Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:27 AM - Re: How to set my accelerometer? (Mike Beresford)
2. 01:15 AM - Re: How to set my accelerometer? (ssssskippy)
3. 05:27 AM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Eric Wobschall)
4. 06:00 AM - Re: Re: How to set my accelerometer? (Olivier Vigneron)
5. 09:16 AM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
6. 09:30 AM - Engine failure in Yak-50 (Richard Goode)
7. 10:52 AM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (pilko2)
8. 11:31 AM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Paul Hamlin)
9. 11:49 AM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Roger Kemp M.D.)
10. 12:07 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Roger Kemp M.D.)
11. 12:24 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
12. 12:25 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
13. 12:56 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Paul Hamlin)
14. 01:42 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
15. 03:23 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Roger Baker)
16. 04:28 PM - CANCELLED: Warrenton Raider clinic is cancelled for Oct 22-23-24 (Dabear)
17. 05:05 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
18. 05:40 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Eric Wobschall)
19. 05:41 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Eric Wobschall)
20. 05:47 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (KingCJ6@aol.com)
21. 05:47 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Eric Wobschall)
22. 06:04 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Eric Wobschall)
23. 06:35 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Paul Hamlin)
24. 06:41 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (T A LEWIS)
25. 07:10 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
26. 07:14 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
27. 07:16 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
28. 07:22 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Eric Wobschall)
29. 07:44 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Eric Wobschall)
30. 08:22 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Frank Stelwagon)
31. 08:53 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
32. 08:53 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
33. 08:55 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
34. 09:08 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Kregg Victory)
35. 09:26 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
36. 09:35 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Eric Wobschall)
37. 10:00 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Paul Hamlin)
38. 10:16 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
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: How to set my accelerometer? |
Hi all=0A=0AThere is a very basic, very easy G-meter calibration technique:
=0A- Put the G-meter on a solid surface, in the normal flight attitude. It
should =0Anow read 1G=0A- Stand it vertically upright. It should now read z
ero.=0A- Place it in the inverted position. It should now read -1G.=0A=0ATh
is technique is part of the overall calibration routine we use on G-meters
=0Afitted to some more modern aerobatic trainers, and is part of the OEM's
=0Adocumented procedure. The full procedure also includes checks on the eff
ect of =0Avibrations, but that is probably not done for the Russian G-meter
s.=0A=0ABlue skies=0AMike=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A
From: "sammessani@yahoo.fr" <sammessani@yahoo.fr>=0ATo: "yak-list@matronics
.com" <yak-list@matronics.com>=0ASent: Tue, 19 October, 2010 0:39:55=0ASubj
ect: Re: Yak-List: How to set my accelerometer?=0A=0A=0AYou can find it in
AppStore, anyway attache=0AYour gmeter with you mobile,use for this adhesiv
e=0Atape and move them with your hand and check=0Aboth value. A friend of m
e repaired my 2 gmeter=0Aon my yak52 & now they work fine.=0A=0ASam.=0A=0AE
nvoy=C3=A9 de mon iPhone=0A=0ALe 18 oct. 2010 =C3- 21:18, Olivier Vignero
n <ssssskippy@gmail.com> a =C3=A9crit :=0A=0A=0Athank you for your answer.
=0A>=0A>How do you use the iphone to calibrate it? I know that the iphone c
ontains some =0A>accelerometer but I didn't know that you could access to t
he G values?=0A>=0A>=0A>2010/10/18 sammessani@yahoo.fr <sammessani@yahoo.fr
>=0A>=0A>Hi,=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>Easy to repair, the big screw rear the accelerom
eter=0A>>is to stock the gmeter, the 3 screws are for SET the alarm=0A>>lim
it. Open completely the gmeter by the screws on the side=0A>>and you Will u
nderstand the mechanism it's easy=0A>>After the most difficult is to calibr
ate, I used for this my iPhone=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>Sam=0A>>=0A>>Envoy=C3=A9 de mo
n iPhone=0A>>=0A>>Le 18 oct. 2010 =C3- 18:16, "ssssskippy" <ssssskippy@gm
ail.com> a =C3=A9crit :=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>Ok=0A>>>Roger that.=0A>>> =0A>>>In fa
ct it=99s a good thing for me that the GIB have a Gmeter
I=99m still learning =0A>>>aerobatics so my instructor can read
the G=99s in the back seat.=0A>>>Now I understand why I see all in
black when the GIB pull a loop J)))=0A>>> =0A>>>Thanks=0A>>> =0A>>>Olivier
=0A>>> =0A>>>=0A________________________________=0A =0A>>>De :owner-yak-lis
t-server@matronics.com =0A>>>[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] D
e la part de bill wade=0A>>>Envoy=C3=A9 : lundi 18 octobre 2010 17:31=0A>>>
=C3 : yak-list@matronics.com=0A>>>Objet : Re: Yak-List: How to set my ac
celerometer?=0A>>> =0A>>>Yes if its worn so bad that it will not return to
1 g after a flight and gives =0A>>>erroneous measurements in the air, the r
ear cockpit G-meter is not wired to the =0A>>>aircraft and doesn't need the
switch. But keep in mind that the Yak 52 G-meter =0A>>>has a switch in it,
it is wired in front cockpit and front and rear meters are =0A>>>the same.
I had to something with mine because the buzzer kept going off.=0A>>>Does
the GIB really need a G-meter?=0A>>> =0A>>>=0A_____________________________
___=0A =0A>>>From:Olivier Vigneron <ssssskippy@gmail.com>=0A>>>To: yak-list
@matronics.com=0A>>>Sent: Sun, October 17, 2010 5:44:05 PM=0A>>>Subject: Re
: Yak-List: How to set my accelerometer?=0A>>>=0A>>>Thanks for your answer.
=0A>>>=0A>>>So you mean that the best way is to replace it?=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>
>>=0A>>>2010/10/17 bill wade <bwade154@yahoo.com>=0A>>>Olivier I had a prob
lem with my G-meter a few years ago and took the back cover =0A>>>off, mine
the interior was made of brass kind of like a clock and vibration over =0A
>>>the years just wore it out I took the back G-meter out and put it up fro
nt and I =0A>>>had another meter to put in the back you do know that the fr
ont g-meter is also =0A>>>a switch and when you exceed the G limit a buzzin
g sound goes to the headset =0A>>>telling you to knock it off your exceedin
g my G-limits.=0A>>> =0A>>>Bill Wade=0A>>> =0A>>>=0A_______________________
_________=0A =0A>>>From:ssssskippy <ssssskippy@gmail.com>=0A>>>To: "yak-lis
t@matronics.com" <yak-list@matronics.com>=0A>>>Sent: Sun, October 17, 2010
12:20:47 PM=0A>>>Subject: Yak-List: How to set my accelerometer?=0A>>>=0A>>
>>>Hi=0A>>>=0A>>>I have a problem with my rear accelerometer on a yak52.=0A
>>>It shows on the ground a solid 2G instead 1G.=0A>>>=0A>>>In the instrume
nts back, there is 3 small screws and a big one.=0A>>>=0A>>>Can somebody te
lls me how to set the instrument accurately?=0A>>>=0A>>>Thanks=0A>>>=0A>>>O
livier =0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>Le 17 oct. 2010 =C3- 16:18, Eric Wobschall <eric
@buffaloskyline.com> a =C3=A9crit :=0A>>>=0A>>>> --> Yak-List message poste
d by: Eric Wobschall <eric@buffaloskyline.com>=0A>>>> =0A>>>> Any time a pr
opeller can turn, it can potentially windmill, especially if the =0A>>>>res
istance is low.=0A>>>> =0A>>>> As the airplane moves, the air flow creates
pressure differentials in the =0A>>>>propeller blades, which are airfoils.
This forces the blades to move in the =0A>>>>direction of the leading edge,
thereby converting this kinetic energy to torque =0A>>>>acting on the prop
eller shaft.=0A>>>> =0A>>>> =0A>>>> =0A>>>> On Oct 17, 2010, at 12:19 AM, E
Hegenauer <elmar.h@shaw.ca>=0A>>>>> =0A>>>>> Why does the propeller windmi
ll on=0A>>>>> a ceased engine, sheared gearbox?=0A>>>>> =0A>>>>> Elmar=0A>>
>>> =0A>>>>> =0A>>>>> =0A>>>>> =0A>>>>> =0A>>>&=========
================0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>> =0A>>> e
t="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List =0A>>>tp://forums
.matronics.com _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution =0A>>>=0A>
>> =0A>>>http://www.matroni================
=== =0A>>> =0A>>> =0A>>> =0A>>>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?
Yak-List=0A>>>http://forums.matronics.com=0A>>>http://www.matronics.com/con
tribution=0A>>> =0A>=0A> et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?
Yak-List=0A> tp://forums.matronics.com _blank">http://www.matronics.com/con
-========================
================== =0A=0A=0A=0A
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: | How to set my accelerometer? |
Impossible to find simpler and more accurate :-))))
_____
De : owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] De la part de Mike
Beresford
Envoy=E9 : mardi 19 octobre 2010 09:25
=C0 : yak-list@matronics.com
Objet : Re: Yak-List: How to set my accelerometer?
Hi all
There is a very basic, very easy G-meter calibration technique:
- Put the G-meter on a solid surface, in the normal flight attitude. It
should now read 1G
- Stand it vertically upright. It should now read zero.
- Place it in the inverted position. It should now read -1G.
This technique is part of the overall calibration routine we use on
G-meters
fitted to some more modern aerobatic trainers, and is part of the OEM's
documented procedure. The full procedure also includes checks on the
effect
of vibrations, but that is probably not done for the Russian G-meters.
Blue skies
Mike
_____
From: "sammessani@yahoo.fr" <sammessani@yahoo.fr>
Sent: Tue, 19 October, 2010 0:39:55
Subject: Re: Yak-List: How to set my accelerometer?
You can find it in AppStore, anyway attache
Your gmeter with you mobile,use for this adhesive
tape and move them with your hand and check
both value. A friend of me repaired my 2 gmeter
on my yak52 & now they work fine.
Sam.
Envoy=E9 de mon iPhone
Le 18 oct. 2010 =E0 21:18, Olivier Vigneron <ssssskippy@gmail.com> a
=E9crit :
thank you for your answer.
How do you use the iphone to calibrate it? I know that the iphone
contains
some accelerometer but I didn't know that you could access to the G
values?
2010/10/18 <mailto:sammessani@yahoo.fr> sammessani@yahoo.fr <
<mailto:sammessani@yahoo.fr> sammessani@yahoo.fr>
Hi,
Easy to repair, the big screw rear the accelerometer
is to stock the gmeter, the 3 screws are for SET the alarm
limit. Open completely the gmeter by the screws on the side
and you Will understand the mechanism it's easy
After the most difficult is to calibrate, I used for this my iPhone
Sam
Envoy=E9 de mon iPhone
Le 18 oct. 2010 =E0 18:16, "ssssskippy" < <mailto:ssssskippy@gmail.com>
ssssskippy@gmail.com> a =E9crit :
Ok
Roger that.
In fact it=92s a good thing for me that the GIB have a Gmeter=85=85I=92m
still
learning aerobatics so my instructor can read the G=92s in the back
seat.
Now I understand why I see all in black when the GIB pull a loop :-))))
Thanks
Olivier
_____
De : <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
<mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] De la part de bill wade
Envoy=E9 : lundi 18 octobre 2010 17:31
=C0 : <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com> <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
yak-list@matronics.com
Objet : Re: Yak-List: How to set my accelerometer?
Yes if its worn so bad that it will not return to 1 g after a flight and
gives erroneous measurements in the air, the rear cockpit G-meter is not
wired to the aircraft and doesn't need the switch. But keep in mind that
the
Yak 52 G-meter has a switch in it, it is wired in front cockpit and
front
and rear meters are the same. I had to something with mine because the
buzzer kept going off.
Does the GIB really need a G-meter?
_____
From: Olivier Vigneron < <mailto:ssssskippy@gmail.com>
ssssskippy@gmail.com>
yak-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sun, October 17, 2010 5:44:05 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: How to set my accelerometer?
Thanks for your answer.
So you mean that the best way is to replace it?
2010/10/17 bill wade < <mailto:bwade154@yahoo.com>
<mailto:bwade154@yahoo.com> bwade154@yahoo.com>
Olivier I had a problem with my G-meter a few years ago and took the
back
cover off, mine the interior was made of brass kind of like a clock and
vibration over the years just wore it out I took the back G-meter out
and
put it up front and I had another meter to put in the back you do know
that
the front g-meter is also a switch and when you exceed the G limit a
buzzing
sound goes to the headset telling you to knock it off your exceeding my
G-limits.
Bill Wade
_____
From: ssssskippy < <mailto:ssssskippy@gmail.com>
<mailto:ssssskippy@gmail.com> ssssskippy@gmail.com>
yak-list@matronics.com" < <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
<mailto:yak-list@matronics.com> yak-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Sun, October 17, 2010 12:20:47 PM
Subject: Yak-List: How to set my accelerometer?
<mailto:ssssskippy@gmail.com>
<mailto:ssssskippy@gmail.com> ssssskippy@gmail.com>
Hi
I have a problem with my rear accelerometer on a yak52.
It shows on the ground a solid 2G instead 1G.
In the instruments back, there is 3 small screws and a big one.
Can somebody tells me how to set the instrument accurately?
Thanks
Olivier
Le 17 oct. 2010 =E0 16:18, Eric Wobschall <
<mailto:eric@buffaloskyline.com>
<mailto:eric@buffaloskyline.com> eric@buffaloskyline.com> a =E9crit :
<mailto:eric@buffaloskyline.com> <mailto:eric@buffaloskyline.com>
eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>
> Any time a propeller can turn, it can potentially windmill, especially
if
the resistance is low.
>
> As the airplane moves, the air flow creates pressure differentials in
the
propeller blades, which are airfoils. This forces the blades to move in
the
direction of the leading edge, thereby converting this kinetic energy to
torque acting on the propeller shaft.
>
>
>
> On Oct 17, 2010, at 12:19 AM, Elmar Hegenauer wrote:
>
<mailto:elmar.h@shaw.ca> <mailto:elmar.h@shaw.ca> elmar.h@shaw.ca>
>>
>> Why does the propeller windmill on
>> a ceased engine, sheared gearbox?
>>
>> Elmar
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
&========================
et="_blank"> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List tp://
<http://forums.matronics.com> forums.matronics.com _blank">
<http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
<http://www.matroni==================
=>
http://www.matroni===================
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
<http://forums.matronics.com> http://forums.matronics.com
<http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
<http://www.matronics.com/Naviga/www.matronics.com/contribution>
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%3Cfont
+size=>
et="_blank"> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
<http://www.matronics.com/Naviga/www.matronics.com/contribution>
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
=>
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
=>
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
=>
http://www.matro===================
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
=>
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
=>
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
=>
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
=>
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
=>
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
<http://www.matronics.com/contri=====%0A%0A%3C/font%3E%3C/b%3E%
3Cfont%20size
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 failure in Yak-50 |
There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that explains
that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400
lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular
(gear-up) landing on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an
inch of blade is shaved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near that
force. On the other hand, if you hit something else more abruptly, the
inertia of things on the accessory shafts will shear those shafts off
or twist them out of sync. This is all paraphrased, so if you haven't
read it, you should read Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of
prop strikes.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in
> shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
> So the answer is I do not know.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> No problem, Doc.
>
> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design
> to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
> momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to
> just break free like that.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already
> seen Robs post.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how,
> which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly
> trumps speculation.
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>
>
> For those interested in more details:
>
> =B7 As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would
> have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
> =B7 Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty
> much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into
> coarse pitch.
> =B7 The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes
> without oil, which is quite impressive.
> =B7 Oil temperatures didn=92t go up simply because there was
no
> oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for
> the engine failure ' because the pressure release valve had not been
> wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
> =B7 However it then totally seized and this is what broke the
> gearbox ' hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized
> engine.
> =B7 The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible
> to remove most of the cylinders!
> =B7 I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only
> because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of
> cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
> settings in order to preserve the engine.
> =B7 In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is the
> safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
>
>
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Herefordshire
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
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: How to set my accelerometer? |
Hi
Good news!
Thank you very much for all your advices, especialy Rob for the internal
picture and Sam for the calibration procedure.
In fact, it was the transport screw that was blocking the Gmeter internal
mouvement due certainly to the vibrations (good hoping so, Beach Boys
forever :-))) )
Bye and have nice flights
Olivier
2010/10/18 Olivier Vigneron <ssssskippy@gmail.com>
> marvellous!!
>
> Thank you very much
>
> 2010/10/18 Rob Rowe <yak-list@robrowe.plus.com>
>
>>
>> Olivier,
>>
>> As a wild card you could check to see if the G meter's internal transport
>> protection screw has been fully wound OUT (counter-clockwise).
>>
>> It's under the slotted cover ('B' in the attached PDF file) on the back of
>> the meter.
>>
>> You need to make sure that it's snug up against the casing (and not free
>> to rotate) otherwise it might impinge on the mechanism.
>>
>> Bon courage!
>>
>> Rob R.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=316217#316217
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Attachments:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/g_meter_adjustments_844.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a YAK-50
Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that lands gear up.
I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it myself), or he
might have been talking about some other type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES off the prop
(or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no question about that.
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that explains that for
any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must
be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement
with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation,
which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit something
else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory shafts will
shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This is all paraphrased, so
if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's article, which addresses all kinds
of prop strikes.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in shaft. But,
if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
So the answer is I do not know.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
No problem, Doc.
