Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:35 AM - Re: Digital attitude indicator (Craig Winkelmann)
2. 09:22 AM - Re: YAK-52 Prop nut torque value (A. Dennis Savarese)
3. 09:22 AM - Re: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg (A. Dennis Savarese)
4. 10:34 AM - questions and opinions (dabear)
5. 11:20 AM - Re: questions and opinions (A. Dennis Savarese)
6. 12:02 PM - Re: questions and opinions (Roger Baker)
7. 01:32 PM - Re: questions and opinions (Terry Calloway)
8. 03:30 PM - Re: Nanchangs, Sun N Fun and Mogas (keithmckinley)
9. 03:47 PM - Hangar questions - please (Rick Basiliere)
10. 04:06 PM - Anyone east of the Mississippi have a CJ rudder (keithmckinley)
11. 04:15 PM - Re: questions and opinions (dabear)
12. 05:33 PM - Re: Anyone east of the Mississippi have a CJ rudder (dabear)
13. 08:43 PM - Re: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg (cjpilot710@aol.com)
14. 08:56 PM - Re: questions and opinions (Eric Wobschall)
15. 09:07 PM - Re: questions and opinions (cjpilot710@aol.com)
16. 09:07 PM - Re: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg (Eric Wobschall)
17. 10:25 PM - Re: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg (Chris Wise)
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: Digital attitude indicator |
Here is a link to all the electrics available from Spruce.
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/menus/in/attitude.html
The RC Allen RCA 2600 is fully digital as is the TruTrak and MGL. Others have
electric gyros as far as I can tell.
Talk to the manufacturers and see if they can handle roll rates, Gs, etc.
Craig
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=291223#291223
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: YAK-52 Prop nut torque value |
87 Ft/Lbs.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Wobschall
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 1:43 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: YAK-52 Prop nut torque value
Use 100 ft-lbs. You will have to use a dogbone with your torque wrench
and make the appropriate conversion. I use this on-line converter, but
there are many others:
http://www.belknaptools.com/extcalc.asp
On Mar 20, 2010, at 11:10 PM, rebesal@aol.com wrote:
Reinstalling an overhauled prop on friend's YAK-52. Looking for the
torque value for the six prop nuts. Anyone got that handy?
Thanks,
Bob Besal
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics
.com/Navigator?Yak-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution
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: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg |
If the blade angles are set to spec as provided by the manufacturer,
instead of playing with blade angles, why not simply adjust the prop
governor stop?
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Wise
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 12:12 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg
G'Day All,
Have replaced original prop on our 18T with a GT Propeller.
First impression was the totally different shape than the old V530
First flight onSaturday with new prop produced shorter take off
distance and a surprisingly better climb rate.
Pitch was set to produce 100% at full throttle and on take off roll at
full power went to 103%.
Maybe need a very slight tweak on the angles.
This was with full tanks and 3 big blokes.
Yesterday, Sunday 21st went to fly-in come airshow. 30 min flight
along the coast.
Tailwind there and headwind home but appears to be about 8 to 9 knots
faster at the same settings.
Oh, and by the way, much smoother and a lot less vibration.
Very significant improvement during aero display.
1/2 tanks and 2 POB.
Improved climb and aircraft hung in during manoeuvres and rolls far
better than original Russian prop.
We had a height limitation of 1500 ft due to controlled airspace and
hence could not loop, but feel happy that the prop will deliver the
goods at aeros requiring higher power settings.
Attached photo of inverted during roll may demonstrate the attitude of
increased performance in that the nose does not seem to want to drop
away as much as before.
Rolls at 80/80.
I have been looking at replacing the prop for about a year and looked
at Whirlwind, MT and GT propellers.
Have to say that at this stage I am very pleased with the all round
increase in performance.
Cheers and regards,
Chris.
The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link
attachments:
PF Fly In 021.jpg
Note: or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your
e-mail security
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: | questions and opinions |
I'm getting ready for my annual, and I've been thinking about how do I
reduce potential points of failure. So I'd like the group's opinion on a
few things.
1. Removing the rear flap and gear selectors. This would remove the
selector from a potential failure/maintenance item. it would also reduce
the number of air lines and connections.
2. Removing the rear magneto switch. Since I don't fly back there, I'm
the only pilot and only GIBs sit back there, why is it needed?
