Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:47 AM - Fw: Cleared for a low pass................ (forrest johnson)
2. 05:30 AM - Re: Cleared for a low pass................ (Tim Gagnon)
3. 06:11 AM - Red Star Fall Fly-in at KSFM (Stephen Fox)
4. 06:51 AM - Re: Re: Cleared for a low pass................ (Greg Young)
5. 07:24 AM - Re: Cleared for a low pass................ (Tim Gagnon)
6. 07:49 AM - Re: Electrical Problem (Scooter)
7. 08:14 AM - Re: Re: Cleared for a low pass................ (Fred Messinger (fredm))
8. 08:21 AM - Re: Electrical Problem (Tim Gagnon)
9. 08:54 AM - Re: Unknown crashed Yak (the wades)
10. 09:17 AM - Re: Unknown crashed Yak (Tim Gagnon)
11. 09:45 AM - Prop Balancing (Tim Gagnon)
12. 11:45 AM - Re: Unknown crashed Yak (ADE)
13. 01:22 PM - Re: Electrical Problem (YAK-50) (Bitterlich GS11 Mark G)
14. 01:24 PM - Re: Re: Unknown crashed Yak (DaBear)
15. 01:50 PM - Re: Re: BFM/ACM (Bitterlich GS11 Mark G)
16. 02:13 PM - Re: Re: Unknown crashed Yak (Ben Marsh)
17. 02:35 PM - Re: Re: BFM/ACM (Bitterlich GS11 Mark G)
18. 02:40 PM - Re: Unknown crashed Yak (Tim Gagnon)
19. 03:04 PM - Re: Re: Unknown crashed Yak (Jerome van der Schaar)
20. 03:16 PM - Re: Re: Unknown crashed Yak (Ben Marsh)
21. 03:42 PM - Re: Raptors Rule (Bitterlich GS11 Mark G)
22. 03:50 PM - Re: Raptors Rule (Bitterlich GS11 Mark G)
23. 04:13 PM - Re: Raptors Rule (Robert Starnes)
24. 05:30 PM - Re: Raptors Rule (Bitterlich GS11 Mark G)
25. 06:00 PM - Re: Raptors Rule (Tim Gagnon)
26. 06:38 PM - Re: Re: Unknown crashed Yak (Jim Griffin)
27. 06:38 PM - dynon d100 (ron wasson)
28. 07:07 PM - Re: Re: Raptors Rule (Bitterlich GS11 Mark G)
29. 07:25 PM - Re: Re: Raptors Rule (Robert Starnes)
30. 07:36 PM - Re: Re: Raptors Rule (Bitterlich GS11 Mark G)
31. 07:39 PM - Re: Yak list (Robert Starnes)
32. 08:09 PM - Re: Re: Raptors Rule (Robert Starnes)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Fw: Cleared for a low pass................ |
Message
----- Original Message -----
From: The Calhouns
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 10:05 AM
Subject: FW: Cleared for a low pass................
From: Paul A Tanksley [mailto:km7pt@juno.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 9:25 AM
Subject: Fw: Cleared for a low pass................
Beautiful Machine.
The pilot is Anatoly Kvochur, a wonderful individual as well as the consummate
test pilot... He was also the pilot who took a bird strike (at Farnborough
I believe) in a Mig-29 and performed a zero time ejection only after making
sure the crowd was safe and that the aircraft couldn't be saved.
Every time he exits the cockpit following a flight display he does a roman
press, (I'm clueless in Coronado as to what a roman press is. Must be some
sort of a push up???) revealing just how composed he is...!! He also has a hand-shake
like solid granite.
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: Cleared for a low pass................ |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
Looks a bit fishy to me. Shadowing is a bit off.
Anyone else notice the refueling boom deployed?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29365#29365
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: | Red Star Fall Fly-in at KSFM |
September in Maine. The weather is beautiful and the tourists are
gone, it's a perfect time to flock together and fly. So mark your
calendars September 14-17 and plan to join up in Sanford Maine at KSFM.