So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design to prevent
the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop momentum? Otherwise, you'd
think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just break free like that.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already seen Robs post.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how, which surprises
me. Having access to the failed engine certainly trumps speculation.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
For those interested in more details:
As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would have fallen as
the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty much at the same
time as the prop (as one would expect) went into coarse pitch.
The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes without oil, which
is quite impressive.
Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was no oil and so
nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for the engine failure - because
the pressure release valve had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell
out.
However it then totally seized and this is what broke the gearbox - hence
the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized engine.
The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible to remove most
of the cylinders!
I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only because a small
part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of cooling is through air, and
of course he was at very low power settings in order to preserve the engine.
In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is the safest way,
but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
Engine failure in Yak-50
It was the gearbox that broke up, allowing the propeller shaft to turn
freely.
The M14P propeller shaft is incredibly strong, unlike Lycomings, which do
have a certain tendency to shed propellers.
I have only heard of this happening once on a M14P, and that on a very hard
flown Russian Team Sukhoi.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
<http://www.russianaeros.com> 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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
And I'm looking across my office at a selection of unintentionally shortened
prop blades from that very same Yak 50 and concur at least 10 inches of "Oh
bugger" is involved !
kp
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G
CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
Sent: 19 October 2010 17:13
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
--> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a YAK-50
Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that lands gear
up. I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it myself),
or he might have been talking about some other type of aircraft than a
YAK-50.
A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES off the
prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no question about
that.
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that explains that
for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I
think) must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-up)
landing on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade
is shaved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On the other
hand, if you hit something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the
accessory shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's
article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in
shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
So the answer is I do not know.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
No problem, Doc.
So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design
to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop momentum?
Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just break free
like that.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already
seen Robs post.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how,
which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly trumps
speculation.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
For those interested in more details:
. As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would
have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
. Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty
much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into coarse
pitch.
. The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes
without oil, which is quite impressive.
. Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was no
oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for the engine
failure - because the pressure release valve had not been wire-locked, it
unscrewed and fell out.
. However it then totally seized and this is what broke the
gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized engine.
. The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible
to remove most of the cylinders!
. I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only
because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of cooling
is through air, and of course he was at very low power settings in order to
preserve the engine.
. In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is the
safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
He said, per strike
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
ALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a YAK-50
Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that lands gea
r up.- I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it myse
lf), or he might have been talking about some other type of aircraft than a
YAK-50.
A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES off the p
rop (or more).---I own one of these aircraft and there is no question
about that.-
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that explains that
for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I th
ink) must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-up) landin
g on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is sha
ved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand
, if you hit something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the acc
essory shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This i
s all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's articl
e, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.-
On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
---
--- Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point i
n shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
--- So the answer is I do not know.
--- Doc
-----
--- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-
server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
--- Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
--- To: yak-list@matronics.com
--- Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
-----
--- No problem, Doc.
-----
--- So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate desig
n to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop momentum? O
therwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just break free l
ike that.
-----
-----
--- On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
--- Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had alread
y seen Robs post.
--- Doc
-----
--- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-
server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
--- Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
--- To: yak-list@matronics.com
--- Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
-----
--- Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how
, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly trumps s
peculation.
-----
--- On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
---
---
---
---
--- For those interested in more details:
-----
--- =B7- - - ---As had been suggested, I am sure the oil
pressure would have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
--- =B7- - - ---Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pr
essure pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went
into coarse pitch.
--- =B7- - - ---The engine then actually kept going for 9
/10 minutes without oil, which is quite impressive.
--- =B7- - - ---Oil temperatures didn't go up simply beca
use there was no oil and so nothing to measure!- This of course was the r
eason for the engine failure - because the pressure release valve had not b
een wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
--- =B7- - - ---However it then totally seized and this i
s what broke the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with
a seized engine.
--- =B7- - - ---The extent of the seizure was such that i
t is impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
--- =B7- - - ---I would expect the CHT to have risen a bi
t, but only because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority
of cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power settings
in order to preserve the engine.
--- =B7- - - ---In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am su
re gear-up is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the a
ircraft.
-----
-----
--- Richard Goode Aerobatics
--- Rhodds Farm
--- Lyonshall
--- Herefordshire
--- HR5 3LW
--- United Kingdom
-----
--- Tel:- +44 (0) 1544 340120
--- Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
--- www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
-----
-----
-----
--- style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <
http://forums.matronics.com/>
--- style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.ma
tronics.com/contribution
-----
-----
-----
-----
-----
--- http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
--- http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-----
-----
-----
--- style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <
http://forums.matronics.com/>
--- style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.ma
tronics.com/contribution
-----
-----
-----
-----
-----
---
---
---
---
---
---
--- http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
---
---
---
--- http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
---
---
---
---
--- http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---
-----
---
---
--- style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
--- style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.ma
tronics.com/contribution
---
---
le, List Admin.
=0A=0A=0A
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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
That is true. And if you have ever had the pleasure of watching someone
doing a go round from a near gear up landing, it looks like a saw mill with
all the saw dust flying. It may take a tenth of an inch per pass but at
power up to go around it looks like a dust bowl for a heart beat.
No, I was not guilty! Also no names will be given to protect the guilty
parties.
doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Hamlin
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 1:28 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
He said, per strike
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> >
Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a YAK-50
Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that lands gear
up. I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it myself),
or he might have been talking about some other type of aircraft than a
YAK-50.
A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES off the
prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no question about
that.
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronic
s.com> on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that explains that
for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I
think) must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-up)
landing on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade
is shaved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On the other
hand, if you hit something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the
accessory shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's
article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in
shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
So the answer is I do not know.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronic
s.com> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronic
s.com> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
No problem, Doc.
So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design to
prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop momentum?
Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just break free
like that.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already seen
Robs post.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronic
s.com> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronic
s.com> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how, which
surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly trumps
speculation.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
For those interested in more details:
. As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would have
fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
. Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty much at
the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into coarse pitch.
. The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes without
oil, which is quite impressive.
. Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was no oil
and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for the engine
failure - because the pressure release valve had not been wire-locked, it
unscrewed and fell out.
. However it then totally seized and this is what broke the
gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized engine.
. The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible to
remove most of the cylinders!
. I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only because a
small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of cooling is through
air, and of course he was at very low power settings in order to preserve
the engine.
. In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is the
safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
<http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
<http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
<BRp; --> http:p://forums.matronics.com/
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> "
target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com<
&nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
KP,
What's your next plane going to be? Another 50?
Doc
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of pilko2
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 11:29 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
And I'm looking across my office at a selection of unintentionally shortened
prop blades from that very same Yak 50 and concur at least 10 inches of "Oh
bugger" is involved !
kp
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G
CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
Sent: 19 October 2010 17:13
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
--> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a YAK-50
Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that lands gear
up. I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it myself),
or he might have been talking about some other type of aircraft than a
YAK-50.
A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES off the
prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no question about
that.
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that explains that
for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I
think) must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-up)
landing on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade
is shaved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On the other
hand, if you hit something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the
accessory shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's
article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in
shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
So the answer is I do not know.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
No problem, Doc.
So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design
to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop momentum?
Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just break free
like that.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already
seen Robs post.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how,
which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly trumps
speculation.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
For those interested in more details:
. As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would
have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
. Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty
much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into coarse
pitch.
. The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes
without oil, which is quite impressive.
. Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was no
oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for the engine
failure - because the pressure release valve had not been wire-locked, it
unscrewed and fell out.
. However it then totally seized and this is what broke the
gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized engine.
. The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible
to remove most of the cylinders!
. I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only
because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of cooling
is through air, and of course he was at very low power settings in order to
preserve the engine.
. In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is the
safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
You land gear up in a YAK-50 and I don't care how many 1/10's of an inch come
off at a time, which of course has a lot to do with engine rpm, since rate, etc.,
I really don't understand the issue. There is a loud noise and then about
10 inches off of either end are gone. In some cases, the prop is in balance
and can even be flown around the pattern. Amazing huh?
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Roger Kemp M.D.
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:46 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
That is true. And if you have ever had the pleasure of watching someone doing a
go round from a near gear up landing, it looks like a saw mill with all the saw
dust flying. It may take a tenth of an inch per pass but at power up to go
around it looks like a dust bowl for a heart beat.
No, I was not guilty! Also no names will be given to protect the guilty parties.
doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Hamlin
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 1:28 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
He said, per strike
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a YAK-50
Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that lands gear up.
I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it myself), or he
might have been talking about some other type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES off the prop
(or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no question about that.
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that explains that for
any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must
be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement
with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation,
which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit something
else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory shafts will
shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This is all paraphrased, so
if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's article, which addresses all kinds
of prop strikes.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in shaft. But,
if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
So the answer is I do not know.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
No problem, Doc.
So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design to prevent
the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop momentum? Otherwise, you'd
think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just break free like that.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already seen Robs
post.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how, which surprises
me. Having access to the failed engine certainly trumps speculation.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
For those interested in more details:
As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would have fallen
as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty much at the
same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into coarse pitch.
The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes without oil,
which is quite impressive.
Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was no oil and
so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for the engine failure -
because the pressure release valve had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and
fell out.
However it then totally seized and this is what broke the gearbox
- hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized engine.
The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible to remove
most of the cylinders!
I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only because a small
part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of cooling is through air,
and of course he was at very low power settings in order to preserve the engine.
In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is the safest
way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
<BRp; --> http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> < &nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame per second camera focused
on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
Excuse me... ?
This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50, there is a loud
buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT? You have 10 inches or more
gone off each end of your prop.
Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I find that number to
be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time, don't you think?
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
He said, per strike
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a YAK-50
Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that lands gear up.
I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it myself), or
he might have been talking about some other type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES off the prop
(or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no question about that.
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
To: yak-list@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that explains that for
any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must
be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement
with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per
rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit something
else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory shafts will
shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This is all paraphrased, so
if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's article, which addresses all kinds
of prop strikes.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in shaft.
But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
So the answer is I do not know.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
No problem, Doc.
So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design to prevent
the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop momentum? Otherwise, you'd
think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just break free like that.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already seen Robs
post.
Doc
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how, which surprises
me. Having access to the failed engine certainly trumps speculation.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
For those interested in more details:
As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would have fallen
as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty much at the
same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into coarse pitch.
The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes without oil,
which is quite impressive.
Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was no oil and
so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for the engine failure
- because the pressure release valve had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and
fell out.
However it then totally seized and this is what broke the gearbox
- hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized engine.
The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible to remove
most of the cylinders!
I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only because a small
part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of cooling is through air,
and of course he was at very low power settings in order to preserve the engine.
In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is the safest
way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> < &nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time comes off a
t a time, not enough force to shear--
-
ab
-
-
-
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
ALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Really?- And exactly how was that determined?- A 1000 frame per second
camera focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?-
Excuse me... ?-
This is silly.- You make an approach with the gear up in a 50, there is a
loud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT?- You have 10 in
ches or more gone off each end of your prop.-
Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time?- And I find that nu
mber to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time, don't you thin
k?
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
He said, per strike
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
--- To: yak-list@matronics.com
--- Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
---
---
y Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo
.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> >
---
--- Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to
a YAK-50
---
--- Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that
lands gear up.- I think you might have misread the article (I did not re
ad it myself), or he might have been talking about some other type of aircr
aft than a YAK-50.
---
--- A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES
off the prop (or more).---I own one of these aircraft and there is n
o question about that.-
---
---
--- Mark Bitterlich
---
---
--- ________________________________
---
--- From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.y
ahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>- on behalf
of Eric Wobschall
--- Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
--- To: yak-list@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/com
pose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
--- Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
---
---
--- There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that expl
ains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 l
b-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-
up) landing on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of bl
ade is shaved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On the
other hand, if you hit something else more abruptly, the inertia of things
on the accessory shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sy
nc. This is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read Car
l's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.-
---
---
--- On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
---
---
--- - -
--- - - Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear
point in shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the sa
me.
--- - - So the answer is I do not know.
--- - - Doc
--- - ---
--- - - From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc51
1.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>- [m
ailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/m
c/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wob
schall
--- - - Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
--- - - To: yak-list@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.co
m/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
--- - - Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
--- - ---
--- - - No problem, Doc.
--- - ---
--- - - So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a delibera
te design to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop mom
entum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just brea
k free like that.
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - - On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
---
---
--- - - Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you ha
d already seen Robs post.
--- - - Doc
--- - ---
--- - - From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc51
1.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>- [m
ailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/m
c/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wob
schall
--- - - Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
--- - - To: yak-list@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.co
m/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
--- - - Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
--- - ---
--- - - Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so th
at's how, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly
trumps speculation.
--- - ---
--- - - On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - - For those interested in more details:
--- - ---
--- - - =B7- - - ---As had been suggested, I am sure
the oil pressure would have fallen as the pressure release valve became uns
crewed.
--- - - =B7- - - ---Andy says that he noticed the zer
o oil pressure pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expec
t) went into coarse pitch.
--- - - =B7- - - ---The engine then actually kept goi
ng for 9/10 minutes without oil, which is quite impressive.
--- - - =B7- - - ---Oil temperatures didn't go up sim
ply because there was no oil and so nothing to measure!- This of course w
as the reason for the engine failure - because the pressure release valve h
ad not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
--- - - =B7- - - ---However it then totally seized an
d this is what broke the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmi
ll with a seized engine.
--- - - =B7- - - ---The extent of the seizure was suc
h that it is impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
--- - - =B7- - - ---I would expect the CHT to have ri
sen a bit, but only because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast
majority of cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
settings in order to preserve the engine.
--- - - =B7- - - ---In terms of gear-up of gear-down,
I am sure gear-up is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage
to the aircraft.
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - - Richard Goode Aerobatics
--- - - Rhodds Farm
--- - - Lyonshall
--- - - Herefordshire
--- - - HR5 3LW
--- - - United Kingdom
--- - ---
--- - - Tel:- +44 (0) 1544 340120
--- - - Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
--- - - www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- - - blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matroni
cs.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>- <http://forums.matronics.com/>
--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:
//www.matronics.com/contribution
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - - http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- - - http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/
>- <http://forums.matronics.com/>
--- - - http://www.matronics.com/contribution
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- - - blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matroni
cs.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>- <http://forums.matronics.com/>
--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:
//www.matronics.com/contribution
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - - http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - - http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/
>- <http://forums.matronics.com/>
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - - http://www.matronics.com/contribution
--- - -
--- - ---
--- - -
--- - -
--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- - - blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matroni
cs.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:
//www.matronics.com/contribution
--- - -
--- - -
---
---
---
---
---
--- http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.mat
ronics.com <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> <- - - -
- - - - - ---&nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" =
=====
---
---
---
---
le, List Admin.
=0A=0A=0A
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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time folks. I was th
ere, I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not tiny little 1/10"
pieces of dust. The prop is made out of WOOD folks. WOOD. When you whac
k it into a concrete runway it splinters just like you hit it with a hatche
t. The reason there is not enough force to shear steel is because last tim
e I checked, steel is a whole lot harder than compressed wood with a fiberg
lass sheath.
Sorry for blowing a little steam here but how many of you commenting on th
is subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop hit the ground with the
gear up?
How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar?
How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up the pieces?
So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't know what I am t
alking about since you read a good article someplace else on the Internet,
you just go right ahead on with your bad self!
Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even though it comes
apart like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have the ability to ca
use damage to the M-14 engine, to areas that you can go back on this list a
nd read about from people like Richard Goode if you would like.
In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized (and it DID seiz
e), the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to cause failure in t
he gearbox allowing the prop to continue to spin. That comes from the gent
who took it apart.
Have a nice day.
Mark Bitterlich
From: Paul Hamlin
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time comes off a
t a time, not enough force to shear
ab
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
ALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich
@navy.mil>
Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame per second came
ra focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
Excuse me... ?
This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50, there is a l
oud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT? You have 10 inches
or more gone off each end of your prop.
Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I find that numb
er to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time, don't you think?
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@
matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
He said, per strike
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> w
rote:
From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <http://us.m
c511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.c
om
Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
t, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitter
lich@navy.mil <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterli
ch@navy.mil> >
Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a YAK-
50
Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that lands
gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it my
self), or he might have been talking about some other type of aircraft than
a YAK-50.
A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES off t
he prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no question a
bout that.
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-ser
ver@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak
-list-server@matronics.com> on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.c
om <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that explains t
hat for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-ft (
I think) must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-up) la
nding on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is
shaved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On the other
hand, if you hit something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the
accessory shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. Th
is is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's ar
ticle, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in
shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
So the answer is I do not know.
Doc
From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list
-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner
-yak-list-server@matronics.com> [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/
compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yaho
o.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On Behalf Of E
ric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matroni
cs.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.c
om>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
No problem, Doc.
So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design
to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop momentum? Oth
erwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just break free lik
e that.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already
seen Robs post.
Doc
From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list
-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner
-yak-list-server@matronics.com> [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/
compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yaho
o.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On Behalf Of E
ric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matroni
cs.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.c
om>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how,
which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly trumps spe
culation.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
For those interested in more details:
=B7 As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would
have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
=B7 Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty
much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into coarse pi
tch.
=B7 The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes wi
thout oil, which is quite impressive.
=B7 Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was
no oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for the en
gine failure - because the pressure release valve had not been wire-locked,
it unscrewed and fell out.
=B7 However it then totally seized and this is what broke t
he gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized engin
e.
=B7 The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossibl
e to remove most of the cylinders!
=B7 I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only be
cause a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of cooling is
through air, and of course he was at very low power settings in order to p
reserve the engine.
