Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:47 AM - conversions (Bruce Thomas)
2. 04:29 AM - SoCal Fires (Craig Payne)
3. 04:32 AM - Re: conversions (A. Dennis Savarese)
4. 07:48 AM - Introduction/burning fuel in Virginia (GreasySideUp)
5. 08:04 AM - SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. (Hal)
6. 08:23 AM - Re: SoCal Winds (Walter Lannon)
7. 08:40 AM - Re: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. (hkgibby@yahoo.com)
8. 08:50 AM - Re: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. (seancrotty@aol.com)
9. 09:10 AM - Re: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. (Roger Baker)
10. 09:20 AM - Re: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. (seancrotty@aol.com)
11. 09:21 AM - Re: SoCal Fires (Brian Lloyd)
12. 09:31 AM - Re: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. (Tim Gagnon)
13. 09:38 AM - Re: SoCal Fires (Brian Lloyd)
14. 10:02 AM - Re: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. (netmaster15@juno.com)
15. 10:14 AM - Re: Introduction/burning fuel in Virginia (Jan Mevis)
16. 10:25 AM - Re: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. (fish@aviation-tech.com)
17. 11:27 AM - Re: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. (Preston Carter)
18. 01:11 PM - Re: Introduction/burning fuel in Virginia (netmaster15@juno.com)
19. 03:05 PM - Fw: Vote for Walt Fricke/Veterans Airlift Command to win the MicroSoft/USO Above and Beyond Award (Barry Hancock)
20. 06:02 PM - Re: Introduction/burning fuel in Virginia (Tim Gagnon)
21. 07:02 PM - A26 (Joe Howse)
22. 07:33 PM - Re: A26 (Roger Baker)
23. 08:17 PM - Re: A26 (Joe Howse)
24. 08:40 PM - Re: A26 (Lynn Allen)
25. 09:02 PM - Re: A26 (Roger Baker)
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 |
|
Hi Guys, Can anybody help me convert fuel usage figures on the M14P
listed in the flight manual of my 18T.
the specific fuel consumption is listed as g/(h.p.h)
285-315 takeoff
280-310 nominal 1
265-300 nominal 2
210-230 cruise 1
215-235 cruise 2
I an trying to get to litres per hour for each regime. I think it is
grams over hp/hour but cannot make sense of it.
Thanks Bruce Thomas
Melbourne down under
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 |
|
Wow! Hurricanes don't look so bad anymore down here in FLA. At least when the fires
are over you can start to rebuild, no mud and debris from someone's house
a mile away. There are still homes with blue tarp roofs from 2005 down here;
their insurance companies filed bankruptcy, or they were in flood plains and can't
get permits, mortgages, or insurance. Gotcha, gotcha, and more gotcha.
Airports seem to be fairly safe places, no brush to burn, etc. We sunk tiedowns
INSIDE the hangers to keep the airplanes in place if the roof came off; as well
as tie the doors with braces and steel cables.
Craig Payne
cpayne@joimail.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 |
|
Go to my web site, www.yak-52.com. All the information you are asking
about is on the POWER SETTINGS page.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: Bruce Thomas
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 2:46 AM
Subject: Yak-List: conversions
Hi Guys, Can anybody help me convert fuel usage figures on the M14P
listed in the flight manual of my 18T.
the specific fuel consumption is listed as g/(h.p.h)
285-315 takeoff
280-310 nominal 1
265-300 nominal 2
210-230 cruise 1
215-235 cruise 2
I an trying to get to litres per hour for each regime. I think it is
grams over hp/hour but cannot make sense of it.
Thanks Bruce Thomas
Melbourne down under
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: | Introduction/burning fuel in Virginia |
Hello everyone, I've been cruising these boards for a year now (I'm all caught
up on Bernoulli running the landing gear) and finally am making a post. A while
ago Tim G talked me into buying a 50, I was all set to pull the trigger when
a volunteer opportunity to go to the sand box came up. Awesome opportunity
but it set me back about a year. I'm on leave right now, I'll be heading back
soon and then am hoping to buy early spring time frame when I get back.
Seems like there are no 50's on the market right now, if you have any leads please
let me know.
Brings me to my request. Is there anyone in the Virginia area who needs some gas
money thrown through their 52? I still have yet to fly in one, would love
to see how they work and above all the weather out here is absolutely gorgeous!
