Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:07 AM - Re: tank size (Barry Hancock)
2. 06:40 AM - Re: Re: tank size (Roger Kemp)
3. 07:01 AM - Re: Re: tank size (A. Dennis Savarese)
4. 07:43 AM - Re: Re: tank size (viperdoc)
5. 08:42 AM - Re: Re: tank size (A. Dennis Savarese)
6. 10:42 AM - Interesting Gear Up Stats from the Orlando FSDO (viperdoc)
7. 11:47 AM - Re: Tanks for the -50 / CJ-6 (Yak Pilot)
8. 12:19 PM - Re: Interesting Gear Up Stats from the Orlando FSDO (Bill Tally)
9. 01:54 PM - Re: Re: Interesting Gear Up Stats from the Orlando FSDO (Brian Lloyd)
10. 05:19 PM - Operation Pumpkin Drop (Stephen Fox)
11. 08:59 PM - M-14P core (Barry Hancock)
12. 09:12 PM - Experience with Pride Aircraft....L-39 (Tim Gagnon)
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 |
|
On Jul 28, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
> Barry,
>
> Are you referring to this tank for the 50 also?
>
> Doc
Yeah....you can extend the aux tank for about 6 gallons. Anything
more and you'll have a nice large tank....that won't go back in the
airplane. ;)
Barry
Barry Hancock
Worldwide Warbirds, Inc.
office (714) 730-3958
cell (949) 300-5510
www.worldwidewarbirds.com
www.cj6.com
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 |
|
Barry,
You are talking about welding a 10 in stainless steel section onto the
existing AUX tank, correct? That is the mod that TJ told me about.
I have not gotten around to that one yet. Time is the issue.
I have been doing other small projects like working on the Carbon Monoxide
problems with taxi, TO, landing, and shut down. The problem is significant
for my two YAKs, a local CJ as well as a couple of other local YAKs. The CO
levels decrease to well below PEL (permissible exposure limits) in flight.
The airframe mods that Craig Payne and Pappy wrote about help in flight to
lower the levels. They do not do anything for the most dangerous time, on
the ground.
I am working with a company that makes a NASA licensed catalyst but there
are a couple of other issues to using this cold conversion catalyst that I
can't talk about because of my contract with them. There are three ways to
approach this. As you say though, they all are not cheap. Then if I get into
the marketing part of this there is the liability part that the lawyers so
love to sue for to consider. That will also run the cost up! You have
already seen the hesitation in the community to spend a lot on these
aircraft. When cost for doing something gets into the $2000 - 5000 range,
their eyes glaze over. Maybe you are in a different community that accepts
increased cost easily. The one I'm in down here does not accept the cost
lightly and are much more likely to not pay for it.
As soon as I finish gathering data, I will publish an article in the Red
Star rag.
Speaking of YAK 50's, where in Alabama is Roy Wells moving to? His will be
the third 50 in the state if he is moving here.
I do have to say they are a blast to fly. Yesterday I was seeing 250 Kph
(clics) or 132-135 kts at 62% and 650 mmHg. I burned 10 gallons for that
hour I was up. With the current gas on board with the AUX tank ( 33 gal)
that would be a 3 hour sortie with .3 reserve to dead empty. Now, I am not
going to push it that far because I just never plan any flight for max
endurance. To many variables that play into max endurance planning leaving
little room for error. The does give me a comfortable 200 to 250 nm range
though at that power setting. My but, knee, and bladder cannot tolerate much
farther anyway. To many years of training in the fighter community with all
our short hops. I cannot imagine what it is like for the my guys that are
flying 5 to 7 hour sorties now with multiple trips to tanker! That is why it
is the young guys doing it now.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry Hancock
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 3:06 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: tank size
On Jul 28, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
Barry,
Are you referring to this tank for the 50 also?
Doc
Yeah....you can extend the aux tank for about 6 gallons. Anything more and
you'll have a nice large tank....that won't go back in the airplane. ;)
Barry
Barry Hancock
Worldwide Warbirds, Inc.
office (714) 730-3958
cell (949) 300-5510
www.worldwidewarbirds.com
www.cj6.com
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 |
|
Doc,
I believe the tanks are aluminum and not stainless steel. Way too heavy
if they were SS. If one were to fabricate a aluminum type of "box"
where the existing two tanks are located and put a bladder in the box,
there would never be a problem of getting the tank in and out of the
airplane. The "box" could be fabricated with sheet aluminum in such a
way to allow each sheet to fit through the hell hole during assembly.
