Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:06 AM - Re: M14P Jet Mod (A. Dennis Savarese)
2. 07:11 AM - Re: new operating limitations (Warren Hill)
3. 09:12 AM - Re: engine shutter vane adjustment (doug sapp)
4. 09:15 AM - Re: CJ electric fuel pump? Winter project (barryhancock)
5. 09:31 AM - Re: CJ electric fuel pump? Winter project (Noplugs)
6. 09:53 AM - M14P Jet Mod (Richard Goode)
7. 10:11 AM - Re: Re: CJ electric fuel pump? Winter project (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
8. 10:45 AM - Acro and forwartd CG (Bill1200)
9. 11:13 AM - Re: Acro and forwartd CG (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
10. 01:28 PM - Re: Acro and forwartd CG (Mark Davis)
11. 04:21 PM - Re: Acro and forwartd CG (Greg Young)
12. 04:42 PM - Re: Acro and forwartd CG (Bill1200)
13. 06:46 PM - Yak 55 control balancing (TumblingTiger)
14. 08:34 PM - Re: Acro and forwartd CG (Walter Lannon)
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: | Re: M14P Jet Mod |
The difference between plugging and swapping the two jets is, by
swapping the two jets the accelerator pump is not degraded or disabled.
Personally, I think it is a better solution even though for 7 years I
had been running mine with the lower jet (1.0 mm in mine) plugged.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: cjpilot710@aol.com
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 9:59 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: M14P Jet Mod
When I got my engine new direct from Aerostar, it stumbled badly when
advancing the throttle quickly. Scare the popo out me sometimes.
The engine came with a whole selection of jets as part of the parts
kit you get with a new engine. I put in the smallest one I could fine.
I really don't know the size. The engine stopped its stumbling and has
been fine now for 1,500 plus hours.
I've heard of both the plugging and using the .6 mm jet. From all
accounts, both seem to work OK.
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby.
In a message dated 10/19/2009 4:37:46 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
scott-p@texas.net writes:
Yes.
Did this mod on my former SU-29 and my current Yak 55M. Does a great
deal to reduce "stumbling" if power needs to be abruptly increased,
and
seems to reduce loading up while taxiing also, although that is much
less pronounced.
I've been very happy with this mod.
Scott
Larry Pine wrote:
>
> Just seeing what the consensus is.. Has anyone performed the jet
mod
> on the M14 as described in this attachment? If so what are your
> results? Any concerns?
> Thanks in advance.
> N8181C
> /Larry
=======================e
ties Day
=======================
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS
=======================
- List Contribution Web Site sp;
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: new operating limitations |
Kelly,
Mark brings up an excellent point. Look carefully at the operating
limitations paperwork.
After being assigned an aviation safety inspector, I was sent an
Application for Airworthiness Certificate and a draft of my proposed
Phase 2 operating limitations (Group III - Warbirds, Vintage, Replica
and Unique Aircraft). I went over the draft document with a local CJ
owner who is also a working airline captain. This was an obvious cut
and paste exercise. There were duplicate paragraphs, numerous typos
and some paragraphs had wording that appeared to supersede others. I
put together a detailed list of proposed changes (respectfully worded)
and FAX'd them back to my guy at the local FSDO.
When the inspector came out to the hanger, he brought a new set of
revised operating limitations. The majority of the changes I had asked
for had been incorporated. It was certainly not more restrictive. A
couple of paragraphs that I had asked to be removed stayed, but he
explained that these were required for warbirds under the area of
exhibition and air racing by a FAA order. The one paragraph that will
likely get your attention, and remain no matter what you ask for, is
the following:
"Flights to airports other than an alternate airport and the airport
where the aircraft is based are allowed for maintenance of the
aircraft. (Maintenance, as defined in 1.1, is the reference for the
purpose of these flights) Before the flight, the operator must notify
and receive permission from the geographically responsible FSDO where
the maintenance will take place, and notify the FSDO with the
geographic responsibility where the aircraft is based of the intended
maintenance flight. The maintenance performed in connection with the
flight must be recorded in the aircraft records in accordance with
part 43."
I was told that this is now required by a FAA order. So, when I fly my
CJ to another local airport here in the Phoenix metropolitan area for
its upcoming annual, I have to get permission from the local FSDO,
even though it's only 35 miles away. Go figure.
Other items, like the 300 NM rule were taken out. They still require a
Program Letter for any fly-ins, static displays, air shows, etc. I
thought that the rest of the limitations were all pretty reasonable.