The conversations on this board are definitely interesting, It seems like a fantastic
community. I can't wait to join with my own Yak.
Thanks,
Josh
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141500#141500
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: | SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. |
I continue to wonder why the Evergreen 747 fire bomber is not being used.
Two
years ago I saw video footage of this plane at work and had a chance to tal
k
to their chief pilot. The aircraft is amazing in the load it carries, the
choices for delivering the water/suppressant and its handling
characteristics. It apparently has been tangled up in FAA paperwork. For
whatever reason it is a shame it is not in use.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvBRWTumoZI&NR=1 An Evergreen video on
the
supertanker.
In answering my own question:
March 2007:
*747 SUPERTANKER HEADS INTO THE SUNSET*
Shocking news came out of Evergreen Aviation today: A stop work order has
been issued for their multi-million dollar 747 firefighting aircraft and th
e
Supertanker organization within Evergreen is being dismantled. An internal
memo (not for publication) stated that "I regret to advise you that the
Evergreen Supertanker program and Evergreen Supertanker Services Inc. have
been given a "Stop Work" order from the Evergreen Corporate Headquarters...
As of close of business, Tuesday, 21 March 2007, the Evergreen Supertanker
office in Marana, AZ. will be closed for business." Bob McAndrew, former
president of the Supertanker organization, was stunned by the turn of event
s
and the entire affair casts doubt on the future of the DC-10 Supertanker,
the main competitor to the 747.
After probing a little deeper, it appears that leadership in the US Forest
Service (USFS) and the FAA were not receptive to having an aircraft that
would be used for both fighting fires and also hauling cargo (in the
off-season). This was one of the key features of the Evergreen program
because it allowed them to earn a profit between fire seasons (reportedly
around $180,000 a day as a cargo transport). This seems strange because in
years past, that was how other air-tanker companies made money ' fighting
fires during the fire season and hauling cargo during the rest of the year.
Since many of the aircraft types employed by private contractors lent
themselves well to this "double-duty" (principally because they were
originally transport aircraft, bombers, and other aircraft with large
holds), it made the business feasible, if not lucrative. The question that
arises is: When did the FAA (and USFS, for that matter) turn a baleful eye
towards this practice?
Another point of interest surrounds both houses of Congress sending members
in to grill the USFS about some matters of operation. What exactly are they
looking for? Does the hasty cancellation of the 747 program have anything t
o
do with this investigation? And how will the DC-10 come out in light of thi
s
startling turn of events? The situation becomes curiouser and curiouser!
Comments? Contact me at marcher47@firebomberpublications.com
The 747 carries about 24,000 gallons vs 3,000 for the P3. I believe that
the DC-10 carries 16 ' 19,000 gallons.
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 |
|
At least one of the two remaining Martin Mars are on the way this morning
from B.C. to help out.
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: <fish@aviation-tech.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 9:53 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: SoCal Winds
> <fish@aviation-tech.com>
>
> Group,
>
> I counted 4 fire bombers taking off from fox Field
> (Lancaster, CA) and one landing as I drove by on my way to
> California City Airport.
>
> Currently have freinds from San Diego (mandatory evac),
> staying in my California City home.
>
> Worked all day and got one of my hanger finished enough to
> pull my YAK-52 in from the winds.
>
> Laterrr
> John Fischer
>
>
> ----- Original Message Follows -----
> From: Roger Baker <f4ffm2@adelphia.net>
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: SoCal Winds
> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:05:16 -0700
>
>> Essentially, the fire bombers have not flown on the fires
>> we are currently sweating out. They tried two sorties
>> yesterday, I think, but without success. The
>> helicopters that the Navy had out yesterday also weren't
>> too successful as the water they were dropping from
>> their buckets was evaporating before it hit the
>> fire...humidity yesterday was from 0% all the way up to
>> 4%. However, today it appears that the CDF air assetts,
>> as well as the military ones, are finally aggressively
>> in the air. Rumour is that the DC-10 fire bomber will
>> be working in our area today.
>>
>> I keep my Sukhoi and my Interstate at Ramona and they are
>> o.k. even tho the fires have burned right up to the
>> perimeter of the airport. My partner in the Sukhoi
>> lives just a mile or so North of the airport...and at
>> this point, we believe he has lost his house....nobody
>> can get up in that area to check for sure. There is
>> another Sukhoi at Ramona and the owner of that airplane
>> has lost his house.
