timing, mag coil
breakdown or high voltage leaks in the harness. What happens is that
excess carbon builds up "downwind" of each individual spark
contact and timing advance is skewed. A little moisture and there are
new paths for high voltage to find it's way to ground.
Take care of the HV side of your system: points, "cigarette",
rotor, distributor cap, leads and spark plugs. Your reward will be
smooth runnings, dude.
Craig Payne
Checked by AVG Free
Edition.
Date:
3/23/06
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: Auto Wires into the Mags |
Jeff,
Bill Blackwell's conversion is also an excellent conversion. If you take a close
look at the original Russian harness paying particular attention to the braided
shielding that surrounds the mass of plug wires exiting the magneto and also
the braided shields on each individual plug lead, you will note the braids
are porous. Moisture can surely penetrate these braids. (Spray silicone spray
on the braided shields when you have a misfire). If you look at the 90 degree
elbow end of the Russian wiring harness where it connects to the spark plug,
you will see a rubber hose abutting up against the 90 degree elbow. There
is no seal between the rubber hose and the end of the 90 degree elbow. That
rubber hose covers the braided shield on each spark plug lead and also helps
protect the lead from chafing when passing through the engine baffling. During
a driving rain storm, moisture can easily find its way under that rubber hose
on the front spark plug leads and penetrate the pores of the braided shield.
Try washing down your engine with a water bases solution and you'll find out
if moisture can penetrate the braided shields or not. If you look at my conversion
kit plug ends, the security of the fitting over the spark plug virtually
eliminates any possibility of moisture penetration. Finally, when you look
at the magneto cap end where each wire enters into the magneto cap, it is no
less susceptible to moisture penetration with the Russian wiring harness than
with the automotive plug conversion kit I sell. If there is concern as to whether
moisture can enter the magneto cap through the tightly packed 8 mm wires,
RTV/silicone sealant around the opening and in between the wires will remove
that concern and any potential moisture penetration.
Either conversion, Bill Blackwell's or mine, removes the "Achilles heel" of the
M14, which is the Russian wiring harness and significantly reduces operating
costs for the long term.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Linebaugh
To: yak-list@matronics. com
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 7:31 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Auto Wires into the Mags
Yakers,
I may be opening pandora's box here, sorry Dennis, but the Auto-spark plug
conversion kit that Bill Blackwell and all the DVT guys are using has a very
cool machined part with individual holes for each plug wire where they enter
the mag. Each plug wire then has a tight seal as it goes through this block
prior to entering the mag. This eliminates the possibility of water entering the
ignition system at that point.
I lost a good friend years ago flying a Beech 18 after he had a dual engine
failure flying through a heavy rain storm. The NTSB found that water entered
the ignition systems of both engines and forced him down. I was supposed
to be on that flight...after that, my CFI-Dad told me no more flying night cargo...
Jeff Linebaugh
jefflinebaugh@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~jefflinebaugh/
Guarding Val's CJ-6P N621CJ
Memphis, TN
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: | Auto Wires into the Mags |
Dennis I can confirm that experiment, I was draining moisture out of the
lower plug shrouds for weeks.
Gus
_____
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Auto Wires into the Mags
Jeff,
Bill Blackwell's conversion is also an excellent conversion. If you take a
close look at the original Russian harness paying particular attention to
the braided shielding that surrounds the mass of plug wires exiting the
magneto and also the braided shields on each individual plug lead, you will
note the braids are porous. Moisture can surely penetrate these braids.
(Spray silicone spray on the braided shields when you have a misfire). If
you look at the 90 degree elbow end of the Russian wiring harness where it
connects to the spark plug, you will see a rubber hose abutting up against
the 90 degree elbow. There is no seal between the rubber hose and the end
of the 90 degree elbow. That rubber hose covers the braided shield on each
spark plug lead and also helps protect the lead from chafing when passing
through the engine baffling. During a driving rain storm, moisture can
easily find its way under that rubber hose on the front spark plug leads and
penetrate the pores of the braided shield. Try washing down your engine
with a water bases solution and you'll find out if moisture can penetrate
the braided shields or not. If you look at my conversion kit plug ends,
the security of the fitting over the spark plug virtually eliminates any
possibility of moisture penetration. Finally, when you look at the magneto
cap end where each wire enters into the magneto cap, it is no less
susceptible to moisture penetration with the Russian wiring harness than
with the automotive plug conversion kit I sell. If there is concern as to
whether moisture can enter the magneto cap through the tightly packed 8 mm
wires, RTV/silicone sealant around the opening and in between the wires will
remove that concern and any potential moisture penetration.
Either conversion, Bill Blackwell's or mine, removes the "Achilles heel" of
the M14, which is the Russian wiring harness and significantly reduces
operating costs for the long term.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Linebaugh <mailto:jefflinebaugh@earthlink.net>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 7:31 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Auto Wires into the Mags
Yakers,
I may be opening pandora's box here, sorry Dennis, but the Auto-spark plug
conversion kit that Bill Blackwell and all the DVT guys are using has a very
cool machined part with individual holes for each plug wire where they enter
the mag. Each plug wire then has a tight seal as it goes through this block
prior to entering the mag. This eliminates the possibility of water entering
the ignition system at that point.
I lost a good friend years ago flying a Beech 18 after he had a dual engine
failure flying through a heavy rain storm. The NTSB found that water
entered the ignition systems of both engines and forced him down. I was
supposed to be on that flight...after that, my CFI-Dad told me no more
flying night cargo...
Jeff Linebaugh
jefflinebaugh@earthlink.net <mailto:jefflinebaugh@earthlink.net>
http://home.earthlink.net/~jefflinebaugh/
<http://home.earthlink.net/~jefflinebaugh/>
Guarding Val's CJ-6P N621CJ
Memphis, TN
<http://www.incredimail.com/index.asp?id=409&lang=9>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR><!--IncrdiXMLRemarkStart>
<X-FID>FLAVOR00-NONE-0000-0000-000000000000</X-FID>
<X-FVER>4.0</X-FVER>
<X-CNT>;</X-CNT>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<BODY
style="BACKGROUND-POSITION: 0px 0px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 5px 10px 10px; FONT-FAMILY:
Arial"
bgColor=#ffffff background="" scroll=yes ORGYPOS="0">
Dennis I can confirm that
experiment, I was draining moisture out of the lower plug shrouds for
weeks.
Gus
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
Savarese
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 9:07 AM
yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Auto Wires into the
Mags
Jeff,
Bill Blackwell's conversion is also an excellent
conversion. If you take a close look at the original Russian harness
paying particular attention to the braided shielding that surrounds the mass
of plug wires exiting the magneto and also the braided shields on each
individual plug lead, you will note the braids are porous.