KSFM has two runways 7/25 is 6000' X 150' and 14/32 is 4999' X 100'
so plenty of room for element take offs and landings. There's also
plenty of area to have a bombing competition and if the FAA gods are
with us will have a box in place. Also if enough request it, someone
on hand to do aerobatic and spin training.
Don Mayer from the Parachute Shop will also be there showing off the
latest chutes and doing re-packs.
Please go to the web site to learn more and register for the RedStar
Fall Fly-in
Steve Fox
Yak 52
N3043R
http://homepage.mac.com/steve.fox/PhotoAlbum5.html
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cleared for a low pass................ |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Greg Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
No heat distortion from exhaust either.
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
>
> Looks a bit fishy to me. Shadowing is a bit off.
>
> Anyone else notice the refueling boom deployed?
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cleared for a low pass................ |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
uhmm..there are some folks looking out towards the runway which means something
is going on.
I guess we should keep in mind that it is the Russians and they are known for some
of this stuff...and more importantly can get away with it.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29402#29402
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: Electrical Problem |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Scooter" <yakk52@verizon.net>
Do you have a schematic for the 50 that you could post? The slow fade sounds a
little strange. That doesn't sound like a breaker or a short. A schematic would
really help especially given the clue of the working "gen" light.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29408#29408
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Cleared for a low pass................ |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Fred Messinger (fredm)" <fredm@cisco.com>
Also, it looks like the flight attitude is VERY level (as if on
wheels)....one would think that during a low pass, he'd at least slow
down and elevate just a bit.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Greg Young
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 9:50 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Cleared for a low pass................
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Greg Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
No heat distortion from exhaust either.
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
>
> Looks a bit fishy to me. Shadowing is a bit off.
>
> Anyone else notice the refueling boom deployed?
>
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: Electrical Problem |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
Scooter wrote:
> Do you have a schematic for the 50 that you could post? The slow fade sounds
a little strange. That doesn't sound like a breaker or a short. A schematic
would really help especially given the clue of the working "gen" light.
I dont. Unfortunately, the Yak-50 suffers from lack of good manuals. Most of us
have to depend on the -52 manuals or from trial and error.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29417#29417
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Unknown crashed Yak |
I've got a derelict Yak 52 on the field with a good canopy and tail, damage to
the lower firewall though also engine parts good upper cowl and a prop. No wings
or landing gear.
Bill Wade N4450Y
----- Original Message -----
From: Ben Marsh
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 7:46 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Unknown crashed Yak
'don't know, but it sure looked like fun while it lasted.
Can't tell if the fuselage is straight, but it doesn't look like too bad of a
project, save for the canopy; that'll be a real drag.
Good Luck
Marsh
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jerome van der Schaar
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 2:33 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Yak-List: Unknown crashed Yak
Does anybody know the history of this Yak?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=3D1,1&item=3D4625770587&sspagename=3DSTRK%3AMEWA%3AIT
Appriciate your imput.
Thanks,
Jerome
www.yakkes.com
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Unknown crashed Yak |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
Thats just hard to even look at.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29431#29431
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
Anyone run into trouble finding a place to dynamically balance your prop?
I am in the Cincinnait area so if you know of anyone nearby that can handle it,
please pass that along.
Tim
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29444#29444
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Unknown crashed Yak |
Yak was owned by Roger Modglin--who lost his life in an airshow
incident in Claremore Ok last year. It was a well maintained A/C. It
went in on it's back and hit a ditch hard enough to rip the engine off.
Still has Russian radios. Ade Hale--Tulsa
On Apr 18, 2006, at 4:32 PM, Jerome van der Schaar wrote:
> Does anybody know the history of this Yak?
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?
> ViewItem&rd=3D1,1&item=3D4625770587&sspagename=3DSTRK%3AMEWA%3AIT
>
> Appriciate your imput.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jerome
> www.yakkes.com
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: | Electrical Problem (YAK-50) |
Just behind the engine open the lower inspection door underneath the
aircraft.
Stand up inside of that hole.