=B7 In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is
the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/ <h
ttp://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matr
onics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http:
//forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/ <h
ttp://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matr
onics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http:
//forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/ <h
ttp://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matr
onics.com/contribution
http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.matronics
.com/ <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> < &
nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; - List Contribution Web Site -
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: Engine failure in Yak-50 |
Mark,
For what it's worth, some of us "lurkers" out here have seen a V530
prop smite the earth and we do know what a disaster it is.
A pal of ours, for whatever reason, collapsed the nose gear (but
not the mains) of a 52 on landing. The rate of sink of the nose after
the gear broke was quite high (the tail would have had quite a high rate
of climb for a short while, as well) and the nose hit the runway with a
great thumping noise.
I suspect that it is hard to imagine for those who haven't seen it,
what a violent result this creates with the prop. It was as if the prop
exploded. The shank and a few inches of the blades were
recognizable...the remaining wood still attached to what had been the
blades was more like shreds of wood fiber from a cellulose factory than
anything else. Sizable shards of prop wood were scattered over a 50+
foot area.
It may be that this situation had a higher sink rate than the usual
gear up incident. However, it is certain that a V530 prop can dismantle
itself very quickly, and in spectacular fashion
Not what I read about, but what I saw. For insurance reasons, we
weren't able to open up the engine, but I imagine that the content of
the nose case was mush.
BR,
Roger Baker
On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:40 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time folks. I
was there, I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not tiny
little 1/10" pieces of dust. The prop is made out of WOOD folks. WOOD.
When you whack it into a concrete runway it splinters just like you hit
it with a hatchet. The reason there is not enough force to shear steel
is because last time I checked, steel is a whole lot harder than
compressed wood with a fiberglass sheath.
>
> Sorry for blowing a little steam here but how many of you commenting
on this subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop hit the ground
with the gear up?
>
> How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar?
>
> How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up the
pieces?
>
> So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't know what I
am talking about since you read a good article someplace else on the
Internet, you just go right ahead on with your bad self!
>
> Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even though it
comes apart like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have the
ability to cause damage to the M-14 engine, to areas that you can go
back on this list and read about from people like Richard Goode if you
would like.
>
> In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized (and it DID
seize), the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to cause
failure in the gearbox allowing the prop to continue to spin. That
comes from the gent who took it apart.
>
> Have a nice day.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
>
> From: Paul Hamlin
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time comes
off at a time, not enough force to shear
>
> ab
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 8:17 PM
>
Point, MALS-14 64E"
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame per second
camera focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
>
> Excuse me... ?
>
> This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50, there
is a loud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT? You have
10 inches or more gone off each end of your prop.
>
> Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I find that
number to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time, don't you
think?
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matro
nics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> He said, per strike
>
> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14
64E
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
>
>
>
> From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
>
>
Point, MALS-14 64E"
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
>
> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a
YAK-50
>
> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that
lands gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I did not
read it myself), or he might have been talking about some other type of
aircraft than a YAK-50.
>
> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES
off the prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no
question about that.
>
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matro
nics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com> on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance)
of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause damage. During a
regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth
of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near
that force. On the other hand, if you hit something else more abruptly,
the inertia of things on the accessory shafts will shear those shafts
off or twist them out of sync. This is all paraphrased, so if you
haven't read it, you should read Carl's article, which addresses all
kinds of prop strikes.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
>
> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear
point in shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the
same.
> So the answer is I do not know.
> Doc
>
> From:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matro
nics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com>
[mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-serv
er@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> No problem, Doc.
>
> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate
design to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to
just break free like that.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had
already seen Robs post.
> Doc
>
> From:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matro
nics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com>
[mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-serv
er@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's
how, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly
trumps speculation.
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>
>
>
>
> For those interested in more details:
>
> =B7 As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure
would have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
> =B7 Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure
pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into
coarse pitch.
> =B7 The engine then actually kept going for 9/10
minutes without oil, which is quite impressive.
> =B7 Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there
was no oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for
the engine failure - because the pressure release valve had not been
wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
> =B7 However it then totally seized and this is what
broke the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a
seized engine.
> =B7 The extent of the seizure was such that it is
impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
> =B7 I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but
only because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of
cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power settings
in order to preserve the engine.
> =B7 In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure
gear-up is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the
aircraft.
>
>
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Herefordshire
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/>
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/>
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/>
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/>
<http://forums.matronics.com/>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http:p://forums.matronics.com/"
target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com/
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> <
&nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; - List Contribution Web Site -
>
>
>
>
>
> et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> p://forums.matronics.com/
> blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
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: | CANCELLED: Warrenton Raider clinic is cancelled for Oct 22-23-24 |
Folks,
Due to lack of reservations/interest the clinic in Warrenton is cancelled.
Bear
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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
Concur.
Thanks for writing.
Mark
From: Roger Baker
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 6:19 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Mark,
For what it's worth, some of us "lurkers" out here have seen a V530 pr
op smite the earth and we do know what a disaster it is.
A pal of ours, for whatever reason, collapsed the nose gear (but not t
he mains) of a 52 on landing. The rate of sink of the nose after the gear
broke was quite high (the tail would have had quite a high rate of climb fo
r a short while, as well) and the nose hit the runway with a great thumping
noise.
I suspect that it is hard to imagine for those who haven't seen it, wh
at a violent result this creates with the prop. It was as if the prop expl
oded. The shank and a few inches of the blades were recognizable...the rem
aining wood still attached to what had been the blades was more like shreds
of wood fiber from a cellulose factory than anything else. Sizable shards
of prop wood were scattered over a 50+ foot area.
It may be that this situation had a higher sink rate than the usual ge
ar up incident. However, it is certain that a V530 prop can dismantle itse
lf very quickly, and in spectacular fashion
Not what I read about, but what I saw. For insurance reasons, we were
n't able to open up the engine, but I imagine that the content of the nose
case was mush.
BR,
Roger Baker
On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:40 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-
14 64E wrote:
The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time folks. I was th
ere, I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not tiny little 1/10"
pieces of dust. The prop is made out of WOOD folks. WOOD. When you whac
k it into a concrete runway it splinters just like you hit it with a hatche
t. The reason there is not enough force to shear steel is because last tim
e I checked, steel is a whole lot harder than compressed wood with a fiberg
lass sheath.
Sorry for blowing a little steam here but how many of you commenting on th
is subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop hit the ground with the
gear up?
How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar?
How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up the pieces?
So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't know what I am t
alking about since you read a good article someplace else on the Internet,
you just go right ahead on with your bad self!
Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even though it comes
apart like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have the ability to ca
use damage to the M-14 engine, to areas that you can go back on this list a
nd read about from people like Richard Goode if you would like.
In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized (and it DID seiz
e), the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to cause failure in t
he gearbox allowing the prop to continue to spin. That comes from the gent
who took it apart.
Have a nice day.
Mark Bitterlich
From: Paul Hamlin
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time comes off a
t a time, not enough force to shear
ab
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
ALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich
@navy.mil>
Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame per second came
ra focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
Excuse me... ?
This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50, there is a l
oud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT? You have 10 inches
or more gone off each end of your prop.
Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I find that numb
er to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time, don't you think?
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@
matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
He said, per strike
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> w
rote:
From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <http://us.m
c511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.c
om
Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
t, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitter
lich@navy.mil <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterli
ch@navy.mil> >
Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a YAK-
50
Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that lands
gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it my
self), or he might have been talking about some other type of aircraft than
a YAK-50.
A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES off t
he prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no question a
bout that.
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-ser
ver@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak
-list-server@matronics.com> on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.c
om <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that explains t
hat for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-ft (
I think) must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-up) la
nding on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is
shaved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On the other
hand, if you hit something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the
accessory shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. Th
is is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's ar
ticle, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in
shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
So the answer is I do not know.
Doc
From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list
-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner
-yak-list-server@matronics.com> [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/
compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yaho
o.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On Behalf Of E
ric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matroni
cs.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.c
om>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
No problem, Doc.
So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design
to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop momentum? Oth
erwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just break free lik
e that.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already
seen Robs post.
Doc
From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list
-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner
-yak-list-server@matronics.com> [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/
compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yaho
o.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On Behalf Of E
ric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matroni
cs.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.c
om>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how,
which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly trumps spe
culation.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
For those interested in more details:
=B7 As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would
have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
=B7 Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty
much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into coarse pi
tch.
=B7 The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes wi
thout oil, which is quite impressive.
=B7 Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was
no oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for the en
gine failure - because the pressure release valve had not been wire-locked,
it unscrewed and fell out.
=B7 However it then totally seized and this is what broke t
he gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized engin
e.
=B7 The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossibl
e to remove most of the cylinders!
=B7 I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only be
cause a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of cooling is
through air, and of course he was at very low power settings in order to p
reserve the engine.
=B7 In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is
the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
http://www.russianaeros.com/ <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/ <h
ttp://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matr
onics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http:
//forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/ <h
ttp://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matr
onics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http:
//forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/ <h
ttp://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matr
onics.com/contribution
http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.matronics
.com/ <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> < &
nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; - List Contribution Web Site - et
=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List p://forums.matronics.
com/ blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.c
om/Navigator?Yak-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/con
tribution
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 |
He my have been referring only to the Yak-52, and apparently, you
misread what is below. I said 1/10th or an inch PER ROTATION.
May very well not apply to the Yak-50.
On Oct 19, 2010, at 12:12 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a
> YAK-50
>
> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that
> lands gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I did
> not read it myself), or he might have been talking about some other
> type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
>
> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES
> off the prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is
> no question about that.
>
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
> explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional
> resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause
> damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the wood
> prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation,
> which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit
> something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory
> shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read
> Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
>
> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in
> shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
> So the answer is I do not know.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> No problem, Doc.
>
> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design
> to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
> momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to
> just break free like that.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already
> seen Robs post.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how,
> which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly
> trumps speculation.
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>
>
>
>
> For those interested in more details:
>
> As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would
> have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
> Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty
> much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into
> coarse pitch.
> The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes
> without oil, which is quite impressive.
> Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was no
> oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for
> the engine failure - because the pressure release valve had not been
> wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
> However it then totally seized and this is what broke the
> gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized
> engine.
> The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible
> to remove most of the cylinders!
> I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only
> because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of
> cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
> settings in order to preserve the engine.
> In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is
> the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
>
>
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Herefordshire
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/
> >
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/
> >
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 |
PEOPLE!! READ BEFORE YOU POP OFF!! Less that 1/10th PER ROTATION!!!
On Oct 19, 2010, at 12:28 PM, pilko2 wrote:
>
> And I'm looking across my office at a selection of unintentionally
> shortened
> prop blades from that very same Yak 50 and concur at least 10 inches
> of "Oh
> bugger" is involved !
>
> kp
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Bitterlich, Mark G
> CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
> Sent: 19 October 2010 17:13
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> --> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a
> YAK-50
>
> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that
> lands gear
> up. I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it
> myself),
> or he might have been talking about some other type of aircraft than a
> YAK-50.
>
> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES
> off the
> prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no
> question about
> that.
>
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
> explains that
> for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-
> ft (I
> think) must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-up)
> landing on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of
> blade
> is shaved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On
> the other
> hand, if you hit something else more abruptly, the inertia of things
> on the
> accessory shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of
> sync. This
> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's
> article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
>
> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in
> shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
> So the answer is I do not know.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
> Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> No problem, Doc.
>
> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design
> to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
> momentum?
> Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just
> break free
> like that.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already
> seen Robs post.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
> Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how,
> which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly
> trumps
> speculation.
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>
>
>
>
> For those interested in more details:
>
> . As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would
> have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
> . Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty
> much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into
> coarse
> pitch.
> . The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes
> without oil, which is quite impressive.
> . Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was no
> oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for
> the engine
> failure - because the pressure release valve had not been wire-
> locked, it
> unscrewed and fell out.
> . However it then totally seized and this is what broke the
> gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized
> engine.
> . The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible
> to remove most of the cylinders!
> . I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only
> because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of
> cooling
> is through air, and of course he was at very low power settings in
> order to
> preserve the engine.
> . In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is the
> safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
>
>
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Herefordshire
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
> ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
> ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
> ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
> ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
> ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
> ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 |
By my count, this is easily the most elongated string in theYak list's
history! Can we try a new topic like MMO or Flight Suit Policy?
Dave
In a message dated 10/19/2010 5:40:15 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
eric@buffaloskyline.com writes:
--> Yak-List message posted by: Eric Wobschall <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
He my have been referring only to the Yak-52, and apparently, you
misread what is below. I said 1/10th or an inch PER ROTATION.
May very well not apply to the Yak-50.
On Oct 19, 2010, at 12:12 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a
> YAK-50
>
> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that
> lands gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I did
> not read it myself), or he might have been talking about some other
> type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
>
> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES
> off the prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is
> no question about that.
>
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
> explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional
> resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause
> damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the wood
> prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation,
> which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit
> something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory
> shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read
> Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
>
> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in
> shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
> So the answer is I do not know.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> No problem, Doc.
>
> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design
> to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
> momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to
> just break free like that.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already
> seen Robs post.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how,
> which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly
> trumps speculation.
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>
>
>
>
> For those interested in more details:
>
> =B7 As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would
> have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
> =B7 Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty
> much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into
> coarse pitch.
> =B7 The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes
> without oil, which is quite impressive.
> =B7 Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was no
> oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for
> the engine failure - because the pressure release valve had not been
> wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
> =B7 However it then totally seized and this is what broke the
> gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized
> engine.
> =B7 The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible
> to remove most of the cylinders!
> =B7 I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only
> because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of
> cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
> settings in order to preserve the engine.
> =B7 In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is
> the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
>
>
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Herefordshire
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
<http://forums.matronics.com/
> >
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
<http://forums.matronics.com/
> >
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 |
Once again, a nose gear collapse is not a regular gear up landing.
Also, if the plane lands gear up and then rolls out into a brick wall
just as a bomb goes off, that wouldn't be the same either.
On Oct 19, 2010, at 6:19 PM, Roger Baker wrote:
> Mark,
>
> For what it's worth, some of us "lurkers" out here have seen a
> V530 prop smite the earth and we do know what a disaster it is.
>
> A pal of ours, for whatever reason, collapsed the nose gear
> (but not the mains) of a 52 on landing. The rate of sink of the
> nose after the gear broke was quite high (the tail would have had
> quite a high rate of climb for a short while, as well) and the nose
> hit the runway with a great thumping noise.
>
> I suspect that it is hard to imagine for those who haven't seen
> it, what a violent result this creates with the prop. It was as if
> the prop exploded. The shank and a few inches of the blades were
> recognizable...the remaining wood still attached to what had been
> the blades was more like shreds of wood fiber from a cellulose
> factory than anything else. Sizable shards of prop wood were
> scattered over a 50+ foot area.
>
> It may be that this situation had a higher sink rate than the
> usual gear up incident. However, it is certain that a V530 prop can
> dismantle itself very quickly, and in spectacular fashion
>
> Not what I read about, but what I saw. For insurance reasons,
> we weren't able to open up the engine, but I imagine that the
> content of the nose case was mush.
>
> BR,
>
> Roger Baker
>
>
> On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:40 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
> Point, MALS-14 64E wrote:
>
>> The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time folks.
>> I was there, I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not
>> tiny little 1/10" pieces of dust. The prop is made out of WOOD
>> folks. WOOD. When you whack it into a concrete runway it
>> splinters just like you hit it with a hatchet. The reason there is
>> not enough force to shear steel is because last time I checked,
>> steel is a whole lot harder than compressed wood with a fiberglass
>> sheath.
>>
>> Sorry for blowing a little steam here but how many of you
>> commenting on this subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop
>> hit the ground with the gear up?
>>
>> How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar?
>>
>> How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up the
>> pieces?
>>
>> So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't know
>> what I am talking about since you read a good article someplace
>> else on the Internet, you just go right ahead on with your bad self!
>>
>> Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even though
>> it comes apart like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have
>> the ability to cause damage to the M-14 engine, to areas that you
>> can go back on this list and read about from people like Richard
>> Goode if you would like.
>>
>> In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized (and it
>> DID seize), the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to
>> cause failure in the gearbox allowing the prop to continue to
>> spin. That comes from the gent who took it apart.
>>
>> Have a nice day.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time
>> comes off at a time, not enough force to shear
>>
>> ab
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 8:17 PM
>>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E"
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> >
>>
>> Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame per
>> second camera focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
>>
>> Excuse me... ?
>>
>> This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50,
>> there is a loud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS
>> THAT? You have 10 inches or more gone off each end of your prop.
>>
>> Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I find
>> that number to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time,
>> don't you think?
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matro
nics.com
>> on behalf of Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
>> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> He said, per strike
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
>> MALS-14 64E
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> >
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
>>
>>
>> Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> > >
>>
>> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes
>> to a YAK-50
>>
>> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50
>> that lands gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I
>> did not read it myself), or he might have been talking about some
>> other type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
>>
>> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12
>> INCHES off the prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and
>> there is no question about that.
>>
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matro
nics.com
>>
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com
>> > on behalf of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
>> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-
>> list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
>> explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional
>> resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause
>> damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the
>> wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per
>> rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if
>> you hit something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the
>> accessory shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of
>> sync. This is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you
>> should read Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of prop
>> strikes.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear
>> point in shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do
>> the same.
>> So the answer is I do not know.
>> Doc
>>
>> From:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matro
nics.com
>>
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com
>> >
[mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-serv
er@matronics.com
>>
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com
>> > ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
>> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-
>> list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> No problem, Doc.