Moisture can surely penetrate these braids. (Spray silicone spray on
thebraided shields when you have a misfire). If you look at
the 90 degree elbow end of the Russian wiring harness where it connects to the
spark plug, you will see a rubber hose abutting up against the 90 degree
elbow. There is no seal between therubber hose and the end of the
90 degree elbow. That rubber hose covers the braided shield on
each spark plug lead and also helps protectthe leadfrom chafing
when passing through the engine baffling. During a driving rain storm,
moisture can easily find its way under that rubber hose on the front spark
plug leadsand penetrate the pores of the braided shield. Try
washing down your engine with a water bases solution and you'll find out if
moisture can penetrate the braided shields or not. If you
lookat myconversion kit plug ends, the security of
thefitting over the spark plug virtually eliminates any possibility of
moisture penetration.Finally, when you look at the magneto cap end
where each wire enters into the magneto cap, it is no lesssusceptible to
moisture penetration with the Russian wiring harness than with the automotive
plug conversion kit I sell. Ifthere is concern as to whether
moisture can enter the magneto cap through the tightly packed 8
mmwires,RTV/silicone sealant around the opening and in between the
wireswill remove that concern and any potential moisture
penetration.
Either conversion, Bill Blackwell's or mine,
removesthe "Achilles heel" of the M14, which is the Russian wiring
harness and significantly reduces operating costs for the long
term.
Dennis
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT:
#000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
<A title=jefflinebaugh@earthlink.net
">Jeff Linebaugh
To: <A title=yak-list@matronics.com
">yak-list@matronics. com
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 7:31
AM
Subject: Yak-List: Auto Wires into the
Mags
<TABLE id=INCREDIMAINTABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width="100%"
border=0>
<TD id=INCREDITEXTREGION
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; CURSOR: auto; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
width="100%">Yakers,
I may be opening pandora's box here, sorry Dennis, but the
Auto-spark plug conversion kit that Bill Blackwell and all the DVT
guys are using has a very cool machined part with individual holes for
each plug wire where they enter the mag. Each plug wire then has a
tight seal as it goes through this block prior to entering the mag.
This eliminates the possibility of water entering the ignition system
at that point.
I lost a good friend years ago flying a Beech 18 after he had a
dual engine failure flying through a heavy rain storm. The NTSB
found that water entered the ignition systems of both engines and
forced him down. I was supposed to be on that flight...after that, my
CFI-Dad told me no more flying night cargo...
Jeff Linebaugh
<A
">jefflinebaugh@earthlink.net
<EM><A
/">http://home.earthlink.net/~jefflinebaugh/</EM>
<EM>Guarding Val's CJ-6P N621CJ</EM>
<EM>Memphis, TN</EM>
<TD id=INCREDIANIM vAlign=bottom
align=middle><SPAN
id=IncrediStamp><A
"><IMG alt=""
hspace=0 src="cid:466271914@24032006-0A75" align=baseline
border=0>
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/ 2nd class |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
forrest johnson wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "forrest johnson"
> <flushjohnson@charter.net>
>
> Thanks for the offer but I am in Fort Worth Tx. I could be wrong but I
> think the RPA Fast Manual requires 1 yr. wing and Com/2nd to get a
> FAST lead. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks Forrest
> flushjohnson@charter.net
Now, I remember the 1yr part but don't remember the CSEL part. (Getting
old is hell.) I also remember the discusion going on several years back
about allowing people with only wing qual to lead flights but didn't
know the "rule" had officially changed.
(Thanks for the update Al.)
So the question is, do you really need a lead qualification?
--
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 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: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
--> Yak-List message posted by: fish@aviation-tech.com
Group,
I am not taking a stand on either side of this this discussion, but I would
like to point out one thing.
I keep hearing the military trains 20 yr old to fly this way. When I went through
Flight Engineer School (Little Rock AFB, AR), it was a total imersion class.
We ate/drank and thought of nothing but flying 24 hrs a day, 6 1/2 days a week
(fri or Sat night out), for a year. This has a direct effect on your learning/performance
when flying.
I found that after a two week break in flying, my performance was degraded on
my next flight.
Most current jet fighters have fatigue indexes and are pulled from service well
before reaching the end of their index. Some are rebuilt using new components
to extend thier service life (F-18, unk about others), and some are scrapped.
On C-130's we always had a list of restrected aircraft because of fatigue. They
were allowed to fly, but with severe limitations.
Just someting to consider, with ACM/FAST.
Fly Safe
John Fischer
>
>
>Another very good post Steve.
>Dennis
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Steve Dalton
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 7:15 AM
> Subject: Yak-List: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues
>
>
> >>>Subject: Yak-List: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues
>
> >>>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!
>
>
> There have been several very good comments made here about metal >fatigue,
pulling wings off (and the consequences for us all), and about >whether the
RPA should be involved in BFM/ACM training. May I add my >two cents worth about
risk and training for BFM/ACM?
>
>
> Comparing the risk of Acro vs. ACM:
>
>
> I flew the F-4, F-16 and T-38 (about 1,000 hours in each) and was an >IP/Evaluator
in each. I remember sending T-38 solo students out to fly >all the acro they
wanted. They had about 150 hours total time and they >were flying a plane that
had a 500 KIAS entry speed for a loop and >needed almost 10,000' to split-s.
I don't remember any of these rookies >killing themselves doing solo acro.
They tended to kill themselves (and >their instructors) in the traffic pattern
and during formation training >(hint, hint).
>
>
> However, I remember far too many experienced fighter pilots killed in >BFM/ACM
missions. I realize the planes we fly are much different, but >the concepts
of BFM/ACM are the same. Doesn't matter if you're in a >Fokker or an F-22,
if you make a small mistake, you're dead. And I >don't mean the other guy shot
you down. These experienced, highly >trained and proficient pilots flew into
each other or the ground, during >peacetime training. Few of us "Yakkers" are
experienced, highly >trained, or proficient in BFM/ACM. So, IMHO, flying BFM/ACM
is MUCH >riskier than doing loops and rolls by yourself.
>
>
> ACM training clinics:
>
>
> Based on experience, I must say, and I'm very serious, that this is no >different
than teaching brain surgery to a pilot through the use of >weekend clinics.
Yeah, after a couple clinics you could probably safely >cut someone's head
open. But, would you really know what the heck >you're doing? Would you really
know what to do when the "unexpected" >occurs? If you haven't cracked a skull
open in several months, would >you feel proficient? Confident? Clueless perhaps?
Would you want to >be the patient? Or in our case, the other pilot in the
BFM engagement >flying against a clueless, non-proficient, hardly trained rookie.
But, >hey, he did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night. J
>
>
> A military fighter pilot flies all the time. He/she IS experienced, >highly
trained and proficient. He/she HAS developed a good g-tolerance. > It took
him/her YEARS of CONSTANT training to get there. And they >STILL have BFM/ACM
accidents!!