>>
>> Ramona is about 20 something miles inland, but I live down
>> on the coast, and we are all packed up and ready to
>> evacuate. My Yak buddies in some other coastal
>> communities just to the south of us have evacuated their
>> homes. Yesterday was ugly and today appears to be no
>> better.
>>
>> Roger
>> Baker_____________________________________________________
>> __ On Oct 23, 2007, at 3:58 AM, Craig Payne wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Must be a bit sporty to fly in those Santa Anna winds, I
>> > assume that smoke has shut down a few airports also.
>> > As I remember, Ramona is a firebase facility we we
>> > used to clear the pattern and taxiway when ever one of
>> the fire bombers headed in/out. >
>> > My personal "best" on crosswinds in the CJ was a 30+ Kt
>> > component. Was not a real pretty landing. Since then I
>> > have experienced same in a Light Sport out at West
>> > Pecos. The key seems to be good low speed handling, a
>> wide runway helps too. >
>> >
>> > Craig Payne
>> > cpayne@joimail.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. |
All,
Canadians (Bombardier) build a fire fighting a/c called the CL-415 that is used
all over the Med that, for some reason, CA and FL don't have. CA uses a few on
short term lease basis that is too little too late. With the cost in FL/GA and
now CA fire damage running into the billions, the U.S. should have several
squadrons of these very effective aircraft. Mind-boggling!!
Hoot
Jacksonville, FL
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
-----Original Message-----
From: Hal <yakjock@gmail.com>
To:"Yak List" <yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Yak-List: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker.
I continue to wonder why the Evergreen 747 fire bomber is not bei= ng used. Two
years ago I saw video footage of this plane= at work and had a chance to talk
to their chief pilot. The aircraft is amazing in the load it carries, the cho=
ices for delivering the water/suppressant and its handling characteristics.=
It apparently has been tangled up in FAA paperwork. For whatever reason it
is a shame it is not in use.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvBRWTumoZI&NR=1> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvBRWTumoZI&NR=1 &n= bsp;An Evergreen video on the supertanker.
In answering my own question:
March 2007:
747 SUPERTANKER HEADS INTO THE SUNSET=
Shocking news cam= e out of Evergreen Aviation today: A stop work order has been
issued for th= eir multi-million dollar 747 firefighting aircraft and the Supertanker
orga= nization within Evergreen is being dismantled. An internal memo
(not for pu= blication) stated that "I regret to advise you that the Evergreen
Supe= rtanker program and Evergreen Supertanker Services Inc. have been given
a &= quot;Stop Work" order from the Evergreen Corporate Headquarters... As
= of close of business, Tuesday, 21 March 2007, the Evergreen Supertanker off=
ice in Marana, AZ. will be closed for business." Bob McAndrew, former = president
of the Supertanker organization, was stunned by the turn of event= s and
the entire affair casts doubt on the future of the DC-10 Supertanker,= the main
competitor to the 747.
After probing a little deeper, it appears that leadership in the US= Forest Service
(USFS) and the FAA were not receptive to having an aircraft= that would be
used for both fighting fires and also hauling cargo (in the = off-season). This
was one of the key features of the Evergreen program beca= use it allowed
them to earn a profit between fire seasons (reportedly aroun= d $180,000 a day
as a cargo transport). This seems strange because in years= past, that was how
other air-tanker companies made money ' fighting fire= s during the fire season
and hauling cargo during the rest of the year. Sin= ce many of the aircraft
types employed by private contractors lent themselv= es well to this "double-duty"
(principally because they were orig= inally transport aircraft, bombers,
and other aircraft with large holds), i= t made the business feasible, if not
lucrative. The question that arises is= : When did the FAA (and USFS, for that
matter) turn a baleful eye towards t= his practice?
Another point of interest surrounds both houses of Congress sending= members in
to grill the USFS about some matters of operation. What exactly= are they looking
for? Does the hasty cancellation of the 747 program have = anything to do
with this investigation? And how will the DC-10 come out in = light of this startling
turn of events? The situation becomes curiouser and= curiouser! Comments?
Contact me at <
mailto:marcher47@firebomberpublications.com> marcher47@firebomberpublications.com=
The 747 carries about 24,000 gallons vs 3,000 for the P3.&nbs= p; I believe that
the DC-10 carries 16 ' 19,000 gallons.
