Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:53 AM - Seals for cj6 wobble pump (Harv)
2. 09:50 AM - Re: Tailslides (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
3. 09:50 AM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
4. 10:15 AM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
5. 11:16 AM - Re: Re: Tailslides (A. Dennis Savarese)
6. 11:29 AM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Mark Davis)
7. 12:25 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
8. 12:25 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (cjpilot710@aol.com)
9. 12:29 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
10. 12:45 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Roger Kemp M.D.)
11. 01:00 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
12. 01:14 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
13. 01:14 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Eric Wobschall)
14. 01:21 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (George Coy)
15. 01:39 PM - Brain Engaged (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
16. 01:54 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
17. 02:11 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Jan Mevis)
18. 02:12 PM - Re: Brain Engaged (Jan Mevis)
19. 02:18 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Didier Blouzard)
20. 02:27 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (George Coy)
21. 02:42 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Eric Wobschall)
22. 03:31 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
23. 03:41 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (A. Dennis Savarese)
24. 04:57 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Didier BLOUZARD)
25. 05:33 PM - Re: Tailslides (Bill Geipel)
26. 05:48 PM - CJ Gyro (keithmckinley)
27. 06:30 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (A. Dennis Savarese)
28. 06:40 PM - Re: CJ Gyro (Frank Stelwagon)
29. 06:59 PM - Re: CJ Gyro (keithmckinley)
30. 08:14 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (Roger Kemp M.D.)
31. 08:29 PM - Re: Re: Tailslides (cjpilot710@aol.com)
32. 08:54 PM - CJ6 parts for sale (Nanchang CJ6)
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: | Seals for cj6 wobble pump |
Chaps
Do any of you have a set of the seals to rebuild the cj6a SB-1 fuel wobble pump?
I think the part numbers are..
p/n 388003 (2 off) seal
p/n PA-030 (2 off) seal
p/n PA-031 (2 off) seal
I do have the larger casing o-ring seal but not the ones for the internal shaft
or scrapers.
Any help appreciated.
Rgs
Harv
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338858#338858
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 |
|
I need to answer your message Bill, and I don't think you are going to
life it very much..... sorry.
You say: "There must be a reason that so much conversation is generated
by this. Why would you want to do this during normal fun flying on a
clear beautiful day? Unless you have something to prove to yourself.
Cause No one else will care. "
The conversation is being generated because there is a sense that an
operating capability of an aircraft is being questioned based on a
source that is undocumented, with no named author, and I object to that.
As to what aerobatic maneuvers I do, or anyone else does, and why they
do them, that is a personal decision and needs no justification to you
or anyone else.
You say: "If it says in the manual, don't do it."
Agreed! However, I do not refer to a download from a web site as "A
MANUAL".
"If you believe something else, have at it. Go by yourself so the
innocent don't get hurt or run risk of getting hurt."
AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT! You can see ALREADY that
because someone has said: TAIL SLIDES ARE UNSAFE IN A YAK AIRCRAFT,
that now we have people saying what Bill just said above. It's a done
deal. It's unsafe. If you do it you're risking your life. And don't
do it with anyone else in the aircraft!
Not only is this gent saying HE is not going to do it, he is advising
OTHERS not to do it. That is just wrong.
"It's like paying taxes, the book says do it,"
What BOOK Bill? Have you got a copy handy?
"but there is always someone that pushes the envelope and tries to avoid
it. And in the end, a burial at sea."
I guess I will end up buried at Sea then... because I always push the
envelope which is why I fly a fully aerobatic aircraft. If you don't
want to, then that's your decision, but since you seem to be questioning
mine... I will ask you... why in the world do you own a YAK if all you
are going to do is fly it straight and level?
Take care,
Mark Bitterlich
On May 3, 2011, at 11:15 AM, "Roger Kemp M.D." <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
wrote:
<viperdoc@mindspring.com>
>
> The translated RU pilots' manual states for the novice to avoid them.
> No insinuation of experience made with this post. Just stating the
> recommendations made by the guys that had the most experience.
> Doc
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Grayson
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 10:37 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: Tailslides
>
>
> Is there any consensus on doing tailslides in the Yak-52?
>
> Grayson
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338764#338764
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Mark,
Excuse me, but I am going to reply in kind to your email.
First, I think there is a tad bit of difference in loads, airspeeds,
handling characteristics, etc., between a YAK-52 and MILITARY JET
AIRCRAFT. Ya think? That said, I am not attempting to exclude you from
the discussion by any means. But..... What single engine prop aircraft
have you done tail slides in? If 'none', that is ok too.
Second, I have a ton of internet "references" myself on many subjects
pertaining to Yaks and other Russian Aircraft. There is a tendency for
many people to list a reference to a web site and from then on treat it
as "The Real Deal". This is one of the reasons why Wiki is no longer
allowed to be used as a reference in any "paper" that is produced
professionally, namely in college. I am not saying you are doing this.
I am saying that unless I see a document written by the Russians who
built this airplane, I tend to look at it askance. My reason for saying
this, is that in one sentence you refer to "Don't Do It" stuff listing
NATOPS on one hand, and a web site on the other. The two are not the
same, nor should they be treated as such.
You mention that you "seen some [tail slides] done that appear to create
a much higher than typical backward airspeed". Me too. Namely at
air-shows. Done by aerobatic professionals with GOBS AND GOBS of
experience. I am very careful to never equate what I have SEEN with
what I can DO. Regardless, you talk about these circumstances as
creating an excessively high loads on control surfaces. Ok, tell me how
you came to make that statement? In other words, this is your opinion
based on what exact data? Do you happen to have any accident data
available that corroborates control surface damage from tail slides? If
we have an Aeronautical Engineer on the web site, please chime in.
Excuse me, but I am not going to equate what you learned as a child, and
what you did in the military with Unlimited Level Aerobatic Maneuvers.
There are similarities of course, but they are not equivalent.
You said: " So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing
why SOMEONE deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in
a POH."
NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! However, that does not mean that
someone/anyone should impose those limitations on others, or IMPLY that
those limitations should be imposed on others without REFERENCES. And a
"reference" does not mean what someone ELSE wrote on the "Internet" or
was pulled off a web site.
You said: Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed
routinely without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
exceeding load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive."
So you are saying that if I write an article about how unsafe your car
is to drive, and you have been driving it for 10 years without any
problem what-so-ever, you will immediately stop driving it because I
wrote an article, without references, without proof, without anything
other than my opinion, that said your car is UNSAFE? I think not.
You said: "If it came from someone in the design, manufacture, or
writing the initial operating limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm
interested."
YEP! That's exactly the same thing that I said. If this "apparent
limitation" on tail slides came from someone in the design, manufacture,
or writing of the initial operating limitations of the YAK-52, then I am
interested.
What you seem to be saying is that you do not need this kind of reliable
source to believe a limitation (because
"someone/somewhere/sometime/somehow SAID it) but you DO need that kind
of reliable source to allow you to dismiss it. And if that works for
you, I'm OK with that. Just don't tell others that you think they
should think the same way.
The closest source I have right now that I PERSONALLY BELIEVE (emphasis
on PERSONALLY) is someone who flew these EXACT AIRCRAFT in competition,
became the Russian National Aerobatic Champion in these aircraft, and
then was a TEST PILOT FOR SUKHOI, not to mention the United States
Unlimited Aerobatic COACH! This man worked hand in hand with the
factory who made these aircraft in Russia. Now if you have someone
MORE QUALIFIED than that, or a RUSSIAN MANUAL that talks about this,
please let me know.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Mark,
Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before.... in
the
POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the one that
came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is correct.
I'm
sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for years, but
I'm
still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of this POH.
The
link follows:
www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
parenthesis
like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin of the manual.
Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
done
tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in one that
has
the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my YAK-52 POH
albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training that makes
me
heed the "don't do it" stuff.
As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
create
a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck (my case)
or
skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would impart a
potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
"Which
is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well, you
tell
me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child that it
wasn't a
good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car at 80 mph
fingers
pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to the prevailing
wind.
Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the socket taught me that
fairing
your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my joints. Back to my
flight
training....don't yank on the G (or rolling pulls).
So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why SOMEONE
deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
without
causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been exceeding load
limits
that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came from someone in
the
design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating limitations of the
YAK
52 then I'm interested.
Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
Mark Davis
N44YK
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Point,
> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>
> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
estimated
> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides in
> any make or model of aircraft.
>
> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces (that
> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
and
> rudder please.
>
> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
> you tell me.
>
> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
backwards.
> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual pressure
> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
> compared to normal flight.
>
> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
are
> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about when
> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>
> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
tail
> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
will
> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>
> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large degree,
> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and when
> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
the
> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>
> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
put
> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
> something breaks.
>
> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have performed
> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
YAK
> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic coach.
> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
that
> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Mark,
> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in
a
>
> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew of
> two
> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
> potential
> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
> response
> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
> surfaces".
> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
> not"
> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>
> Mark Davis
> N44YK
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Point,
>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
> impact
>> on tail slides.
>>
>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
> tumbles
>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many tail-slides
> in
>> my YAK-50.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>> prohibited
>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
> read
>> it
>> though.
>>
>> Mark Davis
>> N44YK
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Eric Wobschall" <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>
>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro planes
>> like
>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
for
>>> sure.
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to perform?
>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
somewhere,
>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>
>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Grayson
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way .. in public.
Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and abilities.
There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many other
countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER refer to those
in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this country.
In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode that detail
"how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have here
in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that we have
because of it.
Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have rarely (IF EVER)
disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue to keep
that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not really. What we
basically have going on in this particular conversation is actually a
comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to believe
mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it starts
becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to advise OTHER
people to do.
In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise other people
what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone else should
either.
Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this aircraft that
discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
perspective. I believe people should make up their own minds and avoid
trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this country imposes
Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition Aircraft. My
UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY that my
aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or Parachuting. The only
problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for Glider
Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean because the FAA
has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my aircraft is
unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has said you
can't do it.
Is the above a good example of what you are talking about? Nope. But
it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what this CAA
said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA said this,
and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual for the
YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight restriction on
tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly centers on
YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
My best,
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
Savarese
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given to me about
13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained in Russia by
Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the information
from the original Russian flight manual and from the instructors who
trained him.
I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or who says
it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation Administration
(CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to be something
behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
Dennis
On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
>
> Mark,
>
> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before.... in
> the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the one
> that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
correct.
> I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for
years,
> but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of
> this POH. The link follows:
>
> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>
> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
> parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin
of
> the manual.
>
> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
> done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in one
> that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my
> YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training
> that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>
> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
> create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck
(my
> case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would
impart
> a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
> "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
> you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child
that
> it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car at
> 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to
> the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the
socket
> taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my
> joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or rolling
> pulls).
>
> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why SOMEONE
> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
> without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
exceeding
> load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came
from
> someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating
> limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
>
> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>
> Mark Davis
> N44YK
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>
>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
estimated
>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
in
>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>
>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces (that
>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
and
>> rudder please.
>>
>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>> you tell me.
>>
>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
backwards.
>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual pressure
>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>> compared to normal flight.
>>
>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
are
>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about when
>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>
>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
tail
>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it will
>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>
>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
degree,
>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
when
>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
the
>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>
>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
put
>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>> something breaks.
>>
>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have performed
>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
YAK
>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic coach.
>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
that
>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in a
>>
>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
of
>> two
>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>> potential
>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>> response
>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>> surfaces".
>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>> not"
>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>
>> Mark Davis
>> N44YK
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>> Point, MALS-14 64E"
>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Point,
>>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>> impact
>>> on tail slides.
>>>
>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>> tumbles
>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many tail-slides
>> in
>>> my YAK-50.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>> prohibited
>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>> read
>>> it
>>> though.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>
>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro planes
>>> like
>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
for
>>>> sure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
perform?
>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
somewhere,
>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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 |
|
Mark,
I have no problem with your comments whatsoever. I do disagree with
some of the words in your last paragraph where you say, "We don't know
the REASON for why this particular CAA said this, and it is still
hear-say." We do know the reason, assuming it is fact in the first
place. I posted it in the email where I said the Lithuanian CAA has
prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's.
Do I have a document from the Lithuanian CAA that says this? Obviously,
no I don't. But I am working on trying to get documentation pertaining
to this so-called prohibited maneuver. If and when I get a copy of it,
I'll post it to the list. In the meantime, consider it only hearsay.
Dennis
On 5/4/2011 12:06 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>
>
> Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way .. in public.
> Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and abilities.
>
> There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many other
> countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER refer to those
> in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this country.
>
> In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode that detail
> "how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have here
> in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that we have
> because of it.
>
> Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have rarely (IF EVER)
> disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue to keep
> that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not really. What we
> basically have going on in this particular conversation is actually a
> comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
>
> You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to believe
> mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it starts
> becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to advise OTHER
> people to do.
>
> In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise other people
> what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone else should
> either.
>
> Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this aircraft that
> discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
> perspective. I believe people should make up their own minds and avoid
> trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
>
> Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this country imposes
> Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition Aircraft. My
> UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY that my
> aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or Parachuting. The only
> problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for Glider
> Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean because the FAA
> has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my aircraft is
> unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has said you
> can't do it.
>
> Is the above a good example of what you are talking about? Nope. But
> it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what this CAA
> said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA said this,
> and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual for the
> YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight restriction on
> tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly centers on
> YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
>
> My best,
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
> Savarese
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>
> The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given to me about
> 13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained in Russia by
>
> Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the information
> from the original Russian flight manual and from the instructors who
> trained him.
>
> I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or who says
> it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation Administration
> (CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to be something
>
> behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
> substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
> Dennis
>
>
> On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before.... in
>> the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the one
>> that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
> correct.
>> I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for
> years,
>> but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of
>> this POH. The link follows:
>>
>> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>>
>> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
>> parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin
> of
>> the manual.
>>
>> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
>> done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in one
>> that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my
>> YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training
>> that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>>
>> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
>> create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck
> (my
>> case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would
> impart
>> a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
>> "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>> you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child
> that
>> it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car at
>> 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to
>> the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the
> socket
>> taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my
>> joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or rolling
>> pulls).
>>
>> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why SOMEONE
>> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
>> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
>> without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
> exceeding
>> load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came
> from
>> someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating
>> limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
>>
>> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>>
>> Mark Davis
>> N44YK
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>>
>>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
> estimated
>>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
> in
>>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>>
>>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces (that
>>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
> and
>>> rudder please.
>>>
>>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>>> you tell me.
>>>
>>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
> backwards.
>>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual pressure
>>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>>> compared to normal flight.
>>>
>>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
> are
>>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about when
>>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>>
>>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
> tail
>>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it will
>>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>>
>>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
> degree,
>>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
> when
>>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
> the
>>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>>
>>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
> put
>>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>>> something breaks.
>>>
>>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have performed
>>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
> YAK
>>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic coach.
>>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
> that
>>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in a
>>>
>>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
> of
>>> two
>>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>>> potential
>>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>>> response
>>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>>> surfaces".
>>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>>> not"
>>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"
>>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>> Point,
>>>> MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>>
>>>> Mark,
>>>>
>>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>>> impact
>>>> on tail slides.
>>>>
>>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>>> tumbles
>>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many tail-slides
>>> in
>>>> my YAK-50.
>>>>
>>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>
>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>>>
>>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>>> prohibited
>>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>>> read
>>>> it
>>>> though.
>>>>
>>>> Mark Davis
>>>> N44YK
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
>>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Eric Wobschall
>>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro planes
>>>> like
>>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
> for
>>>>> sure.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Grayson"<grayson50@hotmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
> perform?
>>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
> somewhere,
>>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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 |
|
Mark,
My only intention in entering this conversation on tailslides was to
respond to the message posted by Grayson <grayson50@hotmail.com> asking "Is
there any consensus on doing tailslides in the Yak-52?" As I said, the POH
that came with my YAK specifically excluded that maneuver. I thought that
he might want to be aware of that so he could make his own decision. But, I
also later qualified my reference to the POH with "albeit possibly in
error". Unfortunately there's a language barrier that makes it impossible
for most of us to research original Russian manuals. Hopefully Grayson has
taken enough from the discussion to make his own decision, just like
everyone else who's interested. I hope Dennis can backtrack where he got
the information for the POH on his website and resolve it for everyones'
benefit and *possible* safety.
Fly safe, fly often and FLY NAVY!
Mark Davis
N44YK
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 10:43 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Mark,
>
> Excuse me, but I am going to reply in kind to your email.
>
> First, I think there is a tad bit of difference in loads, airspeeds,
> handling characteristics, etc., between a YAK-52 and MILITARY JET
> AIRCRAFT. Ya think? That said, I am not attempting to exclude you from
> the discussion by any means. But..... What single engine prop aircraft
> have you done tail slides in? If 'none', that is ok too.
>
> Second, I have a ton of internet "references" myself on many subjects
> pertaining to Yaks and other Russian Aircraft. There is a tendency for
> many people to list a reference to a web site and from then on treat it
> as "The Real Deal". This is one of the reasons why Wiki is no longer
> allowed to be used as a reference in any "paper" that is produced
> professionally, namely in college. I am not saying you are doing this.
> I am saying that unless I see a document written by the Russians who
> built this airplane, I tend to look at it askance. My reason for saying
> this, is that in one sentence you refer to "Don't Do It" stuff listing
> NATOPS on one hand, and a web site on the other. The two are not the
> same, nor should they be treated as such.
>
> You mention that you "seen some [tail slides] done that appear to create
> a much higher than typical backward airspeed". Me too. Namely at
> air-shows. Done by aerobatic professionals with GOBS AND GOBS of
> experience. I am very careful to never equate what I have SEEN with
> what I can DO. Regardless, you talk about these circumstances as
> creating an excessively high loads on control surfaces. Ok, tell me how
> you came to make that statement? In other words, this is your opinion
> based on what exact data? Do you happen to have any accident data
> available that corroborates control surface damage from tail slides? If
> we have an Aeronautical Engineer on the web site, please chime in.
>
> Excuse me, but I am not going to equate what you learned as a child, and
> what you did in the military with Unlimited Level Aerobatic Maneuvers.
> There are similarities of course, but they are not equivalent.
>
> You said: " So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing
> why SOMEONE deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in
> a POH."
>
> NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! However, that does not mean that
> someone/anyone should impose those limitations on others, or IMPLY that
> those limitations should be imposed on others without REFERENCES. And a
> "reference" does not mean what someone ELSE wrote on the "Internet" or
> was pulled off a web site.
>
> You said: Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed
> routinely without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
> exceeding load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive."
>
> So you are saying that if I write an article about how unsafe your car
> is to drive, and you have been driving it for 10 years without any
> problem what-so-ever, you will immediately stop driving it because I
> wrote an article, without references, without proof, without anything
> other than my opinion, that said your car is UNSAFE? I think not.
>
> You said: "If it came from someone in the design, manufacture, or
> writing the initial operating limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm
> interested."
>
> YEP! That's exactly the same thing that I said. If this "apparent
> limitation" on tail slides came from someone in the design, manufacture,
> or writing of the initial operating limitations of the YAK-52, then I am
> interested.
>
> What you seem to be saying is that you do not need this kind of reliable
> source to believe a limitation (because
> "someone/somewhere/sometime/somehow SAID it) but you DO need that kind
> of reliable source to allow you to dismiss it. And if that works for
> you, I'm OK with that. Just don't tell others that you think they
> should think the same way.
>
> The closest source I have right now that I PERSONALLY BELIEVE (emphasis
> on PERSONALLY) is someone who flew these EXACT AIRCRAFT in competition,
> became the Russian National Aerobatic Champion in these aircraft, and
> then was a TEST PILOT FOR SUKHOI, not to mention the United States
> Unlimited Aerobatic COACH! This man worked hand in hand with the
> factory who made these aircraft in Russia. Now if you have someone
> MORE QUALIFIED than that, or a RUSSIAN MANUAL that talks about this,
> please let me know.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:01 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Mark,
>
> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before.... in
> the
> POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the one that
>
> came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is correct.
> I'm
> sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for years, but
> I'm
> still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of this POH.
> The
> link follows:
>
> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>
> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
> parenthesis
> like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin of the manual.
>
> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
> done
> tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in one that
> has
> the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my YAK-52 POH
> albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training that makes
> me
> heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>
> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
> create
> a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck (my case)
> or
> skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would impart a
> potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
> "Which
> is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well, you
> tell
> me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child that it
> wasn't a
> good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car at 80 mph
> fingers
> pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to the prevailing
> wind.
> Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the socket taught me that
> fairing
> your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my joints. Back to my
> flight
> training....don't yank on the G (or rolling pulls).
>
> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why SOMEONE
> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
> without
> causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been exceeding load
> limits
> that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came from someone in
> the
> design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating limitations of the
> YAK
> 52 then I'm interested.
>
> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>
> Mark Davis
> N44YK
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Point,
>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>
>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
> estimated
>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides in
>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>
>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces (that
>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
> and
>> rudder please.