Look towards the front of the aircraft
Up near the top right mounted on the engine firewall is a large enclosed
electrical panel.
Open this panel by removing... as I remember... the four screws on each
corner.
Look into the middle of this panel and you will see a rather large
electrical BUS FUSE.
This will be black in color, round, and about oh... 2 inches long or so. It
will have a 90 degree terminal SOLDERED onto each end of the fuse, and held
in by nuts on a stud as I remember.
I can not remember the rating on it... but it's about 20 or 30 amps.
CHECK THIS FUSE FOR CONTINUITY... or better yet, just turn on the electrical
master and verify that you have 28 volts DC on both sides of this fuse.
These things go bad... not only because they BLOW, but because they fail
internally and literally just fall apart inside from long term vibration.
If it is bad, then go to the local electrical supply house and find one of
the same amperage and length. Solder the 90 degree terminals to each end.
If you have to, you can make new terminals to fit the fuse that you end up
with. Once you see the thing you'll know what I mean and what is needed.
Forget about finding a new Russian fuse to go in there. It's possible, but
not likely and not worth the effort. Been there done that.
There is no promise that this is your problem, but given your description,
it is the first place to look. If you have no voltage on EITHER side of the
fuse, then you have a main contactor relay problem more than likely... but
again, given how you described the failure, you have high hopes for it being
this fuse. Your description was one of falling voltage. A fuse will do
this. In the future, you need to check both the voltage and the current
draw using the meter in the aircraft as all this is happening. Looking at
it, it shows current draw and should normally be close to zero. Pushing in
the button shows voltage, and my guess is that this was going all over the
place and ending up at zero.
The YAK-52 has ALMOST the same panel.. but it is located in a different
place and is not a direct replacement.
Mark Bitterlich
N50YK
wa3jpy
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tim Gagnon
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 8:59 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Electrical Problem
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
Was wondering if anyone good shed some light on this. I have spoken to a few
folks today (thanks TJ) but it was too late to get into the airplane to
check what was mentioned. I am looking for anyone who has had this or a
similar problem or may know what happened.
I have a Yak-50 so keep that in mind.
I am flying along today and go to change the destination in my GPS. As soon
as I do, the radio/GPS goes dead. It kind of put out a static sound before
it went though. Then it comes back on...then back off. So I start load
shedding in case I had just the battery left. Anyway, it finally goes dead
and then I start losing instruments. Oil temp guage, gear lights and fuel
indication. They dim a little bit then they are gone. They come back on
briefly then they are gone again. So, I just shut everything down and landed
without incident.
On the ground, I have a mechanic check it out. What we have is a good
battery but ZERO power getting to the airplane. No instruments (except for
the GEN light??), no shower of sparks, nothing. The things is dead!
So, it sits in the hangar until another mechanic (with a boner for things
electric) takes a look. I would like to give him something to look at and
was hoping someone here could add some insight.
By the way, it was a gorgeous day and I was going to refuel and fly....so I
was pretty pissed!
Thanks in advance.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29269#29269
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: Unknown crashed Yak |
--> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
Yea, still hurts to think about Roger being gone.
DaBear
Tim Gagnon wrote:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
>
>Thats just hard to even look at.
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29431#29431
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
BitterlichMG(at)cherrypoint.usmc.mil wrote:
>> But the issue Tim is not who discovered it first, or who trained with it
when.?
>> The issue is:? Can you do it now, if you were not military first.?
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>> N50YK
>> p.s.? And by the way, I am sure you are correct on all the statements
that you made.?
>>
>>
>> --
Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com> said:
>I would say yes with proper instruction from someone who has the knowhow to
teach it.
>I would venture to say that only a handful of folks out there who are NOT
miltary can
>train a full up dog fight and call it safe.
My point is not who teaches it, but that any pilot with the correct ability
can be taught how to do it.
>Hitman mentioned one of them and I know exactly who he is talking about.
>But as Hitman said, he learned from a former Hornet driver.
>I think, with only a few exceptions, that training should come from
military sources.
