Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:24 AM - Re: prop strike (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
2. 08:10 AM - Re: prop strike (A. Dennis Savarese)
3. 08:22 AM - Re: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
4. 09:39 AM - Re: Re: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
5. 10:27 AM - Re: bearings (doug sapp)
6. 10:36 AM - CJ condition inspection...a few questions (keithmckinley)
7. 11:03 AM - Re: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions (Roger Kemp)
8. 12:09 PM - Re: Re: Performance Yak 52 (Bradly Banks)
9. 01:11 PM - Re: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
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 |
|
Reply to "Some more thoughts".
And yes, that is absolutely true, the accessory shaft is from all I have
read, the weakest link in the system.
This is why I am very very careful to have accurate timing marks on my
engine and record exact timing indications.
If even a minor prop strike occurs, the very first thing you want to
check is to see if the timing on the engine has changed. No matter how
minor the strike, if the timing on the engine has changed, that shaft
has a high probability of being damaged and the engine will require a
tear down. I believe I have mentioned this before.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of George Coy
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 12:50
Subject: RE: Yak-List: prop strike
Some more thoughts
Dear Mr. Coy,
As regards the issue of inspection of the engine after a
propeller strike, we usually find that when propeller strike happens,
the main engine part that it is affected is the shaft that connects the
crankshaft with the accessories case across the supercharger (the part
from the next picture).
p1
About our experience on three cases from four propeller strikes, this
shaft was broken or twisted on the spline zones. We strongly recommend
that this item to be inspected at least, because this shaft drives all
the engine accessories (magnetos, fuel pump, oil pump, generator etc.).
If this shaft fails then the engine quits immediately.
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Goode
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 12:37 PM
Subject: Yak-List: prop strike
I am not saying that an M 14 P should be completely stripped down if it
has a prop strike - I was merely pointing out that the original
instruction came from the engine designer and not from Termikas, who,
like me, has a certain vested interest in engine overhauling.
However, to make it clear, in Europe we do not automatically strip down
any engine that has had a prop strike - as has been pointed out there is
a big range of strikes which can have different results.
What we do, however, is to remove the gearbox, and check the crankshaft
"run - out". If it is less than 0.03 mm, we accept that the basic engine
will be fine, and in that case we simply crack test the gearbox
components; overhaul and then reassemble the gearbox and return the
engine to service. The cost of this is approximately $1800. It seems to
me this is hardly a huge amount for the peace of mind and safety
implications.
On some occasions (very few) we find that the crankshaft "run - out" is
more than the accepted maximum (above), and in that case we perform a
shock load test on the entire engine.
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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 concur 100%. That is the first place to check.
A. Dennis Savarese
334-285-6263
334-546-8182 (mobile)
www.yak-52.com
Skype - Yakguy1
On 7/15/2013 9:20 AM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD wrote:
>
> Reply to "Some more thoughts".
>
> And yes, that is absolutely true, the accessory shaft is from all I have
> read, the weakest link in the system.
>
> This is why I am very very careful to have accurate timing marks on my
> engine and record exact timing indications.
>
> If even a minor prop strike occurs, the very first thing you want to
> check is to see if the timing on the engine has changed. No matter how
> minor the strike, if the timing on the engine has changed, that shaft
> has a high probability of being damaged and the engine will require a
> tear down. I believe I have mentioned this before.
>
> Mark Bitterlich
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of George Coy
> Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 12:50
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: prop strike
>
> Some more thoughts
>
>
>
> Dear Mr. Coy,
>
> As regards the issue of inspection of the engine after a
> propeller strike, we usually find that when propeller strike happens,
> the main engine part that it is affected is the shaft that connects the
> crankshaft with the accessories case across the supercharger (the part
> from the next picture).
>
>
>
>
>
> p1
>
>
>
>
>
> About our experience on three cases from four propeller strikes, this
> shaft was broken or twisted on the spline zones. We strongly recommend
> that this item to be inspected at least, because this shaft drives all
> the engine accessories (magnetos, fuel pump, oil pump, generator etc.).
> If this shaft fails then the engine quits immediately.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Goode
> Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 12:37 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: prop strike
>
>
>
> I am not saying that an M 14 P should be completely stripped down if it
> has a prop strike - I was merely pointing out that the original
> instruction came from the engine designer and not from Termikas, who,
> like me, has a certain vested interest in engine overhauling.
>
>
>
> However, to make it clear, in Europe we do not automatically strip down
> any engine that has had a prop strike - as has been pointed out there is
> a big range of strikes which can have different results.
>
>
>
> What we do, however, is to remove the gearbox, and check the crankshaft
> "run - out". If it is less than 0.03 mm, we accept that the basic engine
> will be fine, and in that case we simply crack test the gearbox
> components; overhaul and then reassemble the gearbox and return the
> engine to service. The cost of this is approximately $1800. It seems to
> me this is hardly a huge amount for the peace of mind and safety
> implications.
>
>
>
> On some occasions (very few) we find that the crankshaft "run - out" is
> more than the accepted maximum (above), and in that case we perform a
> shock load test on the entire engine.
>
>
>
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>
> Rhodds Farm
>
> Lyonshall
>
> Hereford
>
> HR5 3LW
>
>
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>
> www.russianaeros.com
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> http://forums.matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
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: | Engine teardown after prop strike Questions |
Since you checked back in, I will reply to your comment Doc.
You take a very interesting point of view regarding your "rosy red pink". You
are suggesting that safety dictates a total tear down for the purpose of safety.
Ok, for the moment let's say that is true. Just who is it that you are going to
have perform that engine tear down? Monty Barrett? If so, he is one of the
good choices I most surely would vote for! He is also not cheap. That being
the case, how many people might just try an engine teardown/rebuild in their
own hangar?