>>
>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>> you tell me.
>>
>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
> backwards.
>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual pressure
>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>> compared to normal flight.
>>
>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
> are
>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about when
>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>
>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
> tail
>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
> will
>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>
>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large degree,
>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and when
>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
> the
>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>
>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
> put
>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>> something breaks.
>>
>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have performed
>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
> YAK
>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic coach.
>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
> that
>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in
> a
>>
>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew of
>> two
>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>> potential
>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>> response
>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>> surfaces".
>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>> not"
>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>
>> Mark Davis
>> N44YK
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Point,
>>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>> impact
>>> on tail slides.
>>>
>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>> tumbles
>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many tail-slides
>> in
>>> my YAK-50.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>> prohibited
>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>> read
>>> it
>>> though.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Eric Wobschall" <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>
>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro planes
>>> like
>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
> for
>>>> sure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to perform?
>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
> somewhere,
>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Thanks Dennis.
You are correct.
I'd like to see the exact Lithuanian CAA statements.
That said, all of us... you, me, and every other Experimental Exhibition
Aircraft owner OUT there in the United States, needs to be EXTREMELY
careful of what we say regarding our "obligation" to abide by orders
from Foreign CAA's. Paying attention to them, and making careful and
thought worthy decisions based on them ... YES. ABIDING by them as if
they are SACROSANCT... NO!
Think I am wrong about this? And this is not directed at you Dennis,
but EVERY READER out there, then fine...
Consider this: When your M-14 engine reaches about 500 hours, remove it
from your airplane and send it in to be over-hauled. Because gents,
that is what the Russians did and there is no end to the manuals and
books that require it. Certain CAA's from certain foreign countries
ALSO require it. There are also a lot of CAA's out there that OUTLAW,
PROHIBIT, DENY the option of putting automotive conversion spark plugs
and wires on M-14 engines as well. Because they deem them to be UNSAFE.
U N S A F E !!
But we know that to be wrong and we know that the automotive plug and
conversion kit offered (by Dennis for example) are EXTREMELY safe, and
actually grossly IMPROVES the operation of the engine and its overall
reliability. I love it and have it on my own airplane. Can't do it in
England though. Their CAA says it is not allowed.
This is where I am going with ALL of this. Or at least some of it.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
Savarese
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
Mark,
I have no problem with your comments whatsoever. I do disagree with
some of the words in your last paragraph where you say, "We don't know
the REASON for why this particular CAA said this, and it is still
hear-say." We do know the reason, assuming it is fact in the first
place. I posted it in the email where I said the Lithuanian CAA has
prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's.
Do I have a document from the Lithuanian CAA that says this? Obviously,
no I don't. But I am working on trying to get documentation pertaining
to this so-called prohibited maneuver. If and when I get a copy of it,
I'll post it to the list. In the meantime, consider it only hearsay.
Dennis
On 5/4/2011 12:06 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>
>
> Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way .. in
public.
> Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and abilities.
>
> There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many other
> countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER refer to
those
> in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this country.
>
> In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode that
detail
> "how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have here
> in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that we have
> because of it.
>
> Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have rarely (IF
EVER)
> disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue to keep
> that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not really. What
we
> basically have going on in this particular conversation is actually a
> comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
>
> You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to believe
> mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it starts
> becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to advise
OTHER
> people to do.
>
> In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise other people
> what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone else
should
> either.
>
> Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this aircraft that
> discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
> perspective. I believe people should make up their own minds and
avoid
> trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
>
> Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this country imposes
> Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition Aircraft. My
> UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY that my
> aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or Parachuting. The
only
> problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for Glider
> Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean because the
FAA
> has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my aircraft is
> unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has said you
> can't do it.
>
> Is the above a good example of what you are talking about? Nope. But
> it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what this CAA
> said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA said this,
> and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual for the
> YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight restriction on
> tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly centers
on
> YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
>
> My best,
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
> Savarese
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>
> The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given to me
about
> 13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained in Russia
by
>
> Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the
information
> from the original Russian flight manual and from the instructors who
> trained him.
>
> I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or who says
> it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation
Administration
> (CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to be
something
>
> behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
> substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
> Dennis
>
>
> On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before....
in
>> the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the
one
>> that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
> correct.
>> I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for
> years,
>> but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of
>> this POH. The link follows:
>>
>> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>>
>> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
>> parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin
> of
>> the manual.
>>
>> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
>> done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in
one
>> that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my
>> YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training
>> that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>>
>> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
>> create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck
> (my
>> case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would
> impart
>> a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
>> "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>> you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child
> that
>> it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car
at
>> 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to
>> the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the
> socket
>> taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my
>> joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or rolling
>> pulls).
>>
>> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why
SOMEONE
>> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
>> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
>> without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
> exceeding
>> load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came
> from
>> someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating
>> limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
>>
>> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>>
>> Mark Davis
>> N44YK
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>>
>>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
> estimated
>>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
> in
>>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>>
>>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces (that
>>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
> and
>>> rudder please.
>>>
>>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>>> you tell me.
>>>
>>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
> backwards.
>>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual pressure
>>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>>> compared to normal flight.
>>>
>>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
> are
>>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about when
>>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>>
>>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
> tail
>>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
will
>>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>>
>>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
> degree,
>>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
> when
>>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
> the
>>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>>
>>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
> put
>>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>>> something breaks.
>>>
>>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have
performed
>>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
> YAK
>>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic
coach.
>>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
> that
>>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in a
>>>
>>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
> of
>>> two
>>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>>> potential
>>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>>> response
>>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>>> surfaces".
>>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>>> not"
>>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
Cherry
>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"
>>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>> Point,
>>>> MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>>
>>>> Mark,
>>>>
>>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>>> impact
>>>> on tail slides.
>>>>
>>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>>> tumbles
>>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many
tail-slides
>>> in
>>>> my YAK-50.
>>>>
>>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Davis
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>
>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>>>
>>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>>> prohibited
>>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>>> read
>>>> it
>>>> though.
>>>>
>>>> Mark Davis
>>>> N44YK
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
>>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Eric Wobschall
>>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro
planes
>>>> like
>>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
> for
>>>>> sure.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Grayson"<grayson50@hotmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
> perform?
>>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
> somewhere,
>>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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 |
|
This discussion of tail slides has been real interesting. It points a
problem that both Dennis and Mark have so apply pointed out. The real
documentation of limits vs practices. I owned a Varga Kachina for a num
ber of
years. I found that it looped and rolled nicely. One day (by-my-self)
I
spun it. It did it beautifully. Oooops I THAN read the placard
=9CNo Spins
Allowed=9D. My curiosity got me and I called the factory direct,
and asked
for the engineer. Small company way back than- got right to the man.
I
asked why the Kacahina wasn't certified for acrobatics? His answer was no
t a
structural limited but the airplane had a =9Cpro unrecoverable flat
spin
character particularly with the CG near the aft limited=9D. So th
ere you go.
I often spun the Kachina BUT only with me in it and no one in the back
seat. Sweet little airplane.
I would not try to tail slide a CJ-6. Not that it might not do one
aerodynamically, but I look at the structure of the tail and from my exper
ience
though the years, comparing it to similar aircraft, it =9Clooks
=9D to light to
take a lot of back loads. This has nothing to do with the fabric coveri
ng,
but the very structure its self. Plus we=99ve had a number of issue
s with
different CJs out there with cracked horizontal stabilizers front spars at
the hole for the elevator cable.
Plus I think we need to analyze a true =98tail slide=99 vs a
=98wipe stall=99.
Not the aerobatic pro here, a true tail slide requires enough power to
maintain aircraft control inputs to hold the aircraft in a vertical posit
ion
but not enough to maintain altitude (hover) so that it drops controlled
along
its vertical flight path. Thus there is positive pressure on the flight
controls (at least the tail anyway) until the airplane either rights itse
lf
or the pilots recovers.
A =98wipe stall=99 is quite different. The airplane never has
enough power or
the throttle is closed and the airplane starts to fall. At some very
early point the aerodynamic loads from reverse airflow will start having
an
effect on the controls. Here is where its get dangerous. If the pilot ho
les
the controls =98rock hard=99 in the natural position, the air
plane will NOT
slide backward indefinitely. It will pick it=99s own way to recov
er. The
pilots control input can determine which way that accrues. It is the
uncontrolled rapid movement of rudder and elevators against their stops
where the
damage can happened. Here is where I think the CJ has its limits.
When I do hammerhead turns in the CJ, I don=99t wait for the stop
point like
I did in my Pitts. While still in forward flight, I =9Cmotor
=9D her around
quite early and I make sure that I have a good hold of the stick/rudder.
I
have inadvertently done wipe stalls in the CJ and quite frankly she is ve
ry
benign and predicable, BUT I am gun-shy of the tail structure.
I have not look at the structural difference between the 52 vs 50. While
the 50 is defiantly lighter and there is very little difference in overal
l
shape, it would be interesting to =9Cfine the truth so to speak
=9D.
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
In a message dated 5/4/2011 1:16:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
mark.bitterlich@navy.mil writes:
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way .. in public.
Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and abilities.
There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many other
countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER refer to those
in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this country.
In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode that detail
"how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have here
in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that we have
because of it.
Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have rarely (IF EVER)
disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue to keep
that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not really. What we
basically have going on in this particular conversation is actually a
comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to believe
mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it starts
becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to advise OTHER
people to do.
In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise other people
what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone else should
either.
Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this aircraft that
discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
perspective. I believe people should make up their own minds and avoid
trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this country imposes
Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition Aircraft. My
UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY that my
aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or Parachuting. The only
problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for Glider
Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean because the FAA
has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my aircraft is
unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has said you
can't do it.
Is the above a good example of what you are talking about? Nope. But
it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what this CAA
said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA said this,
and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual for the
YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight restriction on
tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly centers on
YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
My best,
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
Savarese
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given to me about
13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained in Russia by
Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the information
from the original Russian flight manual and from the instructors who
trained him.
I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or who says
it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation Administration
(CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to be something
behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
Dennis
On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
>
> Mark,
>
> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before.... in
> the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the one
> that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
correct.
> I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for
years,
> but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of
> this POH. The link follows:
>
> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>
> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
> parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin
of
> the manual.
>
> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
> done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in one
> that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my
> YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training
> that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>
> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
> create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck
(my
> case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would
impart
> a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
> "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
> you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child
that
> it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car at
> 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to
> the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the
socket
> taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my
> joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or rolling
> pulls).
>
> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why SOMEONE
> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
> without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
exceeding
> load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came
from
> someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating
> limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
>
> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>
> Mark Davis
> N44YK
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>
>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
estimated
>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
in
>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>
>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces (that
>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
and
>> rudder please.
>>
>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>> you tell me.
>>
>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
backwards.
>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual pressure
>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>> compared to normal flight.
>>
>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
are
>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about when
>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>
>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
tail
>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it will
>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>
>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
degree,
>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
when
>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
the
>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>
>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
put
>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>> something breaks.
>>
>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have performed
>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
YAK
>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic coach.
>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
that
>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in a
>>
>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
of
>> two
>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>> potential
>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>> response
>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>> surfaces".
>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>> not"
>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>
>> Mark Davis
>> N44YK
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>> Point, MALS-14 64E"
>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>> Point,
>>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>> impact
>>> on tail slides.
>>>
>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>> tumbles
>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many tail-slides
>> in
>>> my YAK-50.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>> prohibited
>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>> read
>>> it
>>> though.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Eric Wobschall
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>
>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro planes
>>> like
>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
for
>>>> sure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
perform?
>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
somewhere,
>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
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 |
|
Understood.
Good answer.
To be clear, I want to see a Russian Manual that says tail slides are
unsafe in YAK-52's.
Failing that, I want a person who has or had, direct contact with the
factory that built them. It would be nice if that person also had VAST
experience in flying them and teaching others to fly in them as well.
I have that. Which is why I put in my 2 cents as well for Grayson to
consider.
Take care,
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 2:21 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Mark,
My only intention in entering this conversation on tailslides was
to
respond to the message posted by Grayson <grayson50@hotmail.com> asking
"Is
there any consensus on doing tailslides in the Yak-52?" As I said, the
POH
that came with my YAK specifically excluded that maneuver. I thought
that
he might want to be aware of that so he could make his own decision.
But, I
also later qualified my reference to the POH with "albeit possibly in
error". Unfortunately there's a language barrier that makes it
impossible
for most of us to research original Russian manuals. Hopefully Grayson
has
taken enough from the discussion to make his own decision, just like
everyone else who's interested. I hope Dennis can backtrack where he
got
the information for the POH on his website and resolve it for everyones'
benefit and *possible* safety.
Fly safe, fly often and FLY NAVY!
Mark Davis
N44YK
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 10:43 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Point,
> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Mark,
>
> Excuse me, but I am going to reply in kind to your email.
>
> First, I think there is a tad bit of difference in loads, airspeeds,
> handling characteristics, etc., between a YAK-52 and MILITARY JET
> AIRCRAFT. Ya think? That said, I am not attempting to exclude you
from
> the discussion by any means. But..... What single engine prop
aircraft
> have you done tail slides in? If 'none', that is ok too.
>
> Second, I have a ton of internet "references" myself on many subjects
> pertaining to Yaks and other Russian Aircraft. There is a tendency
for
> many people to list a reference to a web site and from then on treat
it
> as "The Real Deal". This is one of the reasons why Wiki is no longer
> allowed to be used as a reference in any "paper" that is produced
> professionally, namely in college. I am not saying you are doing
this.
> I am saying that unless I see a document written by the Russians who
> built this airplane, I tend to look at it askance. My reason for
saying
> this, is that in one sentence you refer to "Don't Do It" stuff listing
> NATOPS on one hand, and a web site on the other. The two are not the
> same, nor should they be treated as such.
>
> You mention that you "seen some [tail slides] done that appear to
create
> a much higher than typical backward airspeed". Me too. Namely at
> air-shows. Done by aerobatic professionals with GOBS AND GOBS of
> experience. I am very careful to never equate what I have SEEN with
> what I can DO. Regardless, you talk about these circumstances as
> creating an excessively high loads on control surfaces. Ok, tell me
how
> you came to make that statement? In other words, this is your opinion
> based on what exact data? Do you happen to have any accident data
> available that corroborates control surface damage from tail slides?
If
> we have an Aeronautical Engineer on the web site, please chime in.
>
> Excuse me, but I am not going to equate what you learned as a child,
and
> what you did in the military with Unlimited Level Aerobatic Maneuvers.
> There are similarities of course, but they are not equivalent.
>
> You said: " So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing
> why SOMEONE deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include
in
> a POH."
>
> NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! However, that does not mean that
> someone/anyone should impose those limitations on others, or IMPLY
that
> those limitations should be imposed on others without REFERENCES. And
a
> "reference" does not mean what someone ELSE wrote on the "Internet" or
> was pulled off a web site.
>
> You said: Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed
> routinely without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't
been
> exceeding load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive."
>
> So you are saying that if I write an article about how unsafe your car
> is to drive, and you have been driving it for 10 years without any
> problem what-so-ever, you will immediately stop driving it because I
> wrote an article, without references, without proof, without anything
> other than my opinion, that said your car is UNSAFE? I think not.
>
> You said: "If it came from someone in the design, manufacture, or
> writing the initial operating limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm
> interested."
>
> YEP! That's exactly the same thing that I said. If this "apparent
> limitation" on tail slides came from someone in the design,
manufacture,
> or writing of the initial operating limitations of the YAK-52, then I
am
> interested.
>
> What you seem to be saying is that you do not need this kind of
reliable
> source to believe a limitation (because
> "someone/somewhere/sometime/somehow SAID it) but you DO need that kind
> of reliable source to allow you to dismiss it. And if that works for
> you, I'm OK with that. Just don't tell others that you think they
> should think the same way.
>
> The closest source I have right now that I PERSONALLY BELIEVE
(emphasis
> on PERSONALLY) is someone who flew these EXACT AIRCRAFT in
competition,
> became the Russian National Aerobatic Champion in these aircraft, and
> then was a TEST PILOT FOR SUKHOI, not to mention the United States
> Unlimited Aerobatic COACH! This man worked hand in hand with the
> factory who made these aircraft in Russia. Now if you have someone
> MORE QUALIFIED than that, or a RUSSIAN MANUAL that talks about this,
> please let me know.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:01 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Mark,
>
> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before.... in
> the
> POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the one
that
>
> came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is correct.
> I'm
> sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for years,
but
> I'm
> still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of this
POH.
> The
> link follows:
>
> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>
> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
> parenthesis
> like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin of the
manual.
>
> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
> done
> tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in one that
> has
> the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my YAK-52
POH
> albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training that
makes
> me
> heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>
> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
> create
> a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck (my
case)
> or
> skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would impart a
> potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
> "Which
> is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well, you
> tell
> me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child that it
> wasn't a
> good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car at 80 mph
> fingers
> pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to the prevailing
> wind.
> Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the socket taught me that
> fairing
> your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my joints. Back to my
> flight
> training....don't yank on the G (or rolling pulls).
>
> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why SOMEONE
> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
> without
> causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been exceeding load
> limits
> that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came from someone
in
> the
> design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating limitations of
the
> YAK
> 52 then I'm interested.
>
> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>
> Mark Davis
> N44YK
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Point,
>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>
>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
> estimated
>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
in
>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>
>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces
(that
>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
> and
>> rudder please.
>>
>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads?
Well,
>> you tell me.
>>
>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
> backwards.
>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual
pressure
>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>> compared to normal flight.
>>
>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
> are
>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about
when
>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>
>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
> tail
>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
> will
>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>
>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
degree,
>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
when
>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
> the
>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>
>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
> put
>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>> something breaks.
>>
>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have
performed
>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
> YAK
>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic
coach.
>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
> that
>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in
> a
>>
>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
of
>> two
>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>> potential
>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>> response
>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>> surfaces".
>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>> not"
>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>
>> Mark Davis
>> N44YK
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Point,
>>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>> impact
>>> on tail slides.
>>>
>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>> tumbles
>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many
tail-slides
>> in
>>> my YAK-50.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>> prohibited
>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>> read
>>> it
>>> though.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Eric Wobschall" <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>
>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro planes
>>> like
>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
> for
>>>> sure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
perform?
>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
> somewhere,
>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
The manuals were first distributed by Wess Crowder as he was importing YAK's
brand new in the box from his source in RU. It came with the Russian
translated POH bound with a leather cover and the monofilament line binding
the paper. The one Dennis has on his website is a reproduction of one of
those manuals. I have a printed version of that manual. Scott Patterson has
the one of the original POH's from Wes Crowder since he bought his YAK
directly from Wes around 1995.
The manual states as "Prohibited maneuvers...tailslides."
Doc
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Mark,
My only intention in entering this conversation on tailslides was to
respond to the message posted by Grayson <grayson50@hotmail.com> asking "Is
there any consensus on doing tailslides in the Yak-52?" As I said, the POH
that came with my YAK specifically excluded that maneuver. I thought that
he might want to be aware of that so he could make his own decision. But, I
also later qualified my reference to the POH with "albeit possibly in
error". Unfortunately there's a language barrier that makes it impossible
for most of us to research original Russian manuals. Hopefully Grayson has
taken enough from the discussion to make his own decision, just like
everyone else who's interested. I hope Dennis can backtrack where he got
the information for the POH on his website and resolve it for everyones'
benefit and *possible* safety.
Fly safe, fly often and FLY NAVY!
Mark Davis
N44YK
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 10:43 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Mark,
>
> Excuse me, but I am going to reply in kind to your email.
>
> First, I think there is a tad bit of difference in loads, airspeeds,
> handling characteristics, etc., between a YAK-52 and MILITARY JET
> AIRCRAFT. Ya think? That said, I am not attempting to exclude you from
> the discussion by any means. But..... What single engine prop aircraft
> have you done tail slides in? If 'none', that is ok too.
>
> Second, I have a ton of internet "references" myself on many subjects
> pertaining to Yaks and other Russian Aircraft. There is a tendency for
> many people to list a reference to a web site and from then on treat it
> as "The Real Deal". This is one of the reasons why Wiki is no longer
> allowed to be used as a reference in any "paper" that is produced
> professionally, namely in college. I am not saying you are doing this.
> I am saying that unless I see a document written by the Russians who
> built this airplane, I tend to look at it askance. My reason for saying
> this, is that in one sentence you refer to "Don't Do It" stuff listing
> NATOPS on one hand, and a web site on the other. The two are not the
> same, nor should they be treated as such.
>
> You mention that you "seen some [tail slides] done that appear to create
> a much higher than typical backward airspeed". Me too. Namely at
> air-shows. Done by aerobatic professionals with GOBS AND GOBS of
> experience. I am very careful to never equate what I have SEEN with
> what I can DO. Regardless, you talk about these circumstances as
> creating an excessively high loads on control surfaces. Ok, tell me how
> you came to make that statement? In other words, this is your opinion
> based on what exact data? Do you happen to have any accident data
> available that corroborates control surface damage from tail slides? If
> we have an Aeronautical Engineer on the web site, please chime in.