He spent the rest of his time going through my logbooks and looking to
make sure that everything that all the required placards were in place.
Here in central Arizona there are a lot of warbirds and our local FSDO
seems to do a good job. I thought that the person assigned to me
handled things professionally and gave me every consideration
possible. Nothing confrontational, nothing weird, no apparent hidden
agendas.
Best,
Warren Hill
Mesa, AZ
On Oct 19, 2009, at 6:51 AM, Kelley Monroe wrote:
> I have just purchased a CJ with 10 year old operating limitations.
> I want to get the new limitation and go to the FAA with them to get
> the home base moved and a new airworthy certificate. Can some one
> lead me to these? Thanks Kelley
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: engine shutter vane adjustment |
Keith,It could be many things, worn center ring screws, worn center ring
holes where the long pivot bolts go through, worn long pivot bolts, bad
wobblers (small cam at the bottom of each vane). It could also be a kinked
cable, or loose clamps. If I were to bet on any one item it would be worn
wobblers, but without actually seeing your shutters it is impossible for me
to say for sure. I carry 100% of the parts of the shutters in stock.
Contact me off line if you need help.
Always Yakin,
Doug
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 2:12 PM, keithmckinley
<keith.mckinley@townisp.com>wrote:
> keith.mckinley@townisp.com>
>
> The engine control knob for my shutter vanes does not feel right. Almost
> like I'm working against a bad spring. It's hard to turn. I can really only
> get full open or full closed. Any where else but the exact middle position
> and vanes move open or closed on their own. They usually won't stay in the
> mid position either. (knob spins) Looked at the linkage and don't see any
> issues. I know there are detents on the knob that should allow it to stay in
> place at many different settings but mine will not hold.
>
> Ideas?
>
> Thanks
>
> --------
> Keith McKinley
> 700HS
> KFIT
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=268602#268602
>
>
--
Douglas Sapp
Doug Sapp LLC
18B Riverview Road
Omak WA 98841
PH 509-826-4610
Fax 509-826-3644
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: CJ electric fuel pump? Winter project |
We replace the wobble pump with a Facet electric pump that has an internal check
valve (very important!). We incorporate a prime/boost solenoid with a momentary
up/on down switch. The end game is the wobble pump and primer are replaced
with an electric boost pump improving safety and usability. On our refurbs
we also cut new blank right side panels and have our CB panel on the right side
where the primer location was...out of the way yet still in plain sight.
As others have said, this is first and foremost an important improvement in safety
in emergency situations, and secondarily a huge step forward in convenience.
We also locate the prime/boost switch right next to the engine start switch
so you no longer need 3 hands to start the airplane.
That gives me a thought. I have to test fly an airplane we just put new fuel tanks
in...I'll try to remember to do a simulated engine out and see how well I
can continuously operate the wobble pump and aviate, navigate, and communicate.
I'm tired and nearly upside down just writing that...wish me luck!
Barry
--------
Barry Hancock
Worldwide Warbirds, Inc.
www.worldwidewarbirds.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=268698#268698
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CJ electric fuel pump? Winter project |
You might have this already if not it might help you with your plan
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=268699#268699
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/20091020101024_174.pdf
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 |
|
I find it odd that owners/pilots should do this sort of crude
modification when they clearly have no idea what is the purpose of that
jet.
This jet is part of the acceleration pump, which, when the throttle is
opened allows a certain amount of extra fuel to be pumped into the
carburettor.
The reason that many M14P engines hesitate when the throttle is opened
is simply that this jet is too rich and is putting in too much fuel.
This jet is designed to be adjustable, and five different jets are made
varying from 0.9 to 1.4mm. Even the 0.9 can be too large with some
engines, in which case one can fill the jet with solder, and drill out a
smaller hole.
Note that, with the jet blocked, you are also likely to get a stumble,
but in this case through too weak a mixture.
The best way of assessing which jet that you need, is to open the
throttle when the engine is running on the ground, to see if it does
stumble, and if there is obvious black smoke denoting over-richness. If
so, then go to a small jet.
Also, few owners change compensating jets. Engines when new are usually
set up rich, and again there is a range (I think 1.2 - 2.1mm), and the
right jet is very important to control the cylinder temperatures and
also fuel consumption.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340 120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340 129
www.russianaeros.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: CJ electric fuel pump? Winter project |
I use the exact same fuel pump in my UTVA-66 and highly recommend it.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of barryhancock
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 9:15
Subject: Yak-List: Re: CJ electric fuel pump? Winter project
--> <bhancock@worldwidewarbirds.com>
We replace the wobble pump with a Facet electric pump that has an
internal check valve (very important!). We incorporate a prime/boost
solenoid with a momentary up/on down switch. The end game is the wobble
pump and primer are replaced with an electric boost pump improving
safety and usability. On our refurbs we also cut new blank right side
panels and have our CB panel on the right side where the primer location
was...out of the way yet still in plain sight.