>>
>> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate
>> design to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from
>> prop momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough
>> inertia to just break free like that.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had
>> already seen Robs post.
>> Doc
>>
>> From:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matro
nics.com
>>
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com
>> >
[mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-serv
er@matronics.com
>>
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com
>> > ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
>> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-
>> list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so
>> that's how, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine
>> certainly trumps speculation.
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> For those interested in more details:
>>
>> =B7 As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure
>> would have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
>> =B7 Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure
>> pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went
>> into coarse pitch.
>> =B7 The engine then actually kept going for 9/10
>> minutes without oil, which is quite impressive.
>> =B7 Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because
>> there was no oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the
>> reason for the engine failure - because the pressure release valve
>> had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
>> =B7 However it then totally seized and this is what
>> broke the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with
>> a seized engine.
>> =B7 The extent of the seizure was such that it is
>> impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
>> =B7 I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but
>> only because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast
>> majority of cooling is through air, and of course he was at very
>> low power settings in order to preserve the engine.
>> =B7 In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-
>> up is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the
>> aircraft.
>>
>>
>> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>> Rhodds Farm
>> Lyonshall
>> Herefordshire
>> HR5 3LW
>> United Kingdom
>>
>> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
>> > <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>
>>
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
>> > <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http:p://forums.matronics.com/"
target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
>> < &nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution"
>> ======
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; - List Contribution Web
>> Site -
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> p://forums.matronics.com/
>> blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
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/co
ntribution
>>
>
>
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 |
Mark:
I was paraphrasing from a paper written by an expert (Carl Hayes) and
never claimed to be one myself. As I mentioned, it's on the M-14P
website. However, here it is for your convenience: -Eric
On Oct 19, 2010, at 3:17 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame per
> second camera focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
>
> Excuse me... ?
>
> This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50, there
> is a loud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT? You
> have 10 inches or more gone off each end of your prop.
>
> Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I find
> that number to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time,
> don't you think?
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> He said, per strike
>
> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
>
>
Cherry
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> > >
>
> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to
a
> YAK-50
>
> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50
that
> lands gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I did
> not read it myself), or he might have been talking about some other
> type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
>
> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12
INCHES
> off the prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is
> no question about that.
>
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com
> > on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> >
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
> explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional
> resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause
> damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the wood
> prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation,
> which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit
> something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory
> shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read
> Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
>
> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear
point
> in shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the
> same.
> So the answer is I do not know.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com
> > [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com
> > ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> >
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> No problem, Doc.
>
> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate
> design to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
> momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to
> just break free like that.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had
> already seen Robs post.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com
> > [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matr
onics.com
> > ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> >
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so
that's
> how, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine
> certainly trumps speculation.
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>
>
>
>
> For those interested in more details:
>
> =B7 As had been suggested, I am sure the oil
pressure
> would have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
> =B7 Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure
> pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went
> into coarse pitch.
> =B7 The engine then actually kept going for 9/10
minutes
> without oil, which is quite impressive.
> =B7 Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because
there
> was no oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason
> for the engine failure - because the pressure release valve had not
> been wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
> =B7 However it then totally seized and this is what
broke
> the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a
> seized engine.
> =B7 The extent of the seizure was such that it is
> impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
> =B7 I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but
only
> because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of
> cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
> settings in order to preserve the engine.
> =B7 In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure
gear-up
> is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the
> aircraft.
>
>
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Herefordshire
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://forums.matronics.com
> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
<http://forums.matronics.com/
> >
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://forums.matronics.com
> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
<http://forums.matronics.com/
> >
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://forums.matronics.com
> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http:p://forums.matronics.com/"
target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> <
> &nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
The answer is yes to have watched it happen and examined the aftermath.-
-Having followed this list there is one thing I know for sure - no point
in continuing this.
-
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time folks.- I was
there, I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not tiny little 1/1
0" pieces of dust.- The prop is made out of WOOD folks.- WOOD.- When
you whack it into a concrete runway it splinters just like you hit it with
a hatchet.- The reason there is not enough force to shear steel is becaus
e last time I checked, steel is a whole lot harder than compressed wood wit
h a fiberglass sheath.--
-
Sorry for blowing a little steam here- but how many of you commenting on
this subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop hit the ground with th
e gear up?
-
How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar?
-
How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up the pieces?
-
-
So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't know what I am t
alking about since you read a good article someplace else on the Internet,
you just go right ahead on with your bad self!-
-
Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even though it comes
apart like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have the ability to ca
use damage to the M-14 engine, to areas that you can go back on this list a
nd read about from people like Richard Goode if you would like.-
-
In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized (and it DID seiz
e), the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to cause failure in t
he gearbox allowing the prop to continue to spin.- That comes from the ge
nt who took it apart.
-
Have a nice day.
-
Mark Bitterlich
-
-
From: Paul Hamlin
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time comes off a
t a time, not enough force to shear--
-
ab
-
-
-
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
ALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich
@navy.mil>
Really?- And exactly how was that determined?- A 1000 frame per second
camera focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?-
Excuse me... ?-
This is silly.- You make an approach with the gear up in a 50, there is a
loud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT?- You have 10 in
ches or more gone off each end of your prop.-
Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time?- And I find that nu
mber to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time, don't you thin
k?
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@
matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
He said, per strike
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> w
rote:
--- From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <http:
//us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
--- Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
--- To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matro
nics.com
--- Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
---
---
y Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.
bitterlich@navy.mil <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bi
tterlich@navy.mil> >
---
--- Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to
a YAK-50
---
--- Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that
lands gear up.- I think you might have misread the article (I did not re
ad it myself), or he might have been talking about some other type of aircr
aft than a YAK-50.
---
--- A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES
off the prop (or more).---I own one of these aircraft and there is n
o question about that.-
---
---
--- Mark Bitterlich
---
---
--- ________________________________
---
--- From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-li
st-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=own
er-yak-list-server@matronics.com>- on behalf of Eric Wobschall
--- Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
--- To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matro
nics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics
.com>
--- Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
---
---
--- There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that expl
ains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 l
b-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-
up) landing on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of bl
ade is shaved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On the
other hand, if you hit something else more abruptly, the inertia of things
on the accessory shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sy
nc. This is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read Car
l's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.-
---
---
--- On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
---
---
--- - -
--- - - Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear
point in shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the sa
me.
--- - - So the answer is I do not know.
--- - - Doc
--- - ---
--- - - From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owne
r-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?
to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>- [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.y
ahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc5
11.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On
Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
--- - - Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
--- - - To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-li
st@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@m
atronics.com>
--- - - Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
--- - ---
--- - - No problem, Doc.
--- - ---
--- - - So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a delibera
te design to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop mom
entum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just brea
k free like that.
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - - On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
---
---
--- - - Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you ha
d already seen Robs post.
--- - - Doc
--- - ---
--- - - From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owne
r-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?
to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>- [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.y
ahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc5
11.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On
Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
--- - - Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
--- - - To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-li
st@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@m
atronics.com>
--- - - Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
--- - ---
--- - - Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so th
at's how, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly
trumps speculation.
--- - ---
--- - - On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - - For those interested in more details:
--- - ---
--- - - =B7- - - ---As had been suggested, I am sure
the oil pressure would have fallen as the pressure release valve became uns
crewed.
--- - - =B7- - - ---Andy says that he noticed the zer
o oil pressure pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expec
t) went into coarse pitch.
--- - - =B7- - - ---The engine then actually kept goi
ng for 9/10 minutes without oil, which is quite impressive.
--- - - =B7- - - ---Oil temperatures didn't go up sim
ply because there was no oil and so nothing to measure!- This of course w
as the reason for the engine failure - because the pressure release valve h
ad not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
--- - - =B7- - - ---However it then totally seized an
d this is what broke the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmi
ll with a seized engine.
--- - - =B7- - - ---The extent of the seizure was suc
h that it is impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
--- - - =B7- - - ---I would expect the CHT to have ri
sen a bit, but only because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast
majority of cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
settings in order to preserve the engine.
--- - - =B7- - - ---In terms of gear-up of gear-down,
I am sure gear-up is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage
to the aircraft.
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - - Richard Goode Aerobatics
--- - - Rhodds Farm
--- - - Lyonshall
--- - - Herefordshire
--- - - HR5 3LW
--- - - United Kingdom
--- - ---
--- - - Tel:- +44 (0) 1544 340120
--- - - Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
--- - - www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- - - blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matroni
cs.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/>- <http://forums.matronics.com/>
--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:
//www.matronics.com/contribution
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - - http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- - - http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com
/>- <http://forums.matronics.com/>
--- - - http://www.matronics.com/contribution
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- - - blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matroni
cs.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/>- <http://forums.matronics.com/>
--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:
//www.matronics.com/contribution
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - ---
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - - http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - - http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com
/>- <http://forums.matronics.com/>
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - -
--- - - http://www.matronics.com/contribution
--- - -
--- - ---
--- - -
--- - -
--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
--- - - blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matroni
cs.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/>
--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:
//www.matronics.com/contribution
--- - -
--- - -
---
---
---
---
---
--- http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.mat
ronics.com/ <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> <- - - -
- - - - - ---&nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" =
=====
---
---
---
---
p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; - - - ---- List Contribution Web
Site -
et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
p://forums.matronics.com/
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=0A=0A=0A
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 |
Let's not forget what--the-result of what an engine failure-will be
-. It-will =0Abe-an unplanned landing-, right now, in-a -place
-that maybe off the airport .=0AThe engine-and prop is- the least mos
t important point of considerations-at this =0Apoint-. The most importa
nt consideration is the survival=0Aof your-ass-. With the gear up you m
ay not become inverted-and crushed in an off =0Afield landing .-The ide
a-of landing with the gear down in these =0A=0Aaircraft should be only-
be considered on a prepared surface . The idea of using =0Athe gear down is
fine for a high wing . This may minmises the=0Adamage to the a/c . =0AHowe
ver this type of- landing- will probably crush you-with this type of
canopy =0A.-The insurance company can replace the rudder ,upper canopy-
etc . but not you =0A.=0AThat is why -they recommend using the gear to s
low the aircraft .=0ATerry Lewis------- =0A=0A=0A____________
____________________=0AFrom: Eric Wobschall <eric@buffaloskyline.com>=0ATo:
yak-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Tue, October 19, 2010 8:45:25 PM=0ASubject:
Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50=0A=0AOnce again, a nose gear collap
se is not a regular gear up landing. Also, if the =0Aplane lands gear up an
d then rolls out into a brick wall just as a bomb goes =0Aoff, that wouldn'
t be the same either. =0A=0A=0A=0A=0AOn Oct 19, 2010, at 6:19 PM, Roger Bak
er wrote:=0A=0AMark, =0A>=0A>=0A>-- - For what it's worth, some of us
"lurkers" out here have seen a V530 prop =0A>smite the earth and we do kno
w what a disaster it is.=0A>=0A>=0A>-- - A pal of ours, for whatever
reason, collapsed the nose gear (but not the =0A>mains) of a 52 on landing.
-The rate of sink of the nose after the gear broke =0A>was quite high (t
he tail would have had quite a high rate of climb for a short =0A>while, as
well) and the nose hit the runway with a great thumping noise.=0A>=0A>=0A>
-- - I suspect that it is hard to imagine for those who haven't seen
it, what a =0A>violent result this creates with the prop. -It was as if t
he prop exploded. -The =0A>shank and a few inches of the blades were reco
gnizable...the remaining wood =0A>still attached to what had been the blade
s was more like shreds of wood fiber =0A>from a cellulose factory than anyt
hing else. -Sizable shards of prop wood were =0A>scattered over a 50+ foo
t area.=0A>=0A>=0A>-- - It may be that this situation had a higher si
nk rate than the usual gear up =0A>incident. -However, it is certain that
a V530 prop can dismantle itself very =0A>quickly, and in spectacular fash
ion=0A>=0A>=0A>-- - Not what I read about, but what I saw. -For ins
urance reasons, we weren't =0A>able to open up the engine, but I imagine th
at the content of the nose case was =0A>mush.=0A>=0A>=0A>BR,=0A>=0A>=0A>Rog
er Baker=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:40 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G
CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 =0A>64E wrote:=0A>=0A>The point is that it d
oes not come off 1/10 inch at a time folks.- I was there, =0A>I watched i
t, I have the fragments, and they are not tiny little 1/10" pieces of =0A>d
ust.- The prop is made out of WOOD folks.- WOOD.- When you whack it i
nto a =0A>concrete runway it splinters just like you hit it with a hatchet.
- The reason =0A>there is not enough force to shear steel is because last
time I checked, steel =0A>is a whole lot harder than compressed wood with
a fiberglass sheath.-- =0A>=0A>>-=0A>>Sorry for blowing a little stea
m here- but how many of you commenting on this =0A>>subject matter have a
ctually seen a YAK-50 prop hit the ground with the gear up? =0A>>=0A>>-
=0A>>How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar? =0A>>
-=0A>>How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up the p
ieces?- =0A>>-=0A>>So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply
don't know what I am =0A>>talking about since you read a good article some
place else on the Internet, you =0A>>just go right ahead on with your bad s
elf!- =0A>>=0A>>-=0A>>Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood,
and even though it comes apart =0A>>like an attack with a chainsaw, the fo
rce DOES have the ability to cause damage =0A>>to the M-14 engine, to areas
that you can go back on this list and read about =0A>>from people like Ric
hard Goode if you would like.- =0A>>=0A>>-=0A>>In the case of THIS engi
ne failure, when the engine seized (and it DID seize), =0A>>the spinning ma
ss of the prop assembly was enough to cause failure in the =0A>>gearbox all
owing the prop to continue to spin.- That comes from the gent who =0A>>to
ok it apart. =0A>>=0A>>-=0A>>Have a nice day. =0A>>-=0A>>Mark Bitterlic
h=0A>>-=0A>>-=0A>>=0A>>________________________________=0AFrom: Paul Ha
mlin=0A>>Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM=0A>>To: yak-list@matronics.com=0A>>Su
bject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>the point was a
bout shearing shafts, if only a little at a time comes off at a =0A>>time,
not enough force to shear-- =0A>>=0A>>=0A>>ab=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>
=0A>>--- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14
64E =0A>><mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>>From: Bitterlich
, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E =0A>>><mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
=0A>>>Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50=0A>>>To: yak-list@mat
ronics.com=0A>>>Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 8:17 PM=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>-
=0A>>>MALS-14 64E" =0A>>><http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=ma
rk.bitterlich@navy.mil>=0A>>>=0A>>>Really?- And exactly how was that dete
rmined?- A 1000 frame per second camera =0A>>>focused on a YAK-50 perform
ing a gear up landing?- =0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>Excuse me... ?- =0A>>>=0A>>>T
his is silly.- You make an approach with the gear up in a 50, there is a
loud =0A>>>buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT?- You have
10 inches or more =0A>>>gone off each end of your prop.- =0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>
>>Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time?- And I find that
number to =0A>>>be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time, don't
you think? =0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>Mark Bitterlich=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>_____________
___________________=0A>>>=0A>>>From: =0A>>>http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/m
c/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com =0A>>>on behalf of Paul
Hamlin=0A>>>Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM=0A>>>To: http://us.mc511.mail.yaho
o.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com=0A>>>Subject: RE: Yak-List: En
gine failure in Yak-50=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>He said, per strike=0A>>>=0A>>>---
On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E =0A>
>><http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>--- From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det C
herry Point, MALS-14 64E =0A>>><http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?t
o=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>=0A>>>--- Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine
failure in Yak-50=0A>>>--- To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/comp
ose?to=yak-list@matronics.com=0A>>>--- Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2
010, 5:12 PM=0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- --> Yak-List me
ssage posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, =0A>>>MALS-14 64
E" =0A>>><http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@na
vy.mil =0A>>><http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlic
h@navy.mil> >=0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- Excuse me, but that is not acc
urate information when it comes to a YAK-50=0A>>>--- =0A>>>---
Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that lands gea
r =0A>>>up.- I think you might have misread the article (I did not read i
t myself), or =0A>>>he might have been talking about some other type of air
craft than a YAK-50. =0A>>>=0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- A YAK-50 making
a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES off the =0A>>>prop (or mo
re).---I own one of these aircraft and there is no question about =0A
>>>that.- =0A>>>=0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- Mark Bitt
erlich=0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- _____________________
___________=0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- From: =0A>>>http://us.mc511.mail
.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com =0A>>><http:
//us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.c
om>-=0A>>> on behalf of Eric Wobschall=0A>>>--- Sent: Tue 10/19/201
0 8:23 AM=0A>>>--- To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to
=yak-list@matronics.com =0A>>><http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?
to=yak-list@matronics.com> =0A>>>=0A>>>--- Subject: Re: Yak-List: E
ngine failure in Yak-50=0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- Ther
e's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that explains that =0A>
>>for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I
think) =0A>>>must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-up
) landing on =0A>>>pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch o
f blade is shaved off =0A>>>per rotation, which gets nowhere near that forc
e. On the other hand, if you hit =0A>>>something else more abruptly, the in
ertia of things on the accessory shafts will =0A>>>shear those shafts off o
r twist them out of sync. This is all paraphrased, so if =0A>>>you haven't
read it, you should read Carl's article, which addresses all kinds =0A>>>of
prop strikes.- =0A>>>=0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- On
Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:=0A>>>--- =0A>>>-
-- =0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- - - Not sure but I think
I heard that there is a design shear point in =0A>>>shaft. But, if that we
re so why would a prop strike not do the same.=0A>>>--- - - So th
e answer is I do not know.=0A>>>--- - - Doc=0A>>>--- -
---=0A>>>--- - - From: =0A>>>http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com
/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com =0A>>><http://us.mc511
.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>-=0A>
>>[mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-ser
ver@matronics.com=0A>>>m =0A>>><http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?t
o=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>=0A>>> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschal
l=0A>>>--- - - Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM=0A>>>--
- - - To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@mat
ronics.com =0A>>><http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@m
atronics.com> =0A>>>=0A>>>--- - - Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine f
ailure in Yak-50=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>--- - - No pro
blem, Doc. =0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>--- - - So what is
it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design to =0A>>>prevent th
e engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop momentum? Otherwise, =0A>>
>you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just break free like that.