>
> Excuse me, but I am not going to equate what you learned as a child, and
> what you did in the military with Unlimited Level Aerobatic Maneuvers.
> There are similarities of course, but they are not equivalent.
>
> You said: " So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing
> why SOMEONE deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in
> a POH."
>
> NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! However, that does not mean that
> someone/anyone should impose those limitations on others, or IMPLY that
> those limitations should be imposed on others without REFERENCES. And a
> "reference" does not mean what someone ELSE wrote on the "Internet" or
> was pulled off a web site.
>
> You said: Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed
> routinely without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
> exceeding load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive."
>
> So you are saying that if I write an article about how unsafe your car
> is to drive, and you have been driving it for 10 years without any
> problem what-so-ever, you will immediately stop driving it because I
> wrote an article, without references, without proof, without anything
> other than my opinion, that said your car is UNSAFE? I think not.
>
> You said: "If it came from someone in the design, manufacture, or
> writing the initial operating limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm
> interested."
>
> YEP! That's exactly the same thing that I said. If this "apparent
> limitation" on tail slides came from someone in the design, manufacture,
> or writing of the initial operating limitations of the YAK-52, then I am
> interested.
>
> What you seem to be saying is that you do not need this kind of reliable
> source to believe a limitation (because
> "someone/somewhere/sometime/somehow SAID it) but you DO need that kind
> of reliable source to allow you to dismiss it. And if that works for
> you, I'm OK with that. Just don't tell others that you think they
> should think the same way.
>
> The closest source I have right now that I PERSONALLY BELIEVE (emphasis
> on PERSONALLY) is someone who flew these EXACT AIRCRAFT in competition,
> became the Russian National Aerobatic Champion in these aircraft, and
> then was a TEST PILOT FOR SUKHOI, not to mention the United States
> Unlimited Aerobatic COACH! This man worked hand in hand with the
> factory who made these aircraft in Russia. Now if you have someone
> MORE QUALIFIED than that, or a RUSSIAN MANUAL that talks about this,
> please let me know.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:01 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Mark,
>
> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before.... in
> the
> POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the one that
>
> came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is correct.
> I'm
> sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for years, but
> I'm
> still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of this POH.
> The
> link follows:
>
> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>
> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
> parenthesis
> like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin of the manual.
>
> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
> done
> tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in one that
> has
> the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my YAK-52 POH
> albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training that makes
> me
> heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>
> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
> create
> a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck (my case)
> or
> skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would impart a
> potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
> "Which
> is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well, you
> tell
> me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child that it
> wasn't a
> good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car at 80 mph
> fingers
> pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to the prevailing
> wind.
> Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the socket taught me that
> fairing
> your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my joints. Back to my
> flight
> training....don't yank on the G (or rolling pulls).
>
> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why SOMEONE
> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
> without
> causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been exceeding load
> limits
> that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came from someone in
> the
> design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating limitations of the
> YAK
> 52 then I'm interested.
>
> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>
> Mark Davis
> N44YK
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Point,
>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>
>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
> estimated
>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides in
>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>
>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces (that
>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
> and
>> rudder please.
>>
>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>> you tell me.
>>
>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
> backwards.
>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual pressure
>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>> compared to normal flight.
>>
>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
> are
>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about when
>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>
>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
> tail
>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
> will
>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>
>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large degree,
>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and when
>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
> the
>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>
>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
> put
>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>> something breaks.
>>
>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have performed
>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
> YAK
>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic coach.
>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
> that
>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in
> a
>>
>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew of
>> two
>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>> potential
>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>> response
>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>> surfaces".
>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>> not"
>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>
>> Mark Davis
>> N44YK
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Point,
>>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>> impact
>>> on tail slides.
>>>
>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>> tumbles
>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many tail-slides
>> in
>>> my YAK-50.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>> prohibited
>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>> read
>>> it
>>> though.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Eric Wobschall" <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>
>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro planes
>>> like
>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
> for
>>>> sure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to perform?
>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
> somewhere,
>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Exactly.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of cjpilot710@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
This discussion of tail slides has been real interesting. It points a problem
that both Dennis and Mark have so apply pointed out. The real documentation of
limits vs practices. I owned a Varga Kachina for a number of years. I found
that it looped and rolled nicely. One day (by-my-self) I spun it. It did it
beautifully. Oooops I THAN read the placard No Spins Allowed. My curiosity
got me and I called the factory direct, and asked for the engineer. Small company
way back than- got right to the man. I asked why the Kacahina wasn't certified
for acrobatics? His answer was not a structural limited but the airplane
had a pro unrecoverable flat spin character particularly with the CG near
the aft limited. So there you go. I often spun the Kachina BUT only with me
in it and no one in the back seat. Sweet little airplane.
I would not try to tail slide a CJ-6. Not that it might not do one aerodynamically,
but I look at the structure of the tail and from my experience though the
years, comparing it to similar aircraft, it looks to light to take a lot of
back loads. This has nothing to do with the fabric covering, but the very structure
its self. Plus weve had a number of issues with different CJs out there
with cracked horizontal stabilizers front spars at the hole for the elevator
cable.
Plus I think we need to analyze a true tail slide vs a wipe stall. Not the aerobatic
pro here, a true tail slide requires enough power to maintain aircraft
control inputs to hold the aircraft in a vertical position but not enough to maintain
altitude (hover) so that it drops controlled along its vertical flight
path. Thus there is positive pressure on the flight controls (at least the tail
anyway) until the airplane either rights itself or the pilots recovers.
A wipe stall is quite different. The airplane never has enough power or the throttle
is closed and the airplane starts to fall. At some very early point the
aerodynamic loads from reverse airflow will start having an effect on the controls.
Here is where its get dangerous. If the pilot holes the controls rock
hard in the natural position, the airplane will NOT slide backward indefinitely.
It will pick its own way to recover. The pilots control input can determine
which way that accrues. It is the uncontrolled rapid movement of rudder
and elevators against their stops where the damage can happened. Here is where
I think the CJ has its limits.
When I do hammerhead turns in the CJ, I dont wait for the stop point like I did
in my Pitts. While still in forward flight, I motor her around quite early and
I make sure that I have a good hold of the stick/rudder. I have inadvertently
done wipe stalls in the CJ and quite frankly she is very benign and predicable,
BUT I am gun-shy of the tail structure.
I have not look at the structural difference between the 52 vs 50. While the 50
is defiantly lighter and there is very little difference in overall shape, it
would be interesting to fine the truth so to speak.
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
In a message dated 5/4/2011 1:16:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
writes:
Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way .. in public.
Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and abilities.
There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many other
countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER refer to those
in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this country.
In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode that detail
"how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have here
in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that we have
because of it.
Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have rarely (IF EVER)
disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue to keep
that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not really. What we
basically have going on in this particular conversation is actually a
comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to believe
mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it starts
becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to advise OTHER
people to do.
In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise other people
what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone else should
either.
Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this aircraft that
discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
perspective. I believe people should make up their own minds and avoid
trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this country imposes
Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition Aircraft. My
UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY that my
aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or Parachuting. The only
problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for Glider
Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean because the FAA
has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my aircraft is
unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has said you
can't do it.
Is the above a good example of what you are talking about? Nope. But
it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what this CAA
said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA said this,
and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual for the
YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight restriction on
tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly centers on
YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
My best,
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
Savarese
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given to me about
13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained in Russia by
Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the information
from the original Russian flight manual and from the instructors who
trained him.
I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or who says
it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation Administration
(CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to be something
behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
Dennis
On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
>
> Mark,
>
> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before.... in
> the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the one
> that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
correct.
> I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for
years,
> but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of
> this POH. The link follows:
>
> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>
> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
> parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin
of
> the manual.
>
> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
> done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in one
> that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my
> YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training
> that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>
> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
> create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck
(my
> case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would
impart
> a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
> "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
> you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child
that
> it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car at
> 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to
> the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the
socket
> taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my
> joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or rolling
> pulls).
>
> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why SOMEONE
> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
> without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
exceeding
> load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came
from
> someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating
> limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
>
> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>
> Mark Davis
> N44YK
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>
>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
estimated
>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
in
>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>
>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces (that
>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
and
>> rudder please.
>>
>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>> you tell me.
>>
>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
backwards.
>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual pressure
>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>> compared to normal flight.
>>
>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
are
>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about when
>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>
>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
tail
>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it will
>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>
>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
degree,
>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
when
>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
the
>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>
>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
put
>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>> something breaks.
>>
>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have performed
>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
YAK
>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic coach.
>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
that
>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in a
>>
>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
of
>> two
>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>> potential
>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>> response
>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>> surfaces".
>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>> not"
>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>
>> Mark Davis
>> N44YK
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>> Point, MALS-14 64E"
>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Point,
>>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>> impact
>>> on tail slides.
>>>
>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>> tumbles
>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many tail-slides
>> in
>>> my YAK-50.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>> prohibited
>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>> read
>>> it
>>> though.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>
>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro planes
>>> like
>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
for
>>>> sure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
perform?
>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
somewhere,
>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>================================================e ties Day ================================================
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ================================================
- List Contribution Web Site
sp; ==================================================
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 |
|
Interesting.
My YAK-50 was Wes Crowder's test aircraft for a lot of his
modifications. I have the original Russian Manual. I had it translated
by a Russian and written down line by line.
No tail slide restrictions. Might be a translation thing?
Sorry.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
M.D.
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:05 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
<viperdoc@mindspring.com>
The manuals were first distributed by Wess Crowder as he was importing
YAK's
brand new in the box from his source in RU. It came with the Russian
translated POH bound with a leather cover and the monofilament line
binding
the paper. The one Dennis has on his website is a reproduction of one of
those manuals. I have a printed version of that manual. Scott Patterson
has
the one of the original POH's from Wes Crowder since he bought his YAK
directly from Wes around 1995.
The manual states as "Prohibited maneuvers...tailslides."
Doc
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Mark,
My only intention in entering this conversation on tailslides was
to
respond to the message posted by Grayson <grayson50@hotmail.com> asking
"Is
there any consensus on doing tailslides in the Yak-52?" As I said, the
POH
that came with my YAK specifically excluded that maneuver. I thought
that
he might want to be aware of that so he could make his own decision.
But, I
also later qualified my reference to the POH with "albeit possibly in
error". Unfortunately there's a language barrier that makes it
impossible
for most of us to research original Russian manuals. Hopefully Grayson
has
taken enough from the discussion to make his own decision, just like
everyone else who's interested. I hope Dennis can backtrack where he
got
the information for the POH on his website and resolve it for everyones'
benefit and *possible* safety.
Fly safe, fly often and FLY NAVY!
Mark Davis
N44YK
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 10:43 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Point,
> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Mark,
>
> Excuse me, but I am going to reply in kind to your email.
>
> First, I think there is a tad bit of difference in loads, airspeeds,
> handling characteristics, etc., between a YAK-52 and MILITARY JET
> AIRCRAFT. Ya think? That said, I am not attempting to exclude you
from
> the discussion by any means. But..... What single engine prop
aircraft
> have you done tail slides in? If 'none', that is ok too.
>
> Second, I have a ton of internet "references" myself on many subjects
> pertaining to Yaks and other Russian Aircraft. There is a tendency
for
> many people to list a reference to a web site and from then on treat
it
> as "The Real Deal". This is one of the reasons why Wiki is no longer
> allowed to be used as a reference in any "paper" that is produced
> professionally, namely in college. I am not saying you are doing
this.
> I am saying that unless I see a document written by the Russians who
> built this airplane, I tend to look at it askance. My reason for
saying
> this, is that in one sentence you refer to "Don't Do It" stuff listing
> NATOPS on one hand, and a web site on the other. The two are not the
> same, nor should they be treated as such.
>
> You mention that you "seen some [tail slides] done that appear to
create
> a much higher than typical backward airspeed". Me too. Namely at
> air-shows. Done by aerobatic professionals with GOBS AND GOBS of
> experience. I am very careful to never equate what I have SEEN with
> what I can DO. Regardless, you talk about these circumstances as
> creating an excessively high loads on control surfaces. Ok, tell me
how
> you came to make that statement? In other words, this is your opinion
> based on what exact data? Do you happen to have any accident data
> available that corroborates control surface damage from tail slides?
If
> we have an Aeronautical Engineer on the web site, please chime in.
>
> Excuse me, but I am not going to equate what you learned as a child,
and
> what you did in the military with Unlimited Level Aerobatic Maneuvers.
> There are similarities of course, but they are not equivalent.
>
> You said: " So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing
> why SOMEONE deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include
in
> a POH."
>
> NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! However, that does not mean that
> someone/anyone should impose those limitations on others, or IMPLY
that
> those limitations should be imposed on others without REFERENCES. And
a
> "reference" does not mean what someone ELSE wrote on the "Internet" or
> was pulled off a web site.
>
> You said: Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed
> routinely without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't
been
> exceeding load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive."
>
> So you are saying that if I write an article about how unsafe your car
> is to drive, and you have been driving it for 10 years without any
> problem what-so-ever, you will immediately stop driving it because I
> wrote an article, without references, without proof, without anything
> other than my opinion, that said your car is UNSAFE? I think not.
>
> You said: "If it came from someone in the design, manufacture, or
> writing the initial operating limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm
> interested."
>
> YEP! That's exactly the same thing that I said. If this "apparent
> limitation" on tail slides came from someone in the design,
manufacture,
> or writing of the initial operating limitations of the YAK-52, then I
am
> interested.
>
> What you seem to be saying is that you do not need this kind of
reliable
> source to believe a limitation (because
> "someone/somewhere/sometime/somehow SAID it) but you DO need that kind
> of reliable source to allow you to dismiss it. And if that works for
> you, I'm OK with that. Just don't tell others that you think they
> should think the same way.
>
> The closest source I have right now that I PERSONALLY BELIEVE
(emphasis
> on PERSONALLY) is someone who flew these EXACT AIRCRAFT in
competition,
> became the Russian National Aerobatic Champion in these aircraft, and
> then was a TEST PILOT FOR SUKHOI, not to mention the United States
> Unlimited Aerobatic COACH! This man worked hand in hand with the
> factory who made these aircraft in Russia. Now if you have someone
> MORE QUALIFIED than that, or a RUSSIAN MANUAL that talks about this,
> please let me know.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:01 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Mark,
>
> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before.... in
> the
> POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the one
that
>
> came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is correct.
> I'm
> sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for years,
but
> I'm
> still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of this
POH.
> The
> link follows:
>
> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>
> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
> parenthesis
> like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin of the
manual.
>
> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
> done
> tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in one that
> has
> the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my YAK-52
POH
> albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training that
makes
> me
> heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>
> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
> create
> a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck (my
case)
> or
> skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would impart a
> potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
> "Which
> is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well, you
> tell
> me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child that it
> wasn't a
> good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car at 80 mph
> fingers
> pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to the prevailing
> wind.
> Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the socket taught me that
> fairing
> your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my joints. Back to my
> flight
> training....don't yank on the G (or rolling pulls).
>
> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why SOMEONE
> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
> without
> causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been exceeding load
> limits
> that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came from someone
in
> the
> design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating limitations of
the
> YAK
> 52 then I'm interested.
>
> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>
> Mark Davis
> N44YK
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Point,
>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>
>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
> estimated
>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
in
>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>
>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces
(that
>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
> and
>> rudder please.
>>
>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads?
Well,
>> you tell me.
>>
>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
> backwards.
>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual
pressure
>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>> compared to normal flight.
>>
>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
> are
>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about
when
>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>
>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
> tail
>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
> will
>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>
>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
degree,
>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
when
>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
> the
>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>
>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
> put
>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>> something breaks.
>>
>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have
performed
>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
> YAK
>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic
coach.
>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
> that
>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in
> a
>>
>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
of
>> two
>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>> potential
>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>> response
>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>> surfaces".
>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>> not"
>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>
>> Mark Davis
>> N44YK
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Point,
>>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>> impact
>>> on tail slides.
>>>
>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>> tumbles
>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many
tail-slides
>> in
>>> my YAK-50.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>> prohibited
>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>> read
>>> it
>>> though.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Eric Wobschall" <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>
>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro planes
>>> like
>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
> for
>>>> sure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
perform?
>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
> somewhere,
>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Other countries notwithstanding, my understanding is that the reason we don't have
standard airworthiness certificates for these airplanes in the USA is because
they were not certified here for whatever reason (usually no economic reward
for doing so). In order to to have permission to fly them we have a lot of
restrictions, and the only requirement we must fulfill in terms of the hardware
itself is that it passes a condition inspection. The extra risk inherent in
this arrangement is the reason for the restrictions. The reason things like the
automotive plug conversion are allowed is because the airplane as a whole is
no more certified than the modification, so there's really no airworthiness standard
to be diminished.
As we know, the Russian way of doing things is different than ours, and not all
of it translates to our system. Therefore it's up to us, with the help of the
experts we rely on, to keep our own keysters intact. IMHO, the random application
of the rules that were intended for aircraft with standard airworthiness
certificates to our planes would be improvisational, overzealous and incorrect
on the part of regulatory officials. I am sincere in saying that my local FSDO
has never abused their authority or done anything else than try to get my Yaks
properly documented. Yes, I feel lucky.
Having said all of this, my philosophy has been to first find out how the Russians
did it. This is partly because I'm not as qualified as some to deviate from
the stock airplane. However, even in my case, deviations are warranted. Let's
face it: We can't conform to the rules meant for spam cans and their drivers,
even if we were inclined to.
On May 4, 2011, at 3:18 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
wrote:
>
> Thanks Dennis.
>
> You are correct.
>
> I'd like to see the exact Lithuanian CAA statements.
>
> That said, all of us... you, me, and every other Experimental Exhibition
> Aircraft owner OUT there in the United States, needs to be EXTREMELY
> careful of what we say regarding our "obligation" to abide by orders
> from Foreign CAA's. Paying attention to them, and making careful and
> thought worthy decisions based on them ... YES. ABIDING by them as if
> they are SACROSANCT... NO!
>
>
> Think I am wrong about this? And this is not directed at you Dennis,
> but EVERY READER out there, then fine...
>
> Consider this: When your M-14 engine reaches about 500 hours, remove it
> from your airplane and send it in to be over-hauled. Because gents,
> that is what the Russians did and there is no end to the manuals and
> books that require it. Certain CAA's from certain foreign countries
> ALSO require it. There are also a lot of CAA's out there that OUTLAW,
> PROHIBIT, DENY the option of putting automotive conversion spark plugs
> and wires on M-14 engines as well. Because they deem them to be UNSAFE.
>
>
> U N S A F E !!
>
> But we know that to be wrong and we know that the automotive plug and
> conversion kit offered (by Dennis for example) are EXTREMELY safe, and
> actually grossly IMPROVES the operation of the engine and its overall
> reliability. I love it and have it on my own airplane. Can't do it in
> England though. Their CAA says it is not allowed.
>
> This is where I am going with ALL of this. Or at least some of it.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
> Savarese
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 2:08 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>
> Mark,
> I have no problem with your comments whatsoever. I do disagree with
> some of the words in your last paragraph where you say, "We don't know
> the REASON for why this particular CAA said this, and it is still
> hear-say." We do know the reason, assuming it is fact in the first
> place. I posted it in the email where I said the Lithuanian CAA has
> prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's.
>
> Do I have a document from the Lithuanian CAA that says this? Obviously,
>
> no I don't. But I am working on trying to get documentation pertaining
> to this so-called prohibited maneuver. If and when I get a copy of it,
> I'll post it to the list. In the meantime, consider it only hearsay.
> Dennis
>
> On 5/4/2011 12:06 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>
>>
>> Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way .. in
> public.
>> Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and abilities.
>>
>> There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many other
>> countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER refer to
> those
>> in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this country.
>>
>> In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode that
> detail
>> "how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have here
>> in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that we have
>> because of it.
>>
>> Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have rarely (IF
> EVER)
>> disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue to keep
>> that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not really. What
> we
>> basically have going on in this particular conversation is actually a
>> comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
>>
>> You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to believe
>> mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it starts
>> becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to advise
> OTHER
>> people to do.
>>
>> In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise other people
>> what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone else
> should
>> either.
>>
>> Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this aircraft that
>> discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
>> perspective. I believe people should make up their own minds and
> avoid
>> trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
>>
>> Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this country imposes
>> Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition Aircraft. My
>> UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY that my
>> aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or Parachuting. The
> only
>> problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for Glider
>> Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean because the
> FAA
>> has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my aircraft is
>> unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has said you
>> can't do it.
>>
>> Is the above a good example of what you are talking about? Nope. But
>> it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what this CAA
>> said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA said this,
>> and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual for the
>> YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight restriction on
>> tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly centers
> on
>> YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
>>
>> My best,
>>
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
>> Savarese
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
>> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>>
>> The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given to me
> about
>> 13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained in Russia
> by
>>
>> Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the
> information
>> from the original Russian flight manual and from the instructors who
>> trained him.