Also, I'm contemplating an oil system upgrade of adding a pre-oiler. Except
hose failure, I can't see much down side. What are people using in their
systems?
Finally, has anyone installed a linear actuator or other electronic means of
opening and closing the gills and/or oil cooler door?
Bear
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: questions and opinions |
1 - No reason that I can think of to not remove them. Understand though
that you will have to fabricate a by-pass for each ie: from the
goes-in-to side to the goes-out-to side since air pressure passes from
the rear cockpit controls to the front cockpit controls. You may want
to design a way to plumb the lines directly to the front instead of
fabricating by-passes.
2 - It's not needed except to become part of your spares kit.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: dabear
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 12:26 PM
Subject: Yak-List: questions and opinions
I'm getting ready for my annual, and I've been thinking about how do I
reduce potential points of failure. So I'd like the group's opinion
on a
few things.
1. Removing the rear flap and gear selectors. This would remove the
selector from a potential failure/maintenance item. it would also
reduce
the number of air lines and connections.
2. Removing the rear magneto switch. Since I don't fly back there,
I'm
the only pilot and only GIBs sit back there, why is it needed?
Also, I'm contemplating an oil system upgrade of adding a pre-oiler.
Except
hose failure, I can't see much down side. What are people using in
their
systems?
Finally, has anyone installed a linear actuator or other electronic
means of
opening and closing the gills and/or oil cooler door?
Bear
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: questions and opinions |
Hi Bear,
I can understand your interest in minimizing possible problem points. But
there are a couple of things that I can think of that would make me not do the
things that you're thinking of.
First, how big a problem for both failure and maintenance do the gear and
flap selectors/lines/connectors pose?
I think there is a very small potential for failure and a fairly minor incidence
of air leaks in the lines and connectors for the rear (instructor's) seat.
Failure and maintenance issues with the rear mag switch? I think almost
nil. I expect your thoughts on removing the rear mag switch might center around
a "gone rogue" gib turning your mags off because she/he is pissed at you...or
"gee, it was so noisy, I thought I'd make it quiet". In many years of fooling
around with these airplanes, I've never heard of any gib turning off the mags
accidently or on purpose.
What about the person to whom you sell the airplane when you're through with
it? How is he/she going to get checked out in it?
Over the years, I've checked out quite a few new Yak 52 pilots...plus I've
done a lot of type specific spin training and basic acro instruction in the 52....none
of which would I have done in an airplane where I didn't have access
to the gear, flaps or mags. So, how will any future pilot get checked out in
the airplane when you sell it? Maybe other instructors would be willing to instruct
in such a plane, but I don't know about that.
Another issue that you might consider would be that of pilot incapacitation.
What if you've got a pilot gib and you have a bird strike that whacks you
senseless? Or you have sudden onset bad food poisoning, or other nasty physical
thing that takes you out of the loop. You've now compounded the first emergency
(your incapacitation) with a second emergency....the back seater has to
land the airplane gear up...and that will likely increase the time for emergency
responders to get to you to deal with your physical problem.
My personal take is that I wouldn't do it...not enough upside. Your mileage
may vary. 2 worth.
Best regards,
Roger Baker_______________________________________________________
On Mar 22, 2010, at 10:26 AM, dabear wrote:
>
> I'm getting ready for my annual, and I've been thinking about how do I reduce
potential points of failure. So I'd like the group's opinion on a few things.
>
> 1. Removing the rear flap and gear selectors. This would remove the selector
from a potential failure/maintenance item. it would also reduce the number of
air lines and connections.
>
> 2. Removing the rear magneto switch. Since I don't fly back there, I'm the
only pilot and only GIBs sit back there, why is it needed?
>
>
>
> Also, I'm contemplating an oil system upgrade of adding a pre-oiler. Except
hose failure, I can't see much down side. What are people using in their systems?
>
>
> Finally, has anyone installed a linear actuator or other electronic means of
opening and closing the gills and/or oil cooler door?
>
>
> Bear
>
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: questions and opinions |
Hey Bear,
I agree with Roger Baker. I have done lots of instruction in CJ's and I don't
like jumping in one that doesn't have the original dual operations. I would also
think it may reduce the resale value.
I too have considered a pre-oiler. If you come across an affordable solution let
me know.
I guess now you have 4 cents. :)
Pumper
On Mar 22, 2010, at 12:26 PM, dabear wrote:
>
> I'm getting ready for my annual, and I've been thinking about how do I reduce
potential points of failure. So I'd like the group's opinion on a few things.