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: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. |
At one time while I was still an instructor flying KC-135's I went out to
Scott AFB with my crew to fly "mock up" fire suppression missions" in the
simulator - This was back in the early 90's - They were going to "replumb" some
135's and KC-10's for strictly this purpose and put them in a few guard units
around the country - strictly for fire fighting - Those refueling pumps could
put out something like a 1000 gals a min each and we had four of them - So the
theory was make the "boom" bigger so more could head out at one time - the
pumps were already plenty big.
The problem is this is a political hot button and always has been - the
military taking over a "civilian" contract - The whole thing needs to get looked
at - from where they allow buildings to go up - to what those buildings are
constructed of - to fire breaks around communities - to paying for an air
suppression force that is capable of responding with bigger and better equipment.
I do think the DC-10 has been flying - heard of a close call when a new CA
on his first or second drop didn't plan for the massive CG change when they
opened the doors - I guess it gets your attention - but supposedly that system
has been working well - All this is second hand information - maybe someone
out West has more up to date info.
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: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. |
The DC-10 is flying today....out of Victorville. I don't know where
it is being used, however....probably up in the LAX area. One of the
Martin Mars is supposed to arrive at Lake Elsinore early this afternoon.
Roger___________________________________________________________________
_
On Oct 24, 2007, at 8:49 AM, seancrotty@aol.com wrote:
> At one time while I was still an instructor flying KC-135's I went
> out to Scott AFB with my crew to fly "mock up" fire suppression
> missions" in the simulator - This was back in the early 90's - They
> were going to "replumb" some 135's and KC-10's for strictly this
> purpose and put them in a few guard units around the country -
> strictly for fire fighting - Those refueling pumps could put out
> something like a 1000 gals a min each and we had four of them - So
> the theory was make the "boom" bigger so more could head out at one
> time - the pumps were already plenty big.
>
> The problem is this is a political hot button and always has been -
> the military taking over a "civilian" contract - The whole thing
> needs to get looked at - from where they allow buildings to go up -
> to what those buildings are constructed of - to fire breaks around
> communities - to paying for an air suppression force that is
> capable of responding with bigger and better equipment. I do think
> the DC-10 has been flying - heard of a close call when a new CA on
> his first or second drop didn't plan for the massive CG change when
> they opened the doors - I guess it gets your attention - but
> supposedly that system has been working well - All this is second
> hand information - maybe someone out West has more up to date info.
>
>
> See what's new
>
>
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: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. |
we need hundreds of these larger aircraft - and pilots and training programs
to fly them safely -
It's a travesty what is going on -
Fly Safe - Fly Well
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 |
|
On Oct 24, 2007, at 4:28 AM, Craig Payne wrote:
>
> Wow! Hurricanes don't look so bad anymore down here in FLA. At
> least when the fires are over you can start to rebuild, no mud and
> debris from someone's house a mile away. There are still homes with
> blue tarp roofs from 2005 down here; their insurance companies
> filed bankruptcy, or they were in flood plains and can't get
> permits, mortgages, or insurance. Gotcha, gotcha, and more gotcha.
I know this is a strange concept but, don't people think about the
possibility of a hurricane in an area where hurricanes are likely to
hit and then select a building site to minimize flooding exposure and
then use construction practices that will maximize the ability to
survive high winds?
> Airports seem to be fairly safe places, no brush to burn, etc. We
> sunk tiedowns INSIDE the hangers to keep the airplanes in place if
> the roof came off; as well as tie the doors with braces and steel
> cables.
Oh, you mean actually *plan* for this kind of event! Why, how
unamerican! Don't you know, the government will take care of you.
(Sorry. I get tired of hearing people on the news saying, "why isn't
the government doing something?!?" I want to say to them, "hey
stupid, why didn't YOU plan for this eventuality.")
Realtors think me strange for asking questions like, "what is the
primary water supply for this area? What is the secondary water
supply? Where are the power generating stations and their main feeder
lines? Where is our water treatment plant?"
I moved away from SoCal where I was born and raised. I look at the
area and its dependency on remote water and power resources, its
tendency to burn during the summer and slide into the ocean during
the winter rains and wonder why people keep on moving there. Failure
of any major infrastructure would render the area unable to support
the people who currently live there. Seems rather untenable to me but
then, what do I know.