The box could effectively be assembled inside the fuselage using
countersunk screws on the inside of the box to prevent potential
puncturing of the bladder.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Kemp
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 8:39 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: tank size
Barry,
You are talking about welding a 10 in stainless steel section onto the
existing AUX tank, correct? That is the mod that TJ told me about.
I have not gotten around to that one yet. Time is the issue.
I have been doing other small projects like working on the Carbon
Monoxide problems with taxi, TO, landing, and shut down. The problem is
significant for my two YAKs, a local CJ as well as a couple of other
local YAKs. The CO levels decrease to well below PEL (permissible
exposure limits) in flight. The airframe mods that Craig Payne and Pappy
wrote about help in flight to lower the levels. They do not do anything
for the most dangerous time, on the ground.
I am working with a company that makes a NASA licensed catalyst but
there are a couple of other issues to using this cold conversion
catalyst that I can't talk about because of my contract with them. There
are three ways to approach this. As you say though, they all are not
cheap. Then if I get into the marketing part of this there is the
liability part that the lawyers so love to sue for to consider. That
will also run the cost up! You have already seen the hesitation in the
community to spend a lot on these aircraft. When cost for doing
something gets into the $2000 - 5000 range, their eyes glaze over. Maybe
you are in a different community that accepts increased cost easily.
The one I'm in down here does not accept the cost lightly and are much
more likely to not pay for it.
As soon as I finish gathering data, I will publish an article in the
Red Star rag.
Speaking of YAK 50's, where in Alabama is Roy Wells moving to? His
will be the third 50 in the state if he is moving here.
I do have to say they are a blast to fly. Yesterday I was seeing 250
Kph (clics) or 132-135 kts at 62% and 650 mmHg. I burned 10 gallons for
that hour I was up. With the current gas on board with the AUX tank ( 33
gal) that would be a 3 hour sortie with .3 reserve to dead empty. Now, I
am not going to push it that far because I just never plan any flight
for max endurance. To many variables that play into max endurance
planning leaving little room for error. The does give me a comfortable
200 to 250 nm range though at that power setting. My but, knee, and
bladder cannot tolerate much farther anyway. To many years of training
in the fighter community with all our short hops. I cannot imagine what
it is like for the my guys that are flying 5 to 7 hour sorties now with
multiple trips to tanker! That is why it is the young guys doing it now.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry Hancock
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 3:06 AM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Yak-List: Re: tank size
On Jul 28, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
Barry,
Are you referring to this tank for the 50 also?
Doc
Yeah....you can extend the aux tank for about 6 gallons. Anything
more and you'll have a nice large tank....that won't go back in the
airplane. ;)
Barry
Barry Hancock
Worldwide Warbirds, Inc.
office (714) 730-3958
cell (949) 300-5510
www.worldwidewarbirds.com
www.cj6.com
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
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 |
|
Dennis,
We can look at that. It all the space is utilized with the enclosure of the
bulkheads, that is going to be more gas than my bladder and but could ever
stand! You will be looking at a 6 hour bird! A rough estimate puts the
volume at about 70 gallons just using the two bulkheads!
I stand corrected. It is aluminum not SS.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 9:01 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: tank size
Doc,
I believe the tanks are aluminum and not stainless steel. Way too heavy if
they were SS. If one were to fabricate a aluminum type of "box" where the
existing two tanks are located and put a bladder in the box, there would
never be a problem of getting the tank in and out of the airplane. The
"box" could be fabricated with sheet aluminum in such a way to allow each
sheet to fit through the hell hole during assembly. The box could
effectively be assembled inside the fuselage using countersunk screws on the
inside of the box to prevent potential puncturing of the bladder.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Kemp <mailto:viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 8:39 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: tank size
Barry,
You are talking about welding a 10 in stainless steel section onto the
existing AUX tank, correct? That is the mod that TJ told me about.
I have not gotten around to that one yet. Time is the issue.
I have been doing other small projects like working on the Carbon Monoxide
problems with taxi, TO, landing, and shut down. The problem is significant
for my two YAKs, a local CJ as well as a couple of other local YAKs. The CO
levels decrease to well below PEL (permissible exposure limits) in flight.
The airframe mods that Craig Payne and Pappy wrote about help in flight to
lower the levels. They do not do anything for the most dangerous time, on
the ground.
I am working with a company that makes a NASA licensed catalyst but there
are a couple of other issues to using this cold conversion catalyst that I
can't talk about because of my contract with them. There are three ways to
approach this. As you say though, they all are not cheap. Then if I get into
the marketing part of this there is the liability part that the lawyers so
love to sue for to consider. That will also run the cost up! You have
already seen the hesitation in the community to spend a lot on these
aircraft. When cost for doing something gets into the $2000 - 5000 range,
their eyes glaze over. Maybe you are in a different community that accepts
increased cost easily. The one I'm in down here does not accept the cost
lightly and are much more likely to not pay for it.
