Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:43 AM - Re: Maximum structural cruise (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
2. 03:53 PM - Re: Maximum structural cruise (Sarah Tobin)
3. 05:30 PM - THIS WILL WORK (Frank)
4. 05:42 PM - Re: THIS WILL WORK (Byron Fox)
5. 07:26 PM - Re: Maximum structural cruise (Roger Kemp M.D.)
6. 08:14 PM - Re: Maximum structural cruise (Keith Pickford)
7. 08:44 PM - Re: Maximum structural cruise (Roger Kemp M.D.)
8. 09:27 PM - mounting fuel flow transducer in a CJ (keithmckinley)
9. 09:59 PM - Re: Maximum structural cruise (ACTIVE NZ - Andrew)
10. 11:55 PM - Re: Maximum structural cruise (Jan Mevis)
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: | Maximum structural cruise |
Comments:
In the Marine Corps, there really is no such thing as a Max Mach Operating Limitation
on most tactical aircraft .... I am sure there is probably one for the
prop driven aircraft, but on the jets, the mach limit is that speed you reach
while going straight down in burner... If you happen to have burner.
Of note is the fact that we too are seeing major structural fatigue problems in
a lot of our older aircraft. That was the single MAJOR REASON that the A-6E
Intruder was retired early.
On my personal YAK-50, I was originally told that the aircraft was rated at plus
9, negative 6 G. Then I did a ton of research and found that you were supposed
to RECORD certain parameters of each flight and this added points to a number
that when it was met, the wings on the aircraft were basically retired. In
the case of the YAK-50, in many cases the whole aircraft was "retired" sometimes
after just 50 hours of flight time. Of note is the fact that most everyone
pulls that recording equipment out of the 50's AND 52's, and doesn't "bother
with it anymore". Lot's of other pilots have done this kind of thing before
our YAK's came on to the scene. Examples: T-34's. AT-6's. Both of those aircraft
types have experienced the "WING OFF" warning light illuminating during
flight. With fatal results in every case... And most of those were wearing
chutes by the way. I have personally limited my 50 to plus 5 G's and negative
2. Even that is questionable, but I am willing to take the risk, but do acknowledge
that it IS a risk. I also do not compete the aircraft anymore, and I
don't participate in any ACM stuff.
Eddy current and magnafluxing tests are pretty much out of my budget range. So...
It's a risk.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of netmaster15@juno.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 2:15
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Doc, Thankyou for your response on the subject of " max structural cruise" .
If I understand you correctly we are both saying the same thing; the water gets
a bit muddy when we try to reconcile simantic differences. eg, reference your
first paragraph: " .....while operating in STRUCTURAL CRUISE LIMITATION...."
Please define "structural cruise". Also, what discipline categorizes structural
cruise as a LIMITATION as opposed to a NORMAL OPERATING condition? All
Operations Manuals I have been exposed to in the last 63 years cite Limitations
as Vne, VA, Vlo, Vle, Vfe,max allow. TO Gr WT, max fuel, max tire speed, max
pressure differential, max operating altitude, plus several other operating
limitations. All these limitations are derived from one source; the TYPE CERTIFICATE
AND DATA SHEETS and amendments thereto, eg, supplemental type certificates
if applicable. Also in your first paragraph you use the phrase "....while
operating within their envelope...." But you do not specify what envelope you're
referring to. I agree, there is no yellow arc on the airspeed indicator in
an F-5 but there is certainly a Mach meter and a Max Mach operating LIMITATION.
Plainly, it is very difficult to translate terminology between two different
disciplines.
I'll have to finish this treatise at a later time; I'm already beyond my curfew
limitation. I look forward to your continuing thoughts on this subject. BTW,
I currently own and fly both a YAK -50 and a Harmon Rocket and you're correct,
I don't want any major dissassemblies at altitude so I'm always alert for
new ways to assure the aircraft remains in reuseable condition. Cheers!
Cliff
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "ACTIVE NZ - Andrew" <andrew@nzactive.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
DOC
Please excuse me for intruding on your list. I fly a Harmon Rocket, (mainly) but
eavesdrop on the Yak list cos I'm in a partnership that is rebuilding a Yak-3
in New Zealand.
Anyway...
I have been concerned about this issue for some time, in my Harmon Rocket. It goes
kinda fast, and sometimes I hit pretty harsh bumps when I'm flying in the
yellow arc. (yeah, I know, I should anticipate better.) I've often wondered if
there's a way to check for metal fatigue or overstressing - is this magnaflux
thing something that can be done to wing and horizontal stablizer spars? Is it
a reasonably common procedure (ie, likely to be available in NZ)...or a real
specialist kinda thing?
Andrew
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp M.D.
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 3:30 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Cliff,
AnswerYes I know of 2 aircraft that went down while operating in structural cruise
Limitation as you say. Both were Class A accidents with 2 fatalities in each.
One an F-5F and the other a T-38. I served as the flight surgeon representative
to the SIB (safety investigation board) on the F-5 and I was the interim
representative on the T-38 SIB. Four men died while operating their aircraft
within NORMAL OPERATION PROCEDURE as you say. We call it differently since
we dont have a yellow arcs on our airspeed indicators. Incidentally, one of the
IPs in the F-5 was a good friend of mine. So yes, I know firsthand of two
aircraft that failed while operating within their envelope.
Now the question I have for you is: Are you prepared to totally bet your rosy pink
on whatever Red Star Aircraft it is you are flying? Have you NDId/ magnafluxed
your aircraft to determine if you have metal fatigue or not. Its a military
aircraft not a spam can. It was and is operated like or as a military aircraft.
Cruise limits dont exist. Vne and G limits do. An you do not know for dead
nuts sure what the real structural (read metal fatigue state) integrity of
your spare or spine is. You can only hope that the entries in that Eastern bloc
aircrafts log book really were done and not just pencil whipped. Granted, these
aircraft are tough as nails but so are/ were the F-5, T-38, F-15, A-10, and
the F-16. Their wing are cracking. In some cases the wings are falling off
as well as their dorsal spines are breaking. You just never know.
Ohmake it 3 aircraft that I know of that broke up while operating within their
NORMAL OPERATING LIMITS. I believe the St Louis Guard lost a twin tail sissy
to structural failure while operating in normal ops limits approximately a
year and a half ago. That Eagle driver was lucky, he got out with a shattered
elbow and some contusions. Rumor has it they are still extracting fragments of
seat cushion from his rosy pink after he sucked it up while tumbling/ somersaulting
in the pit while trying to figure out why his jet was not responding any
longer.
By the way my comment initially was made in jest in response to Sabers last line
of his post. I was not aware we had a MAX GUST LOAD on the YAK. Maybe the
CJ does. G limits yesVne yes max crosswind limits yes.Max Gust Load ???
We do not have cocktail hours in any of the squadrons I have served with either.
Either the beer light was lit or it was not. The beer light was lit when the
last jet landed. Cocktail hour...
