Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:55 AM - =?us-ascii?Q?oil_drain_-_down_and_crankshaft_position? (Richard Goode)
2. 02:25 AM - Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch Safety Board. (Etienne Verhellen)
3. 03:08 AM - Re: Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch Safety Board. (Jan Mevis)
4. 10:03 AM - Re: Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch Safety Board. (Etienne Verhellen)
5. 11:55 AM - Re: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil Drainage (Pete Taylor)
6. 12:11 PM - Re: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil Drainage (William Halverson)
7. 02:53 PM - Re: Re: Oil drain down (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
8. 02:53 PM - Re: 18 T lifetime and maintenance (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
9. 02:54 PM - Re: Re:The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil Drainage (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
10. 02:57 PM - Re: oil drain - down and crankshaft position (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
11. 03:19 PM - Re: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil Drainage (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
12. 03:48 PM - Re: 18 T lifetime and maintenance (Didier Blouzard)
13. 04:08 PM - Re: Re: Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch Safety Board. (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
14. 05:30 PM - Re: Re: Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch Safety Board. (cjpilot710@aol.com)
15. 07:03 PM - Re: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil Drainage (cjpilot710@aol.com)
16. 07:18 PM - Re: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil Drainage (Roger Kemp M.D.)
17. 07:49 PM - Re: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil Drainage (Roger Kemp M.D.)
18. 11:44 PM - Re: 18 T lifetime and maintenance (Jan Mevis)
19. 11:58 PM - container transport (Bradly Banks)
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: | =?us-ascii?Q?oil_drain_-_down_and_crankshaft_position? |
>From my discussions with my friend, Sergio Dallan, who first developed the
concept of a "tap" in the oil supply, and the crankcase "window", the
rationale for leaving the engine with the crankshaft throw in the vertical
position had nothing to do with the resultant position of the Pistons, but
was simply that, in its highest position, the oil flow into the crankshaft
and then out was far less.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch Safety Board. |
Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch Safety Board.
=======================================
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/13/Yak-52_RA1428K_Yakkes_Foundation.jpg
http://www.airteamimages.com/yakovlev-yak-52_RA-1428K_-private_121164_large.html
http://www.airteamimages.com/yakovlev-yak-52_RA-1428K_-private_121053_large.html
Recently published Accident Report published by the Dutch Authorities :
In Dutch but can be easily translated ...
http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/index.php/onderzoeken/overtrokken-op-lage-hoogte-2011063/
http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/docs/rapporten/2011063_RA-1428K_Yak_52.pdf
http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=137797
Sad day ... 02 August 2011 ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NI6C5-R1Yg
http://www.flyredstar.org/gallery2/Yak/EHLE%20-%202%20August%202011%20-%201600%20LT..jpg
Better days ...
http://www.flyredstar.org/gallery2/Yak/Formation%20Spa%202009.jpg
As per previous accident report, 'Authorities' realise that there are issues with
'Russian Registration', 'Russian' Pilot Licence, Pilot training, ...
Anyway, a reminder to us all to try to be careful when flying.
Gerard was my friend. RIP buddy.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=394244#394244
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/accident_report_ra_1428k_yak_52__dutch_safety_board_913.pdf
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch Safety Board. |
I don't need a Dutch translation, Etienne :-)
The Dutch authorities indeed state that there's a problem with these RA
registrations, but in the report it also clearly says that this had no
consequence in case of this accident.
You know the 52 far better than I ever will, but IMHO, these planes are
underestimated. The Dutch authorities will demand more formation and
training.
And that's where our friends from Lelystad will intervene. In the future,
when you want to PH-register a Yak 52, then you will have to prove your
skills.
As far as I know, the Dutch Yaks still have some customs issues (same kind
of problems I had in France!). But they 'll get out of it.
You did not answer my question: what is LAA?
Jan
On 14/02/13 11:23, "Etienne Verhellen" <janie@yak52.fr> wrote:
>
>Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch Safety Board.
>=======================================
>
>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/13/Yak-52_RA1428K_Yakkes_F
>oundation.jpg
>http://www.airteamimages.com/yakovlev-yak-52_RA-1428K_-private_121164_larg
>e.html
>http://www.airteamimages.com/yakovlev-yak-52_RA-1428K_-private_121053_larg
>e.html
>
>
>Recently published Accident Report published by the Dutch Authorities :
>
>In Dutch but can be easily translated ...
>
>http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/index.php/onderzoeken/overtrokken-op-lage-hoo
>gte-2011063/
>http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/docs/rapporten/2011063_RA-1428K_Yak_52.pdf
>
>http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=137797
>
>Sad day ... 02 August 2011 ...
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NI6C5-R1Yg
>http://www.flyredstar.org/gallery2/Yak/EHLE%20-%202%20August%202011%20-%20
>1600%20LT..jpg
>
>Better days ...
>http://www.flyredstar.org/gallery2/Yak/Formation%20Spa%202009.jpg
>
>As per previous accident report, 'Authorities' realise that there are
>issues with 'Russian Registration', 'Russian' Pilot Licence, Pilot
>training, ...
>
>
>Anyway, a reminder to us all to try to be careful when flying.
>
>Gerard was my friend. RIP buddy.
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=394244#394244
>
>
>Attachments:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com//files/accident_report_ra_1428k_yak_52__dutch_
>safety_board_913.pdf
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch Safety Board. |
Well, YES, Jan, to state the obvious one LAST time :
if you want to safely fly a Yak-52 (or any aircraft for that matter),
it's probably a good idea to get some training from a qualified
Flight Instructor FI(A) experienced on type !
The Yaks are easy to fly ... most of the time ... and for that reason ... sometimes
...
people just buy one and go fly their toy after a very basic check-out ...
or sometimes ... just after a quick flight in one with a mate !