As soon as I finish gathering data, I will publish an article in the Red
Star rag.
Speaking of YAK 50's, where in Alabama is Roy Wells moving to? His will be
the third 50 in the state if he is moving here.
I do have to say they are a blast to fly. Yesterday I was seeing 250 Kph
(clics) or 132-135 kts at 62% and 650 mmHg. I burned 10 gallons for that
hour I was up. With the current gas on board with the AUX tank ( 33 gal)
that would be a 3 hour sortie with .3 reserve to dead empty. Now, I am not
going to push it that far because I just never plan any flight for max
endurance. To many variables that play into max endurance planning leaving
little room for error. The does give me a comfortable 200 to 250 nm range
though at that power setting. My but, knee, and bladder cannot tolerate much
farther anyway. To many years of training in the fighter community with all
our short hops. I cannot imagine what it is like for the my guys that are
flying 5 to 7 hour sorties now with multiple trips to tanker! That is why it
is the young guys doing it now.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry Hancock
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 3:06 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: tank size
On Jul 28, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
Barry,
Are you referring to this tank for the 50 also?
Doc
Yeah....you can extend the aux tank for about 6 gallons. Anything more and
you'll have a nice large tank....that won't go back in the airplane. ;)
Barry
Barry Hancock
Worldwide Warbirds, Inc.
office (714) 730-3958
cell (949) 300-5510
www.worldwidewarbirds.com
www.cj6.com
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/
Navigator?Yak-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.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 |
|
Doc,
The beauty of a bladder fuel tank is it can be sized to whatever your
personal bladder can handle. :-)
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: viperdoc
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 9:42 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: tank size
Dennis,
We can look at that. It all the space is utilized with the enclosure
of the bulkheads, that is going to be more gas than my bladder and but
could ever stand! You will be looking at a 6 hour bird! A rough estimate
puts the volume at about 70 gallons just using the two bulkheads!
I stand corrected. It is aluminum not SS.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
Savarese
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 9:01 AM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: tank size
Doc,
I believe the tanks are aluminum and not stainless steel. Way too
heavy if they were SS. If one were to fabricate a aluminum type of
"box" where the existing two tanks are located and put a bladder in the
box, there would never be a problem of getting the tank in and out of
the airplane. The "box" could be fabricated with sheet aluminum in such
a way to allow each sheet to fit through the hell hole during assembly.
The box could effectively be assembled inside the fuselage using
countersunk screws on the inside of the box to prevent potential
puncturing of the bladder.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Kemp
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 8:39 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: tank size
Barry,
You are talking about welding a 10 in stainless steel section onto
the existing AUX tank, correct? That is the mod that TJ told me about.
I have not gotten around to that one yet. Time is the issue.
I have been doing other small projects like working on the Carbon
Monoxide problems with taxi, TO, landing, and shut down. The problem is
significant for my two YAKs, a local CJ as well as a couple of other
local YAKs. The CO levels decrease to well below PEL (permissible
exposure limits) in flight. The airframe mods that Craig Payne and Pappy
wrote about help in flight to lower the levels. They do not do anything
for the most dangerous time, on the ground.
I am working with a company that makes a NASA licensed catalyst but
there are a couple of other issues to using this cold conversion
catalyst that I can't talk about because of my contract with them. There
are three ways to approach this. As you say though, they all are not
cheap. Then if I get into the marketing part of this there is the
liability part that the lawyers so love to sue for to consider. That
will also run the cost up! You have already seen the hesitation in the
community to spend a lot on these aircraft. When cost for doing
something gets into the $2000 - 5000 range, their eyes glaze over. Maybe
you are in a different community that accepts increased cost easily.
The one I'm in down here does not accept the cost lightly and are much
more likely to not pay for it.
As soon as I finish gathering data, I will publish an article in the
Red Star rag.
Speaking of YAK 50's, where in Alabama is Roy Wells moving to? His
will be the third 50 in the state if he is moving here.
I do have to say they are a blast to fly. Yesterday I was seeing 250
Kph (clics) or 132-135 kts at 62% and 650 mmHg. I burned 10 gallons for
that hour I was up. With the current gas on board with the AUX tank ( 33
gal) that would be a 3 hour sortie with .3 reserve to dead empty. Now, I
am not going to push it that far because I just never plan any flight
for max endurance. To many variables that play into max endurance
planning leaving little room for error. The does give me a comfortable
200 to 250 nm range though at that power setting. My but, knee, and
bladder cannot tolerate much farther anyway. To many years of training
in the fighter community with all our short hops. I cannot imagine what
it is like for the my guys that are flying 5 to 7 hour sorties now with
multiple trips to tanker! That is why it is the young guys doing it now.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry Hancock
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 3:06 AM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Yak-List: Re: tank size
On Jul 28, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
Barry,
Are you referring to this tank for the 50 also?