Ummm... just like you did for example?
I have seen this happen myself on two occasions and the results were similar.
Meaning: What happened with yours when it finally started back up? It started
making metal. The point here is not what happened in your hangar, but instead
what can happen when you tear down an engine and put it back together again.
People can make mistakes (or even worse things can happen), and those "things"
can put you right into someone's house just as quick as anything else.
Russian Roulette? Darn straight. Just about every which way you go.
What I am trying to say here is that a lot of pilots are not experts at everything
they lay their hands on, and as such they try to make good choices on important
things, often in the name of "SAFETY". But when you make the decision to
pull an engine to pieces that was not made in this country, you better be darn
careful about who you have do it and money should be NO OBJECT. Can you look
me in the eye and say you have taken that approach every time with your airplane(s)?
I can't.
Personally? I'd feel safer flying behind a mid time engine that shaved four inches
off each end of a wooden prop, which then was checked for timing changes,
run-out (Richard Goode), and possibly having the reduction gear case checked)
than I would flying behind a brand new rebuilt engine done by ANYBODY!
In your specific case .... where both gear collapsed after landing... and the airplane
slammed down with a running engine.... a tear down is probably a good
idea, especially since "insurance" is involved.
But in some other cases ..... If it ain't broke don't fix it
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp M.D.
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2013 20:28
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions
Had pitched out of the fight but will re-enter. Since it is my rosy red pink being
pulled behind that thing I am tearing mine down. Yes the last gear up CJ's
engine that I know of (M-14P with wood props) had no damage on tear down by Monty
Barrett. Now saying that the Builder in Lithuania rebuilt the engine with
an out of spec master crank roller bearings that were basically worn out. That
was gotcha waiting to happen. It was not Termikus's shop. That is all I will
say. If the owner of that engine wishes to comment he can.
As for to tear or not teardown, in the US we sort of have the option. Do I take
6 bullets out of the revolver or do I take 5 to play Russian Roulette. It is
our choice but as George said, "insurance is driving the tear down requirement."
If you are self insured and like playing Roulette go for it. If you drop that
bird in some one's house with others having knowledge of your flying with an
engine that had a prop strike that crapped out in flight causing injury on the
ground we are all going to pay. Your only hope is you got morted in the process
so your estate can cover the loses.
Was there one of those in Maine a couple of years ago or was a hydraulic lock that
caused that one fall on to the downtown streets morting both occupants.
My two cents since my insurance company is requiring the tear down, I'm tearing
it down. Would be a hell of a lot easier to repair the sheet metal, replace
the leaking air line, hang to new blades and go fly. But, right now I do not trust
that engine.
Break, any one looking for a YAK -50 project? Will sell the airframe firewall back
minus engine cheap. Contact me off list if interested. Will sell as is for
salvage value or may consider parting it out.
Doc
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 13, 2013, at 4:32 PM, "George Coy" <george.coy@gmail.com> wrote:
Mark, I disagree with you. I think people should have the facts and that includes
factory recommendations. As stated we are experimental, and not required to
follow the factory recommendations on an experimental aircraft. The FAA is already
well aware of the recommended overhaul times for eastern aircraft airframes
and engines and has never even questioned it in an experimental aircraft.
Often, insurance companies are driving the issue of teardown. Yes, I have flown
many a Yak that has had a prop strike and yes, yes I know of many aircraft
hat have hundreds of hours after a prop strike with no sign of damage. I have
seen hidden damage at a normal teardown that was waiting to become more serious.
So I think it is the owner/pilots decision and then should have all the information
to make that decision.
George Coy
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2013 2:33 PM
To: yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions
Richard-
Your reply is a case in point for why I wrote what I did. The fact is that there
are many types of prop strikes and the severity of the loads imposed to the
engine vary greatly.
You have stated many times how lucky we in the West are regarding our Experimental
Category and the ease by which we can license and operate our aircraft compared
to most operators in Europe. This is exactly the thing that I am trying
to protect here and American owners need to take note.
The FAA in the United States often likes to make things simple by categorizing
everything with some kind of written instruction. If they can find a piece of
paper that they can hold close to their chest and demand compliance with, they
often will.
You said: I personally think that far too many pilots in the West are very casual
about these engines after prop strikes.
Richard, you are welcome to any opinion you wish to have, but please lets leave
it at that. When you start to emphasize the validity of a posted document
that happens to agree with your point of view, and that document can possibly
change the way things are handled in another country, that crosses the line from
being an opinion to something else. I would ask that as a friend, you at
least keep that in mind. I know I do.
As regards prop strikes on M-14 engines, I too believe in caution and safety,
but I also believe in applying common sense. I know of three M-14 engines with
prop strikes that have flown over 600 hours since the incident without an issue.
One of those three Prop Strikes was when an SU-31 prop hit a human leg and
tossed the person it was attached to 10 feet in the air, and took a huge chunk
out of both his leg, and one prop blade of an MTV9-260! In that case, the
persons leg needed more of a teardown than the engine did. But hey .... that
was indeed a legitimate prop strike with blade damage.
Lots of things can damage an M-14, and I believe the most significant is some
form of Hydraulic Lock. I have seen far more M-14 engines come apart from this
malady than prop strikes.
So bottom line. Lets continue to have spirited and intense discussions, that include
opinions and experience, but please lets also try to avoid meddling in
issues that can impact how a whole class of engines or airplanes are treated in
a country, especially ones that we dont live in.
Mark
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==================================
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==================================
cs.com
==================================
matronics.com/contribution
==================================
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions |
Ok, I'm lost. No big deal, but just for peace of mind .....