Who one receives training from is of course a personal choice, but also one
where other
people opinions are always worth listening to!
>On the RPA front; I could give a rats ass what the RPA thinks about it.
>They are not a governing body and if they do not endorse it, who cares.
Exactly.
>It will not prevent anyone from doing it. If you are at a RPA "sponsored"
event,
>find your own little slice of sky and have at it. I find it odd that the
RPA will
>hold a amateur aerobatic event at ARS this year but does not suppport ACM
anymore.
>Both can get you killed and more have died from the former.
Exactly.
>For those that want to fight..go fight. If you ball up an airplane, that
sucks.
>If you are inverted at 15 feet AGL pushing for a outside loop and your
wings snap, that sucks too.
Exactly.
>Maybe the RPA should support ownership and basic operation and leave the
rest to the owners.
Exactly.
>Curious how many folks have been killed doing ACM versus aerobatics in the
Yak or CJ?
I would venture to say very few have died doing ACM.
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: Unknown crashed Yak |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ben Marsh" <ben@designselect.net>
"Gone"
Does that mean not flying anymore.
Or, does that mean hurt/killed.
Ben
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DaBear
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Unknown crashed Yak
--> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
Yea, still hurts to think about Roger being gone.
DaBear
Tim Gagnon wrote:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
>
>Thats just hard to even look at.
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29431#29431
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Sarah Tobin (Smash) said:
>I'm going to disagree with this, because...I can.
Ok, then I am going to disagree with it because I do.
>I don't see how civilians could ever (want to) train the way
>the military does. 1 full year of 12 hour days, 5 days a week.
>3 sorties a day, normally 2 flights and 1 sim. Weekly written
>tests, daily stand up tests. Memorization of every possible
>emergency procedure and the ability to state verbatim chronologically
>how you would handle any given situation given only 2 variables.
>Oh btw, you are required to work out at the gym at least 10 hours
>a week and document what you did, plus handle all of the other things
>in life like studying, doing laundry, eating...that seems to fall by
>the way side most of the time...I think I was at my skinniest weight
>when I was in UPT.
It's an interesting concept that the harder the training, the better
product that you receive in the end. The Marines have always held
that to be true, which if accurate, would make all the rest of you
"Second Best" would it not? Just a thought.......
Anyway, of course it is common knowledge that the military trains great
pilots.
That's why all the first Astronauts were always chosen from the military,
their selection and continued training being held by civilians.
And last time I checked, NASA was still a civilian agency.
>Anyway, it's tough, it's really really tough. I don't think even the
>airlines are that rigorous. I know they have long days when they are
>upgrading etc, but I don't think that agony ever goes on for a year.
>Maybe 4 months of LINE/LOFT etc. But it is the same principal, you
>completely surrender yourself to thinking, breathing, eating,
>living flying in a fire hose environment.
>I don't claim to know what the RPA does for training, but even if it
>requires 10 weekends a year to upgrade to ACM/BFM/Formation whatever....
>it will *never* compare to the military training.
Who says it has to? I remember a whole slew of Marine Pilots who went to
watch Sergei Boriak fly a Sukhoi-26 for the first time, they ALL just stood
there
with their mouths hanging open in total awe. What he could do in that
airplane
was beyond any training that they had ever received, was beyond any manuever
that
they had previously believed even possible in a flying machine! Because they
received such wonderful training, and were such good pilots, they mistakenly
believed that they therefore had to be the best at every single form of
flying
there was.... considering for example that Aerobatics is really just a
limited
off-shoot of ACM. Wrong answer.
Their experience... in their face, no excuses necessary, and thank you very
much,
was that here was not only a civilian pilot, but a Russian one at that,
that could eat their lunch with a spoon upon request. Some there muttered
about
how in a real dogfight, they could eat his shorts... others looked at those
people
and said: "Yeah right.... let me know when you give it a try."
>Doesn't make it bad or worse or anything...it just is, what it is.
Damned Skippy. Let me know when you have flown with him.