=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>---
- - On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:=0A>>>---
=0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- - - Sorry Eric, I wrote my response bef
ore seeing that you had already seen =0A>>>Robs post.=0A>>>--- -
- Doc=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>--- - - From: =0A>>>htt
p://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics
.com =0A>>><http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-s
erver@matronics.com>-=0A>>>[mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/comp
ose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com=0A>>>m =0A>>><http://us.mc511.
mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>=0A>>> ]
On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall=0A>>>--- - - Sent: Monday, October 1
8, 2010 1:47 PM=0A>>>--- - - To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/m
c/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com =0A>>><http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com
/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com> =0A>>>=0A>>>--- - - Subj
ect: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50=0A>>>--- - ---=0A
>>>--- - - Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so
that's how, which =0A>>>surprises me. Having access to the failed engine c
ertainly trumps speculation.=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>---
- - On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:=0A>>>---
- - =0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- -
- =0A>>>--- - - For those interested in more details:=0A>>>-
-- - ---=0A>>>--- - - =B7- - - ---As had
been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would have =0A>>>fallen as the p
ressure release valve became unscrewed.=0A>>>--- - - =B7- -
- ---Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty much at
=0A>>>the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into coarse pit
ch.=0A>>>--- - - =B7- - - ---The engine then actually
kept going for 9/10 minutes without =0A>>>oil, which is quite impressive.
=0A>>>--- - - =B7- - - ---Oil temperatures didn't go
up simply because there was no oil =0A>>>and so nothing to measure!- This
of course was the reason for the engine failure =0A>>>- because the pressu
re release valve had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and =0A>>>fell out.
=0A>>>--- - - =B7- - - ---However it then totally sei
zed and this is what broke the =0A>>>gearbox - hence the propeller continui
ng to windmill with a seized engine.=0A>>>--- - - =B7- - -
---The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible to =0A>>>
remove most of the cylinders!=0A>>>--- - - =B7- - - --
-I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only because a =0A>>>sma
ll part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of cooling is through ai
r, =0A>>>and of course he was at very low power settings in order to preser
ve the engine.=0A>>>--- - - =B7- - - ---In terms of g
ear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is the =0A>>>safest way, but also, w
ill cause far less damage to the aircraft.=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>
>>--- - ---=0A>>>--- - - Richard Goode Aerobatics
=0A>>>--- - - Rhodds Farm=0A>>>--- - - Lyonshall=0A>>>
--- - - Herefordshire=0A>>>--- - - HR5 3LW=0A>>>--
- - - United Kingdom=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>--- -
- Tel:- +44 (0) 1544 340120=0A>>>--- - - Fax: +44 (0) 1544 34
0129=0A>>>--- - - www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.c
om/> =0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>--
- - ---=0A>>>--- - - style="color: blue; text-decorat
ion: underline; =0A>>>">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List=0A>>>
--- - - blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matroni
cs.com/ =0A>>><http://forums.matronics.com/>- <http://forums.matronics.co
m/> =0A>>>=0A>>>--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: un
derline; =0A>>>">http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A>>>--- -
---=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>
--- - ---=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>--- - -
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List=0A>>>--- - - http://
forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/>- =0A>>><http://forum
s.matronics.com/> =0A>>>=0A>>>--- - - http://www.matronics.com/co
ntribution=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>
--- - ---=0A>>>--- - - style="color: blue; text-d
ecoration: underline; =0A>>>">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
=0A>>>--- - - blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.m
atronics.com/ =0A>>><http://forums.matronics.com/>- <http://forums.matron
ics.com/> =0A>>>=0A>>>--- - - style="color: blue; text-decorati
on: underline; =0A>>>">http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A>>>---
- ---=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>--- - ---=0A
>>>--- - ---=0A>>>--- - ---=0A>>>--- -
- =0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- - -
=0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- - - ht
tp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List=0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>-
-- - - =0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- - - http://forum
s.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/>- =0A>>><http://forums.mat
ronics.com/> =0A>>>=0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>
--- - - =0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- - - http://ww
w.matronics.com/contribution=0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- - -
--=0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- -
- style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; =0A>>>">http://www.ma
tronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List=0A>>>--- - - blue; text-decoration
: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/ =0A>>><http://forums.matronics.
com/> =0A>>>=0A>>>--- - - style="color: blue; text-decoration:
underline; =0A>>>">http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A>>>--- -
- =0A>>>--- - - =0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- =0A>>>--
- =0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- http:p://forums.matroni
cs.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com/ =0A>>><http://www.mat
ronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> <- - - - - - - - - =0A>>>
---&nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ========0A>
>>--- =0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- =0A>>>--- =0A>>>=0A>>>=0A
>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; -
- - ---- List Contribution Web Site -=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>> =0A>>=0A>
> et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List =0A>>p://foru
ms.matronics.com/ blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution =0A>>=0A>
> =0A>>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List=0A>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/"
>http://forums.matronics.com =0A>>href="http://www.matronics.com/contrib
ution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A>> =0A>>=0A>=0A>=0A>
=0A>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matroni
cs.com/Navigator?Yak-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums
.matronics.com=0A> =0A>href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http
=========== =0A
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
ERIC! BIG OLE ONE FOOT LONG PIECES OF WOOD. SHARDS ALL LONGER THAN 1/10TH OF
AN INCH.
WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT?
Question. Have you ever seen an aircraft with a 530 wooden prop hit the runway.
YES OR NO? If the answer is no, then you really need to stop talking like
you are an expert on the matter because you read an article on the internet.
Regardless of what you are thinking, when the 530 wooden prop hits the ground at
idle RPM, the prop does not come apart at 1/10th of an inch per rotation.
The prop hits and then shatters. The stress of the prop hitting the ground sends
harmonic energy into the wooden structure of the prop which results in a an
overloaded burst of energy causing in some cases a literal explosion of the
remaining material.
I've read everything you have said a few times now. What I am saying is your statements
are completely wrong based on personal experience and personal observation.
If you do not have the same personal experience and personal observations
and are basing your comments on some article you read and are simply demanding
that they must be right and my own eyes must be wrong.... then really...
that's pretty stupid. Sorry, but's that how I feel about it.;
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
PEOPLE!! READ BEFORE YOU POP OFF!! Less that 1/10th PER ROTATION!!!
On Oct 19, 2010, at 12:28 PM, pilko2 wrote:
>
> And I'm looking across my office at a selection of unintentionally
> shortened
> prop blades from that very same Yak 50 and concur at least 10 inches
> of "Oh
> bugger" is involved !
>
> kp
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Bitterlich, Mark G
> CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
> Sent: 19 October 2010 17:13
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> --> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a
> YAK-50
>
> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that
> lands gear
> up. I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it
> myself),
> or he might have been talking about some other type of aircraft than a
> YAK-50.
>
> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES
> off the
> prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no
> question about
> that.
>
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
> explains that
> for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-
> ft (I
> think) must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-up)
> landing on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of
> blade
> is shaved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On
> the other
> hand, if you hit something else more abruptly, the inertia of things
> on the
> accessory shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of
> sync. This
> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's
> article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
>
> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in
> shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
> So the answer is I do not know.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
> Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> No problem, Doc.
>
> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design
> to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
> momentum?
> Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just
> break free
> like that.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already
> seen Robs post.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
> Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how,
> which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly
> trumps
> speculation.
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>
>
>
>
> For those interested in more details:
>
> . As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would
> have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
> . Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty
> much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into
> coarse
> pitch.
> . The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes
> without oil, which is quite impressive.
> . Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was no
> oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for
> the engine
> failure - because the pressure release valve had not been wire-
> locked, it
> unscrewed and fell out.
> . However it then totally seized and this is what broke the
> gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized
> engine.
> . The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible
> to remove most of the cylinders!
> . I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only
> because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of
> cooling
> is through air, and of course he was at very low power settings in
> order to
> preserve the engine.
> . In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is the
> safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
>
>
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Herefordshire
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
> ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
> ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
> ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
> ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
> ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
> ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
Message 26
| 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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
You're right. And who freaking cares? The prop hits the ground. It comes apart
in pieces. Sometimes it shears clean enough to continue flying. Sometimes
it does not. The load imposed on the engine demands an inspection. Others will
try to find ways to justify not doing that. Some people will say that since
the prop comes apart 1/10 of an inch at a time, the load imposed on the engine
is so slight that we can easily just hang another prop on it and continue
flying without a care in the world. Most people that think that way are trying
to save a buck at the possible expense of someone's life. So no, there is no
point in continuing this. There will always be people that put the almighty
dollar above someone else's life, or even their own for that matter. And you're
right again. Having followed this list since 1999, there is really no way
to convince anyone not to do something stupid if they are determined to do so.
Whatever.
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 9:32 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
The answer is yes to have watched it happen and examined the aftermath. Having
followed this list there is one thing I know for sure - no point in continuing
this.
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 9:40 PM
The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time folks. I was there,
I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not tiny little 1/10" pieces
of dust. The prop is made out of WOOD folks. WOOD. When you whack it into
a concrete runway it splinters just like you hit it with a hatchet. The reason
there is not enough force to shear steel is because last time I checked, steel
is a whole lot harder than compressed wood with a fiberglass sheath.
Sorry for blowing a little steam here but how many of you commenting on this
subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop hit the ground with the gear up?
How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar?
How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up the pieces?
So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't know what I am talking
about since you read a good article someplace else on the Internet, you just
go right ahead on with your bad self!
Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even though it comes apart
like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have the ability to cause damage
to the M-14 engine, to areas that you can go back on this list and read about
from people like Richard Goode if you would like.
In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized (and it DID seize),
the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to cause failure in the gearbox
allowing the prop to continue to spin. That comes from the gent who took
it apart.
Have a nice day.
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: Paul Hamlin
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time comes off at a
time, not enough force to shear
ab
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 8:17 PM
Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame per second camera
focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
Excuse me... ?
This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50, there is a loud
buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT? You have 10 inches or more
gone off each end of your prop.
Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I find that number
to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time, don't you think?
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
He said, per strike
--- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a YAK-50
Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that lands gear
up. I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it myself),
or he might have been talking about some other type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES off the
prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no question about that.
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that explains that
for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think)
must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on
pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off
per rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit
something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory shafts
will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This is all paraphrased,
so if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's article, which addresses all
kinds of prop strikes.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in shaft.
But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
So the answer is I do not know.
Doc
From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
No problem, Doc.
So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design to
prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop momentum? Otherwise,
you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just break free like that.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already seen
Robs post.
Doc
From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how, which
surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly trumps speculation.
On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
For those interested in more details:
As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would have
fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty much at
the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into coarse pitch.
The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes without
oil, which is quite impressive.
Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was no oil
and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for the engine failure
- because the pressure release valve had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed
and fell out.
However it then totally seized and this is what broke the gearbox
- hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized engine.
The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible to remove
most of the cylinders!
I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only because
a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of cooling is through
air, and of course he was at very low power settings in order to preserve the
engine.
In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is the safest
way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Herefordshire
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/>
style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> < &nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; - List Contribution Web Site -
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
p://forums.matronics.com/
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
et=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
=nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com
blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Message 27
| 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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
Good point.
Let's talk about the requirement for RPA Formation Pilots to wear a flight suit,
even when training for their FAST card. Now there's a hot topic.
Mark
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of KingCJ6@aol.com
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:44 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
By my count, this is easily the most elongated string in theYak list's history!
Can we try a new topic like MMO or Flight Suit Policy?
Dave
In a message dated 10/19/2010 5:40:15 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, eric@buffaloskyline.com
writes:
He my have been referring only to the Yak-52, and apparently, you
misread what is below. I said 1/10th or an inch PER ROTATION.
May very well not apply to the Yak-50.
On Oct 19, 2010, at 12:12 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a
> YAK-50
>
> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that
> lands gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I did
> not read it myself), or he might have been talking about some other
> type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
>
> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES
> off the prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is
> no question about that.
>
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
> explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional
> resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause
> damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the wood
> prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation,
> which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit
> something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory
> shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read
> Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
>
> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear point in
> shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
> So the answer is I do not know.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> No problem, Doc.
>
> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate design
> to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
> momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to
> just break free like that.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had already
> seen Robs post.
> Doc
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's how,
> which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly
> trumps speculation.
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>
>
>
>
> For those interested in more details:
>
> As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure would
> have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
> Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty
> much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into
> coarse pitch.
> The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes
> without oil, which is quite impressive.
> Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there was no
> oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for
> the engine failure - because the pressure release valve had not been
> wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
> However it then totally seized and this is what broke the
> gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized
> engine.
> The extent of the seizure was such that it is impossible
> to remove most of the cylinders!
> I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only
> because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of
> cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
> settings in order to preserve the engine.
> In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up is
> the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
>
>
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Herefordshire
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/
> >
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/
> >
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>================================================e ties Day ================================================
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ================================================
- List Contribution Web Site
sp; ==================================================
Message 28
| 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 failure in Yak-50 |
Mark, tranquilizers are available.
Read the article I referred to. I didn't say it must be right, but I
would be reticent to dispute an expert like Carl Hayes.
On Oct 19, 2010, at 10:06 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> ERIC! BIG OLE ONE FOOT LONG PIECES OF WOOD. SHARDS ALL LONGER THAN
> 1/10TH OF AN INCH.
>
> WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT?
>
> Question. Have you ever seen an aircraft with a 530 wooden prop hit
> the runway. YES OR NO? If the answer is no, then you really need
> to stop talking like you are an expert on the matter because you
> read an article on the internet.
>
> Regardless of what you are thinking, when the 530 wooden prop hits
> the ground at idle RPM, the prop does not come apart at 1/10th of
> an inch per rotation. The prop hits and then shatters. The stress
> of the prop hitting the ground sends harmonic energy into the wooden
> structure of the prop which results in a an overloaded burst of
> energy causing in some cases a literal explosion of the remaining
> material.
>
> I've read everything you have said a few times now. What I am
> saying is your statements are completely wrong based on personal
> experience and personal observation. If you do not have the same
> personal experience and personal observations and are basing your
> comments on some article you read and are simply demanding that they
> must be right and my own eyes must be wrong.... then really...
> that's pretty stupid. Sorry, but's that how I feel about it.;
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:39 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> >
>
> PEOPLE!! READ BEFORE YOU POP OFF!! Less that 1/10th PER ROTATION!!!
>
>
> On Oct 19, 2010, at 12:28 PM, pilko2 wrote:
>
>>
>> And I'm looking across my office at a selection of unintentionally
>> shortened
>> prop blades from that very same Yak 50 and concur at least 10 inches
>> of "Oh
>> bugger" is involved !
>>
>> kp
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>> Bitterlich, Mark G
>> CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
>> Sent: 19 October 2010 17:13
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> --> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a
>> YAK-50
>>
>> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that
>> lands gear
>> up. I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it
>> myself),
>> or he might have been talking about some other type of aircraft
>> than a
>> YAK-50.
>>
>> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES
>> off the
>> prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no
>> question about
>> that.
>>
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
>> explains that
>> for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-
>> ft (I
>> think) must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-
>> up)
>> landing on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of
>> blade
>> is shaved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On
>> the other
>> hand, if you hit something else more abruptly, the inertia of things
>> on the
>> accessory shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of
>> sync. This
>> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's
>> article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear
>> point in
>> shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
>> So the answer is I do not know.
>> Doc
>>
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
>> Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> No problem, Doc.
>>
>> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate
>> design
>> to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
>> momentum?
>> Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just
>> break free
>> like that.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had
>> already
>> seen Robs post.
>> Doc
>>
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
>> Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's
>> how,
>> which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly
>> trumps
>> speculation.
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> For those interested in more details:
>>
>> . As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure
>> would
>> have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
>> . Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty
>> much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into
>> coarse
>> pitch.
>> . The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes
>> without oil, which is quite impressive.
>> . Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there
>> was no
>> oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for
>> the engine
>> failure - because the pressure release valve had not been wire-
>> locked, it
>> unscrewed and fell out.
>> . However it then totally seized and this is what
>> broke the
>> gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized
>> engine.
>> . The extent of the seizure was such that it is
>> impossible
>> to remove most of the cylinders!
>> . I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only
>> because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of
>> cooling
>> is through air, and of course he was at very low power settings in
>> order to
>> preserve the engine.
>> . In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up
>> is the
>> safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
>>
>>
>> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>> Rhodds Farm
>> Lyonshall
>> Herefordshire
>> HR5 3LW
>> United Kingdom
>>
>> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
>> ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://
>> forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
>> ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/
>> >
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
>> ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://
>> forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
>> ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>
>>
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
>> ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://
>> forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
>> ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 29
| 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 failure in Yak-50 |
Mark, I think you're being pretty rude. That's usually the refuse of
someone who hasn't made their point on an intellectual basis.
On Oct 19, 2010, at 10:06 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> You're right. And who freaking cares? The prop hits the ground.