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of netmaster15@juno.com
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 3:35 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Doc, How many people do you know who have "busted their asses" due to exceeding
max structural cruise without exceeding Vne? This should raise the questions:
What is max structural cruise meant to protect? and, Is max structural cruise
a "LIMITATION" , or a NORMAL OPERATION PROCEDURE? If the latter, then, I
submit it is no different than any other number within the yellow arc and does
not deserve to be over dignified beyond those numbers within such parameter.
In other words, it is nothing more than cocktail information. If one insists upon
operating within the yellow arc, do not encounter turbulent air lest you exceed
MAX GUST LOAD; now there IS a number you should know and understand beyond
the cocktail hour.
Cliff Umscheid
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Roger Kemp M.D." <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Just rememberthe ass you bust maybe your own.
doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of jblake207@comcast.net
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 10:47 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Find attached a "Vee" Speeds chart that I use for my CJ. Developed from the manuals
and from lots of questions asked of people like Pappy, Sapp, Savarese and
others.
If I were a lawyer, I'd make a comment about using at your own risk and that this
office cannot be held liable for any incorrect data... blah, blah, blah. I'm
not a lawyer, so let me simply say use or lose.
JB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Warren Hill" <k7wx@earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 10:12:26 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Fellow CJ-ers,
I wonder if there is a consensus on a figure in knots for maximum structural cruise
for the CJ-6A?
Warren Hill
Mesa, AZ
On Jul 26, 2009, at 6:19 PM, Chris Wise wrote:
> G'Day,
>
> Thanks to Walt, Pappy and Dennis for replying.
> The M14P has a rubber lip seal as well as a slinger, like Walt says.
> The slinger by itself is inadequate, especially during aeros.
> Any other advice would be appreciated re removing prop reduction box
> and the prop shaft.
>
> Thanks and Cheers,
> Chris.
>
>
-Matt Dralle, List =========
===================================
ttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
===================================
tronics.com
===================================
www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
ttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
===================================
tronics.com
===================================
www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
ky"Z+M4Gq(wrIQhaxr^jzZ("X,ZIJr*'!y:0ZwE,jwfffi0fr(Z(jBm &j',r5h.+-
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: | Maximum structural cruise |
5 Gs? That's it? I haven't flown the 50, but in my 55, I routinely fly 6G positive
and 3G negative. Heard anything regarding the 55?
Smash
--- On Tue, 7/28/09, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
> From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2009, 8:31 AM
> "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
>
>
> Comments:
>
>
> In the Marine Corps, there really is no such thing as a Max
> Mach Operating Limitation on most tactical aircraft .... I
> am sure there is probably one for the prop driven aircraft,
> but on the jets, the mach limit is that speed you reach
> while going straight down in burner... If you happen to have
> burner.
>
> Of note is the fact that we too are seeing major structural
> fatigue problems in a lot of our older aircraft. That
> was the single MAJOR REASON that the A-6E Intruder was
> retired early.
>
> On my personal YAK-50, I was originally told that the
> aircraft was rated at plus 9, negative 6 G. Then I did
> a ton of research and found that you were supposed to RECORD
> certain parameters of each flight and this added points to a
> number that when it was met, the wings on the aircraft were
> basically retired. In the case of the YAK-50, in many
> cases the whole aircraft was "retired" sometimes after just
> 50 hours of flight time. Of note is the fact that most
> everyone pulls that recording equipment out of the 50's AND
> 52's, and doesn't "bother with it anymore". Lot's of
> other pilots have done this kind of thing before our YAK's
> came on to the scene. Examples: T-34's.
> AT-6's. Both of those aircraft types have experienced
> the "WING OFF" warning light illuminating during
> flight. With fatal results in every case... And most
> of those were wearing chutes by the way. I have
> personally limited my 50 to plus 5 G's and negative 2.
> Even that is questionable, but I am willing to !
> take the risk, but do acknowledge that it IS a risk.
> I also do not compete the aircraft anymore, and I don't
> participate in any ACM stuff.
>
> Eddy current and magnafluxing tests are pretty much out of
> my budget range. So... It's a risk.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of netmaster15@juno.com
> Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 2:15
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
>
> Doc, Thankyou for your response on the subject of "
> max structural cruise" . If I understand you correctly
> we are both saying the same thing; the water gets a bit
> muddy when we try to reconcile simantic differences. eg,
> reference your first paragraph:"
> .....while operating in STRUCTURAL CRUISE
> LIMITATION...."Please define "structural
> cruise". Also, what discipline categorizes structural cruise
> as a LIMITATION as opposed to a NORMAL OPERATING condition?
> All Operations Manuals I have been exposed to in the
> last 63 years cite Limitations as Vne, VA, Vlo, Vle, Vfe,max
> allow. TO Gr WT, max fuel, max tire speed, max pressure
> differential, max operating altitude, plus several other
> operating limitations. All these limitations are derived
> from one source; the TYPE CERTIFICATE AND DATA SHEETS and
> amendments thereto, eg, supplemental type certificates if
> applicable. Also in your first paragraph you use the
> phrase "....while operating within their envelope...."
> But you do no!
> t specify what envelope you're referring to. I agree,
> there is no yellow arc on the airspeed indicator in an F-5
> but there is certainly a Mach meter and a Max Mach
> operating LIMITATION. Plainly, it is very difficult to
> translate terminology between two different
> disciplines.
>
> I'll have to finish this treatise at a later time;
> I'm already beyond my curfew limitation. I look forward to
> your continuing thoughts on this subject. BTW, I
> currently own and fly both a YAK -50 and a Harmon
> Rocket and you're correct, I don't want any major
> dissassemblies at altitude so I'm always alert for new ways
> to assure the aircraft remains in reuseable condition.
> Cheers!
>
> Cliff
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: "ACTIVE NZ - Andrew" <andrew@nzactive.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
> Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:29:33 +1200
>
>
>
> DOC
>
> Please excuse me for intruding on your list. I fly a Harmon
> Rocket, (mainly) but eavesdrop on the Yak list cos I'm in a
> partnership that is rebuilding a Yak-3 in New Zealand.
>
> Anyway...
>
> I have been concerned about this issue for some time, in my
> Harmon Rocket. It goes kinda fast, and sometimes I hit
> pretty harsh bumps when I'm flying in the yellow arc. (yeah,
> I know, I should anticipate better.) I've often wondered if
> there's a way to check for metal fatigue or overstressing -
> is this magnaflux thing something that can be done to wing
> and horizontal stablizer spars? Is it a reasonably common
> procedure (ie, likely to be available in NZ)...or a real
> specialist kinda thing?
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Roger Kemp M.D.
> Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 3:30 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
>
>
>
> Cliff,
>
> AnswerYes I know of 2 aircraft that went down while
> operating in structural cruise Limitation as you
> say. Both were Class A accidents with 2 fatalities in each.