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jill Gernetzke
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 18:09
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions
A clarification on my post. I was agreeing with Mark's reply to Roger's
post, not Richard's.
Jill
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 |
|
Kelley,
I have all the flight control bearings in stock including the ones for the
#7 pull rods, elevator belcrank, and bottom of rudder. Please contact me
off list if I can be of help.
Best,
Doug
On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Kelley Monroe <kelmonroe@comcast.net>wrote:
> **
> The control surface bearings on the CJ are double roller and unsealed.
> Can a single roller sealed bearing of the same ID an OD be used to replace
> them?
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
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: | CJ condition inspection...a few questions |
Hello all,
Working with a local IA, very experienced all the way back to DC-3's but first
time with a Nanchang. I have a couple questions after looking through everything.
Left dist cap.jpg: I don't see any evidence of carbon tracking. would that assumption
be correct?
QS-2(b).jpg: The QS-2 50 spring attachment occasionally sticks momentarily with
rudder returning to neutral from full throw left with a slight snap. I'm not
sure if it's the spring assembly itself "2" or in arrow labeled "1" the fact that
bracket from the bottom of the rudder pedals to the spring assembly has some
radial play in it (maybe a 1/16" either side of center)
QS-2.jpg: should the QS4-23 adjusting bolt be tight against the QS2-08 crank or
should there be a little play?
Thank you,
Keith
--------
Keith McKinley
700HS
X26 Sebastian, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=404724#404724
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/qs_2_748.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/qs_2b_141.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/left_dist_130.jpg
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Engine teardown after prop strike Questions |
No Mark I am not implying total tear down but to access the accessry drive shaft,
inspect and magnaflux or dye penetrate the gear box and do a master crank run
out your have to take the nose case off the engine. The baffles will have to
be removed so you can take the air start lines off to seperate the supercharger
case from the crank case. The intake tubes and the exhaust manifold has to
be removed. The Oil Sump has to be removed. You can try to leave the carb on
but you will find out that to pull the supercharger and to seperate the accessory
case all of the attached accessories need to be out of your way. Since you
want to look at the journals on the crank too the cylinders need to come off.
No the rockers do not need to be pulled but to get to the base of the connecting
rod the cylinders need to come off. Now to inspect the accessory drive shaft
and the super charger idler gear the super charger section and the accessory
drive section are going to have to be seperated. To do that the air lines from
the spider (air start distributor) have to come off. It is a bit ill managable
if you do not. You can try to leave the mags and the compressor on but you
will be cursing yourself for trying that after about an hour. Yes you can do
it though.
I've been there and I have the damned T shirt.
>From my stand point if I am going that far why not pull the whole damned thing
down so I can see the teeth and dye penetrate all of the gears in the gear box
and the accessory drive along with the crown gear on the crank shaft, the idler
gear that drive the timing cam plate, the accessory gear for the prop governor.
Therer is no real simple easy way to do this with out tearing the engine down.
Since mine plopped down on the ground I want to look at the cylinder base studs,
the crank case through studs for the mounting ring and the cylinder head baffle
mounting studs. Not everybody will require that since 90% of the M-14's flying
have a protruding nose wheel to protect them when the gear collapses.
There is more to mine than most so that is for sure.
I am not implying that everyone should have to completely tear one down. Mine is
at the extreme.
I am not going into how the metal got in the original engine that is at the began
this saga. Yes, the plan is to let Monty take this one apart because I am tired
of tearing M-14's down and putting them back togather.
Like farts, man, there are loud oderless and on the other end there are silent
but deadly ones. There is a spectrum across the bell shaped curve. In this case,
since this engine will be pulling my rosey pink eventually, I want it right.
By the way there was nothing wrong with this engine after it was reassembles before
it took the grass field slide. Don't really expect anything to be wrong with
it this time either but I need to go through the exercise.
Doc
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>Sent: Jul 15, 2013 10:17 AM
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions
>
>
>Since you checked back in, I will reply to your comment Doc.
>
>You take a very interesting point of view regarding your "rosy red pink". You
are suggesting that safety dictates a total tear down for the purpose of safety.
>
>Ok, for the moment let's say that is true. Just who is it that you are going
to have perform that engine tear down? Monty Barrett? If so, he is one of the
good choices I most surely would vote for! He is also not cheap. That being
the case, how many people might just try an engine teardown/rebuild in their
own hangar?
>
>Ummm... just like you did for example?
>
>I have seen this happen myself on two occasions and the results were similar.
Meaning: What happened with yours when it finally started back up? It started
making metal. The point here is not what happened in your hangar, but instead
what can happen when you tear down an engine and put it back together again.
People can make mistakes (or even worse things can happen), and those "things"
can put you right into someone's house just as quick as anything else.
>
>Russian Roulette? Darn straight. Just about every which way you go.
>
>What I am trying to say here is that a lot of pilots are not experts at everything
they lay their hands on, and as such they try to make good choices on important
things, often in the name of "SAFETY". But when you make the decision
to pull an engine to pieces that was not made in this country, you better be darn
careful about who you have do it and money should be NO OBJECT. Can you look
me in the eye and say you have taken that approach every time with your airplane(s)?
I can't.
>
>Personally? I'd feel safer flying behind a mid time engine that shaved four inches
off each end of a wooden prop, which then was checked for timing changes,
run-out (Richard Goode), and possibly having the reduction gear case checked)
than I would flying behind a brand new rebuilt engine done by ANYBODY!
>
>In your specific case .... where both gear collapsed after landing... and the
airplane slammed down with a running engine.... a tear down is probably a good
idea, especially since "insurance" is involved.
>
>But in some other cases ..... If it ain't broke don't fix it
>
>
>Mark Bitterlich
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp M.D.
>Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2013 20:28
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions
>
>Had pitched out of the fight but will re-enter. Since it is my rosy red pink being
pulled behind that thing I am tearing mine down. Yes the last gear up CJ's
engine that I know of (M-14P with wood props) had no damage on tear down by
Monty Barrett. Now saying that the Builder in Lithuania rebuilt the engine with
an out of spec master crank roller bearings that were basically worn out. That
was gotcha waiting to happen. It was not Termikus's shop. That is all I will
say. If the owner of that engine wishes to comment he can.
>As for to tear or not teardown, in the US we sort of have the option. Do I take
6 bullets out of the revolver or do I take 5 to play Russian Roulette. It is
our choice but as George said, "insurance is driving the tear down requirement."
If you are self insured and like playing Roulette go for it. If you drop that
bird in some one's house with others having knowledge of your flying with
an engine that had a prop strike that crapped out in flight causing injury on
the ground we are all going to pay. Your only hope is you got morted in the process
so your estate can cover the loses.
>Was there one of those in Maine a couple of years ago or was a hydraulic lock
that caused that one fall on to the downtown streets morting both occupants.
>My two cents since my insurance company is requiring the tear down, I'm tearing
it down. Would be a hell of a lot easier to repair the sheet metal, replace
the leaking air line, hang to new blades and go fly. But, right now I do not
trust that engine.
>Break, any one looking for a YAK -50 project? Will sell the airframe firewall
back minus engine cheap. Contact me off list if interested. Will sell as is for
salvage value or may consider parting it out.
>
>Doc
>
>Sent from my iPad
>
>On Jul 13, 2013, at 4:32 PM, "George Coy" <george.coy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Mark, I disagree with you. I think people should have the facts and that includes
factory recommendations. As stated we are experimental, and not required
to follow the factory recommendations on an experimental aircraft. The FAA is
already well aware of the recommended overhaul times for eastern aircraft airframes
and engines and has never even questioned it in an experimental aircraft.
Often, insurance companies are driving the issue of teardown. Yes, I have flown
many a Yak that has had a prop strike and yes, yes I know of many aircraft
hat have hundreds of hours after a prop strike with no sign of damage. I have
seen hidden damage at a normal teardown that was waiting to become more serious.
So I think it is the owner/pilots decision and then should have all the information
to make that decision.
>
> George Coy
>
>
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD
> Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2013 2:33 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions
>
>
>
> Richard-
>
>
>
> Your reply is a case in point for why I wrote what I did. The fact is that there
are many types of prop strikes and the severity of the loads imposed to the
engine vary greatly.
>
>
>
> You have stated many times how lucky we in the West are regarding our Experimental
Category and the ease by which we can license and operate our aircraft compared
to most operators in Europe. This is exactly the thing that I am trying
to protect here and American owners need to take note.
>
>
>
> The FAA in the United States often likes to make things simple by categorizing
everything with some kind of written instruction. If they can find a piece
of paper that they can hold close to their chest and demand compliance with, they
often will.
>
>
>
> You said: I personally think that far too many pilots in the West are very casual
about these engines after prop strikes.
>
>
>
> Richard, you are welcome to any opinion you wish to have, but please lets leave
it at that. When you start to emphasize the validity of a posted document
that happens to agree with your point of view, and that document can possibly
change the way things are handled in another country, that crosses the line
from being an opinion to something else. I would ask that as a friend, you at
least keep that in mind. I know I do.
>
>
>
> As regards prop strikes on M-14 engines, I too believe in caution and safety,
but I also believe in applying common sense. I know of three M-14 engines with
prop strikes that have flown over 600 hours since the incident without an issue.
One of those three Prop Strikes was when an SU-31 prop hit a human leg
and tossed the person it was attached to 10 feet in the air, and took a huge chunk
out of both his leg, and one prop blade of an MTV9-260! In that case, the
persons leg needed more of a teardown than the engine did. But hey .... that
was indeed a legitimate prop strike with blade damage.
>
>
>
> Lots of things can damage an M-14, and I believe the most significant is some
form of Hydraulic Lock. I have seen far more M-14 engines come apart from this
malady than prop strikes.
>
>
>
> So bottom line. Lets continue to have spirited and intense discussions, that
include opinions and experience, but please lets also try to avoid meddling in
issues that can impact how a whole class of engines or airplanes are treated
in a country, especially ones that we dont live in.
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
> http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> ==================================
> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==================================
> cs.com
> ==================================
> matronics.com/contribution
> ==================================
>
>
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Performance Yak 52 |
Further to this , I suppose its time to nail my colours to the mast. I
have discussed this issue at length with Sergey , He did indeed
acknowledge that there were problems with the deal, not wanting to dig
further , he voluntarily explained that the aircraft was bought over
the net, sight unseen , some 10 or more years ago, during those years
exporting out of the Ukraine was fraught with corruption and
bureaucratic red tape. And admitted freely that it was a deal that he
would rather forget .I questioned him further about Art=99s
remarks that there were other soured business deals , but he said that
there were none .
I too have had Business dealings with Sergey, I have travelled to the
Ukraine and bought a 52 from Him based, at the retired Limanskoye Mig
airbase on the Moldovan border.
I have spent a week with his family and got to know the children on
first name basis.
He too is a small business owner , who has many connections into the
M14P repair shops dotted around the Ukraine. And Between us have begun a
process to develop a set of composite wings , flight surfaces and other
parts.
I find him candid , and willing to go the extra mile to assist with
finding engine parts and the odd L39 item when needed.
The hospitality we experienced was kind, but never patronising and what
you would expect from a cordial friendship, which is what this has
become.