Or you have 'Instructors' 'teaching stuff' but if something 'nasty' happens expecting
the 'students' to recover
[Exclamation] [Question] the 'student' becoming the 'instructor' in a way !!
Oh well ...
And wouldn't it be nice if all European countries (CAA's !) under EASA (Heaven
Help Us us !)
could agree on common SENSIBLE standards to maintain and operate Yaks 50/52 this
part of the world !
One can only dream about that for now ...
All this has been said before ...
I wrote this
http://forums.matronics.com//files/flight_international_yak_52_issues_original_363.pdf
before this report came out
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/Yak-52%20RA-3585K%2009-12.pdf
Not sure lessons have been learned.
Take care of yourself buddy.
FLY safe. Have FUN.
http://flightplanet.com/other_advert_det.php?id=146 :D
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=394271#394271
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/yak_unusual_attitudes_153.pdf
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil Drainage |
I have used this procedure for about 6 months,a third to a half turn back.I
don't know why it works but at 5 dollars a quart who cares.
Pete taylor
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of PS
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 7:06 AM
Subject: Yak-List: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil
Drainage
Warning, this procedure is for informational purposes only and may damage
your engine, impregnate your dog make you socially unacceptable.
This works for me, or maybe I am a little goofy but here goes....
I have owned 6 round engined aircraft, 5 Yaks and 1 CJ. I rarely have
issues with oil draining through my intake drain system like others. One
evening after studying the oil system I realized the positive displacement
geared oil pump pressurizes the check valve in the oil pump which may keep
it from sealing well. I always back my prop up(turn in reverse) to
horizontal upon exiting the cockpit. I usually move it at most a few inches.
I feel, this relieves the pressure on the check valve in the oil pump
letting the check valve seal. I normally lose very little oil, usually a
couple ounces in weeks.
This is for information purposes and may be total BS.... but it works for
me.
I am ready for a good flaming.... I posted this at the request of a Yak
owner who I taught my procedure.
Good Luck and no warranties expressed or implied.
Phil
--------
PS
Yeager:"Rules are for those who cannot make their own"
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=394134#394134
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil |
Drainage
Hmmm .... should be easy enough to do a 'before' and 'after' comparison.
Thanks!
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of PS
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 7:06 AM
Subject: Yak-List: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil
Drainage
Warning, this procedure is for informational purposes only and may damage
your engine, impregnate your dog make you socially unacceptable.
This works for me, or maybe I am a little goofy but here goes....
I have owned 6 round engined aircraft, 5 Yaks and 1 CJ. I rarely have
issues with oil draining through my intake drain system like others. One
evening after studying the oil system I realized the positive displacement
geared oil pump pressurizes the check valve in the oil pump which may keep
it from sealing well. I always back my prop up(turn in reverse) to
horizontal upon exiting the cockpit. I usually move it at most a few inches.
I feel, this relieves the pressure on the check valve in the oil pump
letting the check valve seal. I normally lose very little oil, usually a
couple ounces in weeks.
This is for information purposes and may be total BS.... but it works for
me.
I am ready for a good flaming.... I posted this at the request of a Yak
owner who I taught my procedure.
Good Luck and no warranties expressed or implied.
Phil
--------
PS
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Oil drain down |
Craig,
I am very glad that it works. I was not questioning your product, or the practice.
I was indeed asking for an explanation of why it works, and from your reply
the only conclusion I can reach is that you do not know.
You said: "Theory is one thing, results are another".
These are Experimental Aircraft thus "experiments" are most definitely acceptable!
Good luck with your experiment.
Mark Bitterlich
p.s. If anyone reading this can come up with an explanation, I'd certainly love
to hear it. Pappy? Dennis? George? Doug? Anyone? I understand how it could
reduce oil coming out the exhaust valves. I do NOT understand how it would
keep oil from leaking past the rings and INTO the cylinders, which HAS TO BE
THE CASE if less oil comes out on pull through.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Cpayne
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 18:32
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Oil drain down
What's missing here is the fact that it works. Theory is one thing, results are
another. Some Russians (Jurgis Kairys) have practiced this for years. Works
for me too, no hydro lock yet and reduced drainage with pull through. Ask Pappy,
he has one of my prototypes installed.
You can just catch it or ... you can slow it down and then catch a little, I do
both.
Craig Payne
>So OK! If we're in agreement up to this point, my question is: "How exactly
does
>putting the #1 cylinder to TDC *PREVENT* oil from getting past the rings and
>into the cylinders?"
>
>My thought is that it does not. And what really ends up happening by doing this
>procedure is that drainage through the exhaust will indeed probably be greatly
>reduced, but at the same time, the chance for hydraulic lock is greatly increased.
>Which means of course, you have to pull the spark plugs to be sure.
>Which means of course, all that oil you saved from draining out the exhaust stacks,
>now drains out the spark plug holes.
>
>
>What am I missing here?
>
>
> Mark
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | 18 T lifetime and maintenance |
You are MORE THAN WELCOME at my airport, and I will do the best to accommodate
your arrival in any way. You can stay at my home until you find a place.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Didier Blouzard
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 19:16
Subject: Re: Yak-List: 18 T lifetime and maintenance
OK OK
that was a try. But I do understand. God bless America!!!
Our best chance is that Richard succeed in his negociations with EASA
and we'll do all we can to support him
If not than I'll have to move to USA with my plane !!!
Thanks Mark
Best regards
Didier
2013/2/13 Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>:
>
> I looked into registering a Yak under a stateside N number (Experimental Exhibition)
and then operating if overseas.
>
> A few things came up.
>
> You would first have to ship the aircraft to the United States and fly off the
necessary Phase 1 testing process before you could move it to Phase 2 and then
ship it back overseas.
>
> Next, the aircraft would have to have a home base in the United States.