Best Regards,
Mark Bitterlich
N50YK
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: Unknown crashed Yak |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
ben(at)designselect.net wrote:
> "Gone"
>
> Does that mean not flying anymore.
>
> Or, does that mean hurt/killed.
>
> Ben
>
> --
>From another post:
Yak was owned by Roger Modglin--who lost his life in an airshow
incident in Claremore Ok last year. It was a well maintained A/C. It
went in on it's back and hit a ditch hard enough to rip the engine off.
Ade Hale--Tulsa
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29497#29497
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: Unknown crashed Yak |
Dear all,
I did not realize the guy has been killed on this crash, bit naive.
Was not my intention to open up bad memories.
Regards,
Jerome
www.yakkes.com
-------Original Message-------
From: DaBear
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Unknown crashed Yak
--> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
Yea, still hurts to think about Roger being gone.
DaBear
Tim Gagnon wrote:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
>
>Thats just hard to even look at.
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=3D29431#29431
>
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Unknown crashed Yak |
I've lost two really dear friends in aviation within the last year and a
half, Sean DeRosier and Art Vance. The best thing to do is restore that
airplane, get it flying and keep the man's memory alive.
First Rule in Aviation: You will lose friends.
Second Rule in Aviation: You can't do anything about Rule #1.
Marsh
_____
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jerome van der
Schaar
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 3:04 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Unknown crashed Yak
Dear all,
I did not realize the guy has been killed on this crash, bit naive.
Was not my intention to open up bad memories.
Regards,
Jerome
<http://www.yakkes.com> www.yakkes.com
-------Original Message-------
From: DaBear <mailto:dabear@damned.org>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Unknown crashed Yak
--> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
Yea, still hurts to think about Roger being gone.
DaBear
Tim Gagnon wrote:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
>
>Thats just hard to even look at.
>
>
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29431#29431
>
>
>
>
======================================
he Yak-List Email Forum -
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
======================================
sp; - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
nics.com
======================================
sp; - List Contribution Web Site -
sp; -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
//www.matronics.com/contribution
======================================
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 |
|
Sarah Tobin [aerobaticgirl@yahoo.com]wrote:
>The new Suk will only be a threat to the US and Brits if
>US and/or Brit pilots are flying them. Russia does not
>have the resourses to fly and train the way we do and are
>therefore not effective with their technology.
And I am sure that every American and British pilot past and present would
agree with your assessment, with the possible exception of those that
actually DID go 1 V 1 with Russians in Korea and were subsequently shot
down.
Hmmm.... a few in Vietnam also came to that same conclusion.
>Ask Jj or Hitman how much they would like to get their hands
>on a little Mig 29/look down shoot down capability!
>Sweet stuff in the hands of competent fliers, not so much in under
>trained ones.
Ask Hitman or Jj when was the last time they went 1 V 1 with a Russian
fighter pilot flying his countries best PRODUCTION aircraft again the best
PRODUCTION American aircraft. The only thing that even comes close is the
"STAGED" event in Germany.
My point is simply this: Talk is fun, but talk is cheap. To think that a
country that can build an airplane like the one mentioned can, but can not
produce a pilot good enough to use it effectively is not logical,
nor is it backed up by history, or my personal experience with Russian
pilots.
Smash... question for ya.... who was the all time highest ranking Allied Ace
of World War II ??? Hint... he wasn't an American. Hint Hint .... he also
wasn't
British.
You said:"Russia does not have the resources to fly and train
the way WE do and are therefore not effective with their technology"
Sorry. I disagree. BUT.... Next to impossible to prove, unless maybe you'd
agree to go 1 v 1 with Sergei in a YAK-52, or a 50, or a Sukhoi, or any
other
available Russian aircraft of your choice. I know for a fact he'd agree to
give it a go .... and he's in his 50's.
My loyalty is to the United States of America, but that does not diminish my
admiration and respect for the products or capabilities of another country,
nor
does it make me believe that anything American is naturally better than
everything
else. Your statement that infers the lack of capability in Russian pilots is
simply
incorrect.