I do not profess that we are the next OKB design bureau , but having a
contact in the Ukraine , who speaks Russian is a current AN2 pilot, and
is as passionate about aircraft design as any of us are , has turned
out to be an adventure I want to continue with. (who knows what we will
come up with?)
Yours sincerely
Bradly banks
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Invert
Sent: 11 July 2013 08:54 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Performance Yak 52
I have heard similar stories about Serge, no direct experience. Always
2 sides to every story of course.
Art
On 11/07/2013, at 4:33 PM, Bradly Banks <brad@runawaymedia.co.za> wrote:
Thanks Bill, this why this forum is so important. I have asked for a
reply, to establish the other side of the story. Ill keep you posted.
Brad
Sent from Samsung Mobile
-------- Original message --------
From: H=C3=A5vard Dale <havard.dale@yaknorway.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Performance Yak 52
Noted!
I also have only god experience with Termikas!
BR
Havard
Sendt fra min iPhone 4S
Den 11. juli 2013 kl. 00:04 skrev bill wade <bwade154@yahoo.com>:
Guys a very good friend of mine had a very bad experience with Serge,
back in 2001. I purchased my Yak from Termikas and he really like the
Yak 52 so he did a deal with Serge. Serge missed the delivery time and
keep leading my friend on until he demanded delivery my friend got a
nicely painted 5G derelict many parts were missing and all data plates
removed an M14 N or II defiantly not a flying airplane. He went on to
buy a damaged yak and used the derelicts parts to make a nice airplane.
I was truly amazed that all skin parts matched up perfectly. Would not
deal with Serge not trustworthy in my book, would deal with Termikas
what he says is what you get!!
Bill Wade N4450Y
Serge has all the technical information regarding this project, it is by
no means a commercial venture yet with a production line. But if you
would like to be part of a select group of HP 52TD's then by all means
join us. My design brief was that the composite set were to fit directly
on to any existing 52 as a kit. Along with the electrical
modifications.
Brad Banks
Sent from Samsung Mobile
-------- Original message --------
From: H=C3=A5vard Dale <havard.dale@yaknorway.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Performance Yak 52
Intresting,
But The Email adress is not in use?
Do you have pictures and more info on The wing kit?
BR
Havard
Sendt fra min iPhone 4S
Den 10. juli 2013 kl. 16:41 skrev Bradly Banks
<brad@runawaymedia.co.za>:
During a recent visit to the Ukraine , I visited his factory. Sergey
(serge) is a graduate of the MiG institute in Moscow. He is a composite
specialist .I have commissioned a set of yak composite wings from him,
myself. I can vouch for him , he is a very demure quiet man with little
to say but enormous experience.
Brad
Sent from Samsung Mobile
-------- Original message --------
From: Bradly Banks <brad@runawaymedia.co.za>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Performance Yak 52
Sure its Sergey orlov and his company is airnotika ill put the email
address up later on today
Sent from Samsung Mobile
-------- Original message --------
From: "Roger Kemp M.D." <viperdoc@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Performance Yak 52
Interesting. Bradly do you have a web address or an email address for
them. Google gave me some interior design company in Ontario, Canada.
Thanks,
Doc
Dale was not trying to be a pompous American. The T-6 (SNJ) was fitted
with a tail hook for carrier qualifications. That design capability
could feasibly be engineered for the 52, not that I have any interest in
that. Now the wings that Bradly spoke of has peaked my interest.
Thanks,
Doc
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 10, 2013, at 8:10 AM, Bradly Banks <brad@runawaymedia.co.za>
wrote:
If you're looking for a major weight improvement , , the Orlov design
bureau in Odessa can sort you out with a set of composite wings +7-4 g
in the TD configuration. Same wing design only with slotted flaps on
each wing with electrical multi position actuator. 90L per side with
intergrated tanks .Standard yak air operated retractable gear. All in
for around $26, 000.
Regards
Brad Banks
Sent from Samsung Mobile
-------- Original message --------
From: Dale <dale@frii.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Performance Yak 52
I wasn't talking about the BS tail hook stuff.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=404361#404361
=p; -->
http://www=====================
========bsp;
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
-Matt
Dra========================
======