>
> All scheduled mechanical inspections are supposed to be done at the home base.
Waivers are indeed allowed, with an explanation. However, the work has to
be done by an FAA approved A&P mechanic. Foreign qualifications and ratings are
not permitted, even if the guy was a Russian Master Mechanic (as in Vladimir).
You have to obtain the U.S. FAA quals.
>
> TEMPORARY operation of a U.S. registered aircraft in another country is permitted,
but once again you run into the other countries rules and regs along with
the FAA's. .
>
> The FAA is not very interested in having operational authority for an aircraft
it has no control over in another country and the general feel I got was that
they also were not interested in the problems aircraft owners might have in
other countries. After all, it is "another country".
>
> If you are really interested in tackling that subject, my best advice to you
Didier is to NOT contact the FAA. Never ask the FAA a question that you do not
know the answer to already. Instead, contact the U.S. Experimental Aircraft
Association and pay attention to what they tell you. If their answer is "no
way", then believe it.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Didier BLOUZARD
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 5:53
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: 18 T lifetime and maintenance
>
> Richard
> Would it help if we set up a delegation of all Yak18T proprietors and go for
a meeting with Duessing in order to propose him a way of doing?
> I feel that we are in great danger of being economically groused.
>
> Duessing is not stupid and Perhaps by going to see him we can arrange something
> Particularly when we know that even in Russia they don't follow Yakovkev requirements....
>
> Another question is could we negotiate with the FAA in USA to put all our 18T
under N reg?
> Would this be a possibility?
> There are inspectors and mech structures in Europe.?
>
> Thanks for your efforts
>
> Kind regards
>
> Didier Blouzard
> +33 6 5184 4802
>
> Le 13 fvr. 2013 10:26, "Richard Goode" <richard.goode@russianaeros.com> a crit
:
>
>
> I am not supporting the actions of EASA, and certainly the current proposals,
which seem to be about to become requirements are, I feel, far too demanding,
even although some significant concessions have been made.
>
>
> Having said that, it is not EASA who has unilaterally "reduced the lifetime
to 3500 hours". All they have done is to speak to the manufacturer (and,
George, there are a few design people left on the light aircraft side of Yakovlev!),
And asked what the maintenance programme should be, and Yakovlev replied
that they should be a total overhaul at 1000 hours! And of course, they are
the manufacturer and must be the ultimate authority for this, however absurd
that might seem to someone used to a Western approach for light aircraft maintenance.
>
>
> So, for the time being, we don't have to follow the total programme,
which included, every 1000 hours or six years, total re-fabric; mandatory repaint;
undercarriage and retraction system overhaul; fuel and oil system removal
and overhaul; all instruments and avionics removed and overhauled etc etc. Nevertheless
it will be a lot more arduous than we expect for a Western aircraft,
which is somewhat ironic since I personally believe that the 18 T is much better
made than most aircraft.
>
>
> I have official paper from the Smolensk factory, confirming the "life"
of the 18 T, which of course they manufactured, at 5000 hours. But the simple
fact is that they were not the designers, and have never had access to design
information.
>
>
> Richard
>
>
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>
> Rhodds Farm
>
> Lyonshall
>
> Hereford
>
> HR5 3LW
>
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>
> www.russianaeros.com
>
>
> ==================================
> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==================================
> cs.com
> ==================================
> matronics.com/contribution
> ==================================
>
>
--
____________________________
Didier BLOUZARD
Directeur Gnral DATEXIS
Portable : +33 6 51 84 48 02
Email: didier.blouzard@gmail.com
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re:The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil Drainage |
Roger that. Makes sense to me.
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, February 13, 2013 21:41
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re:The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake
Oil Drainage
<viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Mark," drain it into a clean container and put the ok back into the
tank" is exactly what I do
Doc
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 13, 2013, at 4:17 PM, "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Craig,
>
> I have seen the M-14 window deal a few times in the past, and it has
always made me slightly curious. Here's what I mean and maybe you can
enlighten me.
>
> The way oil gets into the exhaust stacks, and thus drains out onto the
ground, or into the bucket, or .. whatever ... is because it gets into
the cylinder(s) and then comes out an open exhaust valve. Agreed?
>
> OK, so if we position the #1 cylinder to TDC making sure "of the
pistons in the lower half are pulled "down", I am assuming the goal here
is to try and make sure the lower cylinders have their exhaust valves
closed, so that the oil can't leak out. Or is something else going on
that I am not aware of?
>
> Assuming it has to do with keeping the exhaust valves closed, then one
has to ask how the oil got into the cylinders to begin with?
>
> The oil that gets into the cylinders HAS to come from the crankcase
right?
>
> Typically, the sump fills up first and eventually the oil will
backflow past the piston rings and down into the lower cylinders.
>
> A problem (or "feature" if you will) of stock M-14 piston rings is
that they expand (a lot) with heat. Thus the clearances have to be set
loose when you install them. This aggravates the problem with oil
bleeding past the rings and into the cylinders. American made pistons
and rings helps fix this problem, but to continue.......
>
> Another well known problem besides oil leaking out all over the tarmac
is ... oil NOT leaking out all over the tarmac and instead becoming
trapped within the cylinders because the valves are all closed. This
sets up the owner for the infamous "Hydraulic Lock" problem. Somehow,
oil in the cylinders has to be let out before we start pushing a piston
towards TDC, or else we are looking at bending a rod. Pull the spark
plugs, drain it, etc.
>
> So OK! If we're in agreement up to this point, my question is: "How
exactly does putting the #1 cylinder to TDC *PREVENT* oil from getting
past the rings and into the cylinders?"