Mark Bitterlich
N50YK
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 |
|
Stan Siry said:
>Remember close air support doesn't mean dropping ordnance from 8,000 feet
and above.
>You can't call it CAS at those altitudes.
>Thanks God for Harriers, F-18's, A-10's, Cobras, and Apaches.
When you can paint it with a laser, it really doesn't matter how high the
weapon was dropped from Stan.
Close Air Support should not refer to how close the airplanes got to the
grunt, but to how close the munitions got to the enemy, with the grunts in
very close proximity!
Question: What aircraft dropped the most guided munitions during Desert
Storm per capita? I wish I could place odds on this one! :-)
Mark
N50YK
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: Robert Starnes <a35plt@yahoo.com>
Highest scoring ace on the Allied side was Ivan
Kozhedub of the Soviet VVS.
Again I encourage anybody who is interested in Red
star aircraft to read the book FULCRUM by Alex Zuyev,
a Mig-29 Pilot who defected to Turkey. Many of our
mistaken assumptions of the Former Soviet/ Russian air
force (VVS) can be traced to their sister service, the
PVO, or continental air defense. The VVS is very
capable. BTW the much vaunted Col. Tomb in SE Asia was
a myth, and was more likely to have been a Soviet
Pilot(s).
Exercise COPE INDIA pitting USAF F-15's vs. IAF
Su-27's and Migs resulted in the U.S. being on the
losing side. And Doc, your vipers would have fared
even worse.
When you ASSUME the bad guy is incompetent....
- Robert Starnes
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 |
|
When a person who works for the United States Government is issued their
very first Security Clearance, the first thing he or she is taught is to
neither confirm nor deny anything that is either read or published "in
public" even if it happens to be perfectly correct. What instead is taught
is that the properly trained person simply ignores this information and only
talks about it in the proper forum, in the proper spaces, and at the proper
time. Each time a persons security clearance is raised to a higher level,
this simple fact is required to be relearned, and in some cases the person
in question has to sign documents stating he or she clearly understands this
requirement. I say again... THIS REQUIREMENT.
Those people who are citizens of the United States of America who are not
currently in the employ of Government and do not hold a clearance and who
were never exposed to sensitive or critical information that could impact
the National Security of the United States need not fear any topic of
conversation, and in fact are encouraged to speak of any subject they wish
to, under what is commonly referred to as The Bill of Rights, namely the
First Amendment. This being one of the freedoms that members of our United
States military are sworn to defend with their very lives.
Should a person who falls into the definition contained in paragraph one,
find him or herself in a conversation with anyone described in paragraph
number two, the issue of neither confirming nor denying certain subject
matter still holds true. If the conversation strays into areas that people
in paragraph one feel sensitive, they are required to simply SHUT UP and say
NOTHING FURTHER. If anyone described in paragraph number one feels anyone
ELSE described in paragraph number one is saying things that they should not
be saying, then they are again required BY LAW to contact their local
security officer AND NOT TALK ABOUT IT PUBLICLY.
Given the fact that this list discusses all manner of topics, very few
relating to what does and what does not contribute towards making a YAK or
CJ-6 fly, the present discussion simply has no more, or no less "right" to
be posted or be talked about than my particular passion concerning Flight
Suits, or Pappy's for flying bombers, or Smash's for military flight
training.
I have tried to be tactful with this post, but I find it impossible to not
reply to the comment by Roger Kemp: "All things will be known in time."
Mr. Kemp, what will or will not be known in time now or in the future WILL
not be determined by you, and speaking for Mr. Lloyd, neither him nor I need
your reminder of same.
Mark Bitterlich
N50YK
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of DaBear
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Raptors Rule
--> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear@damned.org>
While none of what has been discussed is classified, and all has been
discussed in Aviation Week I can see that we should move off the topic.
It makes for interesting discussion for those folks in data networking
who have an aviation passion. Funny thing is, there are standards
issues that can't be broken (speed of light, latency due to distance)
and the theoretical ways to account for this in real life applications
is challenging and interesting to those in the field.