> One an F-5F and the other a T-38. I served as the flight
> surgeon representative to the SIB (safety investigation
> board) on the F-5 and I was the interim representative on
> the T-38 SIB. Four men died while operating their
> aircraft within NORMAL OPERATION
> PROCEDURE as you say. We call it differently since
> we dont have a yellow arcs on our airspeed
> indicators. Incidentally, one of the IPs in the F-5
> was a good friend of mine. So yes, I know
> firsthand of two aircraft that failed while
> operating within their envelope.
>
> Now the question I have for you is: Are you prepared to
> totally bet your rosy pink on whatever Red Star Aircraft it
> is you are flying? Have you NDId/ magnafluxed your
> aircraft to determine if you have metal fatigue or not.
> Its a military aircraft not a spam can. It was and
> is operated like or as a military aircraft. Cruise limits
> dont exist. Vne and G limits do. An you do not know
> for dead nuts sure what the real structural (read
> metal fatigue state) integrity of your spare or spine is.
> You can only hope that the entries in that Eastern bloc
> aircrafts log book really were done and not just
> pencil whipped. Granted, these aircraft are tough as
> nails but so are/ were the F-5, T-38, F-15, A-10, and the
> F-16. Their wing are cracking. In some cases the wings are
> falling off as well as their dorsal spines are breaking. You
> just never know.
>
> Ohmake it 3 aircraft that I know of that
> broke up while operating within their NORMAL
> OPERATING LIMITS. I believe the St Louis Guard
> lost a twin tail sissy to structural failure while
> operating in normal ops limits approximately a
> year and a half ago. That Eagle driver was lucky, he got out
> with a shattered elbow and some contusions. Rumor has it
> they are still extracting fragments of seat cushion from his
> rosy pink after he sucked it up while tumbling/
> somersaulting in the pit while trying to figure out why his
> jet was not responding any longer.
>
> By the way my comment initially was made in jest in
> response to Sabers last line of his post. I was not
> aware we had a MAX GUST LOAD on the YAK.
> Maybe the CJ does. G limits yesVne yes
> max crosswind limits yes.Max Gust Load ???
>
> We do not have cocktail hours in any of the squadrons
> I have served with either. Either the beer light was lit or
> it was not. The beer light was lit when the last jet
> landed. Cocktail hour...
>
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of netmaster15@juno.com
> Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 3:35 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
>
>
>
> Doc,How many people do you know who have
> "busted their asses" due to exceeding max structural
> cruise without exceeding Vne? This should raise the
> questions: What is max structural cruise meant to protect?
> and, Is max structural cruise a "LIMITATION" , or a NORMAL
> OPERATION PROCEDURE? If the latter, then, I submit it is no
> different than any other number within the yellow arc and
> does not deserve to be over dignified beyond those numbers
> within such parameter. In other words, it is nothing more
> than cocktail information. If one insists upon operating
> within the yellow arc, do not encounter turbulent air lest
> you exceed MAX GUST LOAD; now there IS a number you
> should know and understand beyond the cocktail hour.
>
> Cliff Umscheid
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: "Roger Kemp M.D." <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
> Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:29:36 -0500
>
> Just rememberthe ass you bust maybe your
> own.
>
> doc
>
>
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of jblake207@comcast.net
> Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 10:47 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
>
>
>
> Find attached a "Vee" Speeds chart that I use for my
> CJ. Developed from the manuals and from lots of
> questions asked of people like Pappy, Sapp, Savarese and
> others.
>
>
>
> If I were a lawyer, I'd make a comment about using at your
> own risk and that this office cannot be held liable for any
> incorrect data... blah, blah, blah. I'm not a lawyer,
> so let me simply say use or lose.
>
>
>
> JB
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Warren Hill" <k7wx@earthlink.net>
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 10:12:26 PM GMT -06:00
> US/Canada Central
> Subject: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
>
>
> Fellow CJ-ers,
>
> I wonder if there is a consensus on a figure in knots for
> maximum structural cruise for the CJ-6A?
>
> Warren Hill
> Mesa, AZ
>
> On Jul 26, 2009, at 6:19 PM, Chris Wise wrote:
>
> > G'Day,
> >
> > Thanks to Walt, Pappy and Dennis for replying.
> > The M14P has a rubber lip seal as well as a slinger,
> like Walt says.
> > The slinger by itself is inadequate, especially during
> aeros.
> > Any other advice would be appreciated re removing prop
> reduction box
> > and the prop shaft.
> >
> > Thanks and Cheers,
> > Chris.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> -Matt Dralle, List =========
>
>
>
>
>
> ===================================
> ttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ===================================
> tronics.com
> ===================================
> www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
> ===================================
> ttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ===================================
> tronics.com
> ===================================
> www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
>
> ky"Z+M4Gq(wrIQhaxr^jzZ("X,ZIJr*'!y:0ZwE,jwfffi0fr(Z(jBm
> &j',r5h.+-
>
>
> Forum -
> FAQ,
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> List Contribution Web Site -
> -Matt
> Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
THE PERFECT SOLUTION TO NATIONAL HEALTH CARE
Here is one way to ensure a perfect national health care
system......................
DEMAND POLITICIANS BELONG TO THE SAME HEALTH CARE PLAN THEY WOULD IMPOSE
ON THE REST OF US! ! !
Guaranteed to work......don't you think?
Pass it on and let's see what happens !
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: THIS WILL WORK |
Please save this sort of e-mail for other venues.
Thanks, Blitz
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 28, 2009, at 5:28 PM, "Frank" <frank@orionite.com> wrote:
> THE PERFECT SOLUTION TO NATIONAL HEALTH CARE
>
> Here is one way to ensure a perfect national health care
> system......................
>
> DEMAND POLITICIANS BELONG TO THE SAME HEALTH CARE PLAN THEY WOULD
> IMPOSE ON THE REST OF US! ! !
>
> Guaranteed to work......don't you think?
>
> Pass it on and let's see what happens !
>
>
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: | Maximum structural cruise |
Andrew,
So you are one of the guys involved in restoring that YAK 3 in NZ. I
think I talked to someone about that bird at onetime then decided the
expense would exceed the benefit. Looks like that may well be the case
with the current economy here in the US.
To answer your question, yes the capability to eddy current and
magnaflux along with, NDT (xray) exist. The expense of xraying the
airframe for me is prohibitive. I probably could get the guys in the
airframe shop to NDT my bird when they are doing one of our jets but
that would be highly illegal for me to ask for that. So, I just have to
pull panels and stick a digital camera in the wings and fuselage to
snap pictures of those places that I cannot see by looking in. Another
thing to invest in I would guess (I have not yet) is a bore scope. Still
though, if you can see the cracks with your eyes it is already a big
problem.
http://www.directindustry.com/scripts/IDPHeader.php?s=9257
<http://www.directindustry.com/scripts/IDPHeader.php?s=9257&URL=http%
3A%2F%2Fwww.geinspectiontechnologies.com%2Fen%2Fproducts%2Feddy_current%2
Findex.html&IDVisite=&MotCle=&RefCat=&IDProduit=57817&IDProdSourc
e=&SourceType=Produit>
&URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geinspectiontechnologies.com%2Fen%2Fproducts%2Fed
dy_current%2Findex.html&IDVisite=&MotCle=&RefCat=&IDProduit=57817
&IDProdSource=&SourceType=Produit
The above url will show you a portable eddy current system (Pulstec)
made by GE for the aerospace industry. I have not had the guts to ask
the cost of the devise and the practicality of having a portable eddy
current sytem begs practicality for me.