>
> My thought is that it does not. And what really ends up happening by
doing this procedure is that drainage through the exhaust will indeed
probably be greatly reduced, but at the same time, the chance for
hydraulic lock is greatly increased. Which means of course, you have to
pull the spark plugs to be sure. Which means of course, all that oil
you saved from draining out the exhaust stacks, now drains out the spark
plug holes.
>
> What am I missing here?
>
> Mark
>
> p.s. Yes Doc, the hose on the sump drain is a good idea. Some folks
have connected that hose you are talking about to a built in electric
pump (mounted on the firewall) which pumps the sump oil back into the
main oil tank. Periodic use of this method during longer down times
prevents the oil from ever reaching the point where it can flow into the
lower cylinders. Pretty complicated method, which means modifying the
sump drain, which means increasing the chance for mechanical failure of
the sump drain, which means the engine runs out of oil in flight. Ugh.
If the sump oil is drained with a hose (Doc's email) into a clean
container, it can be poured right back into the main oil tank I would
think.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Cpayne
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 16:31
> To: yak-list
> Subject: Yak-List: Re:The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake
Oil Drainage
>
>
> Interesting procedure, but I suspect that any pump pressure bleeds off
rather quickly. A better method is to position #1 cylinder to TDC. That
way, all of the pistons in the lower half are pulled "down". Much less
drainage. One way to set the prop to that position is to look through a
gearbox window...IF you have an M-14P Series II engine with an access
panel that can be replaced with a window.
>
> If you have a Huosai or an M-14P Series I engine and are going to park
the airplane for more than a week, I suggest pulling the front plug out
of #1 and finding TDC that way. It matters not whether it is on the
compression stroke or power stroke.
>
> Craig Payne
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | oil drain - down and crankshaft position |
Would that be the result of after shut-down oil drainage coming off the
top of the engine? If correct, then I can grasp that explanation.
If so, then that would also mean that it would not impact oil seeping
past the check valve and into the sump what-so-ever, correct? Yes/No?
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Goode
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 4:53
Subject: Yak-List: oil drain - down and crankshaft position
>From my discussions with my friend, Sergio Dallan, who first developed
the concept of a "tap" in the oil supply, and the crankcase "window",
the rationale for leaving the engine with the crankshaft throw in the
vertical position had nothing to do with the resultant position of the
Pistons, but was simply that, in its highest position, the oil flow into
the crankshaft and then out was far less.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil Drainage |
I'm sure going to try it myself! Turning the oil pump backwards with an
impact on a check valve is something I can grasp.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
Halverson
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 15:09
Subject: Re: Yak-List: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil
Drainage
<william@netpros.net>
Hmmm .... should be easy enough to do a 'before' and 'after'
comparison.
Thanks!
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of PS
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 7:06 AM
Subject: Yak-List: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil
Drainage
Warning, this procedure is for informational purposes only and may
damage
your engine, impregnate your dog make you socially unacceptable.
This works for me, or maybe I am a little goofy but here goes....
I have owned 6 round engined aircraft, 5 Yaks and 1 CJ. I rarely have
issues with oil draining through my intake drain system like others.
One
evening after studying the oil system I realized the positive
displacement
geared oil pump pressurizes the check valve in the oil pump which may
keep
it from sealing well. I always back my prop up(turn in reverse) to
horizontal upon exiting the cockpit. I usually move it at most a few
inches.
I feel, this relieves the pressure on the check valve in the oil pump
letting the check valve seal. I normally lose very little oil, usually
a
couple ounces in weeks.
This is for information purposes and may be total BS.... but it works
for
me.
I am ready for a good flaming.... I posted this at the request of a Yak
owner who I taught my procedure.
Good Luck and no warranties expressed or implied.
Phil
--------
PS
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 18 T lifetime and maintenance |
Mark,
this is so nice. I really do appreciate.
But do not tempt me or I may come for real.
It makes me feel good to read such nice words from friends over the ocean.
Thank you so much Mark.
If things are getting worse in Europe, USA will be the only place to
go...and this could happen !!!!
If you happen to pass by Paris and if I have my CofA back, I will show
you around in my plane if you like.
I'll remember your kind attention Mark
Whish to see you one of these day in France or in America.
You can count on me
Didier
2013/2/14 Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>:
>
> You are MORE THAN WELCOME at my airport, and I will do the best to accommodate
your arrival in any way. You can stay at my home until you find a place.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Didier Blouzard
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 19:16
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: 18 T lifetime and maintenance
>
>
> OK OK
>
> that was a try. But I do understand. God bless America!!!
> Our best chance is that Richard succeed in his negociations with EASA
> and we'll do all we can to support him
> If not than I'll have to move to USA with my plane !!!
> Thanks Mark
>
> Best regards
>
> Didier
>
> 2013/2/13 Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>:
>>
>> I looked into registering a Yak under a stateside N number (Experimental Exhibition)
and then operating if overseas.
>>
>> A few things came up.
>>
>> You would first have to ship the aircraft to the United States and fly off the
necessary Phase 1 testing process before you could move it to Phase 2 and then
ship it back overseas.
>>
>> Next, the aircraft would have to have a home base in the United States.
>>
>> All scheduled mechanical inspections are supposed to be done at the home base.
Waivers are indeed allowed, with an explanation. However, the work has to
be done by an FAA approved A&P mechanic. Foreign qualifications and ratings
are not permitted, even if the guy was a Russian Master Mechanic (as in Vladimir).
You have to obtain the U.S. FAA quals.
>>
>> TEMPORARY operation of a U.S. registered aircraft in another country is permitted,
but once again you run into the other countries rules and regs along with
the FAA's. .
>>
>> The FAA is not very interested in having operational authority for an aircraft
it has no control over in another country and the general feel I got was that
they also were not interested in the problems aircraft owners might have in
other countries. After all, it is "another country".
