Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:20 AM - Re: Main Air Tanks (airmanv2)
2. 02:43 AM - Re: Main Air Tanks (aerostar6)
3. 08:33 AM - Re: Main Air Tanks (Egon)
4. 09:17 AM - Re: Main Air Tanks (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
5. 09:44 AM - Re: Main Air Tanks (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
6. 01:07 PM - Re: Emer gear ext, a better way? (Justin Drafts)
7. 03:09 PM - Re: Re: Emer gear ext, a better way? (A. Dennis Savarese)
8. 05:15 PM - Cleaning house (doug sapp)
9. 06:22 PM - Re: Cleaning house (Phillip Salter)
10. 06:28 PM - Re: Re: Emer gear ext, a better way? (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
11. 06:29 PM - Re: Cleaning house (n4829t)
12. 08:48 PM - Re: Cleaning house (Walter Lannon)
13. 11:12 PM - CJ-6 prop blade query (Jay McIntyre)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Main Air Tanks |
Hello From France Doug,
I will take you those bottles for my CJ6 when the time for exchange will come.
Best
Bruno
--------
Fly safe
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439023#439023
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Main Air Tanks |
Mark me up for two YAK 50 bottles.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439024#439024
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: Main Air Tanks |
Hi Doug. Count me in too. ( CJ main and emg ) when available.
Cheers Egon.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=439040#439040
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 |
|
Bear/Ernie,
Sorry your feelings were hurt by my attempt to be tactful.
Doug is moving forward with a plan.
Others, including you two, think using Scuba Tanks would be a better idea.
If you are not upset because someone else would not change their plan to conform
to your ideas, then move forward with your own ideas and create your own plan.......
and good luck to you both.
And Ernie, you are making mountains out of molehills.
Take care,
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DaBear
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 12:50 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Main Air Tanks
Minimize the ideas and plans of others? I thought we were discussing the merits
of each side in a mature fashion.
Sorry for minimizing anyone...
Count me out, I'm outta here
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 11:37 AM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Main Air Tanks
--> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
I totally support Doug, and I am not going to put any scuba tanks into my Yak-50,
thank you very much anyway. Although Bear/Ernie, if you come up with a plan
and a kit for installing them, I'd love to see it. Nothing wrong with a "Plan
B".
That said, this is not an "either/or" situation. To those that swear by scuba
tanks then run with it yourselves, but please don't minimize the ideas and plans
of others by so doing.
Just saying.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:29 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Main Air Tanks
--> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
Yes, they are your airplanes and each will do as he wants. Yes,
countless modifications have been done to these airplanes without any
ill effect. I guess I'm just more skeptical than many, particularly
with regards to structural integrity of the airframe under loadon these
30-40 year old airplanes. I'm pretty sure a Scuba tank of the same volume, not
pressure, is going to weigh a whole lot more than the original tank or a SS replacement
tank. That would entail a stronger support system, especially when one
takes into account G loading. That is why I eluded to structural considerations.
But, to each his own. I too support Doug and in this case, support his direct
replacement SS tank even if it costs a bit more.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
334-546-8182 (mobile)
www.yak-52.com
Skype - Yakguy1
On 3/3/2015 8:37 AM, DaBear wrote:
>
> First, let me say I support Doug, always have, always will. He has supported
this community for decades.
>
> Agreed, there are a few things that need to be considered to change to SCUBA.
However, let's start with the cost of new bottles. If I have to replace the
main, I'm close to needing to replace the emergency, thats $700 each or $1400.
>
> Now, let's consider that Doug designs and builds a replacement hold down for
2 scuba bottles and the air connections. Worst case it's probably around $200
(for 60 sets - let's play apples to apples). Then we add it up...
> $200 --- Hold down and connection
> $320 ---- 4 hours for removal and install
> $400 ---- 2 SCUBA bottles
> $ 80 --- 1 hour for new W&B
>
> As to the paperwork in the US. I could argue that there is no appreciable effect
on W&B, etc. however, let's say there is and you have to/want to submit the
paperwork, No different than the paperwork for the upgraded engine, fuel
tanks, smoke system, etc.
>
>
> Come on, better tanks, MUCH higher safety margin since the tanks support 3k air
pressure. You can go with aluminum tanks which would weigh about the same.
So the big concern is attachment and structural support. Please remember what
used to be there in the form of radio, etc.
>
> Or $1,000 for a system that is better than before, easier to maintain, and now
cheaper and easier to test and replace. Remember, you take the tank to the
local dive shop for annual testing if you want and find a problem go get a new
tank for less than HALF of the cost of an old CJ/Yak tank.
>
> Come on, we've modified these planes from one end to the other. M14P/PF, new
exhaust, oil shut off, larger aluminum water trap, pre-oiler, fuel tanks, smoke
systems, etc. and on and on. We've done that to improve performance, improve
safety, and make it easier and safer to maintain.
> Replacing a tank with a more expensive tank with no other
> improvements....at least really, seriously, think about an improvement
>
> No offense was intended in the above post, please don't take any. They are your
airplanes. Make your own decision.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bear
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
> Savarese
> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:22 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Main Air Tanks
>
> --> <dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>
> FWIW, there are a few things I believe should be considered if one were to simply
change the hold down and connector and use off the shelf technology. First,
it may not be cheaper in a long run when you factor in the cost of fabricating
a new hold down; de-riveting the original hold downs, re-riveting the removed
rivets, and finally drilling and riveting in the new hold downs. Second,
the placement of the Scuba tank most likely will have an affect on weight and
balance thus requiring a either an aircraft re-weighing or at a minimum, calculation
of the new weight, balance and CG of the airplane. Third, the weight
of the Scuba tank must be taken into account for structural considerations when
designing the hold down and the placement of the tank.