>>
>> I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or who says
>> it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation
> Administration
>> (CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to be
> something
>>
>> behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
>> substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
>> Dennis
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before....
> in
>>> the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the
> one
>>> that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
>> correct.
>>> I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for
>> years,
>>> but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of
>>> this POH. The link follows:
>>>
>>> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>>>
>>> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
>>> parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin
>> of
>>> the manual.
>>>
>>> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
>>> done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in
> one
>>> that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my
>>> YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training
>>> that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>>>
>>> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
>>> create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck
>> (my
>>> case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would
>> impart
>>> a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
>>> "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>>> you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child
>> that
>>> it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car
> at
>>> 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to
>>> the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the
>> socket
>>> taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my
>>> joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or rolling
>>> pulls).
>>>
>>> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why
> SOMEONE
>>> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
>>> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
>>> without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
>> exceeding
>>> load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came
>> from
>>> someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating
>>> limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>>
>>>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>>>
>>>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
>> estimated
>>>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>>>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>>>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
>> in
>>>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>>>
>>>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces (that
>>>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>>>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
>> and
>>>> rudder please.
>>>>
>>>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>>>> you tell me.
>>>>
>>>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
>> backwards.
>>>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual pressure
>>>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>>>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>>>> compared to normal flight.
>>>>
>>>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
>> are
>>>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about when
>>>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
>> tail
>>>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
> will
>>>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>>>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>>>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>>>
>>>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
>> degree,
>>>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
>> when
>>>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>>>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
>> the
>>>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>>>
>>>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
>> put
>>>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>>>> something breaks.
>>>>
>>>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have
> performed
>>>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
>> YAK
>>>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>>>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic
> coach.
>>>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
>> that
>>>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>>>
>>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>
>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>>>
>>>> Mark,
>>>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in a
>>>>
>>>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>>>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
>> of
>>>> two
>>>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>>>> potential
>>>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>>>> response
>>>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>>>> surfaces".
>>>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>>>> not"
>>>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>>>
>>>> Mark Davis
>>>> N44YK
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
> Cherry
>>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"
>>>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>>> Point,
>>>>> MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark,
>>>>>
>>>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>>>> impact
>>>>> on tail slides.
>>>>>
>>>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>>>> tumbles
>>>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many
> tail-slides
>>>> in
>>>>> my YAK-50.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
> Davis
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>>
>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>>>> prohibited
>>>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>>>> read
>>>>> it
>>>>> though.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark Davis
>>>>> N44YK
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
>>>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Eric Wobschall
>>>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro
> planes
>>>>> like
>>>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
>> for
>>>>>> sure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Grayson"<grayson50@hotmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
>> perform?
>>>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
>> somewhere,
>>>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Kind of reminds me of the Shakespearean play .... you guessed it a comedy: "Much
Ado About Nothing"
-----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: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:53 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Exactly.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of cjpilot710@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
This discussion of tail slides has been real interesting. It points a problem
that both Dennis and Mark have so apply pointed out. The real documentation of
limits vs practices. I owned a Varga Kachina for a number of years. I found
that it looped and rolled nicely. One day (by-my-self) I spun it. It did it
beautifully. Oooops I THAN read the placard No Spins Allowed. My curiosity
got me and I called the factory direct, and asked for the engineer. Small company
way back than- got right to the man. I asked why the Kacahina wasn't certified
for acrobatics? His answer was not a structural limited but the airplane
had a pro unrecoverable flat spin character particularly with the CG near
the aft limited. So there you go. I often spun the Kachina BUT only with me
in it and no one in the back seat. Sweet little airplane.
I would not try to tail slide a CJ-6. Not that it might not do one aerodynamically,
but I look at the structure of the tail and from my experience though the
years, comparing it to similar aircraft, it looks to light to take a lot of
back loads. This has nothing to do with the fabric covering, but the very structure
its self. Plus weve had a number of issues with different CJs out there
with cracked horizontal stabilizers front spars at the hole for the elevator
cable.
Plus I think we need to analyze a true tail slide vs a wipe stall. Not the aerobatic
pro here, a true tail slide requires enough power to maintain aircraft
control inputs to hold the aircraft in a vertical position but not enough to maintain
altitude (hover) so that it drops controlled along its vertical flight
path. Thus there is positive pressure on the flight controls (at least the tail
anyway) until the airplane either rights itself or the pilots recovers.
A wipe stall is quite different. The airplane never has enough power or the throttle
is closed and the airplane starts to fall. At some very early point the
aerodynamic loads from reverse airflow will start having an effect on the controls.
Here is where its get dangerous. If the pilot holes the controls rock
hard in the natural position, the airplane will NOT slide backward indefinitely.
It will pick its own way to recover. The pilots control input can determine
which way that accrues. It is the uncontrolled rapid movement of rudder
and elevators against their stops where the damage can happened. Here is where
I think the CJ has its limits.
When I do hammerhead turns in the CJ, I dont wait for the stop point like I did
in my Pitts. While still in forward flight, I motor her around quite early and
I make sure that I have a good hold of the stick/rudder. I have inadvertently
done wipe stalls in the CJ and quite frankly she is very benign and predicable,
BUT I am gun-shy of the tail structure.
I have not look at the structural difference between the 52 vs 50. While the 50
is defiantly lighter and there is very little difference in overall shape, it
would be interesting to fine the truth so to speak.
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
In a message dated 5/4/2011 1:16:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
writes:
Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way .. in public.
Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and abilities.
There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many other
countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER refer to those
in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this country.
In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode that detail
"how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have here
in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that we have
because of it.
Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have rarely (IF EVER)
disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue to keep
that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not really. What we
basically have going on in this particular conversation is actually a
comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to believe
mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it starts
becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to advise OTHER
people to do.
In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise other people
what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone else should
either.
Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this aircraft that
discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
perspective. I believe people should make up their own minds and avoid
trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this country imposes
Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition Aircraft. My
UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY that my
aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or Parachuting. The only
problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for Glider
Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean because the FAA
has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my aircraft is
unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has said you
can't do it.
Is the above a good example of what you are talking about? Nope. But
it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what this CAA
said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA said this,
and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual for the
YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight restriction on
tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly centers on
YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
My best,
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
Savarese
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given to me about
13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained in Russia by
Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the information
from the original Russian flight manual and from the instructors who
trained him.
I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or who says
it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation Administration
(CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to be something
behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
Dennis
On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
>
> Mark,
>
> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before.... in
> the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the one
> that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
correct.
> I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for
years,
> but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of
> this POH. The link follows:
>
> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>
> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
> parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin
of
> the manual.
>
> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
> done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in one
> that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my
> YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training
> that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>
> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
> create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck
(my
> case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would
impart
> a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
> "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
> you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child
that
> it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car at
> 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to
> the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the
socket
> taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my
> joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or rolling
> pulls).
>
> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why SOMEONE
> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
> without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
exceeding
> load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came
from
> someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating
> limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
>
> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>
> Mark Davis
> N44YK
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>
>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
estimated
>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
in
>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>
>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces (that
>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
and
>> rudder please.
>>
>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>> you tell me.
>>
>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
backwards.
>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual pressure
>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>> compared to normal flight.
>>
>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
are
>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about when
>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>
>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
tail
>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it will
>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>
>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
degree,
>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
when
>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
the
>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>
>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
put
>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>> something breaks.
>>
>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have performed
>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
YAK
>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic coach.
>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
that
>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in a
>>
>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
of
>> two
>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>> potential
>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>> response
>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>> surfaces".
>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>> not"
>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>
>> Mark Davis
>> N44YK
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>> Point, MALS-14 64E"
>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Point,
>>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>> impact
>>> on tail slides.
>>>
>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>> tumbles
>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many tail-slides
>> in
>>> my YAK-50.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>> prohibited
>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>> read
>>> it
>>> though.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>
>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro planes
>>> like
>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
for
>>>> sure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
perform?
>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
somewhere,
>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>================================================e ties Day ================================================
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ================================================
- List Contribution Web Site
sp; ==================================================
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 |
|
Something to keep in mind. I have been talking about a YAK-50 manual.
I do not own a YAK-52 manual.
That then might bring into discussion the differences in construction
between YAK-50 and YAK-52 structures, which I am not going to get into.
Now all readers need to pay very close attention to what I am about to
say.
If we all want to take these subjects to the limit, so that everyone can
see it, including the FAA, then go right ahead. I don't own or plan to
own a YAK-52. I honestly believe that tail slides in a YAK-52 are
perfectly safe if done properly and are taught properly by a
professional instructor.
NEXT: I hoped to avoid saying this, but I guess I just can't. Is
everyone listening?
THE FAA CONSIDERS ALL COMMENTS MADE ON THE YAK LIST TO BE PUBLIC
COMMENTS. THUS, PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE AVAILABLE TO BE USED AS EVIDENCE.
Next, as thoughts of FREE SPEECH and all that run through your head,
remember that the FAA is not required to require "DUE PROCESS" when it
comes to enforcement actions.
Think that is just so much baloney? I recently received a Certified
Letter from the FAA saying that I was under investigation. In that
letter, the investigator referred to things that I had said on the YAK
list as "public comments". Whether these comments are things that
people can be held accountable for is a matter for lawyers. Expect at
least $5000 for the retainer.
So the bottom line here is this. As sad as it is to say .... people
need to make sure their brain is engaged before putting their mouth in
gear.
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 |
|
I wish I had written all that. Really an excellent analysis Eric.
Let me add one thing.
You said: "IMHO, the random application of the rules that were intended
for aircraft with standard airworthiness certificates to our planes
would be improvisational, overzealous and incorrect on the part of
regulatory officials."
You then said: " Yes, I feel lucky "
YOU ARE VERY VERY LUCKY INDEED ERIC! And just because it might be "
improvisational, overzealous and incorrect ", does NOT mean that someone
in the name of safety might decide to do EXACTLY THAT. In fact, IMHO,
'someone' already is.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Other countries notwithstanding, my understanding is that the reason we
don't have standard airworthiness certificates for these airplanes in
the USA is because they were not certified here for whatever reason
(usually no economic reward for doing so). In order to to have
permission to fly them we have a lot of restrictions, and the only
requirement we must fulfill in terms of the hardware itself is that it
passes a condition inspection. The extra risk inherent in this
arrangement is the reason for the restrictions. The reason things like
the automotive plug conversion are allowed is because the airplane as a
whole is no more certified than the modification, so there's really no
airworthiness standard to be diminished.
As we know, the Russian way of doing things is different than ours, and
not all of it translates to our system. Therefore it's up to us, with
the help of the experts we rely on, to keep our own keysters intact.
IMHO, the random application of the rules that were intended for
aircraft with standard airworthiness certificates to our planes would be
improvisational, overzealous and incorrect on the part of regulatory
officials. I am sincere in saying that my local FSDO has never abused
their authority or done anything else than try to get my Yaks properly
documented. Yes, I feel lucky.
Having said all of this, my philosophy has been to first find out how
the Russians did it. This is partly because I'm not as qualified as some
to deviate from the stock airplane. However, even in my case, deviations
are warranted. Let's face it: We can't conform to the rules meant for
spam cans and their drivers, even if we were inclined to.
On May 4, 2011, at 3:18 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Thanks Dennis.
>
> You are correct.
>
> I'd like to see the exact Lithuanian CAA statements.
>
> That said, all of us... you, me, and every other Experimental
Exhibition
> Aircraft owner OUT there in the United States, needs to be EXTREMELY
> careful of what we say regarding our "obligation" to abide by orders
> from Foreign CAA's. Paying attention to them, and making careful and
> thought worthy decisions based on them ... YES. ABIDING by them as if
> they are SACROSANCT... NO!
>
>
> Think I am wrong about this? And this is not directed at you Dennis,
> but EVERY READER out there, then fine...
>
> Consider this: When your M-14 engine reaches about 500 hours, remove
it
> from your airplane and send it in to be over-hauled. Because gents,
> that is what the Russians did and there is no end to the manuals and
> books that require it. Certain CAA's from certain foreign countries
> ALSO require it. There are also a lot of CAA's out there that OUTLAW,
> PROHIBIT, DENY the option of putting automotive conversion spark plugs
> and wires on M-14 engines as well. Because they deem them to be
UNSAFE.
>
>
> U N S A F E !!
>
> But we know that to be wrong and we know that the automotive plug and
> conversion kit offered (by Dennis for example) are EXTREMELY safe, and
> actually grossly IMPROVES the operation of the engine and its overall
> reliability. I love it and have it on my own airplane. Can't do it
in
> England though. Their CAA says it is not allowed.
>
> This is where I am going with ALL of this. Or at least some of it.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
> Savarese
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 2:08 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>
> Mark,
> I have no problem with your comments whatsoever. I do disagree with
> some of the words in your last paragraph where you say, "We don't know
> the REASON for why this particular CAA said this, and it is still
> hear-say." We do know the reason, assuming it is fact in the first
> place. I posted it in the email where I said the Lithuanian CAA has
> prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's.
>
> Do I have a document from the Lithuanian CAA that says this?
Obviously,
>
> no I don't. But I am working on trying to get documentation
pertaining
> to this so-called prohibited maneuver. If and when I get a copy of
it,
> I'll post it to the list. In the meantime, consider it only hearsay.
> Dennis
>
> On 5/4/2011 12:06 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>
>>
>> Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way .. in
> public.
>> Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and abilities.
>>
>> There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many other
>> countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER refer to
> those
>> in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this country.
>>
>> In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode that
> detail
>> "how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have
here
>> in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that we have
>> because of it.
>>
>> Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have rarely (IF
> EVER)
>> disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue to keep
>> that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not really. What
> we
>> basically have going on in this particular conversation is actually a
>> comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
>>
>> You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to believe
>> mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it starts
>> becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to advise
> OTHER
>> people to do.
>>
>> In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise other people
>> what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone else
> should
>> either.
>>
>> Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this aircraft that
>> discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
>> perspective. I believe people should make up their own minds and
> avoid
>> trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
>>
>> Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this country
imposes
>> Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition Aircraft. My
>> UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY that my
>> aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or Parachuting. The
> only
>> problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for Glider
>> Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean because the
> FAA
>> has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my aircraft is
>> unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has said you
>> can't do it.
>>
>> Is the above a good example of what you are talking about? Nope.
But
>> it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what this CAA
>> said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA said
this,
>> and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual for the
>> YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight restriction on
>> tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly centers
> on
>> YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
>>
>> My best,
>>
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
>> Savarese
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
>> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>>
>> The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given to me
> about
>> 13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained in Russia
> by
>>
>> Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the
> information
>> from the original Russian flight manual and from the instructors who
>> trained him.
>>
>> I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or who says
>> it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation
> Administration
>> (CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to be
> something
>>
>> behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
>> substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
>> Dennis
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before....
> in
>>> the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the
> one
>>> that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
>> correct.
>>> I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for
>> years,
>>> but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10
of
>>> this POH. The link follows:
>>>
>>> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>>>
>>> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
>>> parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin
>> of
>>> the manual.
>>>
>>> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
>>> done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in
> one
>>> that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and
my
>>> YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight
training
>>> that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>>>
>>> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
>>> create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck
>> (my
>>> case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would
>> impart
>>> a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your
question
>>> "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads?
Well,
>>> you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child
>> that
>>> it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car
> at
>>> 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary
to
>>> the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the
>> socket
>>> taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load on
my
>>> joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or
rolling
>>> pulls).
>>>
>>> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why
> SOMEONE
>>> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
>>> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
>>> without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
>> exceeding
>>> load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came
>> from
>>> someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating
>>> limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
Cherry
>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>>
>>>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>>>
>>>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
>> estimated
>>>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the
reverse?
>>>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>>>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
>> in
>>>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>>>
>>>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces
(that
>>>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>>>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
>> and
>>>> rudder please.
>>>>
>>>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads?
Well,
>>>> you tell me.
>>>>
>>>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
>> backwards.
>>>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual
pressure
>>>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>>>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow
as
>>>> compared to normal flight.
>>>>
>>>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
>> are
>>>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about
when
>>>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
>> tail
>>>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
> will
>>>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>>>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>>>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>>>
>>>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
>> degree,
>>>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
>> when
>>>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of
mechanical
>>>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
>> the
>>>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>>>
>>>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot
to
>> put
>>>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>>>> something breaks.
>>>>
>>>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have
> performed
>>>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
>> YAK
>>>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>>>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic
> coach.
>>>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
>> that
>>>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>>>
>>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Davis
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>
>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>>>
>>>> Mark,
>>>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in a
>>>>
>>>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The
only
>>>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
>> of
>>>> two
>>>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>>>> potential
>>>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>>>> response
>>>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>>>> surfaces".
>>>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the
"why
>>>> not"
>>>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>>>
>>>> Mark Davis
>>>> N44YK
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
> Cherry
>>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"
>>>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
Cherry
>>>> Point,
>>>>> MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark,
>>>>>
>>>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does
the
>>>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>>>> impact
>>>>> on tail slides.
>>>>>
>>>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>>>> tumbles
>>>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many
> tail-slides
>>>> in
>>>>> my YAK-50.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
> Davis
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>>
>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark
Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>>>> prohibited
>>>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>>>> read
>>>>> it
>>>>> though.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark Davis
>>>>> N44YK
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
>>>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Eric Wobschall
>>>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro
> planes
>>>>> like
>>>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
>> for
>>>>>> sure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by:
"Grayson"<grayson50@hotmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
>> perform?
>>>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
>> somewhere,
>>>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Well, whatever you do with a Yak or a Nanchang, as long as you don't end up in
a hole in the ground ...
There have been too many accidents recently, for whatever reasons. Most of the
time, but unconfirmed, pilot's error, unfortunately.
You won't find any precise Russian manuals describing what to do in this or that
case, simply because there was no need to write that kind of manuals back in
the Soviet time: a pilot obeyed the orders from his instructors. That's it. All
other stuff has been written AFTERWARDS and as Mark indicates, is not authoritative.
To keep our Yaks flying: don't push them to the edge.
The 52's nor the 50's can be considered being competitors for today's aerobatics.
THEY ARE OLDTIMERS!!!!!
Fly them as an oldtimer. You can do some nice basic aerobatics without pushing
them to the edge. It hurts when you push an oldtimer as if it were a youngster.
Formation flying - with the proper instruction!!!!!!!! - is nice.
Only my 2 cents,
Jan
Yak 50 RA2005K
Yak 52 RA1453K
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-
> server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of George Coy
> Sent: woensdag 4 mei 2011 10:12
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Kind of reminds me of the Shakespearean play .... you guessed it a
> comedy: "Much Ado About Nothing"
>
> -----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: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:53 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Exactly.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-
> server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of cjpilot710@aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:18 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> This discussion of tail slides has been real interesting. It points a
> problem that both Dennis and Mark have so apply pointed out. The real
> documentation of limits vs practices. I owned a Varga Kachina for a
> number of years. I found that it looped and rolled nicely. One day
> (by-my-self) I spun it. It did it beautifully. Oooops I THAN read the
> placard No Spins Allowed. My curiosity got me and I called the factory
> direct, and asked for the engineer. Small company way back than- got
> right to the man. I asked why the Kacahina wasn't certified for
> acrobatics? His answer was not a structural limited but the airplane
> had a pro unrecoverable flat spin character particularly with the CG
> near the aft limited. So there you go. I often spun the Kachina BUT
> only with me in it and no one in the back seat. Sweet little airplane.
>
>
>
> I would not try to tail slide a CJ-6. Not that it might not do one
> aerodynamically, but I look at the structure of the tail and from my
> experience though the years, comparing it to similar aircraft, it looks
> to light to take a lot of back loads. This has nothing to do with the
> fabric covering, but the very structure its self. Plus weve had a
> number of issues with different CJs out there with cracked horizontal
> stabilizers front spars at the hole for the elevator cable.
>
>
>
> Plus I think we need to analyze a true tail slide vs a wipe stall. Not
> the aerobatic pro here, a true tail slide requires enough power to
> maintain aircraft control inputs to hold the aircraft in a vertical
> position but not enough to maintain altitude (hover) so that it drops
> controlled along its vertical flight path. Thus there is positive
> pressure on the flight controls (at least the tail anyway) until the
> airplane either rights itself or the pilots recovers.
>
>
>
> A wipe stall is quite different. The airplane never has enough power
> or the throttle is closed and the airplane starts to fall. At some
> very early point the aerodynamic loads from reverse airflow will start
> having an effect on the controls. Here is where its get dangerous. If
> the pilot holes the controls rock hard in the natural position, the
> airplane will NOT slide backward indefinitely. It will pick its own
> way to recover. The pilots control input can determine which way that
> accrues. It is the uncontrolled rapid movement of rudder and elevators
> against their stops where the damage can happened. Here is where I
> think the CJ has its limits.