>>
>> If you are really interested in tackling that subject, my best advice to you
Didier is to NOT contact the FAA. Never ask the FAA a question that you do not
know the answer to already. Instead, contact the U.S. Experimental Aircraft
Association and pay attention to what they tell you. If their answer is "no
way", then believe it.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Didier BLOUZARD
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 5:53
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: 18 T lifetime and maintenance
>>
>> Richard
>> Would it help if we set up a delegation of all Yak18T proprietors and go for
a meeting with Duessing in order to propose him a way of doing?
>> I feel that we are in great danger of being economically groused.
>>
>> Duessing is not stupid and Perhaps by going to see him we can arrange something
>> Particularly when we know that even in Russia they don't follow Yakovkev requirements....
>>
>> Another question is could we negotiate with the FAA in USA to put all our 18T
under N reg?
>> Would this be a possibility?
>> There are inspectors and mech structures in Europe.?
>>
>> Thanks for your efforts
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>> Didier Blouzard
>> +33 6 5184 4802
>>
>> Le 13 fvr. 2013 10:26, "Richard Goode" <richard.goode@russianaeros.com> a crit
:
>>
>>
>>
>> I am not supporting the actions of EASA, and certainly the current proposals,
which seem to be about to become requirements are, I feel, far too demanding,
even although some significant concessions have been made.
>>
>>
>>
>> Having said that, it is not EASA who has unilaterally "reduced the lifetime
to 3500 hours". All they have done is to speak to the manufacturer (and,
George, there are a few design people left on the light aircraft side of Yakovlev!),
And asked what the maintenance programme should be, and Yakovlev replied
that they should be a total overhaul at 1000 hours! And of course, they are
the manufacturer and must be the ultimate authority for this, however absurd
that might seem to someone used to a Western approach for light aircraft maintenance.
>>
>>
>>
>> So, for the time being, we don't have to follow the total programme,
which included, every 1000 hours or six years, total re-fabric; mandatory repaint;
undercarriage and retraction system overhaul; fuel and oil system removal
and overhaul; all instruments and avionics removed and overhauled etc etc. Nevertheless
it will be a lot more arduous than we expect for a Western aircraft,
which is somewhat ironic since I personally believe that the 18 T is much better
made than most aircraft.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have official paper from the Smolensk factory, confirming the "life"
of the 18 T, which of course they manufactured, at 5000 hours. But the simple
fact is that they were not the designers, and have never had access to design
information.
>>
>>
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
>> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>>
>> Rhodds Farm
>>
>> Lyonshall
>>
>> Hereford
>>
>> HR5 3LW
>>
>>
>>
>> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>>
>> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>>
>> www.russianaeros.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==================================
>> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> ==================================
>> cs.com
>> ==================================
>> matronics.com/contribution
>> ==================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ____________________________
> Didier BLOUZARD
> Directeur Gnral DATEXIS
> Portable : +33 6 51 84 48 02
> Email: didier.blouzard@gmail.com
>
>
--
____________________________
Didier BLOUZARD
Directeur Gnral DATEXIS
Portable : +33 6 51 84 48 02
Email: didier.blouzard@gmail.com
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch Safety Board. |
Always good advice.
I think I read where you are looking to purchase a YAK-50. Curious on
how you plan on getting instruction in that model?
My first flight in one was after purchase and then flying it 1500 miles
home to North Carolina flying form on a C-180 all the way home. No Nav.
No Radio.
An interesting story I will only share with strong encouragement, which
will probably not be forthcoming.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Etienne
Verhellen
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 13:01
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch
Safety Board.
Well, YES, Jan, to state the obvious one LAST time :
if you want to safely fly a Yak-52 (or any aircraft for that matter),
it's probably a good idea to get some training from a qualified
Flight Instructor FI(A) experienced on type !
The Yaks are easy to fly ... most of the time ... and for that reason
... sometimes ...
people just buy one and go fly their toy after a very basic check-out
...
or sometimes ... just after a quick flight in one with a mate !
Or you have 'Instructors' 'teaching stuff' but if something 'nasty'
happens expecting the 'students' to recover
[Exclamation] [Question] the 'student' becoming the 'instructor' in a
way !!
Oh well ...
And wouldn't it be nice if all European countries (CAA's !) under EASA
(Heaven Help Us us !)
could agree on common SENSIBLE standards to maintain and operate Yaks
50/52 this part of the world !
One can only dream about that for now ...
All this has been said before ...
I wrote this
http://forums.matronics.com//files/flight_international_yak_52_issues_or
iginal_363.pdf
before this report came out
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/Yak-52%20RA-3585K%2009-12
.pdf
Not sure lessons have been learned.
Take care of yourself buddy.
FLY safe. Have FUN.
http://flightplanet.com/other_advert_det.php?id=146 :D
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=394271#394271
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/yak_unusual_attitudes_153.pdf
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch Safety Board. |
MARK!!!!
I can't believe it! Limburg flies 3000 miles of trackless ocean, with
just a compass and a watch, and you can't go half that distance with the same
equipment and a sectional? And oh the embarrassing humility of being led
by the nose by Spam can to boot!
Now that I've pulled your chain, as Paul Harvey would say "what's the rest
of the story"?. He he he ;-)
Always the willing listener,
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
In a message dated 2/14/2013 7:08:15 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
mark.bitterlich@navy.mil writes:
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Always good advice.
I think I read where you are looking to purchase a YAK-50. Curious on
how you plan on getting instruction in that model?
My first flight in one was after purchase and then flying it 1500 miles
home to North Carolina flying form on a C-180 all the way home. No Nav.
No Radio.
An interesting story I will only share with strong encouragement, which
will probably not be forthcoming.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Etienne
Verhellen
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 13:01
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Accident Report - Yak-52 'RA-1428K' - Dutch
Safety Board.