>
> 1. Removing the rear flap and gear selectors. This would remove the selector
from a potential failure/maintenance item. it would also reduce the number of
air lines and connections.
>
> 2. Removing the rear magneto switch. Since I don't fly back there, I'm the
only pilot and only GIBs sit back there, why is it needed?
>
>
>
> Also, I'm contemplating an oil system upgrade of adding a pre-oiler. Except
hose failure, I can't see much down side. What are people using in their systems?
>
>
> Finally, has anyone installed a linear actuator or other electronic means of
opening and closing the gills and/or oil cooler door?
>
>
> Bear
>
>
>
>
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: Nanchangs, Sun N Fun and Mogas |
interesting site:
http://pure-gas.org/
--------
Keith McKinley
700HS
KFIT
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=291335#291335
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: | Hangar questions - please |
St. George, UT (SGU) is moving its airport and requiring fire suppression systems
(sprinklers)to be built into either existing or hangars to be moved from the
old SGU. Sprinklers are not required by NFPA (National Fire Protection Association)
409 which is the basis for both the IFC - International Fire Code and
IBC - International Building Code.
My question and request: What can any of you tell me about your airports and hangars...are
suppression systems required in Group III hangars? (Typically what
we have <18' doors and less than - oops I forget - like 16,000'sq) Seen any
with "2 hour" walls, doors, etc? Something like 4 sheets of 5/8 drywall.
Anecdotally, have you witnessed any hangar fires? Were they sprinklered or not?
Thanks, there are about 50-60 hangar owners here that I'm trying to help (myself
also), your help would be appreciated very much.
Rick b
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: | Anyone east of the Mississippi have a CJ rudder |
I don't care about the covering, just needs to be straight, damage free and have
good quality mounting hardware. you can contact me offline.
Keith
keith@mckinley.us
--------
Keith McKinley
700HS
KFIT
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=291340#291340
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: questions and opinions |
Guess I'll provide some more info. The selectors I've replaced all (4) at
least twice in 9 years of owning the CJ. Not a lot, but I'd like to reduce
the replacement/leak issues. In talking with a few knowledgeable people,
I'm told I should actually use the back selectors on occasion to minimize
their decay. I haven't (except for annual) used the back selectors at all
in at least 6 years.
Not worried about someone turning off the mags, although I do fly young
eagles a few times a year and you never know what a 11-18 y/o will touch/do.
But most time's I've run out of air in during starting has been when a
helpful GIB turns it off because that is what they do in their CJ/Yak.
You make good points about checking someone out, but it can be worked out.
Doesn't seem to be an overwelming reason to keep them. But I'm still
listening. Thanks for the comments.
Dabear
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Baker" <f4ffm2@roadrunner.com>
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: questions and opinions
>
> Hi Bear,
>
> I can understand your interest in minimizing possible problem points.
> But there are a couple of things that I can think of that would make me
> not do the things that you're thinking of.
>
> First, how big a problem for both failure and maintenance do the gear
> and flap selectors/lines/connectors pose?
>
> I think there is a very small potential for failure and a fairly minor
> incidence of air leaks in the lines and connectors for the rear
> (instructor's) seat. Failure and maintenance issues with the rear mag
> switch? I think almost nil. I expect your thoughts on removing the rear
> mag switch might center around a "gone rogue" gib turning your mags off
> because she/he is pissed at you...or "gee, it was so noisy, I thought I'd
> make it quiet". In many years of fooling around with these airplanes,
> I've never heard of any gib turning off the mags accidently or on purpose.
>
> What about the person to whom you sell the airplane when you're
> through with it? How is he/she going to get checked out in it?
>
> Over the years, I've checked out quite a few new Yak 52 pilots...plus
> I've done a lot of type specific spin training and basic acro instruction
> in the 52....none of which would I have done in an airplane where I didn't
> have access to the gear, flaps or mags. So, how will any future pilot get
> checked out in the airplane when you sell it? Maybe other instructors
> would be willing to instruct in such a plane, but I don't know about that.