As others have said, this is first and foremost an important improvement
in safety in emergency situations, and secondarily a huge step forward
in convenience. We also locate the prime/boost switch right next to the
engine start switch so you no longer need 3 hands to start the airplane.
That gives me a thought. I have to test fly an airplane we just put new
fuel tanks in...I'll try to remember to do a simulated engine out and
see how well I can continuously operate the wobble pump and aviate,
navigate, and communicate. I'm tired and nearly upside down just
writing that...wish me luck!
Barry
--------
Barry Hancock
Worldwide Warbirds, Inc.
www.worldwidewarbirds.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=268698#268698
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: | Acro and forwartd CG |
I understand the ramifications of aft CG and airplane control, but I'm wondering
if there is a down side to being forward of CG limit? When I fly acro by myself
(90% of the time), I'm always beyond the forward CG limit. Other than the
inability to keep it in a spin, haven't noticed anything dangerous. It seems exceptionally
safe to always know the nose wants to point towards the earth.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=268704#268704
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: | Acro and forwartd CG |
I am not an expert, but in my opinion a lot of the time it comes down to
control.
As a person who has personally explored the areas well outside of the
normal CG range of many aircraft (due in most part to my PAST personal
weight range, and also sometimes due to my personal stupidity), I have
found that you can run out of pitch authority at slow speeds with too
forward of a CG. When landing, this can lead to some really unfortunate
situations to put it mildly. Doing aerobatics, you can actually stall
the control surface before the wing. Basically you become a test pilot.
Sometimes you live and learn. Sometimes you don't. I got lucky. I am
much more cautious these days. Honestly, I'd much rather exceed gross
weight limits than play with CG limits by any significant amount. Sure,
you can exceed them a little bit and get away with it... But I honestly
would try to stay within published limits when exploring the total
flight envelope of an aircraft. I.E. Aerobatics
I concur that AFT CG's reactions seem to go seriously bad faster than
forward CG excursions. I'm curious what others will offer when it comes
to this. A good question.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill1200
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 10:45
Subject: Yak-List: Acro and forwartd CG
I understand the ramifications of aft CG and airplane control, but I'm
wondering if there is a down side to being forward of CG limit? When I
fly acro by myself (90% of the time), I'm always beyond the forward CG
limit. Other than the inability to keep it in a spin, haven't noticed
anything dangerous. It seems exceptionally safe to always know the nose
wants to point towards the earth.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=268704#268704
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: Acro and forwartd CG |
The ultimate nose down attitude is likely to be increased during recovery
from a departure from controlled flight or spin resulting in the need for
much more altitude for the round out and recovery. Just as your pitch rate
of change increases drastically as you approach aft CG, similarly the pitch
rate decreases as you push toward forward CG limits. Cross countries
pushing the envelope of CG or gross weight are one thing, pushing the same
envelopes performing acro is more Chuck Yeager territory. Don't do it.
Mark Davis
N44YK
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 12:09 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Acro and forwartd CG
> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
>
> I am not an expert, but in my opinion a lot of the time it comes down to
> control.
>
> As a person who has personally explored the areas well outside of the
> normal CG range of many aircraft (due in most part to my PAST personal
> weight range, and also sometimes due to my personal stupidity), I have
> found that you can run out of pitch authority at slow speeds with too
> forward of a CG. When landing, this can lead to some really unfortunate
> situations to put it mildly. Doing aerobatics, you can actually stall
> the control surface before the wing. Basically you become a test pilot.
> Sometimes you live and learn. Sometimes you don't. I got lucky. I am
> much more cautious these days. Honestly, I'd much rather exceed gross
> weight limits than play with CG limits by any significant amount. Sure,
> you can exceed them a little bit and get away with it... But I honestly
> would try to stay within published limits when exploring the total
> flight envelope of an aircraft. I.E. Aerobatics
>
> I concur that AFT CG's reactions seem to go seriously bad faster than
> forward CG excursions. I'm curious what others will offer when it comes
> to this. A good question.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill1200
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 10:45
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: Acro and forwartd CG
>
>
> I understand the ramifications of aft CG and airplane control, but I'm
> wondering if there is a down side to being forward of CG limit? When I
> fly acro by myself (90% of the time), I'm always beyond the forward CG
> limit. Other than the inability to keep it in a spin, haven't noticed
> anything dangerous. It seems exceptionally safe to always know the nose
> wants to point towards the earth.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=268704#268704
>
>
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Acro and forwartd CG |
The forward cg limit is based on pitch control authority. The normal place you
see the effect is during flare where you need more speed or prop blast to keep
from running out of elevator. That can bend your airplane if pressed too far.