>
>
> Thanks for listening,
>
> Steve Dalton
>
> Yak-52TW
>
> N52SD
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | G Limits and Lifetime |
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: [INFO]ACM possible issues |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
There are two parts to this discussion and I want to make sure they are
clearly delineated so that we don't get confused. The first part
consists of the actual risks associated with flying ACM and primarily
consists of:
1. pilot training requirements to ensure that the pilots participating
have enough background that they are not likely to hurt themselves,
their buddies, or anyone on the ground;
2. stresses, loading, and life cycle limits to aluminum aircraft structures;
3. legal and regulatory limitations.
We seem to have a lot of people weighing in on these topics. I don't
think anyone disagrees at this point that:
1. people can do stupid things and hurt themselves;
2. you can break your airplane;
3. someone might sue you or someone at the FAA might get a bee in their
bonnet and decide to persecute you for some reason (or no reason at all
as they a wont to do).
The second part has to do with whether RPA should "sanction" this
activity. This is completely independent of the risks involved. As I
have stated before, the responsibility for safe flight always remains
with the pilot, not any organization. It is the pilot's decision whether
or not to participate in ACM activity.
The only reason I can see for RPA to take a stand one way or the other
is to provide some legal protection from liability. Given that RPA has
no assets and no value to speak of (financially speaking) I would
venture that it is not likely to be the target of a lawsuit should
something happen. No one would bother to sue the RPA because they could
never get anything from it.
So, if there are members who are interested in learning the basics of
ACM and there are members willing to teach the basics of ACM, I suggest
that it makes sense for the RPA to passively facilitate.
--
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 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 |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
"I found that after a two week break in flying, my performance was degraded
on my next flight."
That is why it is also called a perishable skill.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: <fish@aviation-tech.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 12:42 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues
> --> Yak-List message posted by: fish@aviation-tech.com
>
> Group,
>
> I am not taking a stand on either side of this this discussion, but I
> would
> like to point out one thing.
>
> I keep hearing the military trains 20 yr old to fly this way. When I went
> through
> Flight Engineer School (Little Rock AFB, AR), it was a total imersion
> class.
> We ate/drank and thought of nothing but flying 24 hrs a day, 6 1/2 days a
> week
> (fri or Sat night out), for a year. This has a direct effect on your
> learning/performance
> when flying.
>
> I found that after a two week break in flying, my performance was degraded
> on
> my next flight.
>
> Most current jet fighters have fatigue indexes and are pulled from service
> well
> before reaching the end of their index. Some are rebuilt using new
> components
> to extend thier service life (F-18, unk about others), and some are
> scrapped.
> On C-130's we always had a list of restrected aircraft because of fatigue.
> They
> were allowed to fly, but with severe limitations.
>
> Just someting to consider, with ACM/FAST.
>
> Fly Safe
> John Fischer
>
>
>>
>>
>>Another very good post Steve.
>>Dennis
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Steve Dalton
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 7:15 AM
>> Subject: Yak-List: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues
>>
>>
>> >>>Subject: Yak-List: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues
>>
>> >>>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!
>>
>>
>>
>> There have been several very good comments made here about metal
>> >fatigue,
> pulling wings off (and the consequences for us all), and about >whether
> the
> RPA should be involved in BFM/ACM training. May I add my >two cents worth
> about
> risk and training for BFM/ACM?
>>
>>
>>
>> Comparing the risk of Acro vs. ACM:
>>
>>
>>
>> I flew the F-4, F-16 and T-38 (about 1,000 hours in each) and was an
>> >IP/Evaluator
> in each. I remember sending T-38 solo students out to fly >all the acro
> they
> wanted. They had about 150 hours total time and they >were flying a plane
> that
> had a 500 KIAS entry speed for a loop and >needed almost 10,000' to
> split-s.
> I don't remember any of these rookies >killing themselves doing solo acro.
> They tended to kill themselves (and >their instructors) in the traffic
> pattern
> and during formation training >(hint, hint).
>>
>>
>>
>> However, I remember far too many experienced fighter pilots killed in
>> >BFM/ACM
> missions. I realize the planes we fly are much different, but >the
> concepts
> of BFM/ACM are the same. Doesn't matter if you're in a >Fokker or an
> F-22,
> if you make a small mistake, you're dead. And I >don't mean the other guy
> shot
> you down. These experienced, highly >trained and proficient pilots flew
> into
> each other or the ground, during >peacetime training. Few of us "Yakkers"
> are
> experienced, highly >trained, or proficient in BFM/ACM. So, IMHO, flying
> BFM/ACM
> is MUCH >riskier than doing loops and rolls by yourself.
>>
>>
>>
>> ACM training clinics:
>>
>>
>>
>> Based on experience, I must say, and I'm very serious, that this is no
>> >different
> than teaching brain surgery to a pilot through the use of >weekend
> clinics.
> Yeah, after a couple clinics you could probably safely >cut someone's head
> open. But, would you really know what the heck >you're doing? Would you
> really
> know what to do when the "unexpected" >occurs? If you haven't cracked a
> skull
> open in several months, would >you feel proficient? Confident? Clueless
> perhaps?
> Would you want to >be the patient? Or in our case, the other pilot in the
> BFM engagement >flying against a clueless, non-proficient, hardly trained
> rookie.
> But, >hey, he did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night. J
>>
>>
>>
>> A military fighter pilot flies all the time. He/she IS experienced,
>> >highly
> trained and proficient. He/she HAS developed a good g-tolerance. > It
> took
> him/her YEARS of CONSTANT training to get there. And they >STILL have
> BFM/ACM
> accidents!!
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for listening,
>>
>> Steve Dalton
>>
>> Yak-52TW
>>
>> N52SD
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Richard,
I stand corrected, this brain degradation is really starting to suck, it was
26G that the Sp wing was tested to with 80mm deflection
Gus
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2658.24">
Stress testing
Richard,
I stand corrected, this brain degradation is really starting to suck, it was 26G
that the Sp wing was tested to with 80mm deflection
Gus
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: STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DURING |
PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES
Hans,
You are right. I've lost three out of my four friends who were excellent pilots
while they were doing air shows or practicing for them. All were excellent professional
pilots. Cindy Rucker was one of my roommates at old Western Airlines
and a crowd pleaser. Started a roll/loop a tad too low and didn't quite pull
out at the bottom in front of hundreds of people.
Rick Brickert could and did fly anything. It was his life's love. He was lost
at the Reno Air Races when his Pond Racer caught fire, engine quit, and he almost
made it to a dead stick in the desert. The fire got him first. ( Don't even
go there about the flight suit.) The other was practicing a complex series
of maneuvers over the Pacific ocean for his next air show in a Chipmunk. Only
Bob Hoover remains.
The whole point of this type of flying is to push the envelope and there's only
one way to find out when you've exceeded it. It seems to attract the high achievers.
They love and are generally up to the task, but it only takes one mistake
at the altitudes they generally fly at.
- Val
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: [Comment]Commercial and CompensationCommercial and CompensationCommercial |
and
"Yup!" (grin) I love that one too. - Val
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: [Comment]Commercial and Compensation |
Glad you enjoyed the tale as intended. 99% of my other experiences with the FAA,
as I told Mr. Short, were positive as well. There's always one bad apple in
every bunch. You just hope that you don't run into them - and "I'll drink to that."