=C3=82=C2=C3=82=C2=B7=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=BA~=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=B0=C3=83
=C2=AD=C3=82=C2=B2,=C3=83=C5=BE=C3=83=84=A2=C3=83=C5-%=C3=82=C2=A2=C3
=82=C2=BD4=C3=83=9CM4}=C3=82=C2=A7r=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=B9=C3=82=C2=AB
=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=B0=C3=83=C2=C3=83=C2=A7{(=C3=82=C2=BA=C3=82=C2=B8=C3
=85=C2=BE=C3=82=C2=AD8^a=C3=82=C2=A9=C3=85
=C3=83=B9D=C3=A2=9E=C2=A2=C3=82=C2=A8=C3=82=C2=A5=C3=85
=C3=83=C2=AE=C3=A2=9E=C2=A2K=C3=82=C2=B6=C3=85=99j=C3=83=C5=A1
=C3=83=C2=A8=C3=85=C2=BE',.+-=C3=83=C2=C3=82=C2=AD=C3=82=C2=BA=C3=82=C2
=B7=C3=82=C2=AC5=C3=82=C2=AB=C3=83=C2=A2=C3=82=C3=82=C2=ABh=C3=82=C2=AE=C3
=83=C5=A1=C3=82=C2=AE=C3=85=99,z=C3=83=CB=9C^=C3=A2=9E=C2=A2=C3
=82=C2=A9=C3=83=C2=B2.+-=C3=82=C2=BA=C3=83=CB=9C=C3=82=C2=A5=C3=85
=C3=83=CB=9C=C3=85=C2=BE=C3=82=C2=B2=C3=83=B9=C3=85=9C=C3=A2
=82=AC=C2=C3=82=C2=AB=C3=85
=C3=83=B9T=C3=85=C2=B8=C3=83=C2=B4=C3=82=C2=AEn=C3=83=A1+=C3=85
=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=BAb=C3=82=C2=A2p+r=C3=82=C2=AFy'=C3=85=C2=A1=C3=82=C2=AD
=C3=83=CB=86C=C3=82=C2=A3 =C3=83=C2=A5=C3=82=C2=A1=C3=82=C2=A7{
=C3=82=C2=AC=C3=82=C3=82=C2=AE=C3=85=99,x(Z=C3=82=C2=B4P>-=C3=82=C2
=A2=C3=83=CB=86Z=C3=82=C2=AD=C3=83=C2=C3=82=C2=A7vk=C3=85=9C=C3=A2
=82=AC k=C3=85=9C=C3=A2=82=AC
j+y=C3=82=C2=A8ky=C3=83=C2=B8m=C3=82=C2=B6=C3=85=C2=B8=C3=83=C2=C3=83=C6
=92&j=C3=83=C5=A1=C3=83=C2=A8=C3=85=C2=BE',r=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=B0=C3=82=C2
5=C3=82=C2=AB=C3=83=C2=A2=C3=82=C3=82=C2=ABh=C3=82=C2=AD=C3=A2=82=AC
=C3=82=C2=A4.+-=C3=A2=82=AC
=C3=83=BAi=C3=83=C2=C3=83=C2=BC0=C3=83=9Af=C3=82=C2=AD=C3=82
=C2=AE=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=B0=C3=83=C2=A2r=C3=83=A1(=C3=A2=82=AC=C2
=BA=C3=83=C2=B3Z=C3=82=C2=BE(=C3=82=C2=B6=C3=85
=C3=83=CB=9CjB=C3=83=C2=A2=C3=82=C2=B2=C3=83=C5=B8=C3=83=C5=A10=C3=83
=988=C3=83=99Ia=C3=83=C2=A4T1$=C3=85=C2=A1=C3=A2=9E=C2=A2=C3=83
=C2=A8+y=C3=82=C2=AB\=C3=82=C2=A2{^=C3=85=C2=BE=C3=83=93=C3=82=C2=A5
=C3=82=C2=B2=C3=A2=82=AC
=C3=82=C2=AFj)ZnW=C3=82=C2=AF=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=B0=C3=82=C2=ABayg=C3=A2
=82=AC=C2=BA=C3=85
=C3=83=C2=AE=C3=85=C2=A1=C3=83-=C3=82=C2=A1=C3=82=C2=AD=C3=83=C2=A7
=C3=83=C2=A1=C3=82=C2=B6=C3=83=C5=A1=C3=83=C2=BD=C3=83=C2=BA+=C3=82=C2=BA
k&j=C3=83=C5=A1=C3=83=C2=A8=C3=85=C2=BE',r=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=B0=C3=82=C2=A1
=C3=82=C2=B6=C3=83=C5=A1=C3=83=C2=BD=C3=83=C2=BA+=C3=82=C2=BAk&j=C3=83=C5
=A1=C3=83=C2=A8=C3=85=C2=BE',r=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=B0=C3=82=C2h=C3=82=C2
=B8=C3=82=C2=AC=C3=82=C2=B4*'=C3=82=C2=B6=C3=82=C2=B8=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=BA
=C3=82=C2=BA=C3=83=CB=9C=C3=82=C2=A8=C3=82g=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=BAJ+^N=C3=82
=C2=A7=C3=A2=82=AC=C5=93*.~=C3=85
=C3=83=C2=B2=C3=82=C2=A2=C3=83=C2=C3=83
zw=C3=82=C2=AB=C3=82=C2=A2=C3=83=C2=AB,=C3=82=C2=BA=C3=85=C2=A1h=C3=82=C2
=AE=C3=83=9C=C3=82=C2=B6=C3=83=C3=83=C2=ABjY^.+-=C3=83=84=A2=C3=82
=C2=A2=C3=82=C3=82=C2=A8ky=C3=83=C2=B8m=C3=82=C2=B6=C3=85=C2=B8=C3=83=C2
=C3=83=C6=92&j=C3=83=C5=A1=C3=83=C2=A8=C3=85=C2=BE',r=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=B0
=C3=82=C2r=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=B0=C3=83=C2=AD=C3=82=C2=AE&=C3=83=C2=AE=C3
=82=C2=B6*'=C3=A2=82=AC
=C3=83=BAi=C3=83=C2=C3=83=C2=BC0=C3=83=9Af=C3=82=C2=AD=C3=82
=C2=AE=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=B0=C3=83=C2=A2r=C3=83=A1(=C3=A2=82=AC=C2
=BA=C3=83=C2=B7(=C3=85=C2=BE=C3=83=C5=A1=C3=83=C2=A2n=C3=83=C2=ABb=C3=82=C2
=A2=C3=83=C5=A1=C3=83=C2=BD=C3=82=C2=C3=83=C5=B8=C3=82=C2=A2{=C3=82=C2
=C3=82=C2=B7=C3=82=C2n=C3=A2=82=AC=C2=A1r=C3=83=C2=BEf
< /BLOCKQUOTE>
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
=========
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> courier
new,courier">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
=========
cs.com
=========
matronics.com/contribution
=========
=C3=AF=C2=C2=BD=C3=AF=C2=C2=BD=C3=AF=C2=C2=BD~=C3=AF=C2=C2=BD
=C3=AF=C2=C2=BD,=C3=AF=C2=C2=BD
=C2=C2=B7=BA~=B0=C3=AD=C2=B2,=C3=9E=C3=99=C3=8A%=C2=A2=C2=BD
4=C3=93M4}=C2=A7r=B9=C2=AB=B0=C3=C3=A7{(=C2=BA=C2=B8=C5=BE
=C2=AD8^a=C2=A9=C5-=C3=8BD=84=A2=C2=A8=C2=A5=C5-=C3=AE=84=A2K=C2
=B6=C5=92j=C3=9A=C3=A8=C5=BE',.+-=C3=C2=AD=C2=BA=C2=B7=C2=AC5=C2=AB=C3
=A2=C2=ABh=C2=AE=C3=9A=C2=AE=C5=92,z=C3=98^=84=A2=C2=A9=C3=B2.+-=C2=BA
=C3=98=C2=A5=C5-=C3=98=C5=BE=C2=B2=C3=8B=C5=93=C2=AB=C5-=C3=8B
T=C5=B8=C3=B4=C2=AEn=C3=87+=C5-=BAb=C2=A2p+r=C2=AFy'=C5=A1=C2=AD=C3
=88C=C2=A3 =C3=A5=C2=A1=C2=A7{
=C2=AC=C2=AE=C5=92,x(Z=C2=B4P>-=C2=A2=C3=88Z=C2=AD=C3=C2=A7vk=C5=93
-k=C5=93-j+y=C2=A8ky=C3=B8m=C2=B6=C5=B8=C3=C3=83&j=C3=9A=C3
=A8=C5=BE',r=B0=C25=C2=AB=C3=A2=C2=ABh=C2=AD-=C2=A4.+-