And that doesn't mean that I don't hope for the best for all my
friends who live in SoCal. I have a hangar and a guest bedroom for
anyone who needs a place to stay for as long as they need to. Just
plug O61 into your GPS and give me a phone call. I can probably find
tie-down space for 20-30 aircraft as well as a place to stay for
twice that many people. We are one CJ6A fuel ta
--
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 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: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. |
There was talk at one time about putting A-10's into the role of firefighter. It
could also serve as an C2 airplane. This was a serious pursuit.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141532#141532
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 |
|
On Oct 24, 2007, at 9:21 AM, Brian Lloyd wrote:
(I hate getting interrupted and then thinking I have finished my
message.)
> And that doesn't mean that I don't hope for the best for all my
> friends who live in SoCal. I have a hangar and a guest bedroom for
> anyone who needs a place to stay for as long as they need to. Just
> plug O61 into your GPS and give me a phone call. I can probably
> find tie-down space for 20-30 aircraft as well as a place to stay
> for twice that many people. We are one CJ6A fuel ta
We are one CJ6A fuel tank away from the northern edge of the LA
basin. Visalia is halfway between ONT and O61 if you are flying a
Yak-52.
--
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 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: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. |
How about hiring some of the hundreds of pilots who were forced into ret
irement at age 60 by the FAA. Many of them are already type rated and ex
perienced in these aircraft. Where do we apply? I asked the Navy if I co
uld come back on active flight status. The bastards told me they had no
SPADS and no F4Us in the inventory. "It's a travesty what is going on"!
!
Check Six,
Cliff Umscheid
-- seancrotty@aol.com wrote:
we need hundreds of these larger aircraft - and pilots and training prog
rams to fly them safely - It's a travesty what is going on - Fly Safe
- Fly Well
========================
========================
========================
========================
======================
_____________________________________________________________
Best Commodity Trading Platforms. Click Now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3mJoKyelDYSFEdg785qF3K
TyHMTRdtEZYcrIzFPP0nDKZQ8r/
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Introduction/burning fuel in Virginia |
There are a few Yak 50's for sale in Europe
Jan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of GreasySideUp
Sent: woensdag 24 oktober 2007 16:48
Subject: Yak-List: Introduction/burning fuel in Virginia
Hello everyone, I've been cruising these boards for a year now (I'm all
caught up on Bernoulli running the landing gear) and finally am making a
post. A while ago Tim G talked me into buying a 50, I was all set to pull
the trigger when a volunteer opportunity to go to the sand box came up.
Awesome opportunity but it set me back about a year. I'm on leave right
now, I'll be heading back soon and then am hoping to buy early spring time
frame when I get back.
Seems like there are no 50's on the market right now, if you have any leads
please let me know.
Brings me to my request. Is there anyone in the Virginia area who needs
some gas money thrown through their 52? I still have yet to fly in one,
would love to see how they work and above all the weather out here is
absolutely gorgeous!
The conversations on this board are definitely interesting, It seems like a
fantastic community. I can't wait to join with my own Yak.
Thanks,
Josh
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141500#141500
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: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. |
Hoot,
The canidain scooper tankers were sitting at the Van Nuys
airport when the fires started and were some of the first
dispatched.
They have been on the ramp for better then a month now
waiting on work.
My Guard unit used (146th Air Wing, 115th AS) to have
C-130E's that were used for firefighting, but then we got
C-130J's and they have not been certified for firefighting
yet.
Laterrr
John Fischer
----- Original Message Follows -----
From: hkgibby@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747
Supertanker.
>
> All,
>
> Canadians (Bombardier) build a fire fighting a/c called
> the CL-415 that is used all over the Med that, for some
> reason, CA and FL don't have. CA uses a few on short term
> lease basis that is too little too late. With the cost in
> FL/GA and now CA fire damage running into the billions,
> the U.S. should have several squadrons of these very
> effective aircraft. Mind-boggling!!
>
> Hoot
> Jacksonville, FL
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hal <yakjock@gmail.com>
>
> Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 07:59:56
> To:"Yak List" <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Yak-List: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747
> Supertanker.
>
>
> I continue to wonder why the Evergreen 747 fire bomber is
> not bei= ng used. Two years ago I saw video footage
of
> this plane= at work and had a chance to talk to their
> chief pilot. The aircraft is amazing in the load
it
> carries, the cho= ices for delivering the
> water/suppressant and its handling characteristics.=
It
> apparently has been tangled up in FAA paperwork. For
> whatever reason it is a shame it is not in use.