Dabear
Roger Kemp wrote:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
>
>Brian,
>I am not trying to be a smart ass on this one. Really, though there things
>in this story line that just can't be talked about in a world wide forum
>like this list.
>Like I said, as things will be known in time.
>Doc
>
>
>
>
>>[Original Message]
>>From: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>>To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>Date: 4/17/2006 8:08:31 AM
>>Subject: Re: Yak-List: Raptors Rule
>>
>>--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>>
>>Roger Kemp wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Brian,
>>>All things will be known in time.
>>>Drop this line/topic.
>>>
>>>
>>Yes sir!
>>
>>--
>>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 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: Raptors Rule |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
a35plt(at)yahoo.com wrote:
> Exercise COPE INDIA pitting USAF F-15's vs. IAF
> Su-27's and Migs resulted in the U.S. being on the
> losing side. And Doc, your vipers would have fared
> even worse.
> When you ASSUME the bad guy is incompetent....
> - Robert Starnes
>
>
> __________________________________________________
>
You need to read more about that exercise. The USAF had their hands tied and were
limited by the ROE. The Indian AF did a nice job but it is not as it was reported
in most media sources.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29537#29537
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: Unknown crashed Yak |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Jim Griffin" <jgriffint28@cox.net>
I'm with you, Tim. It brings back bad memories of a great guy.
Jim Griffin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 11:15 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Unknown crashed Yak
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
>
> Thats just hard to even look at.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29431#29431
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: ron wasson <ronwasson@mindspring.com>
I am thinking of putting a Dynon d100 in my CJ-6A. It looks like
there is space behind. Anyone put in the big Dynon. My back horizon
is getting close to replacement and I want to use the front for
parts. This is the second horizon in 7 years.
ronwasson at mindspring dot com
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: Raptors Rule |
The same exact thing can be said about our 1 V 1 encounters with the former
East German pilots.
It was an interesting situation. The East German pilots were told: "Our
Intell says that you will respond to our aircraft in this very exact
fashion". The East German Pilots said: "But hey, we were never told to do
that, and in fact we would be CRAZY to do that!"... the response was: "Maybe
so, but our Intell says that you would have done it this way, so please...
limit your engagements to our exact limitations". The East Germans replied:
"But we'll lose every time with stupid rules like that"
They were ordered to do it anyway. Every once in awhile, one of them
"cheated" and ends up winning a fight or two. You know how bad "ego" can be
with pilots.
This event was shown on Wings... and every detail documented. I was not
there.
Mark Bitterlich
N50YK
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Tim Gagnon
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 8:58 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Raptors Rule
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Tim Gagnon" <NiftyYak50@msn.com>
a35plt(at)yahoo.com wrote:
> Exercise COPE INDIA pitting USAF F-15's vs. IAF
> Su-27's and Migs resulted in the U.S. being on the
> losing side. And Doc, your vipers would have fared
> even worse.
> When you ASSUME the bad guy is incompetent....
> - Robert Starnes
>
>
> __________________________________________________
>
You need to read more about that exercise. The USAF had their hands tied and
were limited by the ROE. The Indian AF did a nice job but it is not as it
was reported in most media sources.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29537#29537
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: Raptors Rule |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Robert Starnes <a35plt@yahoo.com>
I Read about it in Aerospace week magazine, which I
read religiously as do most folks WORLDWIDE who make
their living in the aviation industry. AW&ST magazine
had numerous articles about this and USN exercises
with the Israeli's (Same Results). Closure for Visual
I.D. is a standard ROE to prevent Blue on Blue
engagements and was the scenario.
The Post was about Raptors , and my point is that we
need MORE of them to maintain air superiority in teh
face of future threats. I live in Atlanta, Ga. where
they build the F-22 and feel strongly about the
subject. There is too much chest beating about how we
are so great, can whip the other guy with our pinky,
etc. when the truth is our Tactical Air fleet is
gettin' pretty long in the tooth.