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Etienne Verhellen" <janie@yak52.fr>
Well, YES, Jan, to state the obvious one LAST time :
if you want to safely fly a Yak-52 (or any aircraft for that matter),
it's probably a good idea to get some training from a qualified
Flight Instructor FI(A) experienced on type !
The Yaks are easy to fly ... most of the time ... and for that reason
... sometimes ...
people just buy one and go fly their toy after a very basic check-out
...
or sometimes ... just after a quick flight in one with a mate !
Or you have 'Instructors' 'teaching stuff' but if something 'nasty'
happens expecting the 'students' to recover
[Exclamation] [Question] the 'student' becoming the 'instructor' in a
way !!
Oh well ...
And wouldn't it be nice if all European countries (CAA's !) under EASA
(Heaven Help Us us !)
could agree on common SENSIBLE standards to maintain and operate Yaks
50/52 this part of the world !
One can only dream about that for now ...
All this has been said before ...
I wrote this
http://forums.matronics.com//files/flight_international_yak_52_issues_or
iginal_363.pdf
before this report came out
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/Yak-52%20RA-3585K%2009-12
.pdf
Not sure lessons have been learned.
Take care of yourself buddy.
FLY safe. Have FUN.
http://flightplanet.com/other_advert_det.php?id=146 :D
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=394271#394271
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/yak_unusual_attitudes_153.pdf
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil Drainage |
Time to put in my two cents worth. Years ago, when I installed the M14-P.
in my CJ, I put in Bill Blackwell's oil tank shutoff system. After almost
2000 hours, it is still working fine and quite frankly, has kept gallons
and gallons of oil off my hangar floor.
However, I've seen the viewing glass on several Russian acro guys
airplanes, which they swore works the same way, keeping oil off the ground
and
reduce possible hydraulic locks. Couple of engine hours ago I installed o
ne of
Craig Payne's kits on my engine. It took a couple of hours to do but 90%
of that was waiting for paint to dry. It was certainly a lot cheaper then
,
and easier than installing a Blackwell system. Why did I install it? I
like neat simple ideas.
Why do I think it works? When the #1 cylinder piston is at top dead
center, pistons #5 and #6 are at the very bottom end of their stroke. Thi
s puts
the scraper ring (on the bottom of the piston) very close to the end of
the cylinder bore. This in essence leaves a very, or a much smaller area
on
the bottom of #5 and #6 for oil to collect in and build up because of
gravity. All fluids have "head pressure". The deeper or higher a column
of
fluid, the higher the head pressure. By the piston being at the bottom of
its
stroke, near the bottom of the cylinder bore, there is less area for the
oil to "stand in" with resulting lower head pressure that could push past
the scraper rings.
One of the things I used to do, (and actually still do out of habit), is
what I call "rock the prop". Years ago, I was told that by moving the
propeller back and forth 10 or 15=B0 and then leaving it in the middle of t
he arc,
I was in essence, causing the causing the pistons to align themselves more
evenly with the cylinder bore and thus causing piston rings to sit better.
Then with properly seated piston rings, they would act more like a seal
against oil that eventually dripped down and tried to flow past the piston
into the top of the cylinder. This could also be unloading the pressure i
n
the oil pump.
One thing I've noticed about the M-14 particularly with the tail draggers
(Yak 50, 52 TD, TW,). When pulling through, prior to starting, they would
dump oil out the exhaust in greater volume than that I ever saw on a nose
wheeled M-14p. Could that have something to do because the engine is tilt
ed
backwards? If so, what are the dynamics?
However, no matter what system or procedure one uses, you'd be a fool not
to pull your engine through before starting. But for God sake, make sure
the mags are off.
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
PS did you get your significant other flowers today? No? God help you
there too.
In a message dated 2/14/2013 6:20:10 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
mark.bitterlich@navy.mil writes:
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
I'm sure going to try it myself! Turning the oil pump backwards with an
impact on a check valve is something I can grasp.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
Halverson
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 15:09
Subject: Re: Yak-List: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil
Drainage
--> Yak-List message posted by: "William Halverson"
<william@netpros.net>
Hmmm .... should be easy enough to do a 'before' and 'after'
comparison.
Thanks!
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of PS
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 7:06 AM
Subject: Yak-List: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil
Drainage
--> Yak-List message posted by: "PS" <psalter@aol.com>
Warning, this procedure is for informational purposes only and may
damage
your engine, impregnate your dog make you socially unacceptable.
This works for me, or maybe I am a little goofy but here goes....
I have owned 6 round engined aircraft, 5 Yaks and 1 CJ. I rarely have
issues with oil draining through my intake drain system like others.
One
evening after studying the oil system I realized the positive
displacement
geared oil pump pressurizes the check valve in the oil pump which may
keep
it from sealing well. I always back my prop up(turn in reverse) to
horizontal upon exiting the cockpit. I usually move it at most a few
inches.
I feel, this relieves the pressure on the check valve in the oil pump
letting the check valve seal. I normally lose very little oil, usually
a
couple ounces in weeks.
This is for information purposes and may be total BS.... but it works
for
me.
I am ready for a good flaming.... I posted this at the request of a Yak
owner who I taught my procedure.
Good Luck and no warranties expressed or implied.
Phil
--------
PS
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil Drainage |
Not the check valve I was thinking about. The shear pin on the compressor driveshaft
coupling was what Came to my mind.
Doc
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 14, 2013, at 5:17 PM, "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
>
> I'm sure going to try it myself! Turning the oil pump backwards with an
> impact on a check valve is something I can grasp.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
> Halverson
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 15:09
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil
> Drainage
>
> <william@netpros.net>
>
> Hmmm .... should be easy enough to do a 'before' and 'after'
> comparison.
>
> Thanks!