> It comes apart in pieces. Sometimes it shears clean enough to
> continue flying. Sometimes it does not. The load imposed on the
> engine demands an inspection. Others will try to find ways to
> justify not doing that. Some people will say that since the prop
> comes apart 1/10 of an inch at a time, the load imposed on the
> engine is so slight that we can easily just hang another prop on it
> and continue flying without a care in the world. Most people that
> think that way are trying to save a buck at the possible expense of
> someone's life. So no, there is no point in continuing this. There
> will always be people that put the almighty dollar above someone
> else's life, or even their own for that matter. And you're right
> again. Having followed this list since 1999, there is really no way
> to convince anyone not to do something stupid if they are determined
> to do so.
>
> Whatever.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 9:32 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> The answer is yes to have watched it happen and examined the
> aftermath. Having followed this list there is one thing I know for
> sure - no point in continuing this.
>
>
> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 9:40 PM
>
>
> The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time folks.
> I was there, I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not
> tiny little 1/10" pieces of dust. The prop is made out of WOOD
> folks. WOOD. When you whack it into a concrete runway it splinters
> just like you hit it with a hatchet. The reason there is not enough
> force to shear steel is because last time I checked, steel is a
> whole lot harder than compressed wood with a fiberglass sheath.
>
> Sorry for blowing a little steam here but how many of you
> commenting on this subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop
> hit the ground with the gear up?
>
> How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar?
>
> How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up the
> pieces?
>
> So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't know
> what I am talking about since you read a good article someplace else
> on the Internet, you just go right ahead on with your bad self!
>
> Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even though
> it comes apart like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have
> the ability to cause damage to the M-14 engine, to areas that you
> can go back on this list and read about from people like Richard
> Goode if you would like.
>
> In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized (and it
> DID seize), the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to
> cause failure in the gearbox allowing the prop to continue to spin.
> That comes from the gent who took it apart.
>
> Have a nice day.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Paul Hamlin
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time
> comes off at a time, not enough force to shear
>
> ab
>
>
> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 8:17 PM
>
>
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> >
>
> Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame per
> second camera focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
>
> Excuse me... ?
>
> This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50,
> there is a loud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT?
> You have 10 inches or more gone off each end of your prop.
>
> Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I find
> that number to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time,
> don't you think?
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> on behalf of Paul Hamlin
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> He said, per strike
>
> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
> MALS-14 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> >
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
>
>
> Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> > >
>
> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes
> to a YAK-50
>
> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50
> that lands gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I
> did not read it myself), or he might have been talking about some
> other type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
>
> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12
> INCHES off the prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and
> there is no question about that.
>
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> > on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
> explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional
> resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause
> damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the wood
> prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation,
> which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit
> something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory
> shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read
> Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
>
> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear
> point in shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do
> the same.
> So the answer is I do not know.
> Doc
>
> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> > ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> No problem, Doc.
>
> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate
> design to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
> momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to
> just break free like that.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had
> already seen Robs post.
> Doc
>
> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> > ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so
> that's how, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine
> certainly trumps speculation.
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>
>
>
>
> For those interested in more details:
>
> As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure
> would have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
> Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure
> pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went
> into coarse pitch.
> The engine then actually kept going for 9/10
> minutes without oil, which is quite impressive.
> Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because
> there was no oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the
> reason for the engine failure - because the pressure release valve
> had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
> However it then totally seized and this is what
> broke the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with
> a seized engine.
> The extent of the seizure was such that it is
> impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
> I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but
> only because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority
> of cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
> settings in order to preserve the engine.
> In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-
> up is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the
> aircraft.
>
>
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Herefordshire
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
> > <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
> > <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com/
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> <
> &nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; - List Contribution Web
> Site -
>
>
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
>
>
>
>
> et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> p://forums.matronics.com/
> blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> et=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> =nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com
> blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
Message 30
| 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 failure in Yak-50 |
Come on guys, enough is enough. When the wooden prop hits the ground it
is going to come apart. As an A&P I don't care if is a tenth on an inch
or 10 inches the engine needs to be opened up and checked especially the
gears front and rear. When and engine runs out of oil it will freeze up
the only question is how long will it take. When the engine freezes and
the prop still turns something broke. Who cares what or why the answer
is the engine frozen. Lets not make this a MMO thing.
Frank CJ6-A N23021
.
Message 31
| 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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
You are absolutely correct. I was rude. And I am going to be rude again. Sometimes
I am human and this is one of those times. So hold on, here it comes again!
My responses come from talking to a person who keeps demanding he is absolutely
right and has ZERO experience compared to something I have seen with my own eyes,
and have left over parts for sitting in the hangar.
What is up with that Eric? Are you calling me a liar? Am I blind? Are your theories
better than my photographs?
I have not tried to make my points on an intellectual basis. I have tried to
make my points by telling you I have seen the evidence with my own eyes and what
you are saying it just totally wrong. Intellectually, I am sure you're right.
Sadly though, a million intellectual guesses get blown out of the water with
a simple proof. I've seen the simple proof... you keep referencing the intellectual
guesses. Ok then. I've got pictures, you've got theories. Good luck
with that.
I consider the fact that you refuse to accept what I have said and keep bantering
on with what you propose to be JUST as rude as I have been, and while I did
not start off rude,.... you're right, I am now.
But that's just me. I admit....once in a awhile I stoop to that level, as many
people here that have been around long enough will attest to, I am sure. So,
once again I am back in form! Ah well, sucks to be me.
I could give a damn less about the 1/10'th of an inch nonsense. Go land a YAK-50
with the gear up and come back and tell me how it goes. ONE TENTH OF AN INCH
AT A TIME. right. ... good luck with that.
Mark Bitterlich
p.s. I'm done. How stupid is this discussion anyway?
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 10:24 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Mark, I think you're being pretty rude. That's usually the refuse of
someone who hasn't made their point on an intellectual basis.
On Oct 19, 2010, at 10:06 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> You're right. And who freaking cares? The prop hits the ground.
> It comes apart in pieces. Sometimes it shears clean enough to
> continue flying. Sometimes it does not. The load imposed on the
> engine demands an inspection. Others will try to find ways to
> justify not doing that. Some people will say that since the prop
> comes apart 1/10 of an inch at a time, the load imposed on the
> engine is so slight that we can easily just hang another prop on it
> and continue flying without a care in the world. Most people that
> think that way are trying to save a buck at the possible expense of
> someone's life. So no, there is no point in continuing this. There
> will always be people that put the almighty dollar above someone
> else's life, or even their own for that matter. And you're right
> again. Having followed this list since 1999, there is really no way
> to convince anyone not to do something stupid if they are determined
> to do so.
>
> Whatever.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 9:32 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> The answer is yes to have watched it happen and examined the
> aftermath. Having followed this list there is one thing I know for
> sure - no point in continuing this.
>
>
> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 9:40 PM
>
>
> The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time folks.
> I was there, I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not
> tiny little 1/10" pieces of dust. The prop is made out of WOOD
> folks. WOOD. When you whack it into a concrete runway it splinters
> just like you hit it with a hatchet. The reason there is not enough
> force to shear steel is because last time I checked, steel is a
> whole lot harder than compressed wood with a fiberglass sheath.
>
> Sorry for blowing a little steam here but how many of you
> commenting on this subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop
> hit the ground with the gear up?
>
> How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar?
>
> How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up the
> pieces?
>
> So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't know
> what I am talking about since you read a good article someplace else
> on the Internet, you just go right ahead on with your bad self!
>
> Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even though
> it comes apart like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have
> the ability to cause damage to the M-14 engine, to areas that you
> can go back on this list and read about from people like Richard
> Goode if you would like.
>
> In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized (and it
> DID seize), the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to
> cause failure in the gearbox allowing the prop to continue to spin.
> That comes from the gent who took it apart.
>
> Have a nice day.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Paul Hamlin
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time
> comes off at a time, not enough force to shear
>
> ab
>
>
> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 8:17 PM
>
>
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> >
>
> Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame per
> second camera focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
>
> Excuse me... ?
>
> This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50,
> there is a loud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT?
> You have 10 inches or more gone off each end of your prop.
>
> Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I find
> that number to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time,
> don't you think?
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> on behalf of Paul Hamlin
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> He said, per strike
>
> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
> MALS-14 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> >
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
>
>
> Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> > >
>
> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes
> to a YAK-50
>
> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50
> that lands gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I
> did not read it myself), or he might have been talking about some
> other type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
>
> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12
> INCHES off the prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and
> there is no question about that.
>
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> > on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
> explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional
> resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause
> damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the wood
> prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation,
> which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit
> something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory
> shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read
> Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
>
> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear
> point in shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do
> the same.
> So the answer is I do not know.
> Doc
>
> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> > ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> No problem, Doc.
>
> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate
> design to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
> momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to
> just break free like that.
>
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>
>
> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had
> already seen Robs post.
> Doc
>
> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> > ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so
> that's how, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine
> certainly trumps speculation.
>
> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>
>
>
>
> For those interested in more details:
>
> As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure
> would have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
> Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure
> pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went
> into coarse pitch.
> The engine then actually kept going for 9/10
> minutes without oil, which is quite impressive.
> Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because
> there was no oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the
> reason for the engine failure - because the pressure release valve
> had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
> However it then totally seized and this is what
> broke the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with
> a seized engine.
> The extent of the seizure was such that it is
> impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
> I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but
> only because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority
> of cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
> settings in order to preserve the engine.
> In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-
> up is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the
> aircraft.
>
>
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Herefordshire
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
> > <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
> > <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com/
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> <
> &nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; <http://forums.matronbsp;/> - List Contribution Web
> Site -
>
>
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
>
>
>
>
> et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> p://forums.matronics.com/
> blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> et=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> =nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
> blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
Message 32
| 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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
Carl is indeed an expert.
My eyes are pretty expert too.
Mark Bitterlich
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Mark, tranquilizers are available.
Read the article I referred to. I didn't say it must be right, but I
would be reticent to dispute an expert like Carl Hayes.
On Oct 19, 2010, at 10:06 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> ERIC! BIG OLE ONE FOOT LONG PIECES OF WOOD. SHARDS ALL LONGER THAN
> 1/10TH OF AN INCH.
>
> WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT?
>
> Question. Have you ever seen an aircraft with a 530 wooden prop hit
> the runway. YES OR NO? If the answer is no, then you really need
> to stop talking like you are an expert on the matter because you
> read an article on the internet.
>
> Regardless of what you are thinking, when the 530 wooden prop hits
> the ground at idle RPM, the prop does not come apart at 1/10th of
> an inch per rotation. The prop hits and then shatters. The stress
> of the prop hitting the ground sends harmonic energy into the wooden
> structure of the prop which results in a an overloaded burst of
> energy causing in some cases a literal explosion of the remaining
> material.
>
> I've read everything you have said a few times now. What I am
> saying is your statements are completely wrong based on personal
> experience and personal observation. If you do not have the same
> personal experience and personal observations and are basing your
> comments on some article you read and are simply demanding that they
> must be right and my own eyes must be wrong.... then really...
> that's pretty stupid. Sorry, but's that how I feel about it.;
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:39 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> >
>
> PEOPLE!! READ BEFORE YOU POP OFF!! Less that 1/10th PER ROTATION!!!
>
>
> On Oct 19, 2010, at 12:28 PM, pilko2 wrote:
>
>>
>> And I'm looking across my office at a selection of unintentionally
>> shortened
>> prop blades from that very same Yak 50 and concur at least 10 inches
>> of "Oh
>> bugger" is involved !
>>
>> kp
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>> Bitterlich, Mark G
>> CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
>> Sent: 19 October 2010 17:13
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> --> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes to a
>> YAK-50
>>
>> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50 that
>> lands gear
>> up. I think you might have misread the article (I did not read it
>> myself),
>> or he might have been talking about some other type of aircraft
>> than a
>> YAK-50.
>>
>> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12 INCHES
>> off the
>> prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and there is no
>> question about
>> that.
>>
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
>> explains that
>> for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional resistance) of 400 lb-
>> ft (I
>> think) must be encountered to cause damage. During a regular (gear-
>> up)
>> landing on pavement with the wood prop, only one-tenth of an inch of
>> blade
>> is shaved off per rotation, which gets nowhere near that force. On
>> the other
>> hand, if you hit something else more abruptly, the inertia of things
>> on the
>> accessory shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of
>> sync. This
>> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read Carl's
>> article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear
>> point in
>> shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do the same.
>> So the answer is I do not know.
>> Doc
>>
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
>> Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> No problem, Doc.
>>
>> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate
>> design
>> to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
>> momentum?
>> Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to just
>> break free
>> like that.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had
>> already
>> seen Robs post.
>> Doc
>>
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric
>> Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so that's
>> how,
>> which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine certainly
>> trumps
>> speculation.
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> For those interested in more details:
>>
>> . As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure
>> would
>> have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
>> . Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure pretty
>> much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went into
>> coarse
>> pitch.
>> . The engine then actually kept going for 9/10 minutes
>> without oil, which is quite impressive.
>> . Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because there
>> was no
>> oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the reason for
>> the engine
>> failure - because the pressure release valve had not been wire-
>> locked, it
>> unscrewed and fell out.
>> . However it then totally seized and this is what
>> broke the
>> gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with a seized
>> engine.
>> . The extent of the seizure was such that it is
>> impossible
>> to remove most of the cylinders!
>> . I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but only
>> because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority of
>> cooling
>> is through air, and of course he was at very low power settings in
>> order to
>> preserve the engine.
>> . In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-up
>> is the
>> safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the aircraft.
>>
>>
>> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>> Rhodds Farm
>> Lyonshall
>> Herefordshire
>> HR5 3LW
>> United Kingdom
>>
>> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
>> ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:// <http:///>
>> forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
>> ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/
>> >
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
>> ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:// <http:///>
>> forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
>> ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>
>>
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
>> ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http:// <http:///>
>> forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
>> ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 33
| 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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
I concur.
And especially since I already said the exact same thing. More than once.
Come on guys ...... is exactly right. Sometimes I just have to say what I have
seen with my own eyes is correct.
Excuse me for doing that. I know I shouldn't.
Mark
p.s. Sorry Frank. I know you'[re right.
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Frank Stelwagon
Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Come on guys, enough is enough. When the wooden prop hits the ground it is going
to come apart. As an A&P I don't care if is a tenth on an inch or 10 inches
the engine needs to be opened up and checked especially the gears front and rear.
When and engine runs out of oil it will freeze up the only question is how
long will it take. When the engine freezes and the prop still turns something
broke. Who cares what or why the answer is the engine frozen. Lets not make
this a MMO thing.
Frank CJ6-A N23021
.
Message 34
| 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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
does anyone know the size of the pieces would be from a 3 bladed MT yak prop as
a result of a gear up landing?
Sent from my Samsung Epic 4G
"Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
>
>You are absolutely correct. I was rude. And I am going to be rude again. Sometimes
I am human and this is one of those times. So hold on, here it comes
again!
>
>My responses come from talking to a person who keeps demanding he is absolutely
right and has ZERO experience compared to something I have seen with my own
eyes, and have left over parts for sitting in the hangar.
>
>What is up with that Eric? Are you calling me a liar? Am I blind? Are your
theories better than my photographs?
>
>I have not tried to make my points on an intellectual basis. I have tried to
make my points by telling you I have seen the evidence with my own eyes and what
you are saying it just totally wrong. Intellectually, I am sure you're right.
Sadly though, a million intellectual guesses get blown out of the water
with a simple proof. I've seen the simple proof... you keep referencing the intellectual
guesses. Ok then. I've got pictures, you've got theories. Good
luck with that.
>
>I consider the fact that you refuse to accept what I have said and keep bantering
on with what you propose to be JUST as rude as I have been, and while I did
not start off rude,.... you're right, I am now.
>
>But that's just me. I admit....once in a awhile I stoop to that level, as many
people here that have been around long enough will attest to, I am sure.
So, once again I am back in form! Ah well, sucks to be me.
>
>I could give a damn less about the 1/10'th of an inch nonsense. Go land a YAK-50
with the gear up and come back and tell me how it goes. ONE TENTH OF AN
INCH AT A TIME. right. ... good luck with that.
>
>Mark Bitterlich
>
>p.s. I'm done. How stupid is this discussion anyway?
>
>________________________________
>
>From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
>Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 10:24 PM
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
>
>Mark, I think you're being pretty rude. That's usually the refuse of
>someone who hasn't made their point on an intellectual basis.
>
>
>On Oct 19, 2010, at 10:06 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
>MALS-14 64E wrote:
>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> You're right. And who freaking cares? The prop hits the ground.
>> It comes apart in pieces. Sometimes it shears clean enough to
>> continue flying. Sometimes it does not. The load imposed on the
>> engine demands an inspection. Others will try to find ways to
>> justify not doing that. Some people will say that since the prop
>> comes apart 1/10 of an inch at a time, the load imposed on the
>> engine is so slight that we can easily just hang another prop on it
>> and continue flying without a care in the world. Most people that
>> think that way are trying to save a buck at the possible expense of
>> someone's life. So no, there is no point in continuing this. There
>> will always be people that put the almighty dollar above someone
>> else's life, or even their own for that matter. And you're right
>> again. Having followed this list since 1999, there is really no way
>> to convince anyone not to do something stupid if they are determined
>> to do so.
>>
>> Whatever.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 9:32 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> The answer is yes to have watched it happen and examined the
>> aftermath. Having followed this list there is one thing I know for
>> sure - no point in continuing this.