; )
- Val
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: ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents |
Good points made Joe. Thank you and welcome to the "Squawk Box hot seat". - Val
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: ACM - A T-34 Owner's two cents |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
Joe,
You may have unset the natural balance between quality information and useless
jabber that sometimes exist here. The Yak list will now implode.
Good stuff.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=23944#23944
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: Commercial/ 2nd class |
Not quite true. You can lead a flight with wingman FAST card in wavered airspace.
With is often done with guys who already have lots of formation time or have
progressed.
The main "benefit" of a Lead FAST card is that a Lead can recommend a pilot for
a wing or lead card. A lead thus become in essence the "guardian of the gate"
so to speak. You as a lead are vouching for the competence, skill, and judgment
of the pilot you are recommending. Not unlike an CFI sending a student up
for his check ride. Same responsibility. The is no place for the "good old
boy club" nor a person looking for power trip.
On a separate note: I'm out flying the B-17 right now and as so often happens
in this business we witnessed one of those surreptitious moments. We were in
DTS a few days ago, when one of the Doolittle Raider showed up. He is 91 and
still swims 5 days a week at the local Y pool. He don't hear well, but is sharp
and very much a gentleman. We took him for a ride in our B-25. As the B-25
circled back over the field, a great American Baud Eagle sour over head and
stayed there until the B-25 returned.
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Sent: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 20:27:28 -0800
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
forrest johnson wrote:
> I did not intend for this to get to the point it has. I am a FAST > WING pilot.
Understand the problems dealing with the FAA. I guess i > didn't make myself
clear. According to what has been writtin Ihave to > have to have a Com/2nd
to fly. I would like to fly weather I am > compensated or not. I love Tto fly!
The rerequirements prevent me from > signing up. The question I have is why to
be a LEAD PILOT should have a > Comm/2nd. I have over 30 yrs. flying and no
need for a comm. Over 2yrs > Form, over 150hrs form , Would some one please enlighten
me why I > cant get a FAST LEAD card. This requirement is stiffling the
FAST > orgination. Iwill now SHUT-up and wait for the responces
You can get a FAST lead card if you have the chops. You don't need a CSEL. You
don't need a FAST lead card to lead a flight unless you want to do it in waivered
airspace (during an actual air show).
The only reason you need the CSEL is if the airshow offers you some compensation,
like gas for your airplane. No CSEL, no gas -- unless you want to risk getting
cited by the FAA.
That is the whole thing in a nutshell.
Want to get trained to be a lead pilot? I would be happy to help you. You in northern
California?
-- 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: Commercial/ 2nd class |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Forrest,
Only RPA requires CSEL to be a FAST Lead.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Date: 3/23/2006 10:34:47 PM
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>
>
> forrest johnson wrote:
> > I did not intend for this to get to the point it has. I am a FAST
> > WING pilot. Understand the problems dealing with the FAA. I guess i
> > didn't make myself clear. According to what has been writtin Ihave to
> > have to have a Com/2nd to fly. I would like to fly weather I am
> > compensated or not. I love Tto fly! The rerequirements prevent me from
> > signing up. The question I have is why to be a LEAD PILOT should have a
> > Comm/2nd. I have over 30 yrs. flying and no need for a comm. Over 2yrs
> > Form, over 150hrs form , Would some one please enlighten me why I
> > cant get a FAST LEAD card. This requirement is stiffling the FAST
> > orgination. Iwill now SHUT-up and wait for the responces
>
> You can get a FAST lead card if you have the chops. You don't need a
> CSEL. You don't need a FAST lead card to lead a flight unless you want
> to do it in waivered airspace (during an actual air show).
>
> The only reason you need the CSEL is if the airshow offers you some
> compensation, like gas for your airplane. No CSEL, no gas -- unless you
> want to risk getting cited by the FAA.
>
> That is the whole thing in a nutshell.
>
> Want to get trained to be a lead pilot? I would be happy to help you.
> You in northern California?
>
> --
> 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 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: | Auto Wires into the Mags |
Did not listen did you Linedogg?
Doc
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Linebaugh
Sent: 3/24/2006 7:36:56 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Auto Wires into the Mags
Yakers,
I may be opening pandora's box here, sorry Dennis, but the Auto-spark plug conversion
kit that Bill Blackwell and all the DVT guys are using has a very cool
machined part with individual holes for each plug wire where they enter the mag.
Each plug wire then has a tight seal as it goes through this block prior to
entering the mag. This eliminates the possibility of water entering the ignition
system at that point.
I lost a good friend years ago flying a Beech 18 after he had a dual engine failure
flying through a heavy rain storm. The NTSB found that water entered the
ignition systems of both engines and forced him down. I was supposed to be on
that flight...after that, my CFI-Dad told me no more flying night cargo...
Jeff Linebaugh
jefflinebaugh@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~jefflinebaugh/
Guarding Val's CJ-6P N621CJ
Memphis, TN
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 |
|
| Subject: | Commercial/ 2nd class |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser@gs.com>
Urghhhh!
Oh I get it a CSEL has a second class medical and therefore better eyes to
see where he is going, those mountains can be a bugger to spot.
Here we go again
Gus
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Forrest,
Only RPA requires CSEL to be a FAST Lead.
Doc
> [Original Message]
> From: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Date: 3/23/2006 10:34:47 PM
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>
>
> forrest johnson wrote:
> > I did not intend for this to get to the point it has. I am a FAST
> > WING pilot. Understand the problems dealing with the FAA. I guess i
> > didn't make myself clear. According to what has been writtin Ihave
> > to have to have a Com/2nd to fly. I would like to fly weather I am
> > compensated or not. I love Tto fly! The rerequirements prevent me
> > from signing up. The question I have is why to be a LEAD PILOT
> > should have a Comm/2nd. I have over 30 yrs. flying and no need for a
> > comm. Over 2yrs Form, over 150hrs form , Would some one please
> > enlighten me why I cant get a FAST LEAD card. This requirement is
> > stiffling the FAST orgination. Iwill now SHUT-up and wait for the
> > responces
>
> You can get a FAST lead card if you have the chops. You don't need a
> CSEL. You don't need a FAST lead card to lead a flight unless you want
> to do it in waivered airspace (during an actual air show).
>
> The only reason you need the CSEL is if the airshow offers you some
> compensation, like gas for your airplane. No CSEL, no gas -- unless
> you want to risk getting cited by the FAA.
>
> That is the whole thing in a nutshell.
>
> Want to get trained to be a lead pilot? I would be happy to help you.
> You in northern California?
>
> --
> 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 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/ 2nd class |
--> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
I believe the Commercial requirement for Lead is a national
requirement. Not just RPA. However, the requirements can be waived by
the National FAST board. Not saying they will be. Specific
requirements like 1 year as wing, 1,000 hour, etc can be waived but some
signatory groups are more accepting to supporting waivers than others.