Magnaflux is a spray kit that can be found in most auto parts stores. It
is a combination of penetrentt and developer that you spray on the
surface to detect a crack. It works well for accessible areas of the
airframe. I used it to find a crack in my fuel tank on my 50. Here is
the URL for Magnaflux for more info.
http://www.magnaflux.com/ProductOverview/Penetrant/tabid/96/Default.aspx
The two above systems are affordable not practical for doing a complete
spar. Someone else can comment of that. I
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ACTIVE NZ -
Andrew
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 11:30 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
DOC
Please excuse me for intruding on your list. I fly a Harmon Rocket,
(mainly) but eavesdrop on the Yak list cos I'm in a partnership that is
rebuilding a Yak-3 in New Zealand.
Anyway...
I have been concerned about this issue for some time, in my Harmon
Rocket. It goes kinda fast, and sometimes I hit pretty harsh bumps when
I'm flying in the yellow arc. (yeah, I know, I should anticipate
better.) I've often wondered if there's a way to check for metal fatigue
or overstressing - is this magnaflux thing something that can be done to
wing and horizontal stablizer spars? Is it a reasonably common procedure
(ie, likely to be available in NZ)...or a real specialist kinda thing?
Andrew
_____
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
M.D.
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 3:30 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Cliff,
AnswerYes I know of 2 aircraft that went down while operating
in structural cruise =9CLimitation=9D as you say. Both were
Class A accidents with 2 fatalities in each. One an F-5F and the other a
T-38. I served as the flight surgeon representative to the SIB (safety
investigation board) on the F-5 and I was the interim representative on
the T-38 SIB. Four men died while operating their aircraft within
=9C NORMAL OPERATION PROCEDURE=99 as you say. We call it
differently since we don=99t have a yellow arcs on our airspeed
indicators. Incidentally, one of the IP=99s in the F-5 was a good
friend of mine. So yes, I know firsthand of two aircraft that failed
while operating within their envelope.
Now the question I have for you is: Are you prepared to totally bet your
rosy pink on whatever Red Star Aircraft it is you are flying? Have you
NDI=99d/ magnafluxed your aircraft to determine if you have metal
fatigue or not. Its=99 a military aircraft not a spam can. It was
and is operated like or as a military aircraft. Cruise limits
don=99t exist. Vne and G limits do. An you do not know for dead
nuts sure what the real structural (read metal fatigue state) integrity
of your spare or spine is. You can only hope that the entries in that
Eastern bloc aircraft=99s log book really were done and not just
pencil whipped. Granted, these aircraft are tough as nails but so are/
were the F-5, T-38, F-15, A-10, and the F-16. Their wing are cracking.
In some cases the wings are falling off as well as their dorsal spines
are breaking. You just never know.
Ohmake it 3 aircraft that I know of that =9C broke
up=9D while operating within their =9C NORMAL OPERATING
LIMITS=9D. I believe the St Louis Guard lost a twin tail sissy
to structural failure while operating =9C in normal ops
limits=9D approximately a year and a half ago. That Eagle driver
was lucky, he got out with a shattered elbow and some contusions. Rumor
has it they are still extracting fragments of seat cushion from his rosy
pink after he sucked it up while tumbling/ somersaulting in the pit
while trying to figure out why his jet was not responding any longer.
By the way my comment initially was made in jest in response to
Saber=99s last line of his post. I was not aware we had a
=9CMAX GUST LOAD=9D on the YAK. Maybe the CJ does. G
limits yesVne yes max crosswind limits
yes.Max Gust Load ???
We do not have cocktail hours in any of the squadrons I have served
with either. Either the beer light was lit or it was not. The beer
light was lit when the last jet landed. Cocktail hour...
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
netmaster15@juno.com
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 3:35 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Doc, How many people do you know who have "busted their asses" due to
exceeding max structural cruise without exceeding Vne? This should
raise the questions: What is max structural cruise meant to protect?
and, Is max structural cruise a "LIMITATION" , or a NORMAL OPERATION
PROCEDURE? If the latter, then, I submit it is no different than any
other number within the yellow arc and does not deserve to be over
dignified beyond those numbers within such parameter. In other words, it
is nothing more than cocktail information. If one insists upon operating
within the yellow arc, do not encounter turbulent air lest you exceed
MAX GUST LOAD; now there IS a number you should know and understand
beyond the cocktail hour.
Cliff Umscheid
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Roger Kemp M.D." <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Just remember=C3=A2=82=AC=C2the ass you bust maybe your own.
doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
jblake207@comcast.net
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 10:47 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Find attached a "Vee" Speeds chart that I use for my CJ. Developed from
the manuals and from lots of questions asked of people like Pappy, Sapp,
Savarese and others.
If I were a lawyer, I'd make a comment about using at your own risk and
that this office cannot be held liable for any incorrect data... blah,
blah, blah. I'm not a lawyer, so let me simply say use or lose.
JB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Warren Hill" <k7wx@earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 10:12:26 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Fellow CJ-ers,
I wonder if there is a consensus on a figure in knots for maximum
structural cruise for the CJ-6A?
Warren Hill
Mesa, AZ
On Jul 26, 2009, at 6:19 PM, Chris Wise wrote:
> G'Day,
>
> Thanks to Walt, Pappy and Dennis for replying.
> The M14P has a rubber lip seal as well as a slinger, like Walt says.
> The slinger by itself is inadequate, especially during aeros.
> Any other advice would be appreciated re removing prop reduction box
> and the prop shaft.
>
> Thanks and Cheers,
> Chris.
>
>
-Matt Dralle, List =========
ttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
tronics.com
www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
~
_____
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: | Maximum structural cruise |
Andrew
-
I believe Air New Zealand do have xray equipment at Chrischurch
-
Regards
-
Keith
-
Yak 52
Ashburton NZ
--- On Wed, 29/7/09, Roger Kemp M.D. <viperdoc@mindspring.com> wrote:
From: Roger Kemp M.D. <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Received: Wednesday, 29 July, 2009, 2:24 PM
Andrew,
So you are one of the guys involved in restoring that YAK 3 in NZ. I think
I talked to someone about that bird at onetime then decided the expense wou
ld exceed the benefit. Looks like that may well be the case with the curren
t economy here in the US.