>>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 9:40 PM
>>
>>
>> The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time folks.
>> I was there, I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not
>> tiny little 1/10" pieces of dust. The prop is made out of WOOD
>> folks. WOOD. When you whack it into a concrete runway it splinters
>> just like you hit it with a hatchet. The reason there is not enough
>> force to shear steel is because last time I checked, steel is a
>> whole lot harder than compressed wood with a fiberglass sheath.
>>
>> Sorry for blowing a little steam here but how many of you
>> commenting on this subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop
>> hit the ground with the gear up?
>>
>> How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar?
>>
>> How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up the
>> pieces?
>>
>> So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't know
>> what I am talking about since you read a good article someplace else
>> on the Internet, you just go right ahead on with your bad self!
>>
>> Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even though
>> it comes apart like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have
>> the ability to cause damage to the M-14 engine, to areas that you
>> can go back on this list and read about from people like Richard
>> Goode if you would like.
>>
>> In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized (and it
>> DID seize), the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to
>> cause failure in the gearbox allowing the prop to continue to spin.
>> That comes from the gent who took it apart.
>>
>> Have a nice day.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time
>> comes off at a time, not enough force to shear
>>
>> ab
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 8:17 PM
>>
>>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> >
>>
>> Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame per
>> second camera focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
>>
>> Excuse me... ?
>>
>> This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50,
>> there is a loud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT?
>> You have 10 inches or more gone off each end of your prop.
>>
>> Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I find
>> that number to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time,
>> don't you think?
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> on behalf of Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> He said, per strike
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
>> MALS-14 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> >
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
>>
>>
>> Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> > >
>>
>> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes
>> to a YAK-50
>>
>> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50
>> that lands gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I
>> did not read it myself), or he might have been talking about some
>> other type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
>>
>> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12
>> INCHES off the prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and
>> there is no question about that.
>>
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> > on behalf of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
>> explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional
>> resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause
>> damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the wood
>> prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation,
>> which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit
>> something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory
>> shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
>> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read
>> Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear
>> point in shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do
>> the same.
>> So the answer is I do not know.
>> Doc
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> > [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> > ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> No problem, Doc.
>>
>> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate
>> design to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
>> momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to
>> just break free like that.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had
>> already seen Robs post.
>> Doc
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> > [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> > ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so
>> that's how, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine
>> certainly trumps speculation.
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> For those interested in more details:
>>
>> As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure
>> would have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
>> Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure
>> pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went
>> into coarse pitch.
>> The engine then actually kept going for 9/10
>> minutes without oil, which is quite impressive.
>> Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because
>> there was no oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the
>> reason for the engine failure - because the pressure release valve
>> had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
>> However it then totally seized and this is what
>> broke the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with
>> a seized engine.
>> The extent of the seizure was such that it is
>> impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
>> I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but
>> only because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority
>> of cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
>> settings in order to preserve the engine.
>> In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-
>> up is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the
>> aircraft.
>>
>>
>> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>> Rhodds Farm
>> Lyonshall
>> Herefordshire
>> HR5 3LW
>> United Kingdom
>>
>> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
>> > <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>
>>
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
>> > <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> <
>> &nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; <http://forums.matronbsp;/> - List Contribution Web
>> Site -
>>
>>
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> p://forums.matronics.com/
>> blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> et=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> =nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 35
| 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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
Yes.
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Kregg Victory
Sent: Wed 10/20/2010 12:05 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
does anyone know the size of the pieces would be from a 3 bladed MT yak prop as
a result of a gear up landing?
Sent from my Samsung Epic(tm) 4G
"Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
>
>You are absolutely correct. I was rude. And I am going to be rude again. Sometimes
I am human and this is one of those times. So hold on, here it comes
again!
>
>My responses come from talking to a person who keeps demanding he is absolutely
right and has ZERO experience compared to something I have seen with my own
eyes, and have left over parts for sitting in the hangar.
>
>What is up with that Eric? Are you calling me a liar? Am I blind? Are your
theories better than my photographs?
>
>I have not tried to make my points on an intellectual basis. I have tried to
make my points by telling you I have seen the evidence with my own eyes and what
you are saying it just totally wrong. Intellectually, I am sure you're right.
Sadly though, a million intellectual guesses get blown out of the water
with a simple proof. I've seen the simple proof... you keep referencing the intellectual
guesses. Ok then. I've got pictures, you've got theories. Good
luck with that.
>
>I consider the fact that you refuse to accept what I have said and keep bantering
on with what you propose to be JUST as rude as I have been, and while I did
not start off rude,.... you're right, I am now.
>
>But that's just me. I admit....once in a awhile I stoop to that level, as many
people here that have been around long enough will attest to, I am sure.
So, once again I am back in form! Ah well, sucks to be me.
>
>I could give a damn less about the 1/10'th of an inch nonsense. Go land a YAK-50
with the gear up and come back and tell me how it goes. ONE TENTH OF AN
INCH AT A TIME. right. ... good luck with that.
>
>Mark Bitterlich
>
>p.s. I'm done. How stupid is this discussion anyway?
>
>________________________________
>
>From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
>Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 10:24 PM
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
>
>Mark, I think you're being pretty rude. That's usually the refuse of
>someone who hasn't made their point on an intellectual basis.
>
>
>On Oct 19, 2010, at 10:06 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
>MALS-14 64E wrote:
>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> You're right. And who freaking cares? The prop hits the ground.
>> It comes apart in pieces. Sometimes it shears clean enough to
>> continue flying. Sometimes it does not. The load imposed on the
>> engine demands an inspection. Others will try to find ways to
>> justify not doing that. Some people will say that since the prop
>> comes apart 1/10 of an inch at a time, the load imposed on the
>> engine is so slight that we can easily just hang another prop on it
>> and continue flying without a care in the world. Most people that
>> think that way are trying to save a buck at the possible expense of
>> someone's life. So no, there is no point in continuing this. There
>> will always be people that put the almighty dollar above someone
>> else's life, or even their own for that matter. And you're right
>> again. Having followed this list since 1999, there is really no way
>> to convince anyone not to do something stupid if they are determined
>> to do so.
>>
>> Whatever.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 9:32 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> The answer is yes to have watched it happen and examined the
>> aftermath. Having followed this list there is one thing I know for
>> sure - no point in continuing this.
>>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 9:40 PM
>>
>>
>> The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time folks.
>> I was there, I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not
>> tiny little 1/10" pieces of dust. The prop is made out of WOOD
>> folks. WOOD. When you whack it into a concrete runway it splinters
>> just like you hit it with a hatchet. The reason there is not enough
>> force to shear steel is because last time I checked, steel is a
>> whole lot harder than compressed wood with a fiberglass sheath.
>>
>> Sorry for blowing a little steam here but how many of you
>> commenting on this subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop
>> hit the ground with the gear up?
>>
>> How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar?
>>
>> How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up the
>> pieces?
>>
>> So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't know
>> what I am talking about since you read a good article someplace else
>> on the Internet, you just go right ahead on with your bad self!
>>
>> Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even though
>> it comes apart like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have
>> the ability to cause damage to the M-14 engine, to areas that you
>> can go back on this list and read about from people like Richard
>> Goode if you would like.
>>
>> In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized (and it
>> DID seize), the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to
>> cause failure in the gearbox allowing the prop to continue to spin.
>> That comes from the gent who took it apart.
>>
>> Have a nice day.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time
>> comes off at a time, not enough force to shear
>>
>> ab
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 8:17 PM
>>
>>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> >
>>
>> Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame per
>> second camera focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
>>
>> Excuse me... ?
>>
>> This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50,
>> there is a loud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT?
>> You have 10 inches or more gone off each end of your prop.
>>
>> Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I find
>> that number to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time,
>> don't you think?
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> on behalf of Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> He said, per strike
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
>> MALS-14 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> >
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
>>
>>
>> Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> > >
>>
>> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it comes
>> to a YAK-50
>>
>> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50
>> that lands gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I
>> did not read it myself), or he might have been talking about some
>> other type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
>>
>> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12
>> INCHES off the prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and
>> there is no question about that.
>>
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> > on behalf of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
>> explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional
>> resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause
>> damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the wood
>> prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation,
>> which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit
>> something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory
>> shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
>> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read
>> Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design shear
>> point in shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do
>> the same.
>> So the answer is I do not know.
>> Doc
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> > [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> > ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> No problem, Doc.
>>
>> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a deliberate
>> design to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
>> momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to
>> just break free like that.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you had
>> already seen Robs post.
>> Doc
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> > [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> > ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so
>> that's how, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine
>> certainly trumps speculation.
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> For those interested in more details:
>>
>> As had been suggested, I am sure the oil pressure
>> would have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
>> Andy says that he noticed the zero oil pressure
>> pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went
>> into coarse pitch.
>> The engine then actually kept going for 9/10
>> minutes without oil, which is quite impressive.
>> Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because
>> there was no oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the
>> reason for the engine failure - because the pressure release valve
>> had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
>> However it then totally seized and this is what
>> broke the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with
>> a seized engine.
>> The extent of the seizure was such that it is
>> impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
>> I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit, but
>> only because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority
>> of cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
>> settings in order to preserve the engine.
>> In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure gear-
>> up is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the
>> aircraft.
>>
>>
>> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>> Rhodds Farm
>> Lyonshall
>> Herefordshire
>> HR5 3LW
>> United Kingdom
>>
>> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
>> > <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>
>>
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
>> > <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> <
>> &nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; <http://forums.matronbsp;/> <http://forums.matronbsp;/> - List Contribution Web
>> Site -
>>
>>
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> p://forums.matronics.com/
>> blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> et=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> =nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 36
| 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 failure in Yak-50 |
Mark:
I am not calling you a lair or disputing your experience. I pointed
out an article written by someone who I know to be expert in this
area. I also objected to being misquoted and taken out of context.
Just because I didn't agree with everything you said doesn't mean I
was saying that I was "absolutely right". I merely referred to the
paper and then clarified certain things that were mischaracterized and
incorrectly repeated. We're not even talking about the exact same
conditions, but you seem to need to force everyone to defer to your
superior wisdom.
Since you don't know me, I don't think it's a good idea for you to say
that I have "ZERO experience" about this.
Lastly, siting your own history of bad manners hardly excuses them.
On Oct 19, 2010, at 11:49 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> You are absolutely correct. I was rude. And I am going to be rude
> again. Sometimes I am human and this is one of those times. So
> hold on, here it comes again!
>
> My responses come from talking to a person who keeps demanding he is
> absolutely right and has ZERO experience compared to something I
> have seen with my own eyes, and have left over parts for sitting in
> the hangar.
>
> What is up with that Eric? Are you calling me a liar? Am I blind?
> Are your theories better than my photographs?
>
> I have not tried to make my points on an intellectual basis. I
> have tried to make my points by telling you I have seen the evidence
> with my own eyes and what you are saying it just totally wrong.
> Intellectually, I am sure you're right. Sadly though, a million
> intellectual guesses get blown out of the water with a simple
> proof. I've seen the simple proof... you keep referencing the
> intellectual guesses. Ok then. I've got pictures, you've got
> theories. Good luck with that.
>
> I consider the fact that you refuse to accept what I have said and
> keep bantering on with what you propose to be JUST as rude as I have
> been, and while I did not start off rude,.... you're right, I am now.
>
> But that's just me. I admit....once in a awhile I stoop to that
> level, as many people here that have been around long enough will
> attest to, I am sure. So, once again I am back in form! Ah well,
> sucks to be me.
>
> I could give a damn less about the 1/10'th of an inch nonsense. Go
> land a YAK-50 with the gear up and come back and tell me how it
> goes. ONE TENTH OF AN INCH AT A TIME. right. ... good luck with
> that.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
> p.s. I'm done. How stupid is this discussion anyway?
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 10:24 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> >
>
> Mark, I think you're being pretty rude. That's usually the refuse of
> someone who hasn't made their point on an intellectual basis.
>
>
> On Oct 19, 2010, at 10:06 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
> MALS-14 64E wrote:
>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> You're right. And who freaking cares? The prop hits the ground.
>> It comes apart in pieces. Sometimes it shears clean enough to
>> continue flying. Sometimes it does not. The load imposed on the
>> engine demands an inspection. Others will try to find ways to
>> justify not doing that. Some people will say that since the prop
>> comes apart 1/10 of an inch at a time, the load imposed on the
>> engine is so slight that we can easily just hang another prop on it
>> and continue flying without a care in the world. Most people that
>> think that way are trying to save a buck at the possible expense of
>> someone's life. So no, there is no point in continuing this. There
>> will always be people that put the almighty dollar above someone
>> else's life, or even their own for that matter. And you're right
>> again. Having followed this list since 1999, there is really no way
>> to convince anyone not to do something stupid if they are determined
>> to do so.
>>
>> Whatever.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 9:32 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> The answer is yes to have watched it happen and examined the
>> aftermath. Having followed this list there is one thing I know for
>> sure - no point in continuing this.
>>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 9:40 PM
>>
>>
>> The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time
>> folks.
>> I was there, I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not
>> tiny little 1/10" pieces of dust. The prop is made out of WOOD
>> folks. WOOD. When you whack it into a concrete runway it splinters
>> just like you hit it with a hatchet. The reason there is not enough
>> force to shear steel is because last time I checked, steel is a
>> whole lot harder than compressed wood with a fiberglass sheath.
>>
>> Sorry for blowing a little steam here but how many of you
>> commenting on this subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop
>> hit the ground with the gear up?
>>
>> How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar?
>>
>> How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up
>> the
>> pieces?
>>
>> So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't know
>> what I am talking about since you read a good article someplace else
>> on the Internet, you just go right ahead on with your bad self!
>>
>> Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even
>> though
>> it comes apart like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have
>> the ability to cause damage to the M-14 engine, to areas that you
>> can go back on this list and read about from people like Richard
>> Goode if you would like.
>>
>> In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized
>> (and it
>> DID seize), the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to
>> cause failure in the gearbox allowing the prop to continue to spin.
>> That comes from the gent who took it apart.
>>
>> Have a nice day.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time
>> comes off at a time, not enough force to shear
>>
>> ab
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 8:17 PM
>>
>>
>> Cherry
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>
>>
>> Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame per
>> second camera focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
>>
>> Excuse me... ?
>>
>> This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50,
>> there is a loud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT?
>> You have 10 inches or more gone off each end of your prop.
>>
>> Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I
>> find
>> that number to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time,
>> don't you think?
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> on behalf of Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> He said, per strike
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
>> MALS-14 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
>>
>>
>> Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>>
>>
>> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it
>> comes
>> to a YAK-50
>>
>> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50
>> that lands gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I
>> did not read it myself), or he might have been talking about some
>> other type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
>>
>> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12
>> INCHES off the prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and
>> there is no question about that.
>>
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> on behalf of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
>> explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional
>> resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause
>> damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the wood
>> prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation,
>> which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit
>> something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory
>> shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
>> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read
>> Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design
>> shear
>> point in shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do
>> the same.
>> So the answer is I do not know.
>> Doc
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> No problem, Doc.
>>
>> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a
>> deliberate
>> design to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
>> momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to
>> just break free like that.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you
>> had
>> already seen Robs post.
>> Doc
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so
>> that's how, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine
>> certainly trumps speculation.
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> For those interested in more details:
>>
>> As had been suggested, I am sure the oil
>> pressure
>> would have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
>> Andy says that he noticed the zero oil
>> pressure
>> pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went
>> into coarse pitch.
>> The engine then actually kept going for 9/10
>> minutes without oil, which is quite impressive.
>> Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because
>> there was no oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the
>> reason for the engine failure - because the pressure release valve
>> had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
>> However it then totally seized and this is
>> what
>> broke the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with
>> a seized engine.
>> The extent of the seizure was such that it is
>> impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
>> I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit,
>> but
>> only because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority
>> of cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
>> settings in order to preserve the engine.
>> In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure
>> gear-
>> up is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the
>> aircraft.
>>
>>
>> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>> Rhodds Farm
>> Lyonshall
>> Herefordshire
>> HR5 3LW
>> United Kingdom
>>
>> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
>>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>
>>
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
>>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> <
>> &nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; <http://forums.matronbsp;/
>> > - List Contribution Web
>> Site -
>>
>>
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> p://forums.matronics.com/
>> blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> et=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> =nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/
>> >
>> blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 37
| 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 failure in Yak-50 |
-
-
Thanks
--- On Wed, 10/20/10, Eric Wobschall <eric@buffaloskyline.com> wrote:
From: Eric Wobschall <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Mark:
I am not calling you a lair or disputing your experience. I pointed out an
article written by someone who I know to be expert in this area. I also obj
ected to being misquoted and taken out of context.
Just because I didn't agree with everything you said doesn't mean I was say
ing that I was "absolutely right". I merely referred to the paper and then
clarified certain things that were mischaracterized and incorrectly repeate
d. We're not even talking about the exact same conditions, but you seem to
need to force everyone to defer to your superior wisdom.
Since you don't know me, I don't think it's a good idea for you to say that
I have "ZERO experience" about this.
Lastly, siting your own history of bad manners hardly excuses them.
On Oct 19, 2010, at 11:49 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS
-14 64E wrote:
MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> You are absolutely correct.- I was rude.- And I am going to be rude a
gain.- Sometimes I am human and this is one of those times.- So hold on
, here it comes again!
>
> My responses come from talking to a person who keeps demanding he is abso
lutely right and has ZERO experience compared to something I have seen with
my own eyes, and have left over parts for sitting in the hangar.