DaBear
Roger Kemp wrote:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
>
>Forrest,
>Only RPA requires CSEL to be a FAST Lead.
>Doc
>
>
>
>
>>[Original Message]
>>From: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>>To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>Date: 3/23/2006 10:34:47 PM
>>Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
>>
>>--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>forrest johnson wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I did not intend for this to get to the point it has. I am a FAST
>>>WING pilot. Understand the problems dealing with the FAA. I guess i
>>>didn't make myself clear. According to what has been writtin Ihave to
>>>have to have a Com/2nd to fly. I would like to fly weather I am
>>>compensated or not. I love Tto fly! The rerequirements prevent me from
>>>signing up. The question I have is why to be a LEAD PILOT should have a
>>>Comm/2nd. I have over 30 yrs. flying and no need for a comm. Over 2yrs
>>>Form, over 150hrs form , Would some one please enlighten me why I
>>>cant get a FAST LEAD card. This requirement is stiffling the FAST
>>>orgination. Iwill now SHUT-up and wait for the responces
>>>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DURING |
PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES
Well said...the PK of the ground is still 1!
Doc
----- Original Message -----
From: Valkyre1
Sent: 3/24/2006 9:44:31 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: STUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DURING
PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES
Hans,
You are right. I've lost three out of my four friends who were excellent pilots
while they were doing air shows or practicing for them. All were excellent professional
pilots. Cindy Rucker was one of my roommates at old Western Airlines
and a crowd pleaser. Started a roll/loop a tad too low and didn't quite pull
out at the bottom in front of hundreds of people.
Rick Brickert could and did fly anything. It was his life's love. He was lost
at the Reno Air Races when his Pond Racer caught fire, engine quit, and he almost
made it to a dead stick in the desert. The fire got him first. ( Don't even
go there about the flight suit.) The other was practicing a complex series
of maneuvers over the Pacific ocean for his next air show in a Chipmunk. Only
Bob Hoover remains.
The whole point of this type of flying is to push the envelope and there's only
one way to find out when you've exceeded it. It seems to attract the high achievers.
They love and are generally up to the task, but it only takes one mistake
at the altitudes they generally fly at.
- Val
Message 35
| 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 PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DU RING |
PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES DURING PRACTICESTUNT PILOT DIES
Douglas Adams summed it up with "There is an art . . . to flying. The knack
lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Gus
The whole point of this type of flying is to push the envelope and there's
only one way to find out when you've exceeded it. It seems to attract the
high achievers. They love and are generally up to the task, but it only
takes one mistake at the altitudes they generally fly at.
- Val
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<SPAN
class=083390218-24032006>Douglas Adams summed it up with "There is an art . . .
to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and
miss."
<SPAN
class=083390218-24032006>
<SPAN
class=083390218-24032006>Gus
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT:
#000000 2px solid">
The whole point of this type of flying is to push the
envelope and there's only one way to find out when you've exceeded it. It
seems to attract the high achievers. They love and are generally up to the
task, but it only takes one mistake at the altitudes they generally fly
at.
-
Val
Message 36
| 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: | [Humor]Val you should get a kick out of this. |
See the attached picture
<<nicola[1].gif>>
Gus
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2658.24">
[Humor]Val you should get a kick out of this.
See the attached picture
nicola[1].gif
Gus
Message 37
| 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/ 2nd class |
--> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
I hope Blade or one of the other check pilots jumps in here, but until
they do, I'll stick my nose in it. (not like I'm shy about sharing my
opinion :-) BTW, the Lead does not require a 2nd class medical, only
requires a 3rd.
So, if you look at the requirements and the responsibilities for lead
versus the abilities for wing they are two different directions. Wing
allows formation flight into waivered airspace (flying wing position, or
leading a flight). Outside of waivered airspace there is no requirement
for wing or lead qualification to fly formation (wing or lead).
The expectation of Lead is to recommend pilots for check rides (wing or
lead), sign annual activity reports, and to be able to instruct pilots
wanting to fly formation (wing or lead). The thought behind commercial
requirement is tied to the perceived higher level skill required for
commercial than private AND the expectation that the lead is someone who
is flying at a higher skill level than wing, AND can coach pilots to
bring their skills up as well.
The requirements for 1k hours, commercial, 1 year as wing, etc. are
reasonable expectations for setting expected skill levels needed to fly
lead and also set "mindset" expectations of a person who will be
reviewing/coach other pilots performance. While debriefing a formation
flight, everyone's views are heard, the lead qualified pilots are
expected to provide feedback/coaching that enables pilot skill
improvement, not just acknowledgment of areas that need improvement.
Waivers to the lead qualification requirements are available through the
RPA check pilot group but must be ultimately approved by the national
FAST board. So the RPA check pilot AND the national board must approve
the waiver. The waiver must be requested AND approved PRIOR to the
check ride.
All of this info is on the RPA website and the qualifications are from
the National FAST document, not an RPA specific document. The only RPA
specific qualification I know of that is different from the national
standard is a requirement for a FAM flight for those FAST card holders
coming from other signatories into RPA.
Disclaimer: I'm not a lead pilot, void where prohibited, your mileage
may vary, and weight before cooking.
Dabear
Fraser, Gus wrote:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser@gs.com>
>
>Urghhhh!
>
>Oh I get it a CSEL has a second class medical and therefore better eyes to
>see where he is going, those mountains can be a bugger to spot.
>
>Here we go again
>
>Gus
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
>Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 12:41 PM
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
>
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
>
>Forrest,
>Only RPA requires CSEL to be a FAST Lead.
>Doc
>
>
>
>
>>[Original Message]
>>From: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>>To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>Date: 3/23/2006 10:34:47 PM
>>Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
>>
>>--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>forrest johnson wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I did not intend for this to get to the point it has. I am a FAST
>>>WING pilot. Understand the problems dealing with the FAA. I guess i
>>>didn't make myself clear. According to what has been writtin Ihave
>>>to have to have a Com/2nd to fly. I would like to fly weather I am
>>>compensated or not. I love Tto fly! The rerequirements prevent me
>>>from signing up. The question I have is why to be a LEAD PILOT
>>>should have a Comm/2nd. I have over 30 yrs. flying and no need for a
>>>comm. Over 2yrs Form, over 150hrs form , Would some one please
>>>enlighten me why I cant get a FAST LEAD card. This requirement is
>>>stiffling the FAST orgination. Iwill now SHUT-up and wait for the
>>>responces
>>>
>>>
Message 38
| 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/ 2nd class |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
If according to RPA rules a FAST Lead must have a commercial ticket, then
lead must also have a 2nd class medical.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "DaBear" <dabear@damned.org>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 12:28 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
> --> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
>
> I hope Blade or one of the other check pilots jumps in here, but until
> they do, I'll stick my nose in it. (not like I'm shy about sharing my
> opinion :-) BTW, the Lead does not require a 2nd class medical, only
> requires a 3rd.