To answer your question, yes the capability to eddy current and magnaflux a
long with, NDT (xray) exist. The expense of xraying the airframe for me is
prohibitive. I probably could get the guys in the airframe shop to NDT my b
ird when they are doing one of our jets but that would be highly illegal fo
r me to ask for that. So, I just have to pull panels and stick a digital ca
mera- in the wings and fuselage to snap pictures of those places that I c
annot see by looking in. -Another thing to invest in I would guess (I hav
e not yet) is a bore scope. Still though, if you can see the cracks with yo
ur eyes it is already a big problem.
http://www.directindustry.com/scripts/IDPHeader.php?s=9257&URL=http%3A%
2F%2Fwww.geinspectiontechnologies.com%2Fen%2Fproducts%2Feddy_current%2Finde
x.html&IDVisite=&MotCle=&RefCat=&IDProduit=57817&IDProdSource=&So
urceType=Produit
The above url will show you a portable eddy current system (Pulstec) made b
y GE for the aerospace industry. I have not had the guts to ask the cost of
the devise and the practicality of having a portable eddy current sytem be
gs practicality for me. -
Magnaflux is a spray kit that can be found in most auto parts stores. It is
a combination of penetrentt and developer that you spray on the surface to
detect a crack. It works well for accessible areas of the airframe. I used
it to find a crack in my fuel tank on my 50. -Here is the URL for Magnaf
lux for more info. http://www.magnaflux.com/ProductOverview/Penetrant/tabid
/96/Default.aspx
The two above systems are affordable not practical for doing a complete spa
r. Someone else can comment of that. I
Doc
-
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@mat
ronics.com] On Behalf Of ACTIVE NZ - Andrew
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 11:30 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
-
DOC
-
Please excuse me for intruding on your list. I fly a Harmon Rocket, (mainly
) but eavesdrop on the Yak list cos I'm in a partnership that is rebuilding
a Yak-3 in New Zealand.
-
Anyway...
-
I have been concerned about this issue for some time, in my Harmon Rocket.
It goes kinda fast, and sometimes I hit pretty harsh bumps when I'm flying
in the yellow arc. (yeah, I know, I should anticipate better.) I've often w
ondered if there's a way to check for metal fatigue or overstressing - is t
his magnaflux thing something that can be done to wing and horizontal stabl
izer spars? Is it a reasonably common procedure (ie, likely to be available
in NZ)...or a real specialist kinda thing?
-
Andrew
-
-
-
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: | Maximum structural cruise |
Cliff,
I was using your own terminology from your post to reply with.
Personally, the Ops Limits published in the POH and the DASH 1 are the
numbers I am familiar with when flying my spam can or YAK. With the my
guys in the squadron it is the DASH 1. Like Jon (Saber), I too have had
to scrounge to find the Regulator V speeds.
Part 23 of the FAA Reg addresses all of the catagories that you refer to
for civilian normal, utility, aerobatic, and commuter category aircraft.
The following URL will take you to the electronic version of the FAA
Regs.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr;sid=6da4e564d2b1
01b3527c1d742e918420;rgn=div5;view=text;node=14%3A1.0.1.3.10;idno=
14;cc=ecfr#14:1.0.1.3.10.3.70.8 FAA reg 23.33 refers to the Gust
Limitations you refered to. The AF has its=99 own set of regs that
address the ops limits as does the published DASH 1 for each of the
operational aircraft. I am not aware of a Max Mach for the F16. I am
aware of max G limitations for various stores configurations.
Were you referring to Critical Mach? Mcr? The number where the aircraft
is flying at the lowest Mach number at which the airflow over a small
region of the wing reaches the speed of sound? Are you trying to take
me down the path of a discussion on Mach tuck. If so, why and what does
it have to do with flying YAK 50=99s? We are never going to get
there so compressibility is not an issue. It was an issue for the Bf
109, P-51, P-38, P-47, Spitfire, Me-262 and the P-80 along with the
Gloster Meteor. I have not heard the Russians discuss it with the YAK
3=99s but they probably experienced Mach tuck too. It was an issue
with the Mig 15 early own as I understand too. Then again the intake was
subject to Mcr with shock wave development in the intake causing
compressor stalls too. A lot has been learned about flying transonic and
supersonic since we were kids.
I believe your question was =9C How many people do you know who
have "busted their asses" due to exceeding max structural cruise
without exceeding Vne=9D The answer is 3 that I am aware of
personally that broke up operating within the published ops limits for
the particular aircraft. You=99ll have to tell me what the max
structural cruise is though. Are we back to operating in the yellow arc?
Check 6,
Doc
PS.
By the way, tonight at 2200, the Military Channel is having show on
called Operation Red October. It is about German owned MIG 29 vs the
F-18. Enjoy.
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
netmaster15@juno.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 1:15 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Doc, Thankyou for your response on the subject of " max structural
cruise" . If I understand you correctly we are both saying the same
thing; the water gets a bit muddy when we try to reconcile simantic
differences. eg, reference your first paragraph: " .....while
operating in STRUCTURAL CRUISE LIMITATION...." Please define
"structural cruise". Also, what discipline categorizes structural cruise
as a LIMITATION as opposed to a NORMAL OPERATING condition? All
Operations Manuals I have been exposed to in the last 63 years cite
Limitations as Vne, VA, Vlo, Vle, Vfe,max allow. TO Gr WT, max fuel, max
tire speed, max pressure differential, max operating altitude, plus
several other operating limitations. All these limitations are derived
from one source; the TYPE CERTIFICATE AND DATA SHEETS and amendments
thereto, eg, supplemental type certificates if applicable. Also in your
first paragraph you use the phrase "....while operating within their
envelope...." But you do not specify what envelope you're referring to.
I agree, there is no yellow arc on the airspeed indicator in an F-5 but
there is certainly a Mach meter and a Max Mach operating LIMITATION.
Plainly, it is very difficult to translate terminology between two
different disciplines.
I'll have to finish this treatise at a later time; I'm already beyond
my curfew limitation. I look forward to your continuing thoughts on
this subject. BTW, I currently own and fly both a YAK -50 and a Harmon
Rocket and you're correct, I don't want any major dissassemblies at
altitude so I'm always alert for new ways to assure the aircraft remains
in reuseable condition. Cheers!
Cliff
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "ACTIVE NZ - Andrew" <andrew@nzactive.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
=C3=AF=C2=BB=C2
DOC
Please excuse me for intruding on your list. I fly a Harmon Rocket,
(mainly) but eavesdrop on the Yak list cos I'm in a partnership that is
rebuilding a Yak-3 in New Zealand.
Anyway...
I have been concerned about this issue for some time, in my Harmon
Rocket. It goes kinda fast, and sometimes I hit pretty harsh bumps when
I'm flying in the yellow arc. (yeah, I know, I should anticipate
better.) I've often wondered if there's a way to check for metal fatigue
or overstressing - is this magnaflux thing something that can be done to
wing and horizontal stablizer spars? Is it a reasonably common procedure
(ie, likely to be available in NZ)...or a real specialist kinda thing?
Andrew
_____
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
M.D.