>
> Another issue that you might consider would be that of pilot
> incapacitation. What if you've got a pilot gib and you have a bird strike
> that whacks you senseless? Or you have sudden onset bad food poisoning,
> or other nasty physical thing that takes you out of the loop. You've now
> compounded the first emergency (your incapacitation) with a second
> emergency....the back seater has to land the airplane gear up...and that
> will likely increase the time for emergency responders to get to you to
> deal with your physical problem.
>
> My personal take is that I wouldn't do it...not enough upside. Your
> mileage may vary. 2 worth.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Roger Baker_______________________________________________________
> On Mar 22, 2010, at 10:26 AM, dabear wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm getting ready for my annual, and I've been thinking about how do I
>> reduce potential points of failure. So I'd like the group's opinion on a
>> few things.
>>
>> 1. Removing the rear flap and gear selectors. This would remove the
>> selector from a potential failure/maintenance item. it would also reduce
>> the number of air lines and connections.
>>
>> 2. Removing the rear magneto switch. Since I don't fly back there, I'm
>> the only pilot and only GIBs sit back there, why is it needed?
>>
>>
>>
>> Also, I'm contemplating an oil system upgrade of adding a pre-oiler.
>> Except hose failure, I can't see much down side. What are people using
>> in their systems?
>>
>>
>> Finally, has anyone installed a linear actuator or other electronic means
>> of opening and closing the gills and/or oil cooler door?
>>
>>
>> Bear
>>
>
>
>
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: Anyone east of the Mississippi have a CJ rudder |
I have one on my CJ. I'll sell it to you for 140k.
seriously though....
let me know if you find two and what the cost of the 2nd is.
Dabear
----- Original Message -----
From: "keithmckinley" <keith.mckinley@townisp.com>
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 7:05 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Anyone east of the Mississippi have a CJ rudder
> <keith.mckinley@townisp.com>
>
> I don't care about the covering, just needs to be straight, damage free
> and have good quality mounting hardware. you can contact me offline.
>
> Keith
>
> keith@mckinley.us
>
> --------
> Keith McKinley
> 700HS
> KFIT
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=291340#291340
>
>
>
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: | Re: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg |
I believe the prop has to be set at a known angle. Like at the flat pitch
stop. The angle is measured at the one meter point from the center of th
e hub and on the back or flat side of the blade. The angle of the set, al
lows the blade to operate efficiently over the range of RPM. Of course th
e both blades need to be the same angle. The governor controls the RPM bu
t does not pay attention to whatever the pitch is. The pitch is what it
is, depending on RPM setting and MP. I think. :>}
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
-----Original Message-----
From: A. Dennis Savarese <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
Sent: Mon, Mar 22, 2010 7:30 am
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg
If the blade angles are set to spec as provided by the manufacturer, inste
ad of playing with blade angles, why not simply adjust the prop governor
stop?
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Wise
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 12:12 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg
G'Day All,
Have replaced original prop on our 18T with a GT Propeller.
First impression was the totally different shape than the old V530
First flight onSaturday with new prop produced shorter take off distance
and a surprisingly better climb rate.
Pitch was set to produce 100% at full throttle and on take off roll at ful
l power went to 103%.
Maybe need a very slight tweak on the angles.
This was with full tanks and 3 big blokes.
Yesterday, Sunday 21st went to fly-in come airshow. 30 min flight along th
e coast.
Tailwind there and headwind home but appears to be about 8 to 9 knots fast
er at the same settings.
Oh, and by the way, much smoother and a lot less vibration.
Very significant improvement during aero display.
1/2 tanks and 2 POB.
Improved climb and aircraft hung in during manoeuvres and rolls far better
than original Russian prop.
We had a height limitation of 1500 ft due to controlled airspace and hence
could not loop, but feel happy that the prop will deliver the goods at ae
ros requiring higher power settings.
Attached photo of inverted during roll may demonstrate the attitude of inc
reased performance in that the nose does not seem to want to drop away as
much as before.
Rolls at 80/80.
I have been looking at replacing the prop for about a year and looked at
Whirlwind, MT and GT propellers.
Have to say that at this stage I am very pleased with the all round increa
se in performance.
Cheers and regards,
Chris.
The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachment
s:
PF Fly In 021.jpg
Note: or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail
security
========================
===========
-= - The Yak-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
========================
===========
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: questions and opinions |
My two cents:
I'm not big on all of this re-engineering. These Russians seem to know
what they were doing.