-Robert Starnes
>>
> You need to read more about that exercise. The USAF
> had their hands tied and were limited by the ROE.
> The Indian AF did a nice job but it is not as it was
> reported in most media sources.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
>
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29537#29537
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
>
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Raptors Rule |
Tell me about it. Having an F-14 with Phoenix missiles that can take out
guys a LONG ways out of visual range, and never being given the authority to
fire it does little good in combat. Your comments about visual I.D. being a
requirement are well known, and are confirmed by our Government publicly.
As to all the chest beating, you can't find better examples than to read the
comments on this list by some of the Air Force types. Some of them are just
wrong. Some are just grossly immature. I was surprised to see Smash say
what she did about the Russians. Sergei would toast her cookies in any 1 v
1 she ever got the balls to fly in. I have flown with our fighter pilots...
and I have flown with him. He'd eat them alive.
I've have met other Russian pilots. I have seen them fly. They are
fearless, aggressive, loyal, and I respect the SHIT out of them, and would
be seriously concerned about going head to head with them in anything other
than the F-22. Their new Sukhoi beats the F-16 as the F-16 does an F-4
Phantom.
My comments are based on my personal observations and personal interactions
with Russians met in the Aerobatic and YAK world. Not on any material I
have come across in my job. It it was, it would not be talked about here
... at ALL.
Notice, I do not talk about Electronic Warfare.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert Starnes
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 10:25 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Raptors Rule
--> Yak-List message posted by: Robert Starnes <a35plt@yahoo.com>
I Read about it in Aerospace week magazine, which I
read religiously as do most folks WORLDWIDE who make
their living in the aviation industry. AW&ST magazine
had numerous articles about this and USN exercises
with the Israeli's (Same Results). Closure for Visual
I.D. is a standard ROE to prevent Blue on Blue
engagements and was the scenario.
The Post was about Raptors , and my point is that we
need MORE of them to maintain air superiority in teh
face of future threats. I live in Atlanta, Ga. where
they build the F-22 and feel strongly about the
subject. There is too much chest beating about how we
are so great, can whip the other guy with our pinky,
etc. when the truth is our Tactical Air fleet is
gettin' pretty long in the tooth.
-Robert Starnes
>>
> You need to read more about that exercise. The USAF
> had their hands tied and were limited by the ROE.
> The Indian AF did a nice job but it is not as it was
> reported in most media sources.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
>
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=29537#29537
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
>
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: Robert Starnes <a35plt@yahoo.com>
The tactics that you are talking about (rigid ground
control, no tactical flexibility by A/C commander, etc
) are Classic PVO (air defence force) doctrine. And
where did we learn this? From the Investigation
following the shootdown of boeing airliner KAL 007. A
VVS pilot may well have closed and made visual ID of
007 as an airliner.
VVS ground control tends to act more as a AWACS type
situational awareness resource, as opposed to a flight
director. Especially in point air defense, which was
what most Red Star fighters were designed for.
-Robert Starnes
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: | Re: Raptors Rule |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Robert Starnes <a35plt@yahoo.com>
I guess another point that I would like to make is
that when you're over the other guy's turf as part of
an Expeditionary air force (which is what U.S. Forces
are) and they are playing point air defense over their
Mig Bases, etc. You may have the best, most capable
weapons system going but when it's 100 migs vs. 2
eagles/raptors/superbugz/vipers etc. YOU ARE GOING TO
LOSE. And then they're gonna drive in and bugger the
AWACS. And then things are really going to get
exciting. The Russians, when asked about the
performance (or lack thereof) of the Mig-29 in Gulf
war one described the Iraqi pilots as being pigs with
Rolexes, they had something nice and shiny but had no
clue how to use it.
On the opposite end of the spectrum you gotta love the
Luftwaffe. One of their Tornado pilots told me once
that he thought chocking aircraft was a safety hazard,
because he had to go to afterburner to get over 'em.
I'm still wondering whether or not he was joking but
there is no doubt that I'd fly with those guys
anytime.
-Robert S
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! --
|