>
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of PS
> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 7:06 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil
> Drainage
>
>
> Warning, this procedure is for informational purposes only and may
> damage
> your engine, impregnate your dog make you socially unacceptable.
>
> This works for me, or maybe I am a little goofy but here goes....
>
> I have owned 6 round engined aircraft, 5 Yaks and 1 CJ. I rarely have
> issues with oil draining through my intake drain system like others.
> One
> evening after studying the oil system I realized the positive
> displacement
> geared oil pump pressurizes the check valve in the oil pump which may
> keep
> it from sealing well. I always back my prop up(turn in reverse) to
> horizontal upon exiting the cockpit. I usually move it at most a few
> inches.
> I feel, this relieves the pressure on the check valve in the oil pump
> letting the check valve seal. I normally lose very little oil, usually
> a
> couple ounces in weeks.
>
> This is for information purposes and may be total BS.... but it works
> for
> me.
>
> I am ready for a good flaming.... I posted this at the request of a Yak
> owner who I taught my procedure.
>
> Good Luck and no warranties expressed or implied.
>
> Phil
>
> --------
> PS
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil Drainage |
Pappy,
With the engine tilted back in the tail draggers, the Sump effectively has a
pproximately a third less volume. Like a tipped glass with water flowing in,
the lower lip overflows sooner. Instead of the crankcase port draining the c
ase when the sump has filled to capacity from sitting for a week or so, the e
xcess drains from the sump back into the crankcase. It then drains down the c
ylinder walls of the dependent cylinders.
In an attempt to lessen that angle I place a jack under the tail tie down/ j
ack point and raise the tail up. It does decrease the amount of oil from the
stacks and intake drain. I also drain the sump into a clean container when
she is going to sit for a week. I then pour the oil that drained from the s
ump back into the tank before I go fly.
I generally see 2 to sometimes 3 liters collected in the fuel can over a cou
ple of weeks. This coming from a 90% new engine with 11 hours on it. This is
a tight engine incidentally.
Doc
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 14, 2013, at 9:00 PM, cjpilot710@aol.com wrote:
> Time to put in my two cents worth. Years ago, when I installed the M14-P.
in my CJ, I put in Bill Blackwell's oil tank shutoff system. After almost 2
000 hours, it is still working fine and quite frankly, has kept gallons and g
allons of oil off my hangar floor.
>
> However, I've seen the viewing glass on several Russian acro guys airplane
s, which they swore works the same way, keeping oil off the ground and reduc
e possible hydraulic locks. Couple of engine hours ago I installed one of C
raig Payne's kits on my engine. It took a couple of hours to do but 90% of t
hat was waiting for paint to dry. It was certainly a lot cheaper then, and e
asier than installing a Blackwell system. Why did I install it? I like nea
t simple ideas.
>
> Why do I think it works? When the #1 cylinder piston is at top dead cente
r, pistons #5 and #6 are at the very bottom end of their stroke. This puts t
he scraper ring (on the bottom of the piston) very close to the end of the c
ylinder bore. This in essence leaves a very, or a much smaller area on the b
ottom of #5 and #6 for oil to collect in and build up because of gravity. A
ll fluids have "head pressure". The deeper or higher a column of fluid, the
higher the head pressure. By the piston being at the bottom of its stroke,
near the bottom of the cylinder bore, there is less area for the oil to "st
and in" with resulting lower head pressure that could push past the scraper r
ings.
>
> One of the things I used to do, (and actually still do out of habit), is w
hat I call "rock the prop". Years ago, I was told that by moving the propel
ler back and forth 10 or 15=C2=B0 and then leaving it in the middle of the a
rc, I was in essence, causing the causing the pistons to align themselves mo
re evenly with the cylinder bore and thus causing piston rings to sit better
. Then with properly seated piston rings, they would act more like a seal a
gainst oil that eventually dripped down and tried to flow past the piston in
to the top of the cylinder. This could also be unloading the pressure in th
e oil pump.
>
> One thing I've noticed about the M-14 particularly with the tail draggers (
Yak 50, 52 TD, TW,). When pulling through, prior to starting, they would du
mp oil out the exhaust in greater volume than that I ever saw on a nose whee
led M-14p. Could that have something to do because the engine is tilted bac
kwards? If so, what are the dynamics?
>
> However, no matter what system or procedure one uses, you'd be a fool not t
o pull your engine through before starting. But for God sake, make sure the
mags are off.
>
> Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
>
> PS did you get your significant other flowers today? No? God help you th
ere too.
>
>
>
> In a message dated 2/14/2013 6:20:10 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, mark.bitt
erlich@navy.mil writes:
bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> I'm sure going to try it myself! Turning the oil pump backwards with an
> impact on a check valve is something I can grasp.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
> Halverson
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 15:09
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil
> Drainage
>
> <william@netpros.net>
>
> Hmmm .... should be easy enough to do a 'before' and 'after'
> comparison.
>
> Thanks!
>
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of PS
> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 7:06 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: The Phil Procedure or How I Reduced My Intake Oil
> Drainage
>
>
> Warning, this procedure is for informational purposes only and may
> damage
> your engine, impregnate your dog make you socially unacceptable.
>
> This works for me, or maybe I am a little goofy but here goes....
>
> I have owned 6 round engined aircraft, 5 Yaks and 1 CJ. I rarely have
> issues with oil draining through my intake drain system like others.
> One
> evening after studying the oil system I realized the positive
> displacement
> geared oil pump pressurizes the check valve in the oil pump which may
> keep
> it from sealing well. I always back my prop up(turn in reverse) to
> horizontal upon exiting the cockpit. I usually move it at most a few
> inches.
> I feel, this relieves the pressure on the check valve in the oil pump
> letting the check valve seal. I normally lose very little oil, usually
> a
> couple ounces in weeks.
>
> This is for information purposes and may be total BS.... but it works
> for
> me.