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 3:30 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Cliff,
Answer=C3=A2=82=AC=C2Yes I know of 2 aircraft that went down while
operating in structural cruise
=C3=A2=82=AC=C5=93Limitation=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=9D as you say. Both
were Class A accidents with 2 fatalities in each. One an F-5F and the
other a T-38. I served as the flight surgeon representative to the SIB
(safety investigation board) on the F-5 and I was the interim
representative on the T-38 SIB. Four men died while operating their
aircraft within =C3=A2=82=AC=C5=93 NORMAL OPERATION
PROCEDURE=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2 as you say. We call it differently
since we don=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2t have a yellow arcs on our airspeed
indicators. Incidentally, one of the IP=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2s in the
F-5 was a good friend of mine. So yes, I know firsthand of two
aircraft that failed while operating within their envelope.
Now the question I have for you is: Are you prepared to totally bet your
rosy pink on whatever Red Star Aircraft it is you are flying? Have you
NDI=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2d/ magnafluxed your aircraft to determine if
you have metal fatigue or not. Its=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2 a military
aircraft not a spam can. It was and is operated like or as a military
aircraft. Cruise limits don=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2t exist. Vne and G
limits do. An you do not know for dead nuts sure what the real
structural (read metal fatigue state) integrity of your spare or spine
is. You can only hope that the entries in that Eastern bloc
aircraft=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2s log book really were done and not just
pencil whipped. Granted, these aircraft are tough as nails but so are/
were the F-5, T-38, F-15, A-10, and the F-16. Their wing are cracking.
In some cases the wings are falling off as well as their dorsal spines
are breaking. You just never know.
Oh=C3=A2=82=AC=C2make it 3 aircraft that I know of that
=C3=A2=82=AC=C5=93 broke up=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=9D while operating
within their =C3=A2=82=AC=C5=93 NORMAL OPERATING
LIMITS=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=9D. I believe the St Louis Guard lost a twin
tail sissy to structural failure while operating =C3=A2=82=AC=C5=93
in normal ops limits=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=9D approximately a year and a
half ago. That Eagle driver was lucky, he got out with a shattered elbow
and some contusions. Rumor has it they are still extracting fragments of
seat cushion from his rosy pink after he sucked it up while tumbling/
somersaulting in the pit while trying to figure out why his jet was not
responding any longer.
By the way my comment initially was made in jest in response to
Saber=C3=A2=82=AC=84=A2s last line of his post. I was not aware we
had a =C3=A2=82=AC=C5=93MAX GUST LOAD=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=9D on the
YAK. Maybe the CJ does. G limits yes=C3=A2=82=AC=C2Vne
yes=C3=A2=82=AC=C2 max crosswind limits
yes=C3=A2=82=AC=C2.Max Gust Load ???
We do not have cocktail hours in any of the squadrons I have served
with either. Either the beer light was lit or it was not. The beer
light was lit when the last jet landed. Cocktail
hour=C3=A2=82=AC=C2...
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
netmaster15@juno.com
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 3:35 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Doc, How many people do you know who have "busted their asses" due to
exceeding max structural cruise without exceeding Vne? This should
raise the questions: What is max structural cruise meant to protect?
and, Is max structural cruise a "LIMITATION" , or a NORMAL OPERATION
PROCEDURE? If the latter, then, I submit it is no different than any
other number within the yellow arc and does not deserve to be over
dignified beyond those numbers within such parameter. In other words, it
is nothing more than cocktail information. If one insists upon operating
within the yellow arc, do not encounter turbulent air lest you exceed
MAX GUST LOAD; now there IS a number you should know and understand
beyond the cocktail hour.
Cliff Umscheid
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Roger Kemp M.D." <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Just remember=C3=83=C2=A2=C3=A2=9A=C2=AC=C3=82=C2the ass you
bust maybe your own.
doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
jblake207@comcast.net
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 10:47 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Find attached a "Vee" Speeds chart that I use for my CJ. Developed from
the manuals and from lots of questions asked of people like Pappy, Sapp,
Savarese and others.
If I were a lawyer, I'd make a comment about using at your own risk and
that this office cannot be held liable for any incorrect data... blah,
blah, blah. I'm not a lawyer, so let me simply say use or lose.
JB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Warren Hill" <k7wx@earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 10:12:26 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Fellow CJ-ers,
I wonder if there is a consensus on a figure in knots for maximum
structural cruise for the CJ-6A?
Warren Hill
Mesa, AZ
On Jul 26, 2009, at 6:19 PM, Chris Wise wrote:
> G'Day,
>
> Thanks to Walt, Pappy and Dennis for replying.
> The M14P has a rubber lip seal as well as a slinger, like Walt says.
> The slinger by itself is inadequate, especially during aeros.
> Any other advice would be appreciated re removing prop reduction box
> and the prop shaft.
>
> Thanks and Cheers,
> Chris.
>
>
-Matt Dralle, List =========
ttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
tronics.com
www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
ttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
tronics.com
www.matronics.com/contribution
ky=C2=B7=C3=A8=C5=BE=C3=9B"=C3=8D=C3=AD=C5=93=C2=A2Z+=C3=93M4=C3=93G=C3=9A
q=C3=A7(=C2=BA=C2=B8=C5=BE=C2=AEw=C2=B0r=B9=C2=AB=B0=C3=AA=C3
=93=C3=C2=90=C2=B8=C2=AC=C2=B4I=C5=A1=C5-Qh=C2=AE=C3=A9
=9D=C2=B1=C3=ABax=C3=86=C2=AD=C2=AE=B0=C3=A2r=C3=82=C3=A2=C2=B2=C3=91
^j=C3=9B=C2=ABz=C3=83Z=C2=BE(=C2=B6=C5-=C3=AD=C2=A1=C2=BA=C3=A8=C3=82=C3
=87=C2=AD=C3=A9=C5=A1=C5=B8"=C3=A2=C2=B2=C3=9B=C2=AD=C5-X=C2=AD
=B0=C3=AB,=C2=B9=C3=88Z=C2=B0=C2=B8=C2=AC=C2=B5I=C3J=C3=C3=AC
r=C2=B8=C2=A9=C2=B6*'[1]=C2=B7!=C5-=C3=B7=99y=C2=AA=C3=9C=9E
:0=C5=BEZw=C2=B0=C3=9A=C3=88=C3=A8=C3=82=C3=87=9A=C2=ABE
_____
=C3=A1=C2=A2=C3=9A,=C2=AA=C3=9Ejwf=C2=B9=C3=88f=C2=B9=C3=88f=C2=A2
=C2=B7=C5=A1-=C2=B7=C5=B8-=C3=9Bi=C3=C3=BC0=C3=82f=C2=AD
=C2=AE=B0=C3=A2r=C3=87(=BA=C3=B3Z=C2=BE(=C2=B6=C5-=C3=98jB=C3
=A2=C2=B2=C3=98m=C2=B6=C5=B8=C3=C3=83
&j=C3=9A=C3=A8=C5=BE',r=B0=C25=C2=AB=C3=A2=C2=81=C2=ABh=C2=AD
-=C2=A4.+-=C3=BD=C2=A3
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: | mounting fuel flow transducer in a CJ |
Just wondering how you guys with fuel flow instruments in your CJ are mounting
the transducer.