>
> So, if you look at the requirements and the responsibilities for lead
> versus the abilities for wing they are two different directions. Wing
> allows formation flight into waivered airspace (flying wing position, or
> leading a flight). Outside of waivered airspace there is no requirement
> for wing or lead qualification to fly formation (wing or lead).
>
> The expectation of Lead is to recommend pilots for check rides (wing or
> lead), sign annual activity reports, and to be able to instruct pilots
> wanting to fly formation (wing or lead). The thought behind commercial
> requirement is tied to the perceived higher level skill required for
> commercial than private AND the expectation that the lead is someone who
> is flying at a higher skill level than wing, AND can coach pilots to
> bring their skills up as well.
>
> The requirements for 1k hours, commercial, 1 year as wing, etc. are
> reasonable expectations for setting expected skill levels needed to fly
> lead and also set "mindset" expectations of a person who will be
> reviewing/coach other pilots performance. While debriefing a formation
> flight, everyone's views are heard, the lead qualified pilots are
> expected to provide feedback/coaching that enables pilot skill
> improvement, not just acknowledgment of areas that need improvement.
>
>
> Waivers to the lead qualification requirements are available through the
> RPA check pilot group but must be ultimately approved by the national
> FAST board. So the RPA check pilot AND the national board must approve
> the waiver. The waiver must be requested AND approved PRIOR to the
> check ride.
>
> All of this info is on the RPA website and the qualifications are from
> the National FAST document, not an RPA specific document. The only RPA
> specific qualification I know of that is different from the national
> standard is a requirement for a FAM flight for those FAST card holders
> coming from other signatories into RPA.
>
> Disclaimer: I'm not a lead pilot, void where prohibited, your mileage
> may vary, and weight before cooking.
>
> Dabear
>
> Fraser, Gus wrote:
>
>>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser@gs.com>
>>
>>Urghhhh!
>>
>>Oh I get it a CSEL has a second class medical and therefore better eyes to
>>see where he is going, those mountains can be a bugger to spot.
>>
>>Here we go again
>>
>>Gus
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
>>Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 12:41 PM
>>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
>>
>>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
>>
>>Forrest,
>>Only RPA requires CSEL to be a FAST Lead.
>>Doc
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>[Original Message]
>>>From: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>>>To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>>Date: 3/23/2006 10:34:47 PM
>>>Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
>>>
>>>--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>forrest johnson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I did not intend for this to get to the point it has. I am a FAST
>>>>WING pilot. Understand the problems dealing with the FAA. I guess i
>>>>didn't make myself clear. According to what has been writtin Ihave
>>>>to have to have a Com/2nd to fly. I would like to fly weather I am
>>>>compensated or not. I love Tto fly! The rerequirements prevent me
>>>>from signing up. The question I have is why to be a LEAD PILOT
>>>>should have a Comm/2nd. I have over 30 yrs. flying and no need for a
>>>>comm. Over 2yrs Form, over 150hrs form , Would some one please
>>>>enlighten me why I cant get a FAST LEAD card. This requirement is
>>>>stiffling the FAST orgination. Iwill now SHUT-up and wait for the
>>>>responces
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
>
Message 39
| 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/ 2nd class |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
A. Dennis Savarese wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
> <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
>
> If according to RPA rules a FAST Lead must have a commercial ticket,
> then lead must also have a 2nd class medical.
Well, not necessarily. You could have the CSEL and be operating with a
third-class medical. As such you could not exercise the privileges of a
commercial pilot but you WOULD hold a CSEL. That was my status when I
got my lead patch at Spencer.
Brian Lloyd
brian HYPHEN yak AT lloyd DOT com
Message 40
| 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/ 2nd class |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
Question - how does one get their commercial check ride without showing the
FAA Designated Examiner a 2nd class medical? If you can't exercise the
privileges of the commercial without the 2nd class medical, then what would
be the benefit of having the commercial ticket to begin with? ie: a person
could not accept the proverbial fuel, hotel, meals etc. at an event without
it.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 2:07 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>
> A. Dennis Savarese wrote:
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
>> <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
>>
>> If according to RPA rules a FAST Lead must have a commercial ticket, then
>> lead must also have a 2nd class medical.
>
> Well, not necessarily. You could have the CSEL and be operating with a
> third-class medical. As such you could not exercise the privileges of a
> commercial pilot but you WOULD hold a CSEL. That was my status when I got
> my lead patch at Spencer.
>
> Brian Lloyd
> brian HYPHEN yak AT lloyd DOT com
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
Message 41
| 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/ 2nd class |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "forrest johnson" <flushjohnson@charter.net>
Thank you Dennis! Finally the absurditity of this rule is coming to light! I
meet all of the requirements for a lead, in addition I own and fly a Cessna
414A which I take a Inst. Prof. check ride wheather I need it or not every 6
months. I also hold a Phase 17 wings certificate and working on #18 which
I get in Sept.This is the quality of profesionalism I hold myself to.It just
PISSES ME OFF to have to get a Comm/2nd when all I want is to get a FAST
LEAD card. I don't give a hoot about waivered airspace. We have close to 20
planes in Tx and only one lead- Terry Swalinski. Tex. is a big state and the
lack of lead pilots is really hurting us as a group. I thank every one for
their coments. FORREST
----- Original Message -----
From: "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
> <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
>
> Question - how does one get their commercial check ride without showing
> the FAA Designated Examiner a 2nd class medical? If you can't exercise
> the privileges of the commercial without the 2nd class medical, then what
> would be the benefit of having the commercial ticket to begin with? ie: a
> person could not accept the proverbial fuel, hotel, meals etc. at an event
> without it.
> Dennis
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 2:07 PM
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
>
>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>>
>> A. Dennis Savarese wrote:
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
>>> <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
>>>
>>> If according to RPA rules a FAST Lead must have a commercial ticket,
>>> then lead must also have a 2nd class medical.
>>
>> Well, not necessarily. You could have the CSEL and be operating with a
>> third-class medical. As such you could not exercise the privileges of a
>> commercial pilot but you WOULD hold a CSEL. That was my status when I got
>> my lead patch at Spencer.
>>
>> Brian Lloyd
>> brian HYPHEN yak AT lloyd DOT com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
Message 42
| 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 |
|
Cc: yak-list@matronics.com
| Subject: | Re: Commercial/ 2nd class |
Pappy,
What the hell is a 'SURREPTITIOUS' moment? Is that anything like a '
serendipitous' moment? Or are we having a SENIOR MOMENT?
'Older Than Dirt' wants to know;
Regards
CLIFF
On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 11:11:24 -0500 cjpilot710@aol.com writes:
Not quite true. You can lead a flight with wingman FAST card in wavered
airspace. With is often done with guys who already have lots of
formation time or have progressed.