Acro is a whole nother thing.
Aft cg limits are based on longitudinal stability. At the aft limit pitch is very
sensitive but there is still an acceptable stability derivative, I.e. Tendency
to return to level when disturbed. The margin to the neutral point may be
only a couple % mac. Exceeding the aft limit can make it difficult to impossible
to control. Going past the neutral point will definitely kill you.
Ex-aero engineer
------Original Message------
From: Bill1200
Sender: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
ReplyTo: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Yak-List: Acro and forwartd CG
Sent: Oct 20, 2009 12:45 PM
I understand the ramifications of aft CG and airplane control, but I'm wondering
if there is a down side to being forward of CG limit? When I fly acro by myself
(90% of the time), I'm always beyond the forward CG limit. Other than the
inability to keep it in a spin, haven't noticed anything dangerous. It seems exceptionally
safe to always know the nose wants to point towards the earth.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=268704#268704
Regards,
Greg
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: Acro and forwartd CG |
Thanks
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=268742#268742
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Yak 55 control balancing |
Yak Team,
I have just undergone a top notch paint job on my Yak 55. However as most paint
shops go, a Yak 55 doesn't come through the doors very often. So balancing
the flight controls of a 55M might seem foreign to them. I am just watching over
them as its my butt in the seat.
1st. Aircraft was in original paint and cover. I noticed they riveted the leading
edge cover of the elevator weights prior to factory paint. Which leads me
to believe they balanced the tail feathers prior to paint. I have since recovered
the tail feather with new Polly Fiber. I left the original weights fastened
in the leading edge of the elevators. Same goes with the rudder as the
original weight was reinstalled prior to paint.
A former Yak 55 show pilot gave me this advice: "careful with the elevator balance
- tolerances are narrow and catastrophic flutter is likely at speeds near
reline - I don't recall the parameters (it was 15 years ago) but when I repainted
my YAK this was an issue that we dealt with"
So now after paint is applied I am in search for techniques/procedures to insure
the controls are balanced with in limits, if there are any published.
Catastrophic flutter is not my idea of a fun day at the airport. Anyone with experience
on this, is greatly appreciated.
Mark Sorenson
Tumbling Tigers
N921GRrrrrrrr
captainsorenson@hotmail.com
--------
Mark-
Tumbling Tiger Airshows
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=268756#268756
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/sspx0649_528.jpg
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: Acro and forwartd CG |
Bill:
You have already received some good advise on this subject, particularly the
comments from Greg Young
I presume from your email address you are flying a 52 rather than a CJ. I
do not have any specific knowledge of the 52's flight characteristics but I
think the following comments will apply.
Generally a forward CG will (varying with how far forward): --
1. Decrease cruise speed due to increasing trim drag.
2. Increase stall speed.
3. Improve stall recovery but may increase recovery time to level flight.
4. Decrease elevator authority.
Items 1,2 & 3 you can probably live with.
If you are operating a CJ with all the original avionics etc. removed (195
lbs) and no (or not enough) ballast installed #4 can ruin your day or worse.
The worst case scenario is - solo, no baggage, out of gas (and therefore no
power). There will not be enough elevator authority to make a safe landing.
If, in the Most Forward condition (varies with aircraft type - for the CJ it
is minimum fuel, no baggage, full oil), your CG is ahead of the forward
limit (or you suspect it is) you should flight test as follows:
1. Load in most forward condition.
2. Approach at normal speed and pretend you have a tail wheel. If you can
touch down nose high, at IDLE power, at stall speed
your forward CG is OK Should be able to handle the worst case
with a little more speed.
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill1200" <billdykes52@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 10:45 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Acro and forwartd CG
>
> I understand the ramifications of aft CG and airplane control, but I'm
> wondering if there is a down side to being forward of CG limit? When I fly
> acro by myself (90% of the time), I'm always beyond the forward CG limit.
> Other than the inability to keep it in a spin, haven't noticed anything
> dangerous. It seems exceptionally safe to always know the nose wants to
> point towards the earth.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=268704#268704
>
>
>
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! --
|