-=C3=9Bi=C3=C3=BC0=C3=82f=C2=AD=C2=AE=B0=C3=A2r=C3=87(
=BA=C3=B3Z=C2=BE(=C2=B6=C5-=C3=98jB=C3=A2=C2=B2=C3=9F=C3=9A0=C3=918=C3=92
Ia=C3=A4T1$=C5=A1=84=A2=C3=A8+y=C2=AB\=C2=A2{^=C5=BE=C3'=C2=A5=C2=B2
-=C2=AFj)ZnW=C2=AF=B0=C2=ABayg=BA=C5-=C3=AE=C5=A1=EF
=BD
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Engine teardown after prop strike Questions |
If the timing on the engine is OK, 90% of the stuff you just listed is unnecessary
Doc. However, it is of course your call! That said, my whole point all
along is that every situation differs and that needs to be taken into consideration.
There is no "ONE ANSWER" and we should stay away from any document that
promotes that way of thinking.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 13:59
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions
No Mark I am not implying total tear down but to access the accessry drive shaft,
inspect and magnaflux or dye penetrate the gear box and do a master crank run
out your have to take the nose case off the engine. The baffles will have to
be removed so you can take the air start lines off to seperate the supercharger
case from the crank case. The intake tubes and the exhaust manifold has to
be removed. The Oil Sump has to be removed. You can try to leave the carb on
but you will find out that to pull the supercharger and to seperate the accessory
case all of the attached accessories need to be out of your way. Since you
want to look at the journals on the crank too the cylinders need to come off.
No the rockers do not need to be pulled but to get to the base of the connecting
rod the cylinders need to come off. Now to inspect the accessory drive shaft
and the super charger idler gear the super charger section and the accessory
drive section are going to have to be seperated. T!
o do that the air lines from the spider (air start distributor) have to come off.
It is a bit ill managable if you do not. You can try to leave the mags and
the compressor on but you will be cursing yourself for trying that after about
an hour. Yes you can do it though.
I've been there and I have the damned T shirt.
>From my stand point if I am going that far why not pull the whole damned thing
down so I can see the teeth and dye penetrate all of the gears in the gear box
and the accessory drive along with the crown gear on the crank shaft, the idler
gear that drive the timing cam plate, the accessory gear for the prop governor.
Therer is no real simple easy way to do this with out tearing the engine down.
Since mine plopped down on the ground I want to look at the cylinder base studs,
the crank case through studs for the mounting ring and the cylinder head baffle
mounting studs. Not everybody will require that since 90% of the M-14's flying
have a protruding nose wheel to protect them when the gear collapses.
There is more to mine than most so that is for sure.
I am not implying that everyone should have to completely tear one down. Mine is
at the extreme.
I am not going into how the metal got in the original engine that is at the began
this saga. Yes, the plan is to let Monty take this one apart because I am tired
of tearing M-14's down and putting them back togather.
Like farts, man, there are loud oderless and on the other end there are silent
but deadly ones. There is a spectrum across the bell shaped curve. In this case,
since this engine will be pulling my rosey pink eventually, I want it right.
By the way there was nothing wrong with this engine after it was reassembles before
it took the grass field slide. Don't really expect anything to be wrong with
it this time either but I need to go through the exercise.
Doc
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>Sent: Jul 15, 2013 10:17 AM
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions
>
>--> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
>Since you checked back in, I will reply to your comment Doc.
>
>You take a very interesting point of view regarding your "rosy red pink". You
are suggesting that safety dictates a total tear down for the purpose of safety.
>
>Ok, for the moment let's say that is true. Just who is it that you are going
to have perform that engine tear down? Monty Barrett? If so, he is one of the
good choices I most surely would vote for! He is also not cheap. That being
the case, how many people might just try an engine teardown/rebuild in their
own hangar?
>
>Ummm... just like you did for example?
>
>I have seen this happen myself on two occasions and the results were similar.
Meaning: What happened with yours when it finally started back up? It started
making metal. The point here is not what happened in your hangar, but instead
what can happen when you tear down an engine and put it back together again.