>
>
>
> When I do hammerhead turns in the CJ, I dont wait for the stop point
> like I did in my Pitts. While still in forward flight, I motor her
> around quite early and I make sure that I have a good hold of the
> stick/rudder. I have inadvertently done wipe stalls in the CJ and
> quite frankly she is very benign and predicable, BUT I am gun-shy of
> the tail structure.
>
>
>
> I have not look at the structural difference between the 52 vs 50.
> While the 50 is defiantly lighter and there is very little difference
> in overall shape, it would be interesting to fine the truth so to
> speak.
>
>
>
> Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 5/4/2011 1:16:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil writes:
>
> Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way .. in
> public.
> Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and
> abilities.
>
> There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many
> other
> countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER refer
> to those
> in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this
> country.
>
> In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode that
> detail
> "how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have
> here
> in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that we
> have
> because of it.
>
> Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have rarely
> (IF EVER)
> disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue to
> keep
> that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not really.
> What we
> basically have going on in this particular conversation is
> actually a
> comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
>
> You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to
> believe
> mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it starts
> becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to
> advise OTHER
> people to do.
>
> In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise other
> people
> what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone else
> should
> either.
>
> Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this aircraft
> that
> discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
> perspective. I believe people should make up their own minds and
> avoid
> trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
>
> Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this country
> imposes
> Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition Aircraft.
> My
> UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY that
> my
> aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or Parachuting.
> The only
> problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for
> Glider
> Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean because
> the FAA
> has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my
> aircraft is
> unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has said
> you
> can't do it.
>
> Is the above a good example of what you are talking about? Nope.
> But
> it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what this
> CAA
> said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA said
> this,
> and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual for the
> YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight
> restriction on
> tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly
> centers on
> YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
>
> My best,
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A.
> Dennis
> Savarese
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>
> The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given to me
> about
> 13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained in
> Russia by
>
> Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the
> information
> from the original Russian flight manual and from the instructors
> who
> trained him.
>
> I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or who
> says
> it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation
> Administration
> (CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to be
> something
>
> behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
> substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
> Dennis
>
>
>
> On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
> <markdavis@wbsnet.org>
> >
> > Mark,
> >
> > Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides
> before.... in
> > the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as
> the one
> > that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
> correct.
> > I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many
> for
> years,
> > but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page
> 10 of
> > this POH. The link follows:
> >
> > www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
> >
> > My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
> > parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the
> origin
> of
> > the manual.
> >
> > Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I
> have
> > done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not
> in one
> > that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP
> and my
> > YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight
> training
> > that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
> >
> > As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that
> appear to
> > create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by
> luck
> (my
> > case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that
> would
> impart
> > a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your
> question
> > "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads?
> Well,
> > you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small
> child
> that
> > it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a
> car at
> > 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand
> contrary to
> > the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of
> the
> socket
> > taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load
> on my
> > joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or
> rolling
> > pulls).
> >
> > So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why
> SOMEONE
> > deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a
> POH.
> > Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed
> routinely
> > without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
> exceeding
> > load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it
> came
> from
> > someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial
> operating
> > limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
> >
> > Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
> >
> > Mark Davis
> > N44YK
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
> Cherry
> > Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> > To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >
> >
> Cherry
> >> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> >>
> >> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
> >>
> >> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
> estimated
> >> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the
> reverse?
> >> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit
> this
> >> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-
> slides
> in
> >> any make or model of aircraft.
> >>
> >> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces
> (that
> >> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when
> an
> >> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on
> elevator
> and
> >> rudder please.
> >>
> >> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads?
> Well,
> >> you tell me.
> >>
> >> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
> backwards.
> >> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual
> pressure
> >> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember
> that
> >> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very
> slow as
> >> compared to normal flight.
> >>
> >> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-
> slide, or
> are
> >> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking
> about when
> >> everything is done CORRECTLY!
> >>
> >> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a
> good
> tail
> >> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that
> it will
> >> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control
> stop.
> >> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
> >> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load.
> HUGE.
> >>
> >> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
> degree,
> >> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop,
> and
> when
> >> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of
> mechanical
> >> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can
> happen if
> the
> >> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in
> advance!
> >>
> >> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a
> pilot to
> put
> >> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design
> limits and
> >> something breaks.
> >>
> >> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have
> performed
> >> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that
> the
> YAK
> >> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
> >> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic
> coach.
> >> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I
> respect
> that
> >> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
> >>
> >> Mark Bitterlich
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> >> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
> Davis
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
> >> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> >> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >>
> <markdavis@wbsnet.org>
> >>
> >> Mark,
> >> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates
> in a
> >>
> >> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides".
> The only
> >> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a
> crew
> of
> >> two
> >> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put
> the
> >> potential
> >> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that,
> my
> >> response
> >> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad
> control
> >> surfaces".
> >> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know
> the "why
> >> not"
> >> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
> >>
> >> Mark Davis
> >> N44YK
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
> Cherry
> >> Point, MALS-14 64E"
> >> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> >> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
> >> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >>
> >>
> Cherry
> >> Point,
> >>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> >>>
> >>> Mark,
> >>>
> >>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So
> does the
> >>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have
> any
> >> impact
> >>> on tail slides.
> >>>
> >>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak
> coach
> >> tumbles
> >>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many
> tail-slides
> >> in
> >>> my YAK-50.
> >>>
> >>> Mark Bitterlich
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> >>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Mark Davis
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
> >>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> >>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >>>
> <markdavis@wbsnet.org>
> >>>
> >>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides
> being
> >>> prohibited
> >>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall
> where I
> >> read
> >>> it
> >>> though.
> >>>
> >>> Mark Davis
> >>> N44YK
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
> >>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
> >>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
> >>>>
> >>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro
> planes
> >>> like
> >>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to
> know
> for
> >>>> sure.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
> >>>>
> <grayson50@hotmail.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
> perform?
> >>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
> somewhere,
> >>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available
> online?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Grayson
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Read this topic online here:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >================================================e ties Day
> ================================================ -
> MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ===============================================
> - List Contribution Web Site sp;
> ==================================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
I concur with that. It's true in the USA, but also in Europe.
Whatever you write, can be used against you.
Jan
> -----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: woensdag 4 mei 2011 10:27
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: Brain Engaged
>
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Something to keep in mind. I have been talking about a YAK-50 manual.
> I do not own a YAK-52 manual.
>
> That then might bring into discussion the differences in construction
> between YAK-50 and YAK-52 structures, which I am not going to get into.
>
>
> Now all readers need to pay very close attention to what I am about to
> say.
>
> If we all want to take these subjects to the limit, so that everyone
> can
> see it, including the FAA, then go right ahead. I don't own or plan to
> own a YAK-52. I honestly believe that tail slides in a YAK-52 are
> perfectly safe if done properly and are taught properly by a
> professional instructor.
>
> NEXT: I hoped to avoid saying this, but I guess I just can't. Is
> everyone listening?
>
> THE FAA CONSIDERS ALL COMMENTS MADE ON THE YAK LIST TO BE PUBLIC
> COMMENTS. THUS, PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE AVAILABLE TO BE USED AS EVIDENCE.
>
> Next, as thoughts of FREE SPEECH and all that run through your head,
> remember that the FAA is not required to require "DUE PROCESS" when it
> comes to enforcement actions.
>
> Think that is just so much baloney? I recently received a Certified
> Letter from the FAA saying that I was under investigation. In that
> letter, the investigator referred to things that I had said on the YAK
> list as "public comments". Whether these comments are things that
> people can be held accountable for is a matter for lawyers. Expect at
> least $5000 for the retainer.
>
> So the bottom line here is this. As sad as it is to say .... people
> need to make sure their brain is engaged before putting their mouth in
> gear.
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Hey Yak people,
speaking is fine around a glass of beer...
Did anyone considered asking the Yakovlev Design Bureau in Moscow????
Whatever anyone can say if nothing happens all is well, but if there is an
accident due to a tailslide, then the justice will ask Yakovlev Design
Bureau
Then it will be their answer which will count.
So let's ask Yakovlev Design Bureau......that's probably the best move.
Best
2011/5/4 George Coy <george.coy@gmail.com>
>
> Kind of reminds me of the Shakespearean play .... you guessed it a comedy:
> "Much Ado About Nothing"
>
> -----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: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:53 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Exactly.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of cjpilot710@aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:18 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> This discussion of tail slides has been real interesting. It points a
> problem that both Dennis and Mark have so apply pointed out. The real
> documentation of limits vs practices. I owned a Varga Kachina for a number
> of years. I found that it looped and rolled nicely. One day (by-my-self) I
> spun it. It did it beautifully. Oooops I THAN read the placard No Spins
> Allowed. My curiosity got me and I called the factory direct, and asked for
> the engineer. Small company way back than- got right to the man. I asked
> why the Kacahina wasn't certified for acrobatics? His answer was not a
> structural limited but the airplane had a pro unrecoverable flat spin
> character particularly with the CG near the aft limited. So there you go.
> I often spun the Kachina BUT only with me in it and no one in the back
> seat. Sweet little airplane.
>
>
> I would not try to tail slide a CJ-6. Not that it might not do one
> aerodynamically, but I look at the structure of the tail and from my
> experience though the years, comparing it to similar aircraft, it looks to
> light to take a lot of back loads. This has nothing to do with the fabric
> covering, but the very structure its self. Plus weve had a number of issues
> with different CJs out there with cracked horizontal stabilizers front spars
> at the hole for the elevator cable.
>
>
> Plus I think we need to analyze a true tail slide vs a wipe stall. Not the
> aerobatic pro here, a true tail slide requires enough power to maintain
> aircraft control inputs to hold the aircraft in a vertical position but not
> enough to maintain altitude (hover) so that it drops controlled along its
> vertical flight path. Thus there is positive pressure on the flight
> controls (at least the tail anyway) until the airplane either rights itself
> or the pilots recovers.
>
>
> A wipe stall is quite different. The airplane never has enough power or
> the throttle is closed and the airplane starts to fall. At some very early
> point the aerodynamic loads from reverse airflow will start having an effect
> on the controls. Here is where its get dangerous. If the pilot holes the
> controls rock hard in the natural position, the airplane will NOT slide
> backward indefinitely. It will pick its own way to recover. The pilots
> control input can determine which way that accrues. It is the uncontrolled
> rapid movement of rudder and elevators against their stops where the damage
> can happened. Here is where I think the CJ has its limits.
>
>
> When I do hammerhead turns in the CJ, I dont wait for the stop point like I
> did in my Pitts. While still in forward flight, I motor her around quite
> early and I make sure that I have a good hold of the stick/rudder. I have
> inadvertently done wipe stalls in the CJ and quite frankly she is very
> benign and predicable, BUT I am gun-shy of the tail structure.
>
>
> I have not look at the structural difference between the 52 vs 50. While
> the 50 is defiantly lighter and there is very little difference in overall
> shape, it would be interesting to fine the truth so to speak.
>
>
> Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
>
>
> In a message dated 5/4/2011 1:16:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil writes:
>
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way .. in
> public.
> Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and
> abilities.
>
> There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many other
> countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER refer to
> those
> in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this
> country.
>
> In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode that
> detail
> "how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have
> here
> in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that we have
> because of it.
>
> Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have rarely (IF
> EVER)
> disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue to keep
> that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not really. What
> we
> basically have going on in this particular conversation is actually
> a
> comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
>
> You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to believe
> mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it starts
> becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to advise
> OTHER
> people to do.
>
> In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise other people
> what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone else
> should
> either.
>
> Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this aircraft
> that
> discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
> perspective. I believe people should make up their own minds and
> avoid
> trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
>
> Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this country
> imposes
> Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition Aircraft. My
> UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY that my
> aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or Parachuting. The
> only
> problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for Glider
> Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean because the
> FAA
> has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my aircraft
> is
> unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has said
> you
> can't do it.
>
> Is the above a good example of what you are talking about? Nope.
> But
> it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what this
> CAA
> said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA said
> this,
> and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual for the
> YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight restriction
> on
> tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly centers
> on
> YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
>
> My best,
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
> Savarese
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>
> The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given to me
> about
> 13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained in
> Russia by
>
> Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the
> information
> from the original Russian flight manual and from the instructors who
> trained him.
>
> I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or who says
> it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation
> Administration
> (CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to be
> something
>
> behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
> substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
> Dennis
>
>
> On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
> markdavis@wbsnet.org>
> >
> > Mark,
> >
> > Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides
> before.... in
> > the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the
> one
> > that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
> correct.
> > I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for
> years,
> > but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10
> of
> > this POH. The link follows:
> >
> > www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
> >
> > My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
> > parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the
> origin
> of
> > the manual.
> >
> > Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I
> have
> > done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in
> one
> > that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and
> my
> > YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight
> training
> > that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
> >
> > As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear
> to
> > create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by
> luck
> (my
> > case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would
> impart
> > a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your
> question
> > "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads?
> Well,
> > you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small
> child
> that
> > it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a
> car at
> > 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary
> to
> > the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the
> socket
> > taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load on
> my
> > joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or
> rolling
> > pulls).
> >
> > So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why
> SOMEONE
> > deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a
> POH.
> > Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
> > without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
> exceeding
> > load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it
> came
> from
> > someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial
> operating
> > limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
> >
> > Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
> >
> > Mark Davis
> > N44YK
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
> Cherry
> > Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> > To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >
> >
> Cherry
> >> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> >>
> >> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
> >>
> >> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
> estimated
> >> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the
> reverse?
> >> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
> >> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed
> tail-slides
> in
> >> any make or model of aircraft.
> >>
> >> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces
> (that
> >> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
> >> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on
> elevator
> and
> >> rudder please.
> >>
> >> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads?
> Well,
> >> you tell me.
> >>
> >> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
> backwards.
> >> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual
> pressure
> >> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember
> that
> >> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow
> as
> >> compared to normal flight.
> >>
> >> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide,
> or
> are
> >> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about
> when
> >> everything is done CORRECTLY!
> >>
> >> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a
> good
> tail
> >> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
> will
> >> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control
> stop.
> >> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
> >> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
> >>
> >> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
> degree,
> >> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
> when
> >> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of
> mechanical
> >> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen
> if
> the
> >> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
> >>
> >> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot
> to
> put
> >> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits
> and
> >> something breaks.
> >>
> >> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have
> performed
> >> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that
> the
> YAK
> >> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
> >> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic
> coach.
> >> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I
> respect
> that
> >> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
> >>
> >> Mark Bitterlich
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> >> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
> Davis
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
> >> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> >> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >>
> markdavis@wbsnet.org>
> >>
> >> Mark,
> >> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in
> a
> >>
> >> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The
> only
> >> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a
> crew
> of
> >> two
> >> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put
> the
> >> potential
> >> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
> >> response
> >> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
> >> surfaces".
> >> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the
> "why
> >> not"
> >> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
> >>
> >> Mark Davis
> >> N44YK
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
> Cherry
> >> Point, MALS-14 64E"
> >> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> >> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
> >> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >>
> >>
> Cherry
> >> Point,
> >>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> >>>
> >>> Mark,
> >>>
> >>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does
> the
> >>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
> >> impact
> >>> on tail slides.
> >>>
> >>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
> >> tumbles
> >>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many
> tail-slides
> >> in
> >>> my YAK-50.
> >>>
> >>> Mark Bitterlich
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> >>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
> Davis
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
> >>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> >>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >>>
> markdavis@wbsnet.org>
> >>>
> >>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
> >>> prohibited
> >>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where
> I
> >> read
> >>> it
> >>> though.
> >>>
> >>> Mark Davis
> >>> N44YK
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
> >>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
> >>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
> >>>>
> >>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro
> planes
> >>> like
> >>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to
> know
> for
> >>>> sure.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
> >>>>
> grayson50@hotmail.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
> perform?
> >>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
> somewhere,
> >>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Grayson
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Read this topic online here:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >================================================e ties Day
> ================================================ - MATRONICS
> WEB FORUMS ================================================ -
> List Contribution Web Site sp;
> ==================================================
>
>
--
Didier BLOUZARD
didier.blouzard@gmail.com
0624243672
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 |
|
B.T.W. that is LES Crowder.
-----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: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 4:08 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Interesting.
My YAK-50 was Wes Crowder's test aircraft for a lot of his
modifications. I have the original Russian Manual. I had it translated
by a Russian and written down line by line.
No tail slide restrictions. Might be a translation thing?
Sorry.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
M.D.
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:05 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
<viperdoc@mindspring.com>
The manuals were first distributed by Wess Crowder as he was importing
YAK's
brand new in the box from his source in RU. It came with the Russian
translated POH bound with a leather cover and the monofilament line
binding
the paper. The one Dennis has on his website is a reproduction of one of
those manuals. I have a printed version of that manual. Scott Patterson
has
the one of the original POH's from Wes Crowder since he bought his YAK
directly from Wes around 1995.
The manual states as "Prohibited maneuvers...tailslides."
Doc
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Mark,
My only intention in entering this conversation on tailslides was
to
respond to the message posted by Grayson <grayson50@hotmail.com> asking
"Is
there any consensus on doing tailslides in the Yak-52?" As I said, the
POH
that came with my YAK specifically excluded that maneuver. I thought
that
he might want to be aware of that so he could make his own decision.
But, I
also later qualified my reference to the POH with "albeit possibly in
error". Unfortunately there's a language barrier that makes it
impossible
for most of us to research original Russian manuals. Hopefully Grayson
has
taken enough from the discussion to make his own decision, just like
everyone else who's interested. I hope Dennis can backtrack where he
got
the information for the POH on his website and resolve it for everyones'
benefit and *possible* safety.
Fly safe, fly often and FLY NAVY!
Mark Davis
N44YK
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 10:43 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Point,
> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Mark,
>
> Excuse me, but I am going to reply in kind to your email.
>
> First, I think there is a tad bit of difference in loads, airspeeds,
> handling characteristics, etc., between a YAK-52 and MILITARY JET
> AIRCRAFT. Ya think? That said, I am not attempting to exclude you
from
> the discussion by any means. But..... What single engine prop
aircraft
> have you done tail slides in? If 'none', that is ok too.
>
> Second, I have a ton of internet "references" myself on many subjects
> pertaining to Yaks and other Russian Aircraft. There is a tendency
for
> many people to list a reference to a web site and from then on treat
it
> as "The Real Deal". This is one of the reasons why Wiki is no longer
> allowed to be used as a reference in any "paper" that is produced
> professionally, namely in college. I am not saying you are doing
this.
> I am saying that unless I see a document written by the Russians who
> built this airplane, I tend to look at it askance. My reason for
saying
> this, is that in one sentence you refer to "Don't Do It" stuff listing
> NATOPS on one hand, and a web site on the other. The two are not the
> same, nor should they be treated as such.
>
> You mention that you "seen some [tail slides] done that appear to
create
> a much higher than typical backward airspeed". Me too. Namely at
> air-shows. Done by aerobatic professionals with GOBS AND GOBS of
> experience. I am very careful to never equate what I have SEEN with
> what I can DO. Regardless, you talk about these circumstances as
> creating an excessively high loads on control surfaces. Ok, tell me
how
> you came to make that statement? In other words, this is your opinion
> based on what exact data? Do you happen to have any accident data
> available that corroborates control surface damage from tail slides?
If
> we have an Aeronautical Engineer on the web site, please chime in.
>
> Excuse me, but I am not going to equate what you learned as a child,
and
> what you did in the military with Unlimited Level Aerobatic Maneuvers.
> There are similarities of course, but they are not equivalent.
>
> You said: " So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing
> why SOMEONE deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include
in
> a POH."
>
> NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! However, that does not mean that
> someone/anyone should impose those limitations on others, or IMPLY
that
> those limitations should be imposed on others without REFERENCES. And
a
> "reference" does not mean what someone ELSE wrote on the "Internet" or
> was pulled off a web site.
>
> You said: Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed
> routinely without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't
been
> exceeding load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive."
>
> So you are saying that if I write an article about how unsafe your car
> is to drive, and you have been driving it for 10 years without any
> problem what-so-ever, you will immediately stop driving it because I
> wrote an article, without references, without proof, without anything
> other than my opinion, that said your car is UNSAFE? I think not.
>
> You said: "If it came from someone in the design, manufacture, or
> writing the initial operating limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm
> interested."
>
> YEP! That's exactly the same thing that I said. If this "apparent
> limitation" on tail slides came from someone in the design,
manufacture,
> or writing of the initial operating limitations of the YAK-52, then I
am
> interested.
>
> What you seem to be saying is that you do not need this kind of
reliable
> source to believe a limitation (because
> "someone/somewhere/sometime/somehow SAID it) but you DO need that kind
> of reliable source to allow you to dismiss it. And if that works for
> you, I'm OK with that. Just don't tell others that you think they
> should think the same way.