I know there are different philosophies, and I know not everyone likes
their airplane to be stock. However, I think some of you guys have too
much mechanical talent for your own good. The designers of these
planes have considered (and addressed) all of this stuff. Perhaps I'm
not experimental enough, but some of these Rube Goldberg contraptions
seem like accidents in the making. If no one flies from the back, then
by all means, take out the rudder pedals, stick, and all of the
instruments as well. Reliability would more likely be improved by
taking the time and money invested in such modifications and just
flying more instead.
I know some people here have done some beautiful work on their planes,
and some of these mods have worked for many hours. However, I wonder
if there's a net gain over the approved methods, and I worry that it's
too easy to overlook something important. Not trying to be a kill-joy
here.
On Mar 22, 2010, at 1:26 PM, dabear wrote:
>
> I'm getting ready for my annual, and I've been thinking about how do
> I reduce potential points of failure. So I'd like the group's
> opinion on a few things.
>
> 1. Removing the rear flap and gear selectors. This would remove the
> selector from a potential failure/maintenance item. it would also
> reduce the number of air lines and connections.
>
> 2. Removing the rear magneto switch. Since I don't fly back
> there, I'm the only pilot and only GIBs sit back there, why is it
> needed?
>
>
> Also, I'm contemplating an oil system upgrade of adding a pre-
> oiler. Except hose failure, I can't see much down side. What are
> people using in their systems?
>
>
> Finally, has anyone installed a linear actuator or other electronic
> means of opening and closing the gills and/or oil cooler door?
>
>
> Bear
>
>
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: | Re: questions and opinions |
-----Original Message-----
From: dabear <Dabear@damned.org>
Sent: Mon, Mar 22, 2010 1:26 pm
Subject: Yak-List: questions and opinions
I'm getting ready for my annual, and I've been thinking about how do I red
uce potential points of failure. So I'd like the group's opinion on a few
things.
1. Removing the rear flap and gear selectors. This would remove the select
or from a potential failure/maintenance item. it would also reduce the num
ber of air lines and connections.
The easiest way is to just removed the handles. Or you could read the ar
ticle on how to weld up the back gear valve.
2. Removing the rear magneto switch. Since I don't fly back there, I'm the
only pilot and only GIBs sit back there, why is it needed?
The reason the rear mag was set up the way it was, was because the instruc
tor sat in the rear and he had override control on both the gear and flaps
, plus the mags. The simplest way to bypass the mags is safety wire (use
.040) the switch to the 1&2 position. That way you don't have to worry
about the instructor's selector toggle switch.
Also, I'm contemplating an oil system upgrade of adding a pre-oiler. Excep
t hose failure, I can't see much down side. What are people using in their
systems?
Bill Blackwell could give numbers of the stuff he uses. Worth every penny
in an engine's life.
Finally, has anyone installed a linear actuator or other electronic means
of opening and closing the gills and/or oil cooler door?
Stay with the mechanical stuff. If electrons need to move something it mo
stly like will brake. My original Chinese gill push/pull cable broke. I
replaced it with nice veneer throttle control ordered to its required len
gth, from AS&S. Works great.
Bear
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
Bear
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
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: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg |
Right. GT suggests that you adjust the blade angle to give the proper
static RPM at full power. According to them, it varies from engine to
engine. I realize the stock blade angle is the same on all of them.
On Mar 22, 2010, at 11:42 PM, cjpilot710@aol.com wrote:
>
> I believe the prop has to be set at a known angle. Like at the flat
> pitch stop. The angle is measured at the one meter point from the
> center of the hub and on the back or flat side of the blade. The
> angle of the set, allows the blade to operate efficiently over the
> range of RPM. Of course the both blades need to be the same angle.
> The governor controls the RPM but does not pay attention to whatever
> the pitch is. The pitch is what it is, depending on RPM setting and
> MP. I think. :>}
>
> Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: A. Dennis Savarese <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Mon, Mar 22, 2010 7:30 am
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg
>
> If the blade angles are set to spec as provided by the manufacturer,
> instead of playing with blade angles, why not simply adjust the prop
> governor stop?
> Dennis
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Chris Wise
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 12:12 AM
> Subject: Yak-List: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg
>
> G'Day All,
>
> Have replaced original prop on our 18T with a GT Propeller.
> First impression was the totally different shape than the old V530
> First flight onSaturday with new prop produced shorter take off
> distance and a surprisingly better climb rate.