Doc
Yeah....you can extend the aux tank for about 6 gallons. Anything
more and you'll have a nice large tank....that won't go back in the
airplane. ;)
Barry
Barry Hancock
Worldwide Warbirds, Inc.
office (714) 730-3958
cell (949) 300-5510
www.worldwidewarbirds.com
www.cj6.com
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics
.com/Navigator?Yak-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums
.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-Listhttp://forums.matronics.com
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: | Interesting Gear Up Stats from the Orlando FSDO |
The following link sheds some interesting light on the gear up landing
incident question.
www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/orl/local_more/media/ppt/enl
ow.ppt
<http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/orl/local_more/media
/ppt/enlow.ppt%20-%202006-02-17> - 2006-02-17
Danged, CFI's have a 75% incidence rate for gear up landings among other
things. Does that mean they have "such poor reputations among the aviation
community" too?
Doc
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: Tanks for the -50 / CJ-6 |
Actually Barry, yes. I have had both tanks out. It is indeed a major pain in
the tail. I do believe that you could two aux size tanks in through the access
door though. The best idea is just a frame that you assemble, with a bladder.
Mark
Barry Hancock <bhancock@worldwidewarbirds.com> wrote:
On Jul 27, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Yak-List Digest Server wrote:
Really? From what I see in mine, I have two different size tanks right
next to each other. It appears to me that the original aerobatic tank
could easily be made as big as the Aux tank that currently sits right
next to it.
Guys, have you ever tried to remove the tanks from the aircraft? There is a
limit on tank size due to the geometry of getting the tanks in and out. There
is a TON more room in there for more fuel, but no practical way to take advantage
of the size without MAJOR modifications.
On a separate note, we are just a few weeks away from completing our fuel tank
modification for the CJ-6. It will net 30 gallons per side, is aluminum, will
require only minor reinforcement to existing structure, NO modification to
the vent system, is designed by DoD contracted and former Boeing engineers, will
be less $$$ per gallon than any other system available, and take less than
a week to install. Will have final pricing and pictures available shortly....
Cheers,
Barry
Barry Hancock Worldwide Warbirds, Inc.
office (714) 730-3958
cell (949) 300-5510
www.worldwidewarbirds.com
www.cj6.com
Coming soon: www.yak-3u.com
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal
and confidential use of the designated recipients. If the reader of this
message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review,
use, dissemination, forwarding or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.
Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail or telephone, and delete the
original message and all attachments from your system. Thank you
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: Interesting Gear Up Stats from the Orlando FSDO |
Try this link: www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/orl/local_more/media/ppt/enlow.ppt
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=126188#126188
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: Interesting Gear Up Stats from the Orlando FSDO |
On Jul 29, 2007, at 3:18 PM, Bill Tally wrote:
>
> Try this link: www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/orl/
> local_more/media/ppt/enlow.ppt
Now THAT is just scary. More oversight from the clueless. Statistics
tell them that there *might* be something wrong so they have to act,
even if they have no idea what would make things better.
This is after they make is much more difficult to teach spin
avoidance, spins, and spin recovery. <sigh>
(Just back from a day of recurrent training in spins and aerobatics
so I can make sure I am not developing bad habits.)
--
Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
brian HYPHEN 1927 AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+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-Exupry
PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
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: | Operation Pumpkin Drop |
For those of you at OSH who expressed interest in learning more about
Operation Pumpkin Drop II, here's a link to the web site.
OPD II
You won't regret the trip!
Steve Fox
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 |
|
Anyone have an M14P core that they are willing to part with? Prop
strike or run out OK. Please contact me directly at
bhancock@worldwidewarbirds.com.
Thanks!
Barry
Barry Hancock
Worldwide Warbirds, Inc.
office (714) 730-3958
cell (949) 300-5510
www.worldwidewarbirds.com
www.cj6.com
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: | Experience with Pride Aircraft....L-39 |
I recently had someone ask about an L-39. He is a previous jet owner and wants
to get back into it. He has a thing for the L-39 (and the F-86 but the lack of
a second seat keeps him away...I wish he would reconsider. He may let me in on
the deal!)
Thanks in advance.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=126288#126288
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! --
|