The main "benefit" of a Lead FAST card is that a Lead can recommend a
pilot for a wing or lead card. A lead thus become in essence the
"guardian of the gate" so to speak. You as a lead are vouching for the
competence, skill, and judgment of the pilot you are recommending. Not
unlike an CFI sending a student up for his check ride. Same
responsibility. The is no place for the "good old boy club" nor a person
looking for power trip.
On a separate note: I'm out flying the B-17 right now and as so often
happens in this business we witnessed one of those surreptitious moments.
We were in DTS a few days ago, when one of the Doolittle Raider showed
up. He is 91 and still swims 5 days a week at the local Y pool. He
don't hear well, but is sharp and very much a gentleman. We took him for
a ride in our B-25. As the B-25 circled back over the field, a great
American Baud Eagle sour over head and stayed there until the B-25
returned.
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Sent: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 20:27:28 -0800
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
forrest johnson wrote:
> I did not intend for this to get to the point it has. I am a FAST >
WING pilot. Understand the problems dealing with the FAA. I guess i >
didn't make myself clear. According to what has been writtin Ihave to >
have to have a Com/2nd to fly. I would like to fly weather I am >
compensated or not. I love Tto fly! The rerequirements prevent me from >
signing up. The question I have is why to be a LEAD PILOT should have a >
Comm/2nd. I have over 30 yrs. flying and no need for a comm. Over 2yrs >
Form, over 150hrs form , Would some one please enlighten me why I > cant
get a FAST LEAD card. This requirement is stiffling the FAST >
orgination. Iwill now SHUT-up and wait for the responces
You can get a FAST lead card if you have the chops. You don't need a
CSEL. You don't need a FAST lead card to lea d a flight unless you want
to do it in waivered airspace (during an actual air show).
The only reason you need the CSEL is if the airshow offers you some
compensation, like gas for your airplane. No CSEL, no gas -- unless you
want to risk getting cit ed by the FAA.
That is the whole thing in a nutshell.
Want to get trained to be a lead pilot? I would be happy to help you. You
in northern California?
-- 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 43
| 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/ 2nd class |
Gentlemen,
Having a 414 and taking the instrument proficiency check every 6 months is not
the same flying as flying formation. They have nothing in common. If you 'don't
give a hoot about flying in wavered airspace' what good is having a FAST lead
card since having a FAST card is only good in wavered airspace? In order
to get a lead card you must be recommended by a FAST lead or a FAST checkpilot.
This is not handed to you just because you feel you have the correct experience.
For your info in order to take a commercial pilot flight check, you MUST have current
2nd class medical-period. If you let that laps AFTER your flight check
you can not exercise you commercial privileges. BTW note your license says "privilege"
not "rights". There never been a "right" to fly only the right to
qualify for those privileges. Its been that way since day one.
As far as having a shortage of leads in TX, this is the first I've heard of this.
This is NOT RPA's falut. It is up to the individual to qualify for that position,
not RPA to hand out cards. Also any FAST signatory (T-34, NATA, CAF,
VAC, etc) lead or checkpilot can recommend a pilot for a wing or lead card.
It has always been this way.
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
--> Yak-List message posted by: "forrest johnson" <flushjohnson@charter.net>
Thank you Dennis! Finally the absurditity of this rule is coming to light! I meet
all of the requirements for a lead, in addition I own and fly a Cessna 414A
which I take a Inst. Prof. check ride wheather I need it or not every 6 months.
I also hold a Phase 17 wings certificate and working on #18 which I get in
Sept.This is the quality of profesionalism I hold myself to.It just PISSES ME
OFF to have to get a Comm/2nd when all I want is to get a FAST LEAD card. I don't
give a hoot about waivered airspace. We have close to 20 planes in Tx and
only one lead- Terry Swalinski. Tex. is a big state and the lack of lead pilots
is really hurting us as a group. I thank every one for their coments. FORREST
----- Original Message ----- From: "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" > <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
>
> Question - how does one get their commercial check ride without showing > the
FAA Designated Examiner a 2nd class medical? If you can't exercise > the privileges
of the commercial without the 2nd class medical, then what > would be the
benefit of having the commercial ticket to begin with? ie: a > person could
not accept the proverbial fuel, hotel, meals etc. at an event > without it.
> Dennis
>
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 2:07 PM
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Commercial/ 2nd class
>
>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>>
>> A. Dennis Savarese wrote:
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" >>> <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
>>>
>>> If according to RPA rules a FAST Lead must have a commercial ticket, >>> then
lead must also have a 2nd class medical.
>>
>> Well, not necessarily. You could have the CSEL and be operating with a >> third-class
medical. As such you could not exercise the privileges of a >> commercial
pilot but you WOULD hold a CSEL. That was my status when I got >> my lead
patch at Spencer.
>>
>> Brian Lloyd
>> brian HYPHEN yak AT lloyd DOT com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 44
| 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 |
|
When you have Red Thunder???
Guys, this past weekend was the most fun I've ever had in an airplane,
by far, and we never exceeded 3 G's!
Friday was Tactical Formation that culminated in Fluid Four and Wall
4-ship formations that were well executed.
Saturday we ran our Air War Sim scenario with 4 strike elements for our
"gorilla" package...ABCCC running real time ("Curly flight is IP
inbound") and simulated comms ("Eagle One Two is hit! I'm loosing oil
pressure!")....and a high speed and difficult to see Red Air asset
testing each elements lookout doctrine ("Jackal One Two is dead!" as we
maneuvered into the flights deep six undetected and remained there long
enough to get a good tone ;) ).
Then came Sunday. After a serendipitous event where Mo, an active duty
F/A-18 pilot out of Miramar stood up during the Saturday debrief and
said, "I'm a qualified ground Forward Air Controller...if you guys want
to run a Close Air Support mission, I'm game. Whaddaya need?" Are you
kidding me??? 2 hours later we were in our beautiful hotel meeting
room with Mo giving a real CAS brief, complete with satellite photo
recon, for an 0900 launch Sunday Morning...
The ordinance of choice was the Mk 4.4 FBU (Flour Bomb Unit - corn
flour is preferable) "Bread Maker". The combination of pure ballistics
;)-, and devastating but easily directed frag pattern make it perfect
for "troops in contact".....or was it that Food 4 Less was running a
$.98/bag special? Either way, the results were spectacular!
Below is the debrief from Mo...this guy flies Hornets for a living
(again...after a ground tour as a FAC...gotta love the Marines!)...if
this doesn't reflect the "good to go" attitude, nothing does.
Here's the debrief, I'll put the photos up on photo share:
Desert Thunder III will be this November, if you have any interest in
the tactical environment, you need to be there....all the fun of ACM
(probably much more for most folks), without the G's.
Oh, I do have one objection to the below....sim ordinance my arse!