>
> I am ready for a good flaming.... I posted this at the request of a Yak
> owner who I taught my procedure.
>
> Good Luck and no warranties expressed or implied.
>
> Phil
>
> --------
> PS
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 18 T lifetime and maintenance |
Mark be careful with this kind of proposition, or expect to see a whole
armada of refugies from Europe arriving at your home, all trying to escape
from the new totalitarian EASA state.
Jan
On 14/02/13 23:51, "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
><mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
>You are MORE THAN WELCOME at my airport, and I will do the best to
>accommodate your arrival in any way. You can stay at my home until you
>find a place.
>
>Mark
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Didier Blouzard
>Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 19:16
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Yak-List: 18 T lifetime and maintenance
>
><didier.blouzard@gmail.com>
>
>OK OK
>
>that was a try. But I do understand. God bless America!!!
>Our best chance is that Richard succeed in his negociations with EASA
>and we'll do all we can to support him
>If not than I'll have to move to USA with my plane !!!
>Thanks Mark
>
>Best regards
>
>Didier
>
>2013/2/13 Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>:
>><mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> I looked into registering a Yak under a stateside N number
>>(Experimental Exhibition) and then operating if overseas.
>>
>> A few things came up.
>>
>> You would first have to ship the aircraft to the United States and fly
>>off the necessary Phase 1 testing process before you could move it to
>>Phase 2 and then ship it back overseas.
>>
>> Next, the aircraft would have to have a home base in the United States.
>>
>> All scheduled mechanical inspections are supposed to be done at the
>>home base. Waivers are indeed allowed, with an explanation. However,
>>the work has to be done by an FAA approved A&P mechanic. Foreign
>>qualifications and ratings are not permitted, even if the guy was a
>>Russian Master Mechanic (as in Vladimir). You have to obtain the U.S.
>>FAA quals.
>>
>> TEMPORARY operation of a U.S. registered aircraft in another country is
>>permitted, but once again you run into the other countries rules and
>>regs along with the FAA's. .
>>
>> The FAA is not very interested in having operational authority for an
>>aircraft it has no control over in another country and the general feel
>>I got was that they also were not interested in the problems aircraft
>>owners might have in other countries. After all, it is "another
>>country".
>>
>> If you are really interested in tackling that subject, my best advice
>>to you Didier is to NOT contact the FAA. Never ask the FAA a question
>>that you do not know the answer to already. Instead, contact the U.S.
>>Experimental Aircraft Association and pay attention to what they tell
>>you. If their answer is "no way", then believe it.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Didier BLOUZARD
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 5:53
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: 18 T lifetime and maintenance
>>
>> Richard
>> Would it help if we set up a delegation of all Yak18T proprietors and
>>go for a meeting with Duessing in order to propose him a way of doing?
>> I feel that we are in great danger of being economically groused.
>>
>> Duessing is not stupid and Perhaps by going to see him we can arrange
>>something
>> Particularly when we know that even in Russia they don't follow
>>Yakovkev requirements....
>>
>> Another question is could we negotiate with the FAA in USA to put all
>>our 18T under N reg?
>> Would this be a possibility?
>> There are inspectors and mech structures in Europe.?
>>
>> Thanks for your efforts
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>> Didier Blouzard
>> +33 6 5184 4802
>>
>> Le 13 fvr. 2013 10:26, "Richard Goode"
>><richard.goode@russianaeros.com> a crit :
>>
>>
>>
>> I am not supporting the actions of EASA, and certainly the
>>current proposals, which seem to be about to become requirements are, I
>>feel, far too demanding, even although some significant concessions have
>>been made.
>>
>>
>>
>> Having said that, it is not EASA who has unilaterally "reduced
>>the lifetime to 3500 hours". All they have done is to speak to the
>>manufacturer (and, George, there are a few design people left on the
>>light aircraft side of Yakovlev!), And asked what the maintenance
>>programme should be, and Yakovlev replied that they should be a total
>>overhaul at 1000 hours! And of course, they are the manufacturer and
>>must be the ultimate authority for this, however absurd that might seem
>>to someone used to a Western approach for light aircraft maintenance.
>>
>>
>>
>> So, for the time being, we don't have to follow the total
>>programme, which included, every 1000 hours or six years, total
>>re-fabric; mandatory repaint; undercarriage and retraction system
>>overhaul; fuel and oil system removal and overhaul; all instruments and
>>avionics removed and overhauled etc etc. Nevertheless it will be a lot
>>more arduous than we expect for a Western aircraft, which is somewhat
>>ironic since I personally believe that the 18 T is much better made than
>>most aircraft.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have official paper from the Smolensk factory, confirming the
>>"life" of the 18 T, which of course they manufactured, at 5000 hours.
>>But the simple fact is that they were not the designers, and have never
>>had access to design information.
>>
>>
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
>> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>>
>> Rhodds Farm
>>
>> Lyonshall
>>
>> Hereford
>>
>> HR5 3LW
>>
>>
>>
>> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>>
>> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>>
>> www.russianaeros.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==================================
>> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> ==================================
>> cs.com
>> ==================================
>> matronics.com/contribution
>> ==================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>____________________________
>Didier BLOUZARD
>Directeur Gnral DATEXIS
>Portable : +33 6 51 84 48 02
>Email: didier.blouzard@gmail.com
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | container transport |
Has any one possibly have a drawing of a "trestle" arrangement, that I can
use to transport the fuselage on. I have seen some with wheels on that
attach to the wing spar, in pics from Peter Varland. Im about to ship a
fuselage and if anyone has any suggestions on how best to go about this I
would appreciate the advise.
Bradly Banks
Cell:0825083200
Tel :0333308580
Email :brad@runawaymedia.co.za
Skype: brad.banks10
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! --
|