> Pitch was set to produce 100% at full throttle and on take off roll
> at full power went to 103%.
> Maybe need a very slight tweak on the angles.
> This was with full tanks and 3 big blokes.
> Yesterday, Sunday 21st went to fly-in come airshow. 30 min flight
> along the coast.
> Tailwind there and headwind home but appears to be about 8 to 9
> knots faster at the same settings.
> Oh, and by the way, much smoother and a lot less vibration.
>
> Very significant improvement during aero display.
> 1/2 tanks and 2 POB.
> Improved climb and aircraft hung in during manoeuvres and rolls far
> better than original Russian prop.
> We had a height limitation of 1500 ft due to controlled airspace and
> hence could not loop, but feel happy that the prop will deliver the
> goods at aeros requiring higher power settings.
> Attached photo of inverted during roll may demonstrate the attitude
> of increased performance in that the nose does not seem to want to
> drop away as much as before.
> Rolls at 80/80.
>
> I have been looking at replacing the prop for about a year and
> looked at Whirlwind, MT and GT propellers.
> Have to say that at this stage I am very pleased with the all round
> increase in performance.
>
> Cheers and regards,
> Chris.
>
>
> The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link
> attachments:
> PF Fly In 021.jpg
>
> Note: or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-
> mail security
>
>
> ===================================
> get=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ===================================
> tp://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
> _blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
>
>
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: | Re: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg |
G'Day Jim and Dennis,
Some of us have had the old props refurbished and rebalanced here in
Australia.
We fly into some pretty dry areas at times that have been rain starved
for a while.
Hence the blades have got a bit of a bashing.
We have always set the angle 1000mm from centre to the V530 specs which
from memory is 14.8 degrees??? Please do not hold me to that.
The GT specs are the same distance out at between 8 to 10 degrees.
At 9 degrees on run-up % went over 100% and was advised to slightly
increase the blade angle.
We have it at 11 degrees as we are achieving 100% on takeoff roll with
full power.
I most certainly take on board your comments re the job of the governor
and will take this up with our LAME and prop shop.
I always learn good stuff from you guys and am grateful for it.
Cheers,
Chris.
----- Original Message -----
From: cjpilot710@aol.com
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 2:12 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg
I believe the prop has to be set at a known angle. Like at the flat
pitch stop. The angle is measured at the one meter point from the
center of the hub and on the back or flat side of the blade. The angle
of the set, allows the blade to operate efficiently over the range of
RPM. Of course the both blades need to be the same angle. The governor
controls the RPM but does not pay attention to whatever the pitch is.
The pitch is what it is, depending on RPM setting and MP. I think.
:>}
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
-----Original Message-----
From: A. Dennis Savarese <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Mon, Mar 22, 2010 7:30 am
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg
If the blade angles are set to spec as provided by the manufacturer,
instead of playing with blade angles, why not simply adjust the prop
governor stop?
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Wise
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 12:12 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Emailing: PF Fly In 021.jpg
G'Day All,
Have replaced original prop on our 18T with a GT Propeller.
First impression was the totally different shape than the old V530
First flight onSaturday with new prop produced shorter take off
distance and a surprisingly better climb rate.
Pitch was set to produce 100% at full throttle and on take off roll
at full power went to 103%.
Maybe need a very slight tweak on the angles.
This was with full tanks and 3 big blokes.
Yesterday, Sunday 21st went to fly-in come airshow. 30 min flight
along the coast.
Tailwind there and headwind home but appears to be about 8 to 9
knots faster at the same settings.
Oh, and by the way, much smoother and a lot less vibration.
Very significant improvement during aero display.
1/2 tanks and 2 POB.
Improved climb and aircraft hung in during manoeuvres and rolls far
better than original Russian prop.
We had a height limitation of 1500 ft due to controlled airspace and
hence could not loop, but feel happy that the prop will deliver the
goods at aeros requiring higher power settings.
Attached photo of inverted during roll may demonstrate the attitude
of increased performance in that the nose does not seem to want to drop
away as much as before.
Rolls at 80/80.
I have been looking at replacing the prop for about a year and
looked at Whirlwind, MT and GT propellers.
Have to say that at this stage I am very pleased with the all round
increase in performance.
Cheers and regards,
Chris.
The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link
attachments:
PF Fly In 021.jpg
Note: or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your
e-mail security
get=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
02/06/10 19:35:00
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! --
|