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvBRWTumoZI&NR=1>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvBRWTumoZI&NR=1
&n
> bsp;An Evergreen video on the supertanker.
>
> In answering my own question:
>
> March 2007:
>
> 747 SUPERTANKER HEADS INTO THE SUNSET=
>
> Shocking news cam= e out of Evergreen Aviation today: A
> stop work order has been issued for th= eir
multi-million
> dollar 747 firefighting aircraft and the Supertanker
orga
> nization within Evergreen is being dismantled. An internal
> memo (not for pu= blication) stated that "I regret to
> advise you that the Evergreen Supe= rtanker program and
> Evergreen Supertanker Services Inc. have been given a &
> quot;Stop Work" order from the Evergreen Corporate
> Headquarters... As = of close of business, Tuesday, 21
> March 2007, the Evergreen Supertanker off= ice in
Marana,
> AZ. will be closed for business." Bob McAndrew, former
> president of the Supertanker organization, was stunned by
> the turn of event= s and the entire affair casts doubt
on
> the future of the DC-10 Supertanker,= the main
competitor
> to the 747.
>
> After probing a little deeper, it appears that leadership
> in the US= Forest Service (USFS) and the FAA were not
> receptive to having an aircraft= that would be used for
> both fighting fires and also hauling cargo (in the
> off-season). This was one of the key features of the
> Evergreen program beca= use it allowed them to earn a
> profit between fire seasons (reportedly aroun= d
$180,000
> a day as a cargo transport). This seems strange because in
> years= past, that was how other air-tanker companies
made
> money ' fighting fire= s during the fire season and
> hauling cargo during the rest of the year. Sin= ce many
of
> the aircraft types employed by private contractors lent
> themselv= es well to this "double-duty" (principally
> because they were orig= inally transport aircraft,
bombers
> , and other aircraft with large holds), i= t made the
> business feasible, if not lucrative. The question that
> arises is= : When did the FAA (and USFS, for that
matter)
> turn a baleful eye towards t= his practice?
>
> Another point of interest surrounds both houses of
> Congress sending= members in to grill the USFS about
some
> matters of operation. What exactly= are they looking
for?
> Does the hasty cancellation of the 747 program have
> anything to do with this investigation? And how will the
> DC-10 come out in = light of this startling turn of
> events? The situation becomes curiouser and= curiouser!
> Comments? Contact me at
> <mailto:marcher47@firebomberpublications.com>
> marcher47@firebomberpublications.com=
> The 747 carries about 24,000 gallons vs 3,000 for the
> P3.&nbs= p; I believe that the DC-10 carries 16 '
19,000
> gallons.
>
>
>
>
Use the
Archive
Photoshare
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
> --> http://forums.matronics.com
>
> ==
>
>
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: | SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker. |
I worked with Evergreen a bit on applications for their SuperTanker. I have
been involved in many large programs and technology development efforts.
Sure, the FAA and the USFS were slow to be receptive (the status quo always
is), but the true failure in the SuperTanker's success was Evergreen
themselves. This is a case of the "fish rots from the head". Evergreen
management made terrible decisions in investment, development, marketing,
and certification process. Worst of all, not working with the FAA and the
USFS closely enough (they worked closely, but Evergreen did not try to
understand their options or care to understand the USG's responsibilities),
their airworthiness certification resulted in un-profitable restrictions
that were not necessary. Evergreen brought it upon themselves, but those
who need the capability are the ones that will miss it.
I agree with you, the aircraft is amazing and the chief pilot is an amazing
guy. Many good people worked on the project. A tragic story so far.
Biggs
Yak-52, N6209F
_____
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hal
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 8:00 AM
Subject: Yak-List: SoCal fires and the Evergreen 747 Supertanker.
I continue to wonder why the Evergreen 747 fire bomber is not being used.
Two years ago I saw video footage of this plane at work and had a chance to
talk to their chief pilot. The aircraft is amazing in the load it carries,
the choices for delivering the water/suppressant and its handling
characteristics. It apparently has been tangled up in FAA paperwork. For
whatever reason it is a shame it is not in use.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvBRWTumoZI&NR=1>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvBRWTumoZI&NR=1 An Evergreen video on the
supertanker.