>
> The closest source I have right now that I PERSONALLY BELIEVE
(emphasis
> on PERSONALLY) is someone who flew these EXACT AIRCRAFT in
competition,
> became the Russian National Aerobatic Champion in these aircraft, and
> then was a TEST PILOT FOR SUKHOI, not to mention the United States
> Unlimited Aerobatic COACH! This man worked hand in hand with the
> factory who made these aircraft in Russia. Now if you have someone
> MORE QUALIFIED than that, or a RUSSIAN MANUAL that talks about this,
> please let me know.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:01 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Mark,
>
> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before.... in
> the
> POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the one
that
>
> came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is correct.
> I'm
> sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for years,
but
> I'm
> still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of this
POH.
> The
> link follows:
>
> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>
> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
> parenthesis
> like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin of the
manual.
>
> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
> done
> tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in one that
> has
> the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my YAK-52
POH
> albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training that
makes
> me
> heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>
> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
> create
> a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck (my
case)
> or
> skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would impart a
> potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
> "Which
> is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well, you
> tell
> me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child that it
> wasn't a
> good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car at 80 mph
> fingers
> pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to the prevailing
> wind.
> Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the socket taught me that
> fairing
> your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my joints. Back to my
> flight
> training....don't yank on the G (or rolling pulls).
>
> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why SOMEONE
> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
> without
> causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been exceeding load
> limits
> that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came from someone
in
> the
> design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating limitations of
the
> YAK
> 52 then I'm interested.
>
> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>
> Mark Davis
> N44YK
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Point,
>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>
>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
> estimated
>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
in
>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>
>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces
(that
>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
> and
>> rudder please.
>>
>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads?
Well,
>> you tell me.
>>
>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
> backwards.
>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual
pressure
>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>> compared to normal flight.
>>
>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
> are
>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about
when
>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>
>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
> tail
>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
> will
>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>
>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
degree,
>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
when
>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
> the
>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>
>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
> put
>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>> something breaks.
>>
>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have
performed
>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
> YAK
>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic
coach.
>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
> that
>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in
> a
>>
>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
of
>> two
>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>> potential
>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>> response
>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>> surfaces".
>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>> not"
>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>
>> Mark Davis
>> N44YK
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Point,
>>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>> impact
>>> on tail slides.
>>>
>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>> tumbles
>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many
tail-slides
>> in
>>> my YAK-50.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>> prohibited
>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>> read
>>> it
>>> though.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Eric Wobschall" <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>
>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro planes
>>> like
>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
> for
>>>> sure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
perform?
>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
> somewhere,
>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Oh, I know it...
On May 4, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
wrote:
>
> I wish I had written all that. Really an excellent analysis Eric.
>
> Let me add one thing.
>
> You said: "IMHO, the random application of the rules that were intended
> for aircraft with standard airworthiness certificates to our planes
> would be improvisational, overzealous and incorrect on the part of
> regulatory officials."
>
> You then said: " Yes, I feel lucky "
>
> YOU ARE VERY VERY LUCKY INDEED ERIC! And just because it might be "
> improvisational, overzealous and incorrect ", does NOT mean that someone
> in the name of safety might decide to do EXACTLY THAT. In fact, IMHO,
> 'someone' already is.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 4:08 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Other countries notwithstanding, my understanding is that the reason we
> don't have standard airworthiness certificates for these airplanes in
> the USA is because they were not certified here for whatever reason
> (usually no economic reward for doing so). In order to to have
> permission to fly them we have a lot of restrictions, and the only
> requirement we must fulfill in terms of the hardware itself is that it
> passes a condition inspection. The extra risk inherent in this
> arrangement is the reason for the restrictions. The reason things like
> the automotive plug conversion are allowed is because the airplane as a
> whole is no more certified than the modification, so there's really no
> airworthiness standard to be diminished.
>
> As we know, the Russian way of doing things is different than ours, and
> not all of it translates to our system. Therefore it's up to us, with
> the help of the experts we rely on, to keep our own keysters intact.
> IMHO, the random application of the rules that were intended for
> aircraft with standard airworthiness certificates to our planes would be
> improvisational, overzealous and incorrect on the part of regulatory
> officials. I am sincere in saying that my local FSDO has never abused
> their authority or done anything else than try to get my Yaks properly
> documented. Yes, I feel lucky.
>
> Having said all of this, my philosophy has been to first find out how
> the Russians did it. This is partly because I'm not as qualified as some
> to deviate from the stock airplane. However, even in my case, deviations
> are warranted. Let's face it: We can't conform to the rules meant for
> spam cans and their drivers, even if we were inclined to.
>
>
> On May 4, 2011, at 3:18 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
> MALS-14 64E wrote:
>
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Thanks Dennis.
>>
>> You are correct.
>>
>> I'd like to see the exact Lithuanian CAA statements.
>>
>> That said, all of us... you, me, and every other Experimental
> Exhibition
>> Aircraft owner OUT there in the United States, needs to be EXTREMELY
>> careful of what we say regarding our "obligation" to abide by orders
>> from Foreign CAA's. Paying attention to them, and making careful and
>> thought worthy decisions based on them ... YES. ABIDING by them as if
>> they are SACROSANCT... NO!
>>
>>
>> Think I am wrong about this? And this is not directed at you Dennis,
>> but EVERY READER out there, then fine...
>>
>> Consider this: When your M-14 engine reaches about 500 hours, remove
> it
>> from your airplane and send it in to be over-hauled. Because gents,
>> that is what the Russians did and there is no end to the manuals and
>> books that require it. Certain CAA's from certain foreign countries
>> ALSO require it. There are also a lot of CAA's out there that OUTLAW,
>> PROHIBIT, DENY the option of putting automotive conversion spark plugs
>> and wires on M-14 engines as well. Because they deem them to be
> UNSAFE.
>>
>>
>> U N S A F E !!
>>
>> But we know that to be wrong and we know that the automotive plug and
>> conversion kit offered (by Dennis for example) are EXTREMELY safe, and
>> actually grossly IMPROVES the operation of the engine and its overall
>> reliability. I love it and have it on my own airplane. Can't do it
> in
>> England though. Their CAA says it is not allowed.
>>
>> This is where I am going with ALL of this. Or at least some of it.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
>> Savarese
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 2:08 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>>
>> Mark,
>> I have no problem with your comments whatsoever. I do disagree with
>> some of the words in your last paragraph where you say, "We don't know
>
>> the REASON for why this particular CAA said this, and it is still
>> hear-say." We do know the reason, assuming it is fact in the first
>> place. I posted it in the email where I said the Lithuanian CAA has
>> prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's.
>>
>> Do I have a document from the Lithuanian CAA that says this?
> Obviously,
>>
>> no I don't. But I am working on trying to get documentation
> pertaining
>> to this so-called prohibited maneuver. If and when I get a copy of
> it,
>> I'll post it to the list. In the meantime, consider it only hearsay.
>> Dennis
>>
>> On 5/4/2011 12:06 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>
>>>
>>> Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way .. in
>> public.
>>> Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and abilities.
>>>
>>> There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many other
>>> countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER refer to
>> those
>>> in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this country.
>>>
>>> In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode that
>> detail
>>> "how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have
> here
>>> in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that we have
>>> because of it.
>>>
>>> Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have rarely (IF
>> EVER)
>>> disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue to keep
>>> that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not really. What
>> we
>>> basically have going on in this particular conversation is actually a
>>> comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
>>>
>>> You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to believe
>>> mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it starts
>>> becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to advise
>> OTHER
>>> people to do.
>>>
>>> In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise other people
>>> what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone else
>> should
>>> either.
>>>
>>> Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this aircraft that
>>> discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
>>> perspective. I believe people should make up their own minds and
>> avoid
>>> trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
>>>
>>> Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this country
> imposes
>>> Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition Aircraft. My
>>> UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY that my
>>> aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or Parachuting. The
>> only
>>> problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for Glider
>>> Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean because the
>> FAA
>>> has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my aircraft is
>>> unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has said you
>>> can't do it.
>>>
>>> Is the above a good example of what you are talking about? Nope.
> But
>>> it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what this CAA
>>> said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA said
> this,
>>> and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual for the
>>> YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight restriction on
>>> tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly centers
>> on
>>> YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
>>>
>>> My best,
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
>>> Savarese
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
>>> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>>>
>>> The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given to me
>> about
>>> 13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained in Russia
>> by
>>>
>>> Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the
>> information
>>> from the original Russian flight manual and from the instructors who
>>> trained him.
>>>
>>> I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or who says
>>> it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation
>> Administration
>>> (CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to be
>> something
>>>
>>> behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
>>> substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
>>> Dennis
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>>>
>>>> Mark,
>>>>
>>>> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before....
>> in
>>>> the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the
>> one
>>>> that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
>>> correct.
>>>> I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for
>>> years,
>>>> but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10
> of
>>>> this POH. The link follows:
>>>>
>>>> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>>>>
>>>> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
>>>> parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin
>>> of
>>>> the manual.
>>>>
>>>> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
>>>> done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in
>> one
>>>> that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and
> my
>>>> YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight
> training
>>>> that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>>>>
>>>> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
>>>> create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck
>>> (my
>>>> case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would
>>> impart
>>>> a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your
> question
>>>> "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads?
> Well,
>>>> you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child
>>> that
>>>> it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car
>> at
>>>> 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary
> to
>>>> the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the
>>> socket
>>>> taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load on
> my
>>>> joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or
> rolling
>>>> pulls).
>>>>
>>>> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why
>> SOMEONE
>>>> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
>>>> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
>>>> without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
>>> exceeding
>>>> load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came
>>> from
>>>> someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating
>>>> limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>>>>
>>>> Mark Davis
>>>> N44YK
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
> Cherry
>>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
>>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
>>> estimated
>>>>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the
> reverse?
>>>>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>>>>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
>>> in
>>>>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces
> (that
>>>>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>>>>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
>>> and
>>>>> rudder please.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads?
> Well,
>>>>> you tell me.
>>>>>
>>>>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
>>> backwards.
>>>>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual
> pressure
>>>>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>>>>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow
> as
>>>>> compared to normal flight.
>>>>>
>>>>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
>>> are
>>>>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about
> when
>>>>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
>>> tail
>>>>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
>> will
>>>>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>>>>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>>>>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
>>> degree,
>>>>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
>>> when
>>>>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of
> mechanical
>>>>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
>>> the
>>>>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>>>>
>>>>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot
> to
>>> put
>>>>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>>>>> something breaks.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have
>> performed
>>>>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
>>> YAK
>>>>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>>>>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic
>> coach.
>>>>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
>>> that
>>>>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
> Davis
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>>>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>>
>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark,
>>>>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in a
>>>>>
>>>>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The
> only
>>>>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
>>> of
>>>>> two
>>>>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>>>>> potential
>>>>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>>>>> response
>>>>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>>>>> surfaces".
>>>>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the
> "why
>>>>> not"
>>>>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark Davis
>>>>> N44YK
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
>> Cherry
>>>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"
>>>>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>>>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
> Cherry
>>>>> Point,
>>>>>> MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does
> the
>>>>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>>>>> impact
>>>>>> on tail slides.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>>>>> tumbles
>>>>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many
>> tail-slides
>>>>> in
>>>>>> my YAK-50.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
>> Davis
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>>>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark
> Davis"<markdavis@wbsnet.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>>>>> prohibited
>>>>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>>>>> read
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark Davis
>>>>>> N44YK
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
>>>>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Eric Wobschall
>>>>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro
>> planes
>>>>>> like
>>>>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
>>> for
>>>>>>> sure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by:
> "Grayson"<grayson50@hotmail.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
>>> perform?
>>>>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
>>> somewhere,
>>>>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Thank you.
I knew better.
Talked to him, never met him. Sorry.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of George Coy
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 5:20 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
B.T.W. that is LES Crowder.
-----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: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 4:08 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Point,
MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Interesting.
My YAK-50 was Wes Crowder's test aircraft for a lot of his
modifications. I have the original Russian Manual. I had it translated
by a Russian and written down line by line.
No tail slide restrictions. Might be a translation thing?
Sorry.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
M.D.
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:05 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
<viperdoc@mindspring.com>
The manuals were first distributed by Wess Crowder as he was importing
YAK's
brand new in the box from his source in RU. It came with the Russian
translated POH bound with a leather cover and the monofilament line
binding
the paper. The one Dennis has on his website is a reproduction of one of
those manuals. I have a printed version of that manual. Scott Patterson
has
the one of the original POH's from Wes Crowder since he bought his YAK
directly from Wes around 1995.
The manual states as "Prohibited maneuvers...tailslides."
Doc
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Mark,
My only intention in entering this conversation on tailslides was
to
respond to the message posted by Grayson <grayson50@hotmail.com> asking
"Is
there any consensus on doing tailslides in the Yak-52?" As I said, the
POH
that came with my YAK specifically excluded that maneuver. I thought
that
he might want to be aware of that so he could make his own decision.
But, I
also later qualified my reference to the POH with "albeit possibly in
error". Unfortunately there's a language barrier that makes it
impossible
for most of us to research original Russian manuals. Hopefully Grayson
has
taken enough from the discussion to make his own decision, just like
everyone else who's interested. I hope Dennis can backtrack where he
got
the information for the POH on his website and resolve it for everyones'
benefit and *possible* safety.
Fly safe, fly often and FLY NAVY!
Mark Davis
N44YK
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 10:43 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
Point,
> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Mark,
>
> Excuse me, but I am going to reply in kind to your email.
>
> First, I think there is a tad bit of difference in loads, airspeeds,
> handling characteristics, etc., between a YAK-52 and MILITARY JET
> AIRCRAFT. Ya think? That said, I am not attempting to exclude you
from
> the discussion by any means. But..... What single engine prop
aircraft
> have you done tail slides in? If 'none', that is ok too.
>
> Second, I have a ton of internet "references" myself on many subjects
> pertaining to Yaks and other Russian Aircraft. There is a tendency
for
> many people to list a reference to a web site and from then on treat
it
> as "The Real Deal". This is one of the reasons why Wiki is no longer
> allowed to be used as a reference in any "paper" that is produced
> professionally, namely in college. I am not saying you are doing
this.
> I am saying that unless I see a document written by the Russians who
> built this airplane, I tend to look at it askance. My reason for
saying
> this, is that in one sentence you refer to "Don't Do It" stuff listing
> NATOPS on one hand, and a web site on the other. The two are not the
> same, nor should they be treated as such.
>
> You mention that you "seen some [tail slides] done that appear to
create
> a much higher than typical backward airspeed". Me too. Namely at
> air-shows. Done by aerobatic professionals with GOBS AND GOBS of
> experience. I am very careful to never equate what I have SEEN with
> what I can DO. Regardless, you talk about these circumstances as
> creating an excessively high loads on control surfaces. Ok, tell me
how
> you came to make that statement? In other words, this is your opinion
> based on what exact data? Do you happen to have any accident data
> available that corroborates control surface damage from tail slides?
If
> we have an Aeronautical Engineer on the web site, please chime in.
>
> Excuse me, but I am not going to equate what you learned as a child,
and
> what you did in the military with Unlimited Level Aerobatic Maneuvers.
> There are similarities of course, but they are not equivalent.
>
> You said: " So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing
> why SOMEONE deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include
in
> a POH."
>
> NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! However, that does not mean that
> someone/anyone should impose those limitations on others, or IMPLY
that
> those limitations should be imposed on others without REFERENCES. And
a
> "reference" does not mean what someone ELSE wrote on the "Internet" or
> was pulled off a web site.
>
> You said: Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed
> routinely without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't
been
> exceeding load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive."
>
> So you are saying that if I write an article about how unsafe your car
> is to drive, and you have been driving it for 10 years without any
> problem what-so-ever, you will immediately stop driving it because I
> wrote an article, without references, without proof, without anything
> other than my opinion, that said your car is UNSAFE? I think not.
>
> You said: "If it came from someone in the design, manufacture, or
> writing the initial operating limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm
> interested."
>
> YEP! That's exactly the same thing that I said. If this "apparent
> limitation" on tail slides came from someone in the design,
manufacture,
> or writing of the initial operating limitations of the YAK-52, then I
am
> interested.
>
> What you seem to be saying is that you do not need this kind of
reliable
> source to believe a limitation (because
> "someone/somewhere/sometime/somehow SAID it) but you DO need that kind
> of reliable source to allow you to dismiss it. And if that works for
> you, I'm OK with that. Just don't tell others that you think they
> should think the same way.
>
> The closest source I have right now that I PERSONALLY BELIEVE
(emphasis
> on PERSONALLY) is someone who flew these EXACT AIRCRAFT in
competition,
> became the Russian National Aerobatic Champion in these aircraft, and
> then was a TEST PILOT FOR SUKHOI, not to mention the United States
> Unlimited Aerobatic COACH! This man worked hand in hand with the
> factory who made these aircraft in Russia. Now if you have someone
> MORE QUALIFIED than that, or a RUSSIAN MANUAL that talks about this,
> please let me know.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:01 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Mark,
>
> Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides before.... in
> the
> POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as the one
that
>
> came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is correct.
> I'm
> sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for years,
but
> I'm
> still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of this
POH.
> The
> link follows:
>
> www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>
> My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
> parenthesis
> like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin of the
manual.
>
> Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
> done
> tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not in one that
> has
> the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my YAK-52
POH
> albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training that
makes
> me
> heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>
> As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
> create
> a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck (my
case)
> or
> skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would impart a
> potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
> "Which
> is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well, you
> tell
> me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child that it
> wasn't a
> good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a car at 80 mph
> fingers
> pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to the prevailing
> wind.
> Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the socket taught me that
> fairing
> your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my joints. Back to my
> flight
> training....don't yank on the G (or rolling pulls).
>
> So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why SOMEONE
> deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
> Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
> without
> causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been exceeding load
> limits
> that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came from someone
in
> the
> design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating limitations of
the
> YAK
> 52 then I'm interested.
>
> Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>
> Mark Davis
> N44YK
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
>
> Point,
>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>
>> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
> estimated
>> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
in
>> any make or model of aircraft.
>>
>> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces
(that
>> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
> and
>> rudder please.
>>
>> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads?
Well,
>> you tell me.
>>
>> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
> backwards.
>> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual
pressure
>> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>> compared to normal flight.
>>
>> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
> are
>> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about
when
>> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>
>> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
> tail
>> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
> will
>> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>
>> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
degree,
>> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
when
>> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
> the
>> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>
>> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
> put
>> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>> something breaks.
>>
>> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have
performed
>> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
> YAK
>> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic
coach.
>> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
> that
>> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in
> a
>>
>> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
of
>> two
>> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>> potential
>> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>> response
>> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>> surfaces".
>> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>> not"
>> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>
>> Mark Davis
>> N44YK
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
>> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Point,
>>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>> impact
>>> on tail slides.
>>>
>>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>> tumbles
>>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many
tail-slides
>> in
>>> my YAK-50.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>> prohibited
>>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>> read
>>> it
>>> though.
>>>
>>> Mark Davis
>>> N44YK
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Eric Wobschall" <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>>
>>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com>
>>>>
>>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro planes
>>> like
>>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
> for
>>>> sure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
perform?
>>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
> somewhere,
>>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Grayson
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Yes, I considered that immediately, but found out through a friend in
Lithuania that it will be very difficult finding someone who reads,
writes and understands English. Next would be Aerostar I guess.
Dennis
On 5/4/2011 4:11 PM, Didier Blouzard wrote:
> Hey Yak people,
> speaking is fine around a glass of beer...
> Did anyone considered asking the Yakovlev Design Bureau in Moscow????
> Whatever anyone can say if nothing happens all is well, but if there is
> an accident due to a tailslide, then the justice will ask Yakovlev
> Design Bureau
> Then it will be their answer which will count.
> So let's ask Yakovlev Design Bureau......that's probably the best move.
>
> Best
>
> 2011/5/4 George Coy <george.coy@gmail.com <mailto:george.coy@gmail.com>>
>
> <mailto:george.coy@gmail.com>>
>
> Kind of reminds me of the Shakespearean play .... you guessed it a
> comedy: "Much Ado About Nothing"
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
> [mailto: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: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:53 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>
> Exactly.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of
> cjpilot710@aol.com <mailto:cjpilot710@aol.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:18 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> This discussion of tail slides has been real interesting. It points
> a problem that both Dennis and Mark have so apply pointed out. The
> real documentation of limits vs practices. I owned a Varga Kachina
> for a number of years. I found that it looped and rolled nicely.
> One day (by-my-self) I spun it. It did it beautifully. Oooops I
> THAN read the placard No Spins Allowed. My curiosity got me and I
> called the factory direct, and asked for the engineer. Small
> company way back than- got right to the man. I asked why the
> Kacahina wasn't certified for acrobatics? His answer was not a
> structural limited but the airplane had a pro unrecoverable flat
> spin character particularly with the CG near the aft limited. So
> there you go. I often spun the Kachina BUT only with me in it and
> no one in the back seat. Sweet little airplane.
>
>
> I would not try to tail slide a CJ-6. Not that it might not do one
> aerodynamically, but I look at the structure of the tail and from my
> experience though the years, comparing it to similar aircraft, it
> looks to light to take a lot of back loads. This has nothing to do
> with the fabric covering, but the very structure its self. Plus
> weve had a number of issues with different CJs out there with
> cracked horizontal stabilizers front spars at the hole for the
> elevator cable.