There is a very short fuel line between pump and carb and I believe there needs
to be 6" inches of straight fuel line in and out of the transducer.
The angles that the fittings enter the fuel pump and carb make it look a little
awkward to get those straight runs.
Thanks
--------
Keith McKinley
700HS
KFIT
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=255070#255070
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: | Maximum structural cruise |
Sweet. Thx for info, doc & keith...will follow up.
And, uh, I never HEARD of an aircraft where the expense exceeds the
benefit. Do they make them? :)
Andrew
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Keith Pickford
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 3:31 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
Andrew
I believe Air New Zealand do have xray equipment at Chrischurch
Regards
Keith
Yak 52
Ashburton NZ
--- On Wed, 29/7/09, Roger Kemp M.D. <viperdoc@mindspring.com> wrote:
From: Roger Kemp M.D. <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Received: Wednesday, 29 July, 2009, 2:24 PM
Andrew,
So you are one of the guys involved in restoring that YAK 3 in
NZ. I think I talked to someone about that bird at onetime then decided
the expense would exceed the benefit. Looks like that may well be the
case with the current economy here in the US.
To answer your question, yes the capability to eddy current and
magnaflux along with, NDT (xray) exist. The expense of xraying the
airframe for me is prohibitive. I probably could get the guys in the
airframe shop to NDT my bird when they are doing one of our jets but
that would be highly illegal for me to ask for that. So, I just have to
pull panels and stick a digital camera in the wings and fuselage to
snap pictures of those places that I cannot see by looking in. Another
thing to invest in I would guess (I have not yet) is a bore scope. Still
though, if you can see the cracks with your eyes it is already a big
problem.
http://www.directindustry.com/scripts/IDPHeader.php?s=9257&URL=http%3
A%2
F%2Fwww.geinspectiontechnologies.com%2Fen%2Fproducts%2Feddy_current%2Fin
dex.html&IDVisite=&MotCle=&RefCat=&IDProduit=57817&IDProdSource=
&SourceT
ype=Produit
The above url will show you a portable eddy current system
(Pulstec) made by GE for the aerospace industry. I have not had the guts
to ask the cost of the devise and the practicality of having a portable
eddy current sytem begs practicality for me.
Magnaflux is a spray kit that can be found in most auto parts
stores. It is a combination of penetrentt and developer that you spray
on the surface to detect a crack. It works well for accessible areas of
the airframe. I used it to find a crack in my fuel tank on my 50. Here
is the URL for Magnaflux for more info.
http://www.magnaflux.com/ProductOverview/Penetrant/tabid/96/Default.aspx
<http://www...magnaflux.com/ProductOverview/Penetrant/tabid/96/Default.a
spx>
The two above systems are affordable not practical for doing a
complete spar. Someone else can comment of that. I
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of ACTIVE NZ -
Andrew
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 11:30 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
DOC
Please excuse me for intruding on your list. I fly a Harmon
Rocket, (mainly) but eavesdrop on the Yak list cos I'm in a partnership
that is rebuilding a Yak-3 in New Zealand.
Anyway...
I have been concerned about this issue for some time, in my
Harmon Rocket. It goes kinda fast, and sometimes I hit pretty harsh
bumps when I'm flying in the yellow arc. (yeah, I know, I should
anticipate better.) I've often wondered if there's a way to check for
metal fatigue or overstressing - is this magnaflux thing something that
can be done to wing and horizontal stablizer spars? Is it a reasonably
common procedure (ie, likely to be available in NZ)...or a real
specialist kinda thing?
Andrew
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: | Maximum structural cruise |
I once did +9G and -5G on my Yak 50. No damage, theoretically allowed, but a very
unwise thing to do. And I'll do it NEVER again, not with a Yak 50.
Yak 50's are destined to be treated as oldtimers. Nice and smooth aerobatics, formation
flying. That's it.
The 55 is a much stronger built. But even then, why would you pull more than +6G
or push more then -3G, unless you try to win Advanced competition ? And for
Unlimited you could barely even participate with a 55.
Jan
YK50 RA2005K
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sarah Tobin
Sent: woensdag 29 juli 2009 0:52
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
5 Gs? That's it? I haven't flown the 50, but in my 55, I routinely fly 6G positive
and 3G negative. Heard anything regarding the 55?
Smash
--- On Tue, 7/28/09, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
> From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, July 28, 2009, 8:31 AM
> "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
>
>
> Comments:
>
>
> In the Marine Corps, there really is no such thing as a Max
> Mach Operating Limitation on most tactical aircraft .... I
> am sure there is probably one for the prop driven aircraft,
> but on the jets, the mach limit is that speed you reach
> while going straight down in burner... If you happen to have
> burner.
>
> Of note is the fact that we too are seeing major structural
> fatigue problems in a lot of our older aircraft. That
> was the single MAJOR REASON that the A-6E Intruder was
> retired early.
>
> On my personal YAK-50, I was originally told that the
> aircraft was rated at plus 9, negative 6 G. Then I did
> a ton of research and found that you were supposed to RECORD
> certain parameters of each flight and this added points to a
> number that when it was met, the wings on the aircraft were
> basically retired. In the case of the YAK-50, in many
> cases the whole aircraft was "retired" sometimes after just
> 50 hours of flight time. Of note is the fact that most
> everyone pulls that recording equipment out of the 50's AND
> 52's, and doesn't "bother with it anymore". Lot's of
> other pilots have done this kind of thing before our YAK's
> came on to the scene. Examples: T-34's.
> AT-6's. Both of those aircraft types have experienced
> the "WING OFF" warning light illuminating during
> flight. With fatal results in every case... And most
> of those were wearing chutes by the way. I have
> personally limited my 50 to plus 5 G's and negative 2.
> Even that is questionable, but I am willing to !
> take the risk, but do acknowledge that it IS a risk.
> I also do not compete the aircraft anymore, and I don't
> participate in any ACM stuff.
>
> Eddy current and magnafluxing tests are pretty much out of
> my budget range. So... It's a risk.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of netmaster15@juno.com
> Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 2:15
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
>
> Doc, Thankyou for your response on the subject of "
> max structural cruise" . If I understand you correctly
> we are both saying the same thing; the water gets a bit
> muddy when we try to reconcile simantic differences. eg,
> reference your first paragraph: "
> .....while operating in STRUCTURAL CRUISE
> LIMITATION...." Please define "structural
> cruise". Also, what discipline categorizes structural cruise
> as a LIMITATION as opposed to a NORMAL OPERATING condition?
> All Operations Manuals I have been exposed to in the
> last 63 years cite Limitations as Vne, VA, Vlo, Vle, Vfe,max
> allow. TO Gr WT, max fuel, max tire speed, max pressure
> differential, max operating altitude, plus several other
> operating limitations. All these limitations are derived
> from one source; the TYPE CERTIFICATE AND DATA SHEETS and
> amendments thereto, eg, supplemental type certificates if
> applicable. Also in your first paragraph you use the
> phrase "....while operating within their envelope...."