In answering my own question:
March 2007:
747 SUPERTANKER HEADS INTO THE SUNSET
Shocking news came out of Evergreen Aviation today: A stop work order has
been issued for their multi-million dollar 747 firefighting aircraft and the
Supertanker organization within Evergreen is being dismantled. An internal
memo (not for publication) stated that "I regret to advise you that the
Evergreen Supertanker program and Evergreen Supertanker Services Inc. have
been given a "Stop Work" order from the Evergreen Corporate Headquarters...
As of close of business, Tuesday, 21 March 2007, the Evergreen Supertanker
office in Marana, AZ. will be closed for business." Bob McAndrew, former
president of the Supertanker organization, was stunned by the turn of events
and the entire affair casts doubt on the future of the DC-10 Supertanker,
the main competitor to the 747.
After probing a little deeper, it appears that leadership in the US Forest
Service (USFS) and the FAA were not receptive to having an aircraft that
would be used for both fighting fires and also hauling cargo (in the
off-season). This was one of the key features of the Evergreen program
because it allowed them to earn a profit between fire seasons (reportedly
around $180,000 a day as a cargo transport). This seems strange because in
years past, that was how other air-tanker companies made money - fighting
fires during the fire season and hauling cargo during the rest of the year.
Since many of the aircraft types employed by private contractors lent
themselves well to this "double-duty" (principally because they were
originally transport aircraft, bombers, and other aircraft with large
holds), it made the business feasible, if not lucrative. The question that
arises is: When did the FAA (and USFS, for that matter) turn a baleful eye
towards this practice?
Another point of interest surrounds both houses of Congress sending members
in to grill the USFS about some matters of operation. What exactly are they
looking for? Does the hasty cancellation of the 747 program have anything to
do with this investigation? And how will the DC-10 come out in light of this
startling turn of events? The situation becomes curiouser and curiouser!
Comments? Contact me at marcher47@firebomberpublications.com
The 747 carries about 24,000 gallons vs 3,000 for the P3. I believe that
the DC-10 carries 16 - 19,000 gallons.
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: | Introduction/burning fuel in Virginia |
Hi Jan, I've got a pristine 50 that may be for sale when you're ready to
buy, plus a ton of spares that I'm willing to sell together or separate
ly from the aircraft. Note my e mail address and contact me when your to
ur is up.
Cliff Umscheid
Ps Be sure to research the cost of having an aircraft shipped from Europ
e to the states and then assembled and licensed.
-- "Jan Mevis" <jan.mevis@informavia.be> wrote:
There are a few Yak 50's for sale in Europe
Jan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of GreasySideUp
Sent: woensdag 24 oktober 2007 16:48
Subject: Yak-List: Introduction/burning fuel in Virginia
>
Hello everyone, I've been cruising these boards for a year now (I'm all
caught up on Bernoulli running the landing gear) and finally am making a
post. A while ago Tim G talked me into buying a 50, I was all set to pu
ll
the trigger when a volunteer opportunity to go to the sand box came up.
Awesome opportunity but it set me back about a year. I'm on leave right
now, I'll be heading back soon and then am hoping to buy early spring ti
me
frame when I get back.
Seems like there are no 50's on the market right now, if you have any le
ads
please let me know.
Brings me to my request. Is there anyone in the Virginia area who needs
some gas money thrown through their 52? I still have yet to fly in one,
would love to see how they work and above all the weather out here is
absolutely gorgeous!
The conversations on this board are definitely interesting, It seems lik
e a
fantastic community. I can't wait to join with my own Yak.
Thanks,
Josh
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141500#141500
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
_____________________________________________________________
Discount Online Trading - Click Now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3mJ8YT5pmWI69dmc4X0qYF
8H9z7OIhN50MrMuThrxWY9kIR9/
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: | Fwd: Vote for Walt Fricke/Veterans Airlift Command to win the |
MicroSoft/USO Above and Beyond Award
Well, he's gone over to the dark side (T-28's) but Walt is still a good
friend to many in the community and thought this may be of interest...
Begin forwarded message:
> From: "Walt Fricke" <Walt.fricke@veteransairlift.org>
> Date: October 24, 2007 2:55:32 PM PDT
> To: <admin@veteransairlift.org>
> Subject: Vote for Walt Fricke/Veterans Airlift Command to win the
> MicroSoft/USO Above and Beyond Award
>
> Microsoft and the USO have selected Walt Fricke, CEO and Founder of
> -the Veterans Airlift Command--as one of--two-semi
finalists for one
> of the "Above and--Beyond"--awards.-
> -
> -A public vote is being managed my MSN online to select the winner.