>
>
> Plus I think we need to analyze a true tail slide vs a wipe stall.
> Not the aerobatic pro here, a true tail slide requires enough
> power to maintain aircraft control inputs to hold the aircraft in a
> vertical position but not enough to maintain altitude (hover) so
> that it drops controlled along its vertical flight path. Thus there
> is positive pressure on the flight controls (at least the tail
> anyway) until the airplane either rights itself or the pilots recovers.
>
>
> A wipe stall is quite different. The airplane never has enough
> power or the throttle is closed and the airplane starts to fall. At
> some very early point the aerodynamic loads from reverse airflow
> will start having an effect on the controls. Here is where its get
> dangerous. If the pilot holes the controls rock hard in the natural
> position, the airplane will NOT slide backward indefinitely. It
> will pick its own way to recover. The pilots control input can
> determine which way that accrues. It is the uncontrolled rapid
> movement of rudder and elevators against their stops where the
> damage can happened. Here is where I think the CJ has its limits.
>
>
> When I do hammerhead turns in the CJ, I dont wait for the stop point
> like I did in my Pitts. While still in forward flight, I motor her
> around quite early and I make sure that I have a good hold of the
> stick/rudder. I have inadvertently done wipe stalls in the CJ and
> quite frankly she is very benign and predicable, BUT I am gun-shy of
> the tail structure.
>
>
> I have not look at the structural difference between the 52 vs 50.
> While the 50 is defiantly lighter and there is very little
> difference in overall shape, it would be interesting to fine the
> truth so to speak.
>
>
> Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
>
>
> In a message dated 5/4/2011 1:16:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> writes:
>
> Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>
> Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way ..
> in public.
> Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and
> abilities.
>
> There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many
> other
> countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER
> refer to those
> in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this
> country.
>
> In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode
> that detail
> "how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have here
> in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that
> we have
> because of it.
>
> Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have
> rarely (IF EVER)
> disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue
> to keep
> that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not
> really. What we
> basically have going on in this particular conversation is
> actually a
> comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
>
> You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to
> believe
> mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it
> starts
> becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to
> advise OTHER
> people to do.
>
> In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise
> other people
> what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone
> else should
> either.
>
> Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this
> aircraft that
> discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
> perspective. I believe people should make up their own
> minds and avoid
> trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
>
> Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this
> country imposes
> Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition
> Aircraft. My
> UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY
> that my
> aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or
> Parachuting. The only
> problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for
> Glider
> Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean
> because the FAA
> has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my
> aircraft is
> unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has
> said you
> can't do it.
>
> Is the above a good example of what you are talking about?
> Nope. But
> it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what
> this CAA
> said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA
> said this,
> and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual
> for the
> YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight
> restriction on
> tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly
> centers on
> YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
>
> My best,
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
> Savarese
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net <mailto:dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>>
>
> The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given
> to me about
> 13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained
> in Russia by
>
> Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the
> information
> from the original Russian flight manual and from the
> instructors who
> trained him.
>
> I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or
> who says
> it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation
> Administration
> (CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to
> be something
>
> behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
> substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
> Dennis
>
>
> On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
> <markdavis@wbsnet.org <mailto:markdavis@wbsnet.org>>
> >
> > Mark,
> >
> > Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides
> before.... in
> > the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as
> the one
> > that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
> correct.
> > I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for
> years,
> > but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of
> > this POH. The link follows:
> >
> > www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
> <http://www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc>
> >
> > My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
> > parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin
> of
> > the manual.
> >
> > Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
> > done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not
> in one
> > that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my
> > YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training
> > that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
> >
> > As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
> > create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck
> (my
> > case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would
> impart
> > a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
> > "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
> > you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child
> that
> > it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a
> car at
> > 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to
> > the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the
> socket
> > taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my
> > joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or rolling
> > pulls).
> >
> > So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why
> SOMEONE
> > deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
> > Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
> > without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
> exceeding
> > load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came
> from
> > someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating
> > limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
> >
> > Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
> >
> > Mark Davis
> > N44YK
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
> > Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
> > To: <yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >
> >
> >> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
> >>
> >> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
> >>
> >> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
> estimated
> >> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
> >> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
> >> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
> in
> >> any make or model of aircraft.
> >>
> >> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces (that
> >> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
> >> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
> and
> >> rudder please.
> >>
> >> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
> >> you tell me.
> >>
> >> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
> backwards.
> >> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual pressure
> >> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
> >> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
> >> compared to normal flight.
> >>
> >> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
> are
> >> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about when
> >> everything is done CORRECTLY!
> >>
> >> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
> tail
> >> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
> will
> >> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
> >> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
> >> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
> >>
> >> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
> degree,
> >> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
> when
> >> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
> >> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
> the
> >> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
> >>
> >> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
> put
> >> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
> >> something breaks.
> >>
> >> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have
> performed
> >> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
> YAK
> >> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
> >> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic
> coach.
> >> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
> that
> >> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
> >>
> >> Mark Bitterlich
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
> >> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
> >> To: yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
> >> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >>
> <markdavis@wbsnet.org <mailto:markdavis@wbsnet.org>>
> >>
> >> Mark,
> >> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in a
> >>
> >> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
> >> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
> of
> >> two
> >> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
> >> potential
> >> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
> >> response
> >> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
> >> surfaces".
> >> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
> >> not"
> >> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
> >>
> >> Mark Davis
> >> N44YK
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
> Cherry
> >> Point, MALS-14 64E"
> >> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
> >> To: <yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
> >> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >>
> >>
> >> Point,
> >>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
> >>>
> >>> Mark,
> >>>
> >>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
> >>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
> >> impact
> >>> on tail slides.
> >>>
> >>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
> >> tumbles
> >>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many
> tail-slides
> >> in
> >>> my YAK-50.
> >>>
> >>> Mark Bitterlich
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
> >>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
> >>> To: yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
> >>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >>>
> <markdavis@wbsnet.org <mailto:markdavis@wbsnet.org>>
> >>>
> >>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
> >>> prohibited
> >>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
> >> read
> >>> it
> >>> though.
> >>>
> >>> Mark Davis
> >>> N44YK
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
> >>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com <mailto:eric@buffaloskyline.com>>
> >>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>>
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com <mailto:eric@buffaloskyline.com>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro
> planes
> >>> like
> >>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
> for
> >>>> sure.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
> >>>>
> <grayson50@hotmail.com <mailto:grayson50@hotmail.com>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
> perform?
> >>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
> somewhere,
> >>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Grayson
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Read this topic online here:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >=======================e ties Day ======================
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ======================= -
> List Contribution Web Site sp;
> =========================
>
>
> ==========
> List Email Forum -
> rget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==========
> http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> le, List Admin.
> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
> --
> Didier BLOUZARD
> didier.blouzard@gmail.com <mailto:didier.blouzard@gmail.com>
> 0624243672
>
> *
>
>
> *
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 |
|
Our inspector could ask the question directly to them.
I'll find out and keep the List informed.
Best Dennis
Didier Blouzard
+33 6 2424 3672
Le 5 mai 2011 00:34, "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net> a crit
:
>
> Yes, I considered that immediately, but found out through a friend in Lithuania
that it will be very difficult finding someone who reads, writes and understands
English. Next would be Aerostar I guess.
> Dennis
>
> On 5/4/2011 4:11 PM, Didier Blouzard wrote:
>> Hey Yak people,
>> speaking is fine around a glass of beer...
>> Did anyone considered asking the Yakovlev Design Bureau in Moscow????
>> Whatever anyone can say if nothing happens all is well, but if there is
>> an accident due to a tailslide, then the justice will ask Yakovlev
>> Design Bureau
>> Then it will be their answer which will count.
>> So let's ask Yakovlev Design Bureau......that's probably the best move.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> 2011/5/4 George Coy <george.coy@gmail.com <mailto:george.coy@gmail.com>>
>>
>> <mailto:george.coy@gmail.com>>
>>
>> Kind of reminds me of the Shakespearean play .... you guessed it a
>> comedy: "Much Ado About Nothing"
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
>> [mailto: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: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:53 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>>
>> Exactly.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of
>> cjpilot710@aol.com <mailto:cjpilot710@aol.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:18 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>> This discussion of tail slides has been real interesting. It points
>> a problem that both Dennis and Mark have so apply pointed out. The
>> real documentation of limits vs practices. I owned a Varga Kachina
>> for a number of years. I found that it looped and rolled nicely.
>> One day (by-my-self) I spun it. It did it beautifully. Oooops I
>> THAN read the placard No Spins Allowed. My curiosity got me and I
>> called the factory direct, and asked for the engineer. Small
>> company way back than- got right to the man. I asked why the
>> Kacahina wasn't certified for acrobatics? His answer was not a
>> structural limited but the airplane had a pro unrecoverable flat
>> spin character particularly with the CG near the aft limited. So
>> there you go. I often spun the Kachina BUT only with me in it and
>> no one in the back seat. Sweet little airplane.
>>
>>
>>
>> I would not try to tail slide a CJ-6. Not that it might not do one
>> aerodynamically, but I look at the structure of the tail and from my
>> experience though the years, comparing it to similar aircraft, it
>> looks to light to take a lot of back loads. This has nothing to do
>> with the fabric covering, but the very structure its self. Plus
>> weve had a number of issues with different CJs out there with
>> cracked horizontal stabilizers front spars at the hole for the
>> elevator cable.
>>
>>
>>
>> Plus I think we need to analyze a true tail slide vs a wipe stall.
>> Not the aerobatic pro here, a true tail slide requires enough
>> power to maintain aircraft control inputs to hold the aircraft in a
>> vertical position but not enough to maintain altitude (hover) so
>> that it drops controlled along its vertical flight path. Thus there
>> is positive pressure on the flight controls (at least the tail
>> anyway) until the airplane either rights itself or the pilots recovers.
>>
>>
>>
>> A wipe stall is quite different. The airplane never has enough
>> power or the throttle is closed and the airplane starts to fall. At
>> some very early point the aerodynamic loads from reverse airflow
>> will start having an effect on the controls. Here is where its get
>> dangerous. If the pilot holes the controls rock hard in the natural
>> position, the airplane will NOT slide backward indefinitely. It
>> will pick its own way to recover. The pilots control input can
>> determine which way that accrues. It is the uncontrolled rapid
>> movement of rudder and elevators against their stops where the
>> damage can happened. Here is where I think the CJ has its limits.
>>
>>
>>
>> When I do hammerhead turns in the CJ, I dont wait for the stop point
>> like I did in my Pitts. While still in forward flight, I motor her
>> around quite early and I make sure that I have a good hold of the
>> stick/rudder. I have inadvertently done wipe stalls in the CJ and
>> quite frankly she is very benign and predicable, BUT I am gun-shy of
>> the tail structure.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have not look at the structural difference between the 52 vs 50.
>> While the 50 is defiantly lighter and there is very little
>> difference in overall shape, it would be interesting to fine the
>> truth so to speak.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 5/4/2011 1:16:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> writes:
>>
>> Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>>
>> Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way ..
>> in public.
>> Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and
>> abilities.
>>
>> There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many
>> other
>> countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER
>> refer to those
>> in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this
>> country.
>>
>> In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode
>> that detail
>> "how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have here
>> in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that
>> we have
>> because of it.
>>
>> Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have
>> rarely (IF EVER)
>> disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue
>> to keep
>> that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not
>> really. What we
>> basically have going on in this particular conversation is
>> actually a
>> comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
>>
>> You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to
>> believe
>> mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it
>> starts
>> becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to
>> advise OTHER
>> people to do.
>>
>> In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise
>> other people
>> what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone
>> else should
>> either.
>>
>> Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this
>> aircraft that
>> discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
>> perspective. I believe people should make up their own
>> minds and avoid
>> trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
>>
>> Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this
>> country imposes
>> Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition
>> Aircraft. My
>> UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY
>> that my
>> aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or
>> Parachuting. The only
>> problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for
>> Glider
>> Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean
>> because the FAA
>> has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my
>> aircraft is
>> unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has
>> said you
>> can't do it.
>>
>> Is the above a good example of what you are talking about?
>> Nope. But
>> it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what
>> this CAA
>> said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA
>> said this,
>> and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual
>> for the
>> YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight
>> restriction on
>> tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly
>> centers on
>> YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
>>
>> My best,
>>
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
>> Savarese
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>
>> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net <mailto:dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>>
>>
>> The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given
>> to me about
>> 13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained
>> in Russia by
>>
>> Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the
>> information
>> from the original Russian flight manual and from the
>> instructors who
>> trained him.
>>
>> I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or
>> who says
>> it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation
>> Administration
>> (CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to
>> be something
>>
>> behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
>> substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
>> Dennis
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
>> <markdavis@wbsnet.org <mailto:markdavis@wbsnet.org>>
>> >
>> > Mark,
>> >
>> > Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides
>> before.... in
>> > the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as
>> the one
>> > that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
>> correct.
>> > I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for
>> years,
>> > but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10 of
>> > this POH. The link follows:
>> >
>> > www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>> <http://www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc>
>> >
>> > My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
>> > parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin
>> of
>> > the manual.
>> >
>> > Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
>> > done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not
>> in one
>> > that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and my
>> > YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training
>> > that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>> >
>> > As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
>> > create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck
>> (my
>> > case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would
>> impart
>> > a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
>> > "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>> > you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child
>> that
>> > it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a
>> car at
>> > 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary to
>> > the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the
>> socket
>> > taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load on my
>> > joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or rolling
>> > pulls).
>> >
>> > So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why
>> SOMEONE
>> > deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
>> > Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
>> > without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
>> exceeding
>> > load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came
>> from
>> > someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating
>> > limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
>> >
>> > Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>> >
>> > Mark Davis
>> > N44YK
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>> > Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>> > To: <yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
>> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>> >
>> >
>> >> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>> >>
>> >> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>> >>
>> >> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
>> estimated
>> >> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>> >> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>> >> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
>> in
>> >> any make or model of aircraft.
>> >>
>> >> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces (that
>> >> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>> >> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
>> and
>> >> rudder please.
>> >>
>> >> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>> >> you tell me.
>> >>
>> >> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
>> backwards.
>> >> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual pressure
>> >> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>> >> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow as
>> >> compared to normal flight.
>> >>
>> >> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
>> are
>> >> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about when
>> >> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>> >>
>> >> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
>> tail
>> >> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
>> will
>> >> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>> >> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>> >> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>> >>
>> >> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
>> degree,
>> >> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
>> when
>> >> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>> >> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
>> the
>> >> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>> >>
>> >> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot to
>> put
>> >> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>> >> something breaks.
>> >>
>> >> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have
>> performed
>> >> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
>> YAK
>> >> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>> >> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic
>> coach.
>> >> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
>> that
>> >> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>> >>
>> >> Mark Bitterlich
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
>> >> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>> >> To: yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
>> >> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>> >>
>> <markdavis@wbsnet.org <mailto:markdavis@wbsnet.org>>
>> >>
>> >> Mark,
>> >> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in a
>> >>
>> >> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>> >> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
>> of
>> >> two
>> >> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>> >> potential
>> >> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>> >> response
>> >> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>> >> surfaces".
>> >> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>> >> not"
>> >> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>> >>
>> >> Mark Davis
>> >> N44YK
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
>> Cherry
>> >> Point, MALS-14 64E"
>> >> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>> >> To: <yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>>
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>> >> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Point,
>> >>> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Mark,
>> >>>
>> >>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>> >>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>> >> impact
>> >>> on tail slides.
>> >>>
>> >>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>> >> tumbles
>> >>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many
>> tail-slides
>> >> in
>> >>> my YAK-50.
>> >>>
>> >>> Mark Bitterlich
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
>> >>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>> >>> To: yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
>> >>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>> >>>
>> <markdavis@wbsnet.org <mailto:markdavis@wbsnet.org>>
>> >>>
>> >>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>> >>> prohibited
>> >>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where I
>> >> read
>> >>> it
>> >>> though.
>> >>>
>> >>> Mark Davis
>> >>> N44YK
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
>> >>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com <mailto:eric@buffaloskyline.com>>
>> >>> To: <yak-list@matronics.com <mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>>
>> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>> >>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com <mailto:eric@buffaloskyline.com>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro
>> planes
>> >>> like
>> >>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
>> for
>> >>>> sure.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>> >>>>
>> <grayson50@hotmail.com <mailto:grayson50@hotmail.com>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
>> perform?
>> >>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
>> somewhere,
>> >>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Grayson
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Read this topic online here:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >=======================e ties Day ======================
>> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ======================= -
>> List Contribution Web Site sp;
>> =========================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> List Email Forum -
>> rget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> ==========
>> http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> le, List Admin.
>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Didier BLOUZARD
>> didier.blouzard@gmail.com <mailto:didier.blouzard@gmail.com>
>> 0624243672
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Mark,
I don't dislike it or like it. I don't care what you have to say or don't have
to say.
Have you proof that it is safe? Other than someone's word? Is it not better to
error on the safe side?
I would venture to say that most Yak52 owners are not the hard acro type.
So like I said go have fun. Just having done a tail slide doesn't mean it's safe
or not.
I think you should go out in your Yak 52 and do it. You do have a yak52 don't you?
It would be easy to own a different type airplane and tell your friends to get'er
done in a yak52.
You are a scary angry guy.
Good luck. I could only aspire to be as good as you. And trust me, I don't care
what acro you do.
Show me where it lists approved maneuvers. Just because it doesn't say you can't
doesn't mean it's approved.
The book doesn't say you need wings, but something's are obvious.
I' not talking to the Waldo Peepers of the world. Just the rest of us.
On May 4, 2011, at 11:43 AM, "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14
64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
>
> I need to answer your message Bill, and I don't think you are going to
> life it very much..... sorry.
>
> You say: "There must be a reason that so much conversation is generated
> by this. Why would you want to do this during normal fun flying on a
> clear beautiful day? Unless you have something to prove to yourself.
> Cause No one else will care. "
>
> The conversation is being generated because there is a sense that an
> operating capability of an aircraft is being questioned based on a
> source that is undocumented, with no named author, and I object to that.
> As to what aerobatic maneuvers I do, or anyone else does, and why they
> do them, that is a personal decision and needs no justification to you
> or anyone else.
>
> You say: "If it says in the manual, don't do it."
>
> Agreed! However, I do not refer to a download from a web site as "A
> MANUAL".
>
> "If you believe something else, have at it. Go by yourself so the
> innocent don't get hurt or run risk of getting hurt."
>
> AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT! You can see ALREADY that
> because someone has said: TAIL SLIDES ARE UNSAFE IN A YAK AIRCRAFT,
> that now we have people saying what Bill just said above. It's a done
> deal. It's unsafe. If you do it you're risking your life. And don't
> do it with anyone else in the aircraft!
>
> Not only is this gent saying HE is not going to do it, he is advising
> OTHERS not to do it. That is just wrong.
>
> "It's like paying taxes, the book says do it,"
>
> What BOOK Bill? Have you got a copy handy?
>
> "but there is always someone that pushes the envelope and tries to avoid
> it. And in the end, a burial at sea."
>
> I guess I will end up buried at Sea then... because I always push the
> envelope which is why I fly a fully aerobatic aircraft. If you don't
> want to, then that's your decision, but since you seem to be questioning
> mine... I will ask you... why in the world do you own a YAK if all you
> are going to do is fly it straight and level?
>
> Take care,
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
> On May 3, 2011, at 11:15 AM, "Roger Kemp M.D." <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
> wrote:
>
> <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
>>
>> The translated RU pilots' manual states for the novice to avoid them.
>> No insinuation of experience made with this post. Just stating the
>> recommendations made by the guys that had the most experience.
>> Doc
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Grayson
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 10:37 AM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Yak-List: Tailslides
>>
>>
>> Is there any consensus on doing tailslides in the Yak-52?
>>
>> Grayson
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338764#338764
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Never worked well, now totally TU. Before I chuck it, does anyone want it? Contact
me offline.
--------
Keith McKinley
700HS
KFIT
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338940#338940
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 |
|
Tell Andre I said hello and hope to see him again in the future.
Dennis
On 5/4/2011 6:49 PM, Didier BLOUZARD wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Didier BLOUZARD<didier.blouzard@gmail.com>
>
> Our inspector could ask the question directly to them.
> I'll find out and keep the List informed.
>
> Best Dennis
>
> Didier Blouzard
> +33 6 2424 3672
>
> Le 5 mai 2011 00:34, "A. Dennis Savarese"<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net> a crit
:
>
>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>>
>> Yes, I considered that immediately, but found out through a friend in Lithuania
that it will be very difficult finding someone who reads, writes and understands
English. Next would be Aerostar I guess.
>> Dennis
>>
>> On 5/4/2011 4:11 PM, Didier Blouzard wrote:
>>> Hey Yak people,
>>> speaking is fine around a glass of beer...
>>> Did anyone considered asking the Yakovlev Design Bureau in Moscow????