> But you do no!
> t specify what envelope you're referring to. I agree,
> there is no yellow arc on the airspeed indicator in an F-5
> but there is certainly a Mach meter and a Max Mach
> operating LIMITATION. Plainly, it is very difficult to
> translate terminology between two different
> disciplines.
>
> I'll have to finish this treatise at a later time;
> I'm already beyond my curfew limitation. I look forward to
> your continuing thoughts on this subject. BTW, I
> currently own and fly both a YAK -50 and a Harmon
> Rocket and you're correct, I don't want any major
> dissassemblies at altitude so I'm always alert for new ways
> to assure the aircraft remains in reuseable condition.
> Cheers!
>
> Cliff
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: "ACTIVE NZ - Andrew" <andrew@nzactive.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
> Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:29:33 +1200
>
>
>
> DOC
>
> Please excuse me for intruding on your list. I fly a Harmon
> Rocket, (mainly) but eavesdrop on the Yak list cos I'm in a
> partnership that is rebuilding a Yak-3 in New Zealand.
>
> Anyway...
>
> I have been concerned about this issue for some time, in my
> Harmon Rocket. It goes kinda fast, and sometimes I hit
> pretty harsh bumps when I'm flying in the yellow arc. (yeah,
> I know, I should anticipate better.) I've often wondered if
> there's a way to check for metal fatigue or overstressing -
> is this magnaflux thing something that can be done to wing
> and horizontal stablizer spars? Is it a reasonably common
> procedure (ie, likely to be available in NZ)...or a real
> specialist kinda thing?
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Roger Kemp M.D.
> Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 3:30 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
>
>
>
> Cliff,
>
> AnswerYes I know of 2 aircraft that went down while
> operating in structural cruise Limitation as you
> say. Both were Class A accidents with 2 fatalities in each.
> One an F-5F and the other a T-38. I served as the flight
> surgeon representative to the SIB (safety investigation
> board) on the F-5 and I was the interim representative on
> the T-38 SIB. Four men died while operating their
> aircraft within NORMAL OPERATION
> PROCEDURE as you say. We call it differently since
> we dont have a yellow arcs on our airspeed
> indicators. Incidentally, one of the IPs in the F-5
> was a good friend of mine. So yes, I know
> firsthand of two aircraft that failed while
> operating within their envelope.
>
> Now the question I have for you is: Are you prepared to
> totally bet your rosy pink on whatever Red Star Aircraft it
> is you are flying? Have you NDId/ magnafluxed your
> aircraft to determine if you have metal fatigue or not.
> Its a military aircraft not a spam can. It was and
> is operated like or as a military aircraft. Cruise limits
> dont exist. Vne and G limits do. An you do not know
> for dead nuts sure what the real structural (read
> metal fatigue state) integrity of your spare or spine is.
> You can only hope that the entries in that Eastern bloc
> aircrafts log book really were done and not just
> pencil whipped. Granted, these aircraft are tough as
> nails but so are/ were the F-5, T-38, F-15, A-10, and the
> F-16. Their wing are cracking. In some cases the wings are
> falling off as well as their dorsal spines are breaking. You
> just never know.
>
> Ohmake it 3 aircraft that I know of that
> broke up while operating within their NORMAL
> OPERATING LIMITS. I believe the St Louis Guard
> lost a twin tail sissy to structural failure while
> operating in normal ops limits approximately a
> year and a half ago. That Eagle driver was lucky, he got out
> with a shattered elbow and some contusions. Rumor has it
> they are still extracting fragments of seat cushion from his
> rosy pink after he sucked it up while tumbling/
> somersaulting in the pit while trying to figure out why his
> jet was not responding any longer.
>
> By the way my comment initially was made in jest in
> response to Sabers last line of his post. I was not
> aware we had a MAX GUST LOAD on the YAK.
> Maybe the CJ does. G limits yesVne yes
> max crosswind limits yes.Max Gust Load ???
>
> We do not have cocktail hours in any of the squadrons
> I have served with either. Either the beer light was lit or
> it was not. The beer light was lit when the last jet
> landed. Cocktail hour...
>
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of netmaster15@juno.com
> Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 3:35 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
>
>
>
> Doc, How many people do you know who have
> "busted their asses" due to exceeding max structural
> cruise without exceeding Vne? This should raise the
> questions: What is max structural cruise meant to protect?
> and, Is max structural cruise a "LIMITATION" , or a NORMAL
> OPERATION PROCEDURE? If the latter, then, I submit it is no
> different than any other number within the yellow arc and
> does not deserve to be over dignified beyond those numbers
> within such parameter. In other words, it is nothing more
> than cocktail information. If one insists upon operating
> within the yellow arc, do not encounter turbulent air lest
> you exceed MAX GUST LOAD; now there IS a number you
> should know and understand beyond the cocktail hour.
>
> Cliff Umscheid
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: "Roger Kemp M.D." <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
> Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:29:36 -0500
>
> Just rememberthe ass you bust maybe your
> own.
>
> doc
>
>
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of jblake207@comcast.net
> Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 10:47 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
>
>
>
> Find attached a "Vee" Speeds chart that I use for my
> CJ. Developed from the manuals and from lots of
> questions asked of people like Pappy, Sapp, Savarese and
> others.
>
>
>
> If I were a lawyer, I'd make a comment about using at your
> own risk and that this office cannot be held liable for any
> incorrect data... blah, blah, blah. I'm not a lawyer,
> so let me simply say use or lose.
>
>
>
> JB
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Warren Hill" <k7wx@earthlink.net>
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 10:12:26 PM GMT -06:00
> US/Canada Central
> Subject: Yak-List: Maximum structural cruise
>
>
> Fellow CJ-ers,
>
> I wonder if there is a consensus on a figure in knots for
> maximum structural cruise for the CJ-6A?
>
> Warren Hill
> Mesa, AZ
>
> On Jul 26, 2009, at 6:19 PM, Chris Wise wrote:
>
> > G'Day,
> >
> > Thanks to Walt, Pappy and Dennis for replying.
> > The M14P has a rubber lip seal as well as a slinger,
> like Walt says.
> > The slinger by itself is inadequate, especially during
> aeros.
> > Any other advice would be appreciated re removing prop
> reduction box
> > and the prop shaft.
> >
> > Thanks and Cheers,
> > Chris.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> -Matt Dralle, List =========
>
>
>
>
>
> ===================================
> ttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ===================================
> tronics.com
> ===================================
> www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
> ===================================
> ttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ===================================
> tronics.com
> ===================================
> www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
>
> ky"Z+M4Gq(wrIQhaxr^jzZ("X,ZIJr*'!y:0ZwE,jwfffi0fr(Z(jBm
> &j',r5h.+-
>
>
> Forum -
> FAQ,
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> List Contribution Web Site -
> -Matt
> Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
>
>
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! --
|