> -
> -
> Click-this link and vote for-Walt-(2nd tab over, medical
attention
> award).----
> -
> Voting ends on the 29th of Oct, so vote now!
> -
> Pass this on so Veterans Airlift Command can get the press coverage
> and support it needs.
> -
> The Veterans Airlift Command provides free air transportation to
> wounded warriors, veterans and their families for medical and other
> compassionate purposes through a national network of volunteer
> aircraft owners and pilots.
> -
> -
> For more information on the Veterans Airlift Command please go to
> their web site www.veteransairlift.org.
> -
> -
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: Introduction/burning fuel in Virginia |
Josh,
Good to hear you are close to pulling the trigger on a -50! I will keep an ear
out for you as well.....you never know, there may be in one in Ohio available!
Be careful over there! Are you flying or doing the ground thing?
Tim
Cliff, it is Josh that is looking for an airplane...Jan already has one.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141613#141613
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 |
|
Anyone know of an A26 Onmark for sale?
Joe
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 |
|
Joe,
Check with Mark Clark at Courtesy Aircraft. He has an Onmark
A-26C for sale cheap....but it's pretty rough. (courtesyaircraft.com)
Roger Baker________________________________________________________
On Oct 24, 2007, at 7:00 PM, Joe Howse wrote:
> Anyone know of an A26 Onmark for sale?
>
> Joe
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List_-
> ============================================================ _-
> forums.matronics.com_-
> ===========================================================
>
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 |
|
Roger
Thanks, saw it last week, it is too rough.
Joe
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Baker
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 7:35 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: A26
Joe,
Check with Mark Clark at Courtesy Aircraft. He has an Onmark
A-26C for sale cheap....but it's pretty rough. (courtesyaircraft.com)
Roger Baker________________________________________________________
On Oct 24, 2007, at 7:00 PM, Joe Howse wrote:
Anyone know of an A26 Onmark for sale?
Joe
- The Yak-List Email Forum - class="Apple-converted-space">
--> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List - NEW
MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - class="Apple-converted-space"> -->
http://forums.matronics.com
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 |
|
There was one up at Wiley Post in Oklahoma a while back. The CAF's Daisy Mae in
there as well, in pieces. Maybe sponsor it and get it going as a option.
Good Luck,
Lynn
Joe Howse <joeh@shaw.ca> wrote:
Roger
Thanks, saw it last week, it is too rough.
Joe
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Baker
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 7:35 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: A26
Joe,
Check with Mark Clark at Courtesy Aircraft. He has an Onmark A-26C for
sale cheap....but it's pretty rough. (courtesyaircraft.com)
Roger Baker________________________________________________________
On Oct 24, 2007, at 7:00 PM, Joe Howse wrote:
Anyone know of an A26 Onmark for sale?
Joe
- The Yak-List Email Forum - class="Apple-converted-space"> --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List - NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - class="Apple-converted-space"> --> 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 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 |
|
Joe,
You're right...it's very rough. I looked at it several years ago.
There is a privately owed A-26 parked (on display there in
return for free tiedown, I think) at the San Diego Aerospace Museum
annex at Gillespie Field in San Diego. I'm sorry, but I've never
paid it enough attention to be aware of whether it's an Onmark
conversion or not. This airplane has flown within the last couple of
years, however.
Roger__________________________________________________________
On Oct 24, 2007, at 8:16 PM, Joe Howse wrote:
> Roger
>
> Thanks, saw it last week, it is too rough.
>
> Joe
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Roger Baker
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 7:35 PM
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: A26
>
> Joe,
>
> Check with Mark Clark at Courtesy Aircraft. He has an Onmark
> A-26C for sale cheap....but it's pretty rough. (courtesyaircraft.com)
>
> Roger Baker________________________________________________________
> On Oct 24, 2007, at 7:00 PM, Joe Howse wrote:
>
>> Anyone know of an A26 Onmark for sale?
>>
>> Joe
>> - The Yak-List Email Forum - class="Apple-converted-
>> space"> --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-
>> List - NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS - class="Apple-
>> converted-space"> --> http://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-List_-
> ============================================================ _-
> forums.matronics.com_-
> ===========================================================
>
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! --
|