(the baker stole our bombs, we were 20 mike-mike only) I clearly saw
secondaries on both the truck and the water tower....not to mention
their were new flowers already sprouting up around the tower during our
photo passes.... ;)
Barry
Barry Hancock =09
Western Regional Coordinator
RedStar Pilots Association
(949) 300-5510
www.flyredstar.org
"Communism - Lousy Politics, Great Airplanes"
Desert Thunder II - Close Air Support results:
=A0
=A0
Overall, everyone did an awesome job.=A0 Great fun, even on the ground
side!=A0 Nice job by all players listening up, not comm-jamming each
other when it was busy, and being where the FAC asked you to be when he
asked you to be there.=A0 I'll look to provide more details on CAS and on
your specific flight if you ask me to.
=A0
But, on to the highlights -
=A0
Road Recce - Dago Flight did a super job of finding the two items we
were looking for - cars parked along the road and dark spots, round in
shape and half the road or wider.=A0 These things could signal danger,
and Dago flight found the set of cars parked on the north side of the
road, east end of the lake, and accurately described them.=A0 Also, there
was a dark oil spot that covered the south lane, ride at the middle of
the lake.=A0 Dago's comm was awesome and he made it very apparent that he
had seen exactly what we were looking for, giving good reference points
when relaying the information to the FAC.=A0 Nice work!=A0 See attached pic
for where I remember the two items to be - we were in a hurry and I did
not get GPS coords as we drove past, so feel free to correct my
placement of the icons, but your description jived with what I saw as I
drove past...
=A0
Close Air Support - Everyone wins in regards to the learning curve for
CAS - all players did a nice job of adhering to final attack headings
and responding to FAC's calls.=A0 On check-in, everyone found the FAC
quickly and got eyes into the target area quickly.=A0 Curly flight worked
very efficiently, getting through the most number of targets in a very
brief amount of time.=A0 Unfortunately, Curly was sim ordnance only, so
no effects on target could be determined.
=A0
Best Bombs - Condor flight wins both the best bomb award, with a hit at
25 meters, and best CEP with an average at about 33 meters.=A0 Great
shootin'!=A0 See attached photo for plots of hits.=A0 Buzzard was right in
there, with the first bomb falling short - the second was a nice
correction, but still a bit short of the target at 35 meters, but
Buzzard had the azimuth nailed - both looked to be right at the
target.=A0 Great work, really, considering nobody had any idea how those
things would fall!=A0 Condor got a great bracket in, again, see attached
photo.
=A0
Hope you guys had fun, we surely did and looking forward to doing it
again sometime soon!
=A0
=A0
Fly safe, Mo
Message 45
| 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/ 2nd class |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
A. Dennis Savarese wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
> <dsavarese@elmore.rr.com>
>
> Question - how does one get their commercial check ride without showing
> the FAA Designated Examiner a 2nd class medical?
You show a 3rd-class medical.
> If you can't exercise
> the privileges of the commercial without the 2nd class medical, then
> what would be the benefit of having the commercial ticket to begin
> with? ie: a person could not accept the proverbial fuel, hotel, meals
> etc. at an event without it.
No but you could pass the check ride and then get a 2nd-class medical
when you need it. That is what I have been doing off and on for 30
years. When I am not doing anything that might require me to exercise
the privileges of the commercial ticket, I just get a 3rd-class medical.
Or I get a 2nd-class and the not renew it for two years meaning it
reverts to a 3rd-class in the second year.
For example, a commercial is a prerequisite to a CFI. And it is legal to
instruct with only a 3rd-class medical. For example, I can teach my kids
to fly but I am not being compensated so I don't need the 2nd-class
medical. Simple.
Dennis, it is the FAA way: stupid. What more do you need to know?
--
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 46
| 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/ 2nd class |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
cjpilot710@aol.com wrote:
>Gentlemen,
> Having a 414 and taking the instrument proficiency check every 6 months
> is not the same flying as flying formation.
And flying chandeles and lazy-eights is not the same as formation flying
either. And I can learn to fly chandeles, lazy-eights, and
eights-on-pylons without ever taking the Comm checkride. One can
certainly have the experience and capability without having the certificate.
> They have nothing in common.
Other than showing diligence and good airmanship, which is really what
the CSEL requirement for FAST lead is all about. It seemed to someone
like a good way to try to verify that people have the chops.
> If you 'don't give a hoot about flying in wavered airspace'
> what good is having a FAST lead card since having a FAST card is only
> good in wavered airspace? In order to get a lead card you must be
> recommended by a FAST lead or a FAST checkpilot. This is not handed to
> you just because you feel you have the correct experience.
I don't think Forrest wants anyone to "hand out cards". I think he is
perfectly willing to demonstrate his capability in order to *earn* his
FAST lead rating. He just doesn't have the CSEL.
And since they don't have any official lead pilots in the neighborhood
they can't get credit for flying formation and can't keep their FAST
ratings current. They also can't recommend anyone to get their FAST rating.
Forrest has a point: if he has the chops, something any lead or check
pilot can verify for themselves, then the requirement for a commercial
ticket is superfluous.
I don't have an ATP but I am a good pilot, possibly better than some
guys sitting in the left seat of some airliners. Having the ATP does not
confer some kind of proof that you are better, only that you have taken
the test.
Since we go through the process of giving check rides to people who want
a FAST wing or FAST lead certification, the requirement for at least
CSEL is superfluous.
> For your info in order to take a commercial pilot flight check, you MUST
> have current 2nd class medical-period. If you let that laps AFTER your
> flight check you can not exercise you commercial privileges. BTW note
> your license says "privilege" not "rights". There never been a "right"
> to fly only the *_right to qualify for those privileges_*. Its been that
> way since day one.
And who confers the privilege? (This is an orthogonal discussion but I
will comment.) The concept is not that people have an inalienable right
to fly airplanes but they do have an inalienable right to demonstrate
they have the skill and then continue to fly as long as they continue to
demonstrate that skill. The problem with using the term "privilege" is
that it implies that you get to do so at someone else's whim. That is
what is wrong. That is what the FAA did to Bob Hoover. Even when he went
back and took all the tests again and demonstrated his continued
proficiency, they refused to give him back his ratings. That was *WRONG*.
Now back to the discussion at hand.
> As far as having a shortage of leads in TX, this is the first I've heard
> of this. This is NOT RPA's falut. It is up to the individual to
> qualify for that position, not RPA to hand out cards. Also any FAST
> signatory (T-34, NATA, CAF, VAC, etc) lead or checkpilot can recommend
> a pilot for a wing or lead card. It has always been this way.
Is it possible that someone without a CSEL could actually fly an
aircraft to the level of skill we would like to see for a lead rating?
It strikes me that it is possible and even likely. The ability to fly a
chandele, a lazy-eight, or eights-on-pylons does not translate into the
ability to do a rejoin or recognize the need for an undershoot. They do
not convey the ability to recognize how to maneuver your formation to
get it where you want it, when you want it there. These are skills one
learns from flying formation, not from getting a CSEL. Therefore, the
requirement for the commercial rating is superfluous.
--
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|