People can make mistakes (or even worse things can happen), and those "things"
can put you right into someone's house just as quick as anything else.
>
>Russian Roulette? Darn straight. Just about every which way you go.
>
>What I am trying to say here is that a lot of pilots are not experts at everything
they lay their hands on, and as such they try to make good choices on important
things, often in the name of "SAFETY". But when you make the decision
to pull an engine to pieces that was not made in this country, you better be darn
careful about who you have do it and money should be NO OBJECT. Can you look
me in the eye and say you have taken that approach every time with your airplane(s)?
I can't.
>
>Personally? I'd feel safer flying behind a mid time engine that shaved four inches
off each end of a wooden prop, which then was checked for timing changes,
run-out (Richard Goode), and possibly having the reduction gear case checked)
than I would flying behind a brand new rebuilt engine done by ANYBODY!
>
>In your specific case .... where both gear collapsed after landing... and the
airplane slammed down with a running engine.... a tear down is probably a good
idea, especially since "insurance" is involved.
>
>But in some other cases ..... If it ain't broke don't fix it
>
>
>Mark Bitterlich
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp M.D.
>Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2013 20:28
>To: yak-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions
>
>Had pitched out of the fight but will re-enter. Since it is my rosy red pink being
pulled behind that thing I am tearing mine down. Yes the last gear up CJ's
engine that I know of (M-14P with wood props) had no damage on tear down by
Monty Barrett. Now saying that the Builder in Lithuania rebuilt the engine with
an out of spec master crank roller bearings that were basically worn out. That
was gotcha waiting to happen. It was not Termikus's shop. That is all I will
say. If the owner of that engine wishes to comment he can.
>As for to tear or not teardown, in the US we sort of have the option. Do I take
6 bullets out of the revolver or do I take 5 to play Russian Roulette. It is
our choice but as George said, "insurance is driving the tear down requirement."
If you are self insured and like playing Roulette go for it. If you drop that
bird in some one's house with others having knowledge of your flying with
an engine that had a prop strike that crapped out in flight causing injury on
the ground we are all going to pay. Your only hope is you got morted in the process
so your estate can cover the loses.
>Was there one of those in Maine a couple of years ago or was a hydraulic lock
that caused that one fall on to the downtown streets morting both occupants.
>My two cents since my insurance company is requiring the tear down, I'm tearing
it down. Would be a hell of a lot easier to repair the sheet metal, replace
the leaking air line, hang to new blades and go fly. But, right now I do not
trust that engine.
>Break, any one looking for a YAK -50 project? Will sell the airframe firewall
back minus engine cheap. Contact me off list if interested. Will sell as is for
salvage value or may consider parting it out.
>
>Doc
>
>Sent from my iPad
>
>On Jul 13, 2013, at 4:32 PM, "George Coy" <george.coy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Mark, I disagree with you. I think people should have the facts and that includes
factory recommendations. As stated we are experimental, and not required
to follow the factory recommendations on an experimental aircraft. The FAA is
already well aware of the recommended overhaul times for eastern aircraft airframes
and engines and has never even questioned it in an experimental aircraft.
Often, insurance companies are driving the issue of teardown. Yes, I have flown
many a Yak that has had a prop strike and yes, yes I know of many aircraft
hat have hundreds of hours after a prop strike with no sign of damage. I have
seen hidden damage at a normal teardown that was waiting to become more serious.
So I think it is the owner/pilots decision and then should have all the information
to make that decision.
>
> George Coy
>
>
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD
> Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2013 2:33 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine teardown after prop strike Questions
>
>
>
> Richard-
>
>
>
> Your reply is a case in point for why I wrote what I did. The fact is that there
are many types of prop strikes and the severity of the loads imposed to the
engine vary greatly.
>
>
>
> You have stated many times how lucky we in the West are regarding our Experimental
Category and the ease by which we can license and operate our aircraft compared
to most operators in Europe. This is exactly the thing that I am trying
to protect here and American owners need to take note.
>
>
>
> The FAA in the United States often likes to make things simple by categorizing
everything with some kind of written instruction. If they can find a piece
of paper that they can hold close to their chest and demand compliance with, they
often will.
>
>
>
> You said: I personally think that far too many pilots in the West are very casual
about these engines after prop strikes.
>
>
>
> Richard, you are welcome to any opinion you wish to have, but please lets leave
it at that. When you start to emphasize the validity of a posted document
that happens to agree with your point of view, and that document can possibly
change the way things are handled in another country, that crosses the line
from being an opinion to something else. I would ask that as a friend, you at
least keep that in mind. I know I do.
>
>
>
> As regards prop strikes on M-14 engines, I too believe in caution and safety,
but I also believe in applying common sense. I know of three M-14 engines with
prop strikes that have flown over 600 hours since the incident without an issue.
One of those three Prop Strikes was when an SU-31 prop hit a human leg
and tossed the person it was attached to 10 feet in the air, and took a huge chunk
out of both his leg, and one prop blade of an MTV9-260! In that case, the
persons leg needed more of a teardown than the engine did. But hey .... that
was indeed a legitimate prop strike with blade damage.
>
>
>
> Lots of things can damage an M-14, and I believe the most significant is some
form of Hydraulic Lock. I have seen far more M-14 engines come apart from this
malady than prop strikes.
>
>
>
> So bottom line. Lets continue to have spirited and intense discussions, that
include opinions and experience, but please lets also try to avoid meddling in
issues that can impact how a whole class of engines or airplanes are treated
in a country, especially ones that we dont live in.
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>
>
>
> http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
> ==================================
> //www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> ==================================
> cs.com
> ==================================
> matronics.com/contribution
> ==================================
>
>
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|