>>> Whatever anyone can say if nothing happens all is well, but if there is
>>> an accident due to a tailslide, then the justice will ask Yakovlev
>>> Design Bureau
>>> Then it will be their answer which will count.
>>> So let's ask Yakovlev Design Bureau......that's probably the best move.
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> 2011/5/4 George Coy<george.coy@gmail.com<mailto:george.coy@gmail.com>>
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "George Coy"<george.coy@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:george.coy@gmail.com>>
>>>
>>> Kind of reminds me of the Shakespearean play .... you guessed it a
>>> comedy: "Much Ado About Nothing"
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
>>> [mailto: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: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:53 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com<mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of
>>> cjpilot710@aol.com<mailto:cjpilot710@aol.com>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:18 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com<mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>> This discussion of tail slides has been real interesting. It points
>>> a problem that both Dennis and Mark have so apply pointed out. The
>>> real documentation of limits vs practices. I owned a Varga Kachina
>>> for a number of years. I found that it looped and rolled nicely.
>>> One day (by-my-self) I spun it. It did it beautifully. Oooops I
>>> THAN read the placard No Spins Allowed. My curiosity got me and I
>>> called the factory direct, and asked for the engineer. Small
>>> company way back than- got right to the man. I asked why the
>>> Kacahina wasn't certified for acrobatics? His answer was not a
>>> structural limited but the airplane had a pro unrecoverable flat
>>> spin character particularly with the CG near the aft limited. So
>>> there you go. I often spun the Kachina BUT only with me in it and
>>> no one in the back seat. Sweet little airplane.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I would not try to tail slide a CJ-6. Not that it might not do one
>>> aerodynamically, but I look at the structure of the tail and from my
>>> experience though the years, comparing it to similar aircraft, it
>>> looks to light to take a lot of back loads. This has nothing to do
>>> with the fabric covering, but the very structure its self. Plus
>>> weve had a number of issues with different CJs out there with
>>> cracked horizontal stabilizers front spars at the hole for the
>>> elevator cable.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Plus I think we need to analyze a true tail slide vs a wipe stall.
>>> Not the aerobatic pro here, a true tail slide requires enough
>>> power to maintain aircraft control inputs to hold the aircraft in a
>>> vertical position but not enough to maintain altitude (hover) so
>>> that it drops controlled along its vertical flight path. Thus there
>>> is positive pressure on the flight controls (at least the tail
>>> anyway) until the airplane either rights itself or the pilots recovers.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A wipe stall is quite different. The airplane never has enough
>>> power or the throttle is closed and the airplane starts to fall. At
>>> some very early point the aerodynamic loads from reverse airflow
>>> will start having an effect on the controls. Here is where its get
>>> dangerous. If the pilot holes the controls rock hard in the natural
>>> position, the airplane will NOT slide backward indefinitely. It
>>> will pick its own way to recover. The pilots control input can
>>> determine which way that accrues. It is the uncontrolled rapid
>>> movement of rudder and elevators against their stops where the
>>> damage can happened. Here is where I think the CJ has its limits.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> When I do hammerhead turns in the CJ, I dont wait for the stop point
>>> like I did in my Pitts. While still in forward flight, I motor her
>>> around quite early and I make sure that I have a good hold of the
>>> stick/rudder. I have inadvertently done wipe stalls in the CJ and
>>> quite frankly she is very benign and predicable, BUT I am gun-shy of
>>> the tail structure.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I have not look at the structural difference between the 52 vs 50.
>>> While the 50 is defiantly lighter and there is very little
>>> difference in overall shape, it would be interesting to fine the
>>> truth so to speak.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In a message dated 5/4/2011 1:16:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>>> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil<mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> writes:
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
>>> Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>>>
>>> Dennis, I am sorry to argue or debate with you in any way ..
>>> in public.
>>> Once again, you know how much I respect your knowledge and
>>> abilities.
>>>
>>> There are many regulations, from many other CAA's, from many
>>> other
>>> countries, concerning these aircraft. I will NEVER, EVER
>>> refer to those
>>> in a manner that implies that they should be imposed in this
>>> country.
>>>
>>> In that regard I refer to the many postings by Richard Goode
>>> that detail
>>> "how lucky we are" to have the Experimental Category that we have here
>>> in the United States, and the privileges' and freedoms that
>>> we have
>>> because of it.
>>>
>>> Again... I respect your knowledge and opinions. I have
>>> rarely (IF EVER)
>>> disagreed with anything you have said, and I hope I continue
>>> to keep
>>> that record clear, and that is NOT HAPPENING NOW. Not
>>> really. What we
>>> basically have going on in this particular conversation is
>>> actually a
>>> comparison between "your expert" and "my expert".
>>>
>>> You are welcome to believe your expert, and I am welcome to
>>> believe
>>> mine. Where we may come to a split in the road is when it
>>> starts
>>> becoming a matter of what each of us believes is correct to
>>> advise OTHER
>>> people to do.
>>>
>>> In this case, I will say that I am not trying to advise
>>> other people
>>> what to do... one way or the other, and I don't think anyone
>>> else should
>>> either.
>>>
>>> Until there is a document from the manufacturer of this
>>> aircraft that
>>> discusses this issue in ANY way, it remains a matter of personal
>>> perspective. I believe people should make up their own
>>> minds and avoid
>>> trying to tell others that they are wrong or unsafe.
>>>
>>> Let me give you a real world example. The FAA in this
>>> country imposes
>>> Operating Limitations on all Experimental Exhibition
>>> Aircraft. My
>>> UTVA-66 has FAA Operating Limitations that spell out CLEARLY
>>> that my
>>> aircraft is not to be used for Glider Towing, or
>>> Parachuting. The only
>>> problem is that my UTVA-66 was equipped from the FACTORY for
>>> Glider
>>> Towing and Parachuting with the doors off. Does it mean
>>> because the FAA
>>> has put these words into my Operating Limitations that my
>>> aircraft is
>>> unsafe to tow a glider? Nope. But THIS countries "CAA" has
>>> said you
>>> can't do it.
>>>
>>> Is the above a good example of what you are talking about?
>>> Nope. But
>>> it does bring up the point that: We don't know exactly what
>>> this CAA
>>> said. We don't know the REASON for why this particular CAA
>>> said this,
>>> and it is still hear-say. I have a Russian Flight Manual
>>> for the
>>> YAK-50. I have had it translated. There is no flight
>>> restriction on
>>> tail slides. Period. However, since this discussion mainly
>>> centers on
>>> YAK-52, that is probably not relevant. I do not fly YAK-52's.
>>>
>>> My best,
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
>>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
>>> Savarese
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:51 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com<mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>>
>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
>>> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net<mailto:dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>>
>>>
>>> The Yak manual you speak of is on my web site and was given
>>> to me about
>>> 13-14 years ago by a gentleman who is a CFI and was trained
>>> in Russia by
>>>
>>> Russian pilots. He extracted, translated and condensed the
>>> information
>>> from the original Russian flight manual and from the
>>> instructors who
>>> trained him.
>>>
>>> I think my only point is, regardless of who says it's OK or
>>> who says
>>> it's not OK is the fact that a government Civil Aviation
>>> Administration
>>> (CAA) has prohibited tail slides in Yak 52's. There has to
>>> be something
>>>
>>> behind this prohibition, assuming it is true. Now if I can find
>>> substantiating documentation, I will share that with the group.
>>> Dennis
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/3/2011 7:00 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
>>> > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"
>>> <markdavis@wbsnet.org<mailto:markdavis@wbsnet.org>>
>>> >
>>> > Mark,
>>> >
>>> > Now I know where I'd seen the prohibition on tail slides
>>> before.... in
>>> > the POH for my YAK. I found an online copy that is the same as
>>> the one
>>> > that came with N44YK. I'm not sure who generated it or if it is
>>> correct.
>>> > I'm sure tailslides have been done safely in YAK 52's by many for
>>> years,
>>> > but I'm still curious why they are listed as prohibited on page 10
of
>>> > this POH. The link follows:
>>> >
>>> > www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc
>>> <http://www.yak-52.com/downloads/?YAK52%20POH.doc>
>>> >
>>> > My copy of the above manual doesn't have the question marks in
>>> > parenthesis like the link above shows. Maybe Dennis knows the origin
>>> of
>>> > the manual.
>>> >
>>> > Oh... for the record, so I can participate in the discussion, I have
>>> > done tail slides in several aircraft (TA-4J and T-2C), just not
>>> in one
>>> > that has the maneuver prohibited in it's POH (EA-6B NATOPS/SOP and
my
>>> > YAK-52 POH albeit possibly in error). Must be my Navy flight training
>>> > that makes me heed the "don't do it" stuff.
>>> >
>>> > As for the tailslides themselves, I've seen some done that appear to
>>> > create a much higher than typical backward airspeed. Whether by luck
>>> (my
>>> > case) or skill (Sergei Boriak) those would be the ones that would
>>> impart
>>> > a potentially damaging load on control surfaces. As for your question
>>> > "Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>>> > you tell me", my simple mind goes back to learning as a small child
>>> that
>>> > it wasn't a good idea to stick your hand out of the window of a
>>> car at
>>> > 80 mph fingers pointing forward then deflecting your hand contrary
to
>>> > the prevailing wind. Nearly getting my shoulder yanked out of the
>>> socket
>>> > taught me that fairing your hand downwind put a less rapid load on
my
>>> > joints. Back to my flight training....don't yank on the G (or rolling
>>> > pulls).
>>> >
>>> > So, after all that, I still would be interested in knowing why
>>> SOMEONE
>>> > deemed it apparently unsafe in a YAK 52 enough to include in a POH.
>>> > Anecdotal evidence that the maneuver has been performed routinely
>>> > without causing structural failure doesn't mean it hasn't been
>>> exceeding
>>> > load limits that someone, somewhere thinks is excessive. If it came
>>> from
>>> > someone in the design, manufacture, or writing the initial operating
>>> > limitations of the YAK 52 then I'm interested.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks for your input. I enjoy the discussion.
>>> >
>>> > Mark Davis
>>> > N44YK
>>> >
>>> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>> > Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>>> > To:<yak-list@matronics.com<mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>>
>>> > Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:18 PM
>>> > Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>> >> Point, MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>>> >>
>>> >> Ok, let's talk conjecture, just for the fun of it.
>>> >>
>>> >> When an aircraft flies backwards in a tail-slide, what is the
>>> estimated
>>> >> speed and airflow over the control surfaces as it makes the reverse?
>>> >> Any thoughts on that? Before we talk about it, let's limit this
>>> >> discussion please to pilots who have actually performed tail-slides
>>> in
>>> >> any make or model of aircraft.
>>> >>
>>> >> Now. How about a snap roll. What are the speed and flow forces (that
>>> >> would be AIR LOADS) over the control surfaces themselves when an
>>> >> aircraft performs an accelerated snap roll. Let's focus on elevator
>>> and
>>> >> rudder please.
>>> >>
>>> >> Which is higher? Tail Slide Air Loads, or Snap Roll Air Loads? Well,
>>> >> you tell me.
>>> >>
>>> >> The air load on the control surfaces during a tail slide are
>>> backwards.
>>> >> Does this make them higher? We are talking about the actual pressure
>>> >> induced air loads on the surfaces of these controls. Remember that
>>> >> speed through the air during a tail slide is in reality very slow
as
>>> >> compared to normal flight.
>>> >>
>>> >> How about bending moments? Are they higher during a tail-slide, or
>>> are
>>> >> they higher during a 9 G pull at 150 knots? We're talking about when
>>> >> everything is done CORRECTLY!
>>> >>
>>> >> On the other hand.... what happens if you manage to get into a good
>>> tail
>>> >> slide and then just "let go" of the stick? The result is that it
>>> will
>>> >> SLAM with a very large degree of force right into the control stop.
>>> >> Anything hooked to the elevator when this happens... such as a
>>> >> COUNTER-WEIGHT is going to have a HUGE instantaneous load. HUGE.
>>> >>
>>> >> Would it be possible to mismanage the aircraft to such a large
>>> degree,
>>> >> then LET go of the stick, and ALLOW it to SLAM into the stop, and
>>> when
>>> >> that happened, would it BE POSSIBLE to incur some type of mechanical
>>> >> failure? Yep... I do believe that is possible, and it can happen if
>>> the
>>> >> pilot is not prepared for the forces that can happen in advance!
>>> >>
>>> >> That said, I fully agree that it is entirely possible for a pilot
to
>>> put
>>> >> an aircraft into a situation where it exceeds its design limits and
>>> >> something breaks.
>>> >>
>>> >> I have watched tail-slides being taught in a YAK-52. I have
>>> performed
>>> >> tail-slides in a YAK-50. I disagree with anyone that says that the
>>> YAK
>>> >> model aircraft is not safe to do tail-slides... politely and
>>> >> respectfully disagree. The expert I believe in is my aerobatic
>>> coach.
>>> >> Who anyone else believes is their own personal choice and I respect
>>> that
>>> >> too. If you have doubts, THEN DO NOT DO THEM!
>>> >>
>>> >> Mark Bitterlich
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> -----Original Message-----
>>> >> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
>>> >> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:37 PM
>>> >> To: yak-list@matronics.com<mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> >> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>> >>
>>> >> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"
>>> <markdavis@wbsnet.org<mailto:markdavis@wbsnet.org>>
>>> >>
>>> >> Mark,
>>> >> I'll look more for what I referred to, but what Dennis relates in
a
>>> >>
>>> >> follow up is what I had heard, "everything but tailslides". The only
>>> >> obvious difference would be the gross weight of the -52 with a crew
>>> of
>>> >> two
>>> >> compared to the -50 and other YAKs, Sukhois which wouldn't put the
>>> >> potential
>>> >> stress on the fabric surfaces. Whoever initially told me that, my
>>> >> response
>>> >> was "what about the -52TW and others that have metal clad control
>>> >> surfaces".
>>> >> They didn't know the answer. It will be interesting to know the "why
>>> >> not"
>>> >> if the maneuvers are not recommended or prohibited.
>>> >>
>>> >> Mark Davis
>>> >> N44YK
>>> >>
>>> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det
>>> Cherry
>>> >> Point, MALS-14 64E"
>>> >> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil<mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>>> >> To:<yak-list@matronics.com<mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>>
>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:50 PM
>>> >> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>>> >> Point,
>>> >>> MALS-14 64E"<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>> <mailto:mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Mark,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> The Sukhoi 26, 29, and 31 have fabric control surfaces. So does the
>>> >>> YAK-50. I honestly don't think fabric control surfaces have any
>>> >> impact
>>> >>> on tail slides.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> For what it is worth, I have personally seen Sergei Boriak coach
>>> >> tumbles
>>> >>> and tail-slides in YAK-52's. I have personally done many
>>> tail-slides
>>> >> in
>>> >>> my YAK-50.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Mark Bitterlich
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> -----Original Message-----
>>> >>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
>>> >>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
>>> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 3:26 PM
>>> >>> To: yak-list@matronics.com<mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>
>>> >>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Davis"
>>> <markdavis@wbsnet.org<mailto:markdavis@wbsnet.org>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I thought I remembered reading something about tailslides being
>>> >>> prohibited
>>> >>> due to fabric control surfaces on the YAK 52. Can't recall where
I
>>> >> read
>>> >>> it
>>> >>> though.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Mark Davis
>>> >>> N44YK
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Wobschall"
>>> >>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com<mailto:eric@buffaloskyline.com>>
>>> >>> To:<yak-list@matronics.com<mailto:yak-list@matronics.com>>
>>> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:08 PM
>>> >>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: Eric Wobschall
>>> >>> <eric@buffaloskyline.com<mailto:eric@buffaloskyline.com>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Tail slides are verboten for structural reasons in some akro
>>> planes
>>> >>> like
>>> >>>> the Great Lakes (expertise not being the issue). I'd want to know
>>> for
>>> >>>> sure.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On May 3, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Grayson wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Grayson"
>>> <grayson50@hotmail.com<mailto:grayson50@hotmail.com>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> So assuming pilot experience isn't a factor they are ok to
>>> perform?
>>> >>>>> No structural limitations to perform them? Is that stated
>>> somewhere,
>>> >>>>> perhaps in the 'RU Manual'? Is a copy of it available online?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> - Hold is is right :) Especially to the stick and rudder..
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Grayson
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338776#338776
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >=======================e ties Day ======================
>>> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ======================= -
>>> List Contribution Web Site sp;
>>> =========================
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> List Email Forum -
>>> rget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>> ==========
>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>> ==========
>>> le, List Admin.
>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> ==========
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Didier BLOUZARD
>>> didier.blouzard@gmail.com<mailto:didier.blouzard@gmail.com>
>>> 0624243672
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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 |
|
Before you pull it are you sure the inverter (behind the pilots seat) is
healthy? Check it out>
Frank
CJ6-A
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 |
|
First thing I did was swapped gyros. It's the Gyro.
--------
Keith McKinley
700HS
KFIT
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338955#338955
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 |
|
Cliff,
You are absolutely correct. I need to not try firing off quick responses with an
office full of follow ups while running from room to room.
Dennis pointed that out to me also.
On the subject of tail slides unwound, If our refurbishers in Lithuania say the
reason that tail slides are prohibited in the 52 is because of the ram horn counter
weight being damaged and possibly jamming the bell crank is more than enough
for me to decide not to bend the rules.
As the old adage goes: "In aviation, there are laws and there are rules. Rules
can be broken in an emergency. Laws are another thing. The laws of physics can
only be broken once. The offender usually pays dearly...possibly with their life."
To date, I have found that most of what the Russians said to do and not to do with
their aircraft has pretty much held true. Granted there are some areas of
improvement that have been done with some tweaking. The spark plug wire conversion
and fuel bladders are just a couple that come to mind. The TD and TW are
another. Basically though, the overall design of the aircraft has not changed
nor has the experience gleaned by the thousands of DOSAFF students and instructors
that preceded us. Of note, the Yakolev Design Bureau has signed off on the
plug wire and the fuel bladders for use in Europe. Can't find anywhere yet where
they signed off on the tail slide in their archives and POH's that I've been
able to access.
Bend the rules to save your ass but don't break the laws. Old aviators don't get
to be old by breaking the Laws.
Just my 2 cents.
Doc
Sent from my iPad
On May 4, 2011, at 4:20 PM, "George Coy" <george.coy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> B.T.W. that is LES Crowder.
>
> -----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: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 4:08 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Interesting.
>
> My YAK-50 was Wes Crowder's test aircraft for a lot of his
> modifications. I have the original Russian Manual. I had it translated
> by a Russian and written down line by line.
>
> No tail slide restrictions. Might be a translation thing?
>
> Sorry.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
> M.D.
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:05 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
>
> The manuals were first distributed by Wess Crowder as he was importing
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 |
|
"Old aviators don't get to be old by breaking the Laws."
I like that saying! :)
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
In a message dated 5/4/2011 11:14:34 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
viperdoc@mindspring.com writes:
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp M.D."
<viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Cliff,
You are absolutely correct. I need to not try firing off quick responses
with an office full of follow ups while running from room to room.
Dennis pointed that out to me also.
On the subject of tail slides unwound, If our refurbishers in Lithuania
say the reason that tail slides are prohibited in the 52 is because of the
ram horn counter weight being damaged and possibly jamming the bell crank is
more than enough for me to decide not to bend the rules.
As the old adage goes: "In aviation, there are laws and there are rules.
Rules can be broken in an emergency. Laws are another thing. The laws of
physics can only be broken once. The offender usually pays dearly...possibly
with their life."
To date, I have found that most of what the Russians said to do and not to
do with their aircraft has pretty much held true. Granted there are some
areas of improvement that have been done with some tweaking. The spark plug
wire conversion and fuel bladders are just a couple that come to mind. The
TD and TW are another. Basically though, the overall design of the aircraft
has not changed nor has the experience gleaned by the thousands of DOSAFF
students and instructors that preceded us. Of note, the Yakolev Design
Bureau has signed off on the plug wire and the fuel bladders for use in Europe.
Can't find anywhere yet where they signed off on the tail slide in their
archives and POH's that I've been able to access.
Bend the rules to save your ass but don't break the laws. Old aviators
don't get to be old by breaking the Laws.
Just my 2 cents.
Doc
Sent from my iPad
On May 4, 2011, at 4:20 PM, "George Coy" <george.coy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> B.T.W. that is LES Crowder.
>
> -----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: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 4:08 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Interesting.
>
> My YAK-50 was Wes Crowder's test aircraft for a lot of his
> modifications. I have the original Russian Manual. I had it translated
> by a Russian and written down line by line.
>
> No tail slide restrictions. Might be a translation thing?
>
> Sorry.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
> M.D.
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 3:05 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Re: Tailslides
>
> <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
>
> The manuals were first distributed by Wess Crowder as he was importing
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: | CJ6 parts for sale |
Hi All,
We have added more pictures of CJ6 parts in our website.
Please browse into: www.difane.cn
If you are interested in it, please contact me.
Thanks!
Sarah
--------
Sarah's E-mail:lcdzkj@live.cn
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338971#338971
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! --
|