>
> What is up with that Eric?- Are you calling me a liar?- Am I blind?
- Are your theories better than my photographs?
>
> I have not tried to make my points on an intellectual basis.---I ha
ve tried to make my points by telling you I have seen the evidence with my
own eyes and what you are saying it just totally wrong.- Intellectually,
I am sure you're right.- Sadly though, a million intellectual guesses get
blown out of the water with a simple proof.- I've seen the simple proof.
.. you keep referencing the intellectual guesses.- Ok then.- I've got p
ictures, you've got theories.- Good luck with that.
>
> I consider the fact that you refuse to accept what I have said and keep b
antering on with what you propose to be JUST as rude as I have been, and wh
ile I did not start off rude,.... you're right, I am now.
>
> But that's just me.- I admit....once in a awhile I stoop to that level,
as many people here that have been around long enough will attest to, I am
sure.- - So, once again I am back in form!- Ah well, sucks to be me.
>
> I could give a damn less about the 1/10'th of an inch nonsense.- Go lan
d a YAK-50 with the gear up and come back and tell me how it goes.---
ONE TENTH OF AN INCH AT A TIME.---right. ... good luck with that.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
> p.s.- I'm done.- How stupid is this discussion anyway?
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 10:24 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
>
>
> Mark, I think you're being pretty rude. That's usually the refuse of
> someone who hasn't made their point on an intellectual basis.
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 19, 2010, at 10:06 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
> MALS-14 64E wrote:
>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> You're right.- And who freaking cares?- The prop hits the ground.
>> It comes apart in pieces.- Sometimes it shears clean enough to
>> continue flying.- Sometimes it does not.- The load imposed on the
>> engine demands an inspection.- Others will try to find ways to
>> justify not doing that.- Some people will say that since the prop
>> comes apart 1/10 of an inch at a time, the load imposed on the
>> engine is so slight that we can easily just hang another prop on it
>> and continue flying without a care in the world.- Most people that
>> think that way are trying to save a buck at the possible expense of
>> someone's life.- So no, there is no point in continuing this.- There
>> will always be people that put the almighty dollar above someone
>> else's life, or even their own for that matter.- And you're right
>> again.- Having followed this list since 1999, there is really no way
>> to convince anyone not to do something stupid if they are determined
>> to do so.
>>
>> Whatever.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 9:32 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> The answer is yes to have watched it happen and examined the
>> aftermath.- Having followed this list there is one thing I know for
>> sure - no point in continuing this.
>>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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 <m
ark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>
>>- - - Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>- - - To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>- - - Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 9:40 PM
>>
>>
>>- - - The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time fo
lks.
>> I was there, I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not
>> tiny little 1/10" pieces of dust.- The prop is made out of WOOD
>> folks.- WOOD.- When you whack it into a concrete runway it splinters
>> just like you hit it with a hatchet.- The reason there is not enough
>> force to shear steel is because last time I checked, steel is a
>> whole lot harder than compressed wood with a fiberglass sheath.
>>
>>- - - Sorry for blowing a little steam here- but how many of you
>> commenting on this subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop
>> hit the ground with the gear up?
>>
>>- - - How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar
?
>>
>>- - - How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up
the
>> pieces?
>>
>>- - - So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't kn
ow
>> what I am talking about since you read a good article someplace else
>> on the Internet, you just go right ahead on with your bad self!
>>
>>- - - Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even th
ough
>> it comes apart like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have
>> the ability to cause damage to the M-14 engine, to areas that you
>> can go back on this list and read about from people like Richard
>> Goode if you would like.
>>
>>- - - In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized (a
nd it
>> DID seize), the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to
>> cause failure in the gearbox allowing the prop to continue to spin.
>> That comes from the gent who took it apart.
>>
>>- - - Have a nice day.
>>
>>- - - Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>>- - - From: Paul Hamlin
>>- - - Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
>>- - - To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>- - - Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time
>> comes off at a time, not enough force to shear
>>
>> ab
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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 <m
ark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>
>>- - - Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>- - - To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>- - - Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 8:17 PM
>>
>>
herry
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark
.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>
>>
>>- - - Really?- And exactly how was that determined?- A 1000 fra
me per
>> second camera focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
>>
>>- - - Excuse me... ?
>>
>>- - - This is silly.- You make an approach with the gear up in a
50,
>> there is a loud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT?
>> You have 10 inches or more gone off each end of your prop.
>>
>>- - - Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time?- And
I find
>> that number to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time,
>> don't you think?
>>
>>- - - Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>- - - ________________________________
>>
>>- - - From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-ya
k-list-server@matronics.com
>> on behalf of Paul Hamlin
>>- - - Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
>>- - - To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@m
atronics.com
>>- - - Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>>- - - He said, per strike
>>
>>- - - --- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point
,
>> MALS-14 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterl
ich@navy.mil
>>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - - - From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-1
4 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.
mil
>>>
>>- - - - - Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>- - - - - To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=ya
k-list@matronics.com
>>- - - - - Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
>>
>>
IV Det
>> Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to
=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to
=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>>
>>
>>- - - - - Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when
it comes
>> to a YAK-50
>>
>>- - - - - Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a
YAK-50
>> that lands gear up.- I think you might have misread the article (I
>> did not read it myself), or he might have been talking about some
>> other type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
>>
>>- - - - - A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10
or 12
>> INCHES off the prop (or more).---I own one of these aircraft and
>> there is no question about that.
>>
>>
>>- - - - - Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>- - - - - ________________________________
>>
>>- - - - - From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=
owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@ma
tronics.com
>>> on behalf of Eric Wobschall
>>- - - - - Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
>>- - - - - To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=ya
k-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>>- - - - - Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>>- - - - - There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com websit
e) that
>> explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional
>> resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause
>> damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the wood
>> prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation,
>> which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit
>> something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory
>> shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
>> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read
>> Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>>
>>
>>- - - - - On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - - - - - Not sure but I think I heard that there is a
design shear
>> point in shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do
>> the same.
>>- - - - - - - So the answer is I do not know.
>>- - - - - - - Doc
>>
>>- - - - - - - From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compo
se?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@ma
tronics.com
>>> [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-s
erver@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@ma
tronics.com
>>> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>>- - - - - - - Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
>>- - - - - - - To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose
?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>>- - - - - - - Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-
50
>>
>>- - - - - - - No problem, Doc.
>>
>>- - - - - - - So what is it that caused it to shear? Is tha
t a deliberate
>> design to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
>> momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to
>> just break free like that.
>>
>>
>>- - - - - - - On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D.
wrote:
>>
>>
>>- - - - - - - Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing
that you had
>> already seen Robs post.
>>- - - - - - - Doc
>>
>>- - - - - - - From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compo
se?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@ma
tronics.com
>>> [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-s
erver@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@ma
tronics.com
>>> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>>- - - - - - - Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
>>- - - - - - - To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose
?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>>- - - - - - - Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-
50
>>
>>- - - - - - - Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well,
OK... so
>> that's how, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine
>> certainly trumps speculation.
>>
>>- - - - - - - On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode w
rote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - - - - - For those interested in more details:
>>
>>- - - - - - - =B7- - - ---As had been suggested
, I am sure the oil pressure
>> would have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
>>- - - - - - - =B7- - - ---Andy says that he not
iced the zero oil pressure
>> pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went
>> into coarse pitch.
>>- - - - - - - =B7- - - ---The engine then actua
lly kept going for 9/10
>> minutes without oil, which is quite impressive.
>>- - - - - - - =B7- - - ---Oil temperatures didn
't go up simply because
>> there was no oil and so nothing to measure!- This of course was the
>> reason for the engine failure - because the pressure release valve
>> had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
>>- - - - - - - =B7- - - ---However it then total
ly seized and this is what
>> broke the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with
>> a seized engine.
>>- - - - - - - =B7- - - ---The extent of the sei
zure was such that it is
>> impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
>>- - - - - - - =B7- - - ---I would expect the CH
T to have risen a bit, but
>> only because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority
>> of cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
>> settings in order to preserve the engine.
>>- - - - - - - =B7- - - ---In terms of gear-up o
f gear-down, I am sure gear-
>> up is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the
>> aircraft.
>>
>>
>>- - - - - - - Richard Goode Aerobatics
>>- - - - - - - Rhodds Farm
>>- - - - - - - Lyonshall
>>- - - - - - - Herefordshire
>>- - - - - - - HR5 3LW
>>- - - - - - - United Kingdom
>>
>>- - - - - - - Tel:- +44 (0) 1544 340120
>>- - - - - - - Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>>- - - - - - - www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros
.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - - - - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underl
ine; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>- - - - - - - blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://fo
rums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>- <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>- - - - - - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underl
ine; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - - - - - http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>- - - - - - - http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.m
atronics.com/
>>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>- - - - - - - http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - - - - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underl
ine; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>- - - - - - - blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://fo
rums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>- <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>- - - - - - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underl
ine; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - - - - - http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - - - - - http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.m
atronics.com/
>>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - - - - - http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - - - - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underl
ine; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>- - - - - - - blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://fo
rums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>- - - - - - - style="color: blue; text-decoration: underl
ine; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - - - http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http:
//forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> <
>> &nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; <http://forums.matronbsp;/>-
- - - ---- List Contribution Web
>> Site -
>>
>>
>>- - - <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>- - - p://forums.matronics.com/
>>- - - blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>- - - et=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator
?Yak-List
>>- - - =nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matron
ics.com/>
>>- - - blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
le, List Admin.
=0A=0A=0A
Message 38
| 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: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
I was not looking to excuse my bad manners. I was just explaining why I had them.
You pointed out an article written by an expert. And he is an expert. I do
not refute that. But I said that I saw it happen. That trumps the ace.
I did not misquote you or take you out of context. I said that a prop hitting
the ground on a YAK-50 making a gear up landing does not get ground down 1/10th
of an inch at a time, based on what I saw happen with my own eyes and the pieces
of that prop that I then went out and picked up off the runway.
I do not have superior wisdom. I do have good eyesight.
Unless you have landed a YAK-50 with the gear up or have seen this type of prop
hit the ground on a gear up landing, you have zero experience in the matter.
I have asked you multiple times whether you have or have not. You have not
responded. If you have, please say so, otherwise I think it is a perfectly 'good
idea' to assume you have not.
Sorry about that. And sorry to the YAK LIST. I try to help people when I can,
but once in awhile I am a tad rude, or better said, a tad sarcastic.
This is apparently one of those times. Sigh.
Once in awhile I just have a hard time backing down to someone that tries to tell
me that I don't know what I saw with my own eyes.
Mark
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Wed 10/20/2010 12:32 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Mark:
I am not calling you a lair or disputing your experience. I pointed
out an article written by someone who I know to be expert in this
area. I also objected to being misquoted and taken out of context.
Just because I didn't agree with everything you said doesn't mean I
was saying that I was "absolutely right". I merely referred to the
paper and then clarified certain things that were mischaracterized and
incorrectly repeated. We're not even talking about the exact same
conditions, but you seem to need to force everyone to defer to your
superior wisdom.
Since you don't know me, I don't think it's a good idea for you to say
that I have "ZERO experience" about this.
Lastly, siting your own history of bad manners hardly excuses them.
On Oct 19, 2010, at 11:49 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> You are absolutely correct. I was rude. And I am going to be rude
> again. Sometimes I am human and this is one of those times. So
> hold on, here it comes again!
>
> My responses come from talking to a person who keeps demanding he is
> absolutely right and has ZERO experience compared to something I
> have seen with my own eyes, and have left over parts for sitting in
> the hangar.
>
> What is up with that Eric? Are you calling me a liar? Am I blind?
> Are your theories better than my photographs?
>
> I have not tried to make my points on an intellectual basis. I
> have tried to make my points by telling you I have seen the evidence
> with my own eyes and what you are saying it just totally wrong.
> Intellectually, I am sure you're right. Sadly though, a million
> intellectual guesses get blown out of the water with a simple
> proof. I've seen the simple proof... you keep referencing the
> intellectual guesses. Ok then. I've got pictures, you've got
> theories. Good luck with that.
>
> I consider the fact that you refuse to accept what I have said and
> keep bantering on with what you propose to be JUST as rude as I have
> been, and while I did not start off rude,.... you're right, I am now.
>
> But that's just me. I admit....once in a awhile I stoop to that
> level, as many people here that have been around long enough will
> attest to, I am sure. So, once again I am back in form! Ah well,
> sucks to be me.
>
> I could give a damn less about the 1/10'th of an inch nonsense. Go
> land a YAK-50 with the gear up and come back and tell me how it
> goes. ONE TENTH OF AN INCH AT A TIME. right. ... good luck with
> that.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
> p.s. I'm done. How stupid is this discussion anyway?
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 10:24 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
> >
>
> Mark, I think you're being pretty rude. That's usually the refuse of
> someone who hasn't made their point on an intellectual basis.
>
>
> On Oct 19, 2010, at 10:06 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
> MALS-14 64E wrote:
>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> You're right. And who freaking cares? The prop hits the ground.
>> It comes apart in pieces. Sometimes it shears clean enough to
>> continue flying. Sometimes it does not. The load imposed on the
>> engine demands an inspection. Others will try to find ways to
>> justify not doing that. Some people will say that since the prop
>> comes apart 1/10 of an inch at a time, the load imposed on the
>> engine is so slight that we can easily just hang another prop on it
>> and continue flying without a care in the world. Most people that
>> think that way are trying to save a buck at the possible expense of
>> someone's life. So no, there is no point in continuing this. There
>> will always be people that put the almighty dollar above someone
>> else's life, or even their own for that matter. And you're right
>> again. Having followed this list since 1999, there is really no way
>> to convince anyone not to do something stupid if they are determined
>> to do so.
>>
>> Whatever.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 9:32 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> The answer is yes to have watched it happen and examined the
>> aftermath. Having followed this list there is one thing I know for
>> sure - no point in continuing this.
>>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 9:40 PM
>>
>>
>> The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time
>> folks.
>> I was there, I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not
>> tiny little 1/10" pieces of dust. The prop is made out of WOOD
>> folks. WOOD. When you whack it into a concrete runway it splinters
>> just like you hit it with a hatchet. The reason there is not enough
>> force to shear steel is because last time I checked, steel is a
>> whole lot harder than compressed wood with a fiberglass sheath.
>>
>> Sorry for blowing a little steam here but how many of you
>> commenting on this subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop
>> hit the ground with the gear up?
>>
>> How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar?
>>
>> How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up
>> the
>> pieces?
>>
>> So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't know
>> what I am talking about since you read a good article someplace else
>> on the Internet, you just go right ahead on with your bad self!
>>
>> Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even
>> though
>> it comes apart like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have
>> the ability to cause damage to the M-14 engine, to areas that you
>> can go back on this list and read about from people like Richard
>> Goode if you would like.
>>
>> In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized
>> (and it
>> DID seize), the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to
>> cause failure in the gearbox allowing the prop to continue to spin.
>> That comes from the gent who took it apart.
>>
>> Have a nice day.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time
>> comes off at a time, not enough force to shear
>>
>> ab
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, 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: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 8:17 PM
>>
>>
>> Cherry
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>
>>
>> Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame per
>> second camera focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
>>
>> Excuse me... ?
>>
>> This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50,
>> there is a loud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS THAT?
>> You have 10 inches or more gone off each end of your prop.
>>
>> Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I
>> find
>> that number to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the time,
>> don't you think?
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> on behalf of Paul Hamlin
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> He said, per strike
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
>> MALS-14 64E <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
>>
>>
>> Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>>
>>
>> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it
>> comes
>> to a YAK-50
>>
>> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a YAK-50
>> that lands gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I
>> did not read it myself), or he might have been talking about some
>> other type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
>>
>> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12
>> INCHES off the prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and
>> there is no question about that.
>>
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> on behalf of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website) that
>> explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional
>> resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause
>> damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the wood
>> prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per rotation,
>> which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit
>> something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the accessory
>> shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
>> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read
>> Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design
>> shear
>> point in shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not do
>> the same.
>> So the answer is I do not know.
>> Doc
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> No problem, Doc.
>>
>> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a
>> deliberate
>> design to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from prop
>> momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia to
>> just break free like that.
>>
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>
>>
>> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you
>> had
>> already seen Robs post.
>> Doc
>>
>> From: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
>> To: http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so
>> that's how, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine
>> certainly trumps speculation.
>>
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> For those interested in more details:
>>
>> As had been suggested, I am sure the oil
>> pressure
>> would have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
>> Andy says that he noticed the zero oil
>> pressure
>> pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect) went
>> into coarse pitch.
>> The engine then actually kept going for 9/10
>> minutes without oil, which is quite impressive.
>> Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because
>> there was no oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was the
>> reason for the engine failure - because the pressure release valve
>> had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
>> However it then totally seized and this is
>> what
>> broke the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill with
>> a seized engine.
>> The extent of the seizure was such that it is
>> impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
>> I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit,
>> but
>> only because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast majority
>> of cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
>> settings in order to preserve the engine.
>> In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure
>> gear-
>> up is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the
>> aircraft.
>>
>>
>> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>> Rhodds Farm
>> Lyonshall
>> Herefordshire
>> HR5 3LW
>> United Kingdom
>>
>> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
>>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>
>>
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/
>>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline; ">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http:p://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com/
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> <
>> &nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; <http://forums.matronbsp;/> <http://forums.matronbsp;/
>> > - List Contribution Web
>> Site -
>>
>>
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> p://forums.matronics.com/
>> blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> et=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> =nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/
>> >
>> blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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! --
|