>
> Finally, if one were to comply with the aircraft's Ops Limits, I believe it does
say any major modifications require approval of the FSDO. Now you've got
the FAA involved. You may not consider it a major modification, but don't discount
the insurance issue, should an accident or incident occur. From FAA Order
8130.2G under the section covering Experimental Exhibition:
>
> The cognizant FSDO must be notified, and its response received in writing, prior
to flying this aircraft after incorporation of a major change as defined by
14 CFR 21.93 in order to determine whether new operating limitations will be
required.
> The FSDO response
> should be entered in the aircraft's records and a copy sent the FAA Aircraft
Registration Branch, AFS-750, P.O. Box 25504, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125 for
recording in the aircrafts permanent records.
>
> FAR 21.93 defines a major change as:
>
> 21.93 Classification of changes in type design.
> (a) In addition to changes in type design specified in paragraph (b) of this
section, changes in type design are classified as minor and major. Aminor change
is one that has no appreciable effect on the weight, balance, structural strength,
reliability, operational characteristics, or other characteristics affecting
the airworthiness of the product. _All other changes are major changes_.
>
> Given these facts and assuming one does not disregard the documents governing
the issuance of the Special Airworthiness Certificate and Operating Limitations
of the airplane, Doug's form, fit and function replacement tanks are THE best
solution, by far, IMHO.
>
> A. Dennis Savarese
> 334-546-8182 (mobile)
> www.yak-52.com
> Skype - Yakguy1
>
> On 3/2/2015 9:28 PM, DaBear wrote:
>> I have to agree with the Scuba idea. Dont manufacture a new tank,
>> change the hold down and connector and use off the shelf technology
>> cheaper. It would work for the main and emergency. If you used
>> scuba tanks youd only have to change how they were mounted and the
>> connection to the system.
>>
>> Bear
>>
>> *From:*owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Ernest
>> Martinez
>> *Sent:* Monday, March 02, 2015 8:43 PM
>> *To:* yak-list
>> *Subject:* Re: Yak-List: Main Air Tanks
>>
>> Aluminum scuba tanks are designed to be used in salt water, can be
>> hydro tested at any scuba shop, can be replaced for $200, are rated
>> for 4000 PSI, so it would be a looooooooong time before a tank
>> corroded to the point where it couldn't be used to contain 750 PSI.
>>
>> I understand the allure of a direct replacement so you don't need to
>> worry about mounting. I'm assuming Doug is talking about these new
>> tanks with the same form factor as stock.
>>
>> Is that correct Doug??
>>
>> Ernie
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Frank Stelwagon
>> <pfstelwagon@earthlink.net <mailto:pfstelwagon@earthlink.net>> wrote:
>>
>> The Aluminum Scuba Tanks have the same problem as the steel tanks,
>> corrosion. It would take longer but would happen - look at the
>> aluminum air filter case.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> * *
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List*
>>
>> *tp://forums.matronics.com*
>>
>> *_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> * *
>> * *
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List*
>> **
>> **
>> *http://forums.matronics.com*
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
>> **
>> * *
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>
>
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 |
|
Electric starter is available now.
Hydraulic brakes have also been done.
Hydraulic gear .... that would be a tough one.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Main Air Tanks
Plan C? Hydraulic conversion and electric starter....
Doc
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 3, 2015, at 11:41 AM, "\"" <cjpilot710@aol.com> <cjpilot710@aol.com> wrote:
I love this list! At seeing Doug's proposal, I thought - -"There goes
good old Doug, looking after us guys - AGAIN". Than I see Dead Bear's & The Geek's
scuba idea, ( modernist both ) and read Dennis concerns. Now at least I
have something to think about when it comes time to make that decision ( sooner
most likely than later ). It nice to have a "plan B". C Plan anyone? ;-)
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
-----Original Message-----
From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
To: yak-list <yak-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Tue, Mar 3, 2015 10:38 am
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Main Air Tanks
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
I totally support Doug, and I am not going to put
any scuba tanks into my Yak-50, thank you very much anyway. Although
Bear/Ernie, if you come up with a plan and a kit for installing them,
I'd love
to see it. Nothing wrong with a "Plan B".
That said, this is not an
"either/or" situation. To those that swear by scuba tanks then run with
it
yourselves, but please don't minimize the ideas and plans of others by
so
doing.
Just saying.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From:
owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com?> ]
On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:29 AM
To:
yak-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Main Air Tanks
--> Yak-List
message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
-->
<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
Yes, they are your airplanes and each will do
as he wants. Yes,
countless modifications have been done to these airplanes
without any
ill effect. I guess I'm just more skeptical than many,
particularly
with regards to structural integrity of the airframe under loadon
these
30-40 year old airplanes. I'm pretty sure a Scuba tank of the same
volume, not pressure, is going to weigh a whole lot more than the original
tank
or a SS replacement tank. That would entail a stronger support system,
especially when one takes into account G loading. That is why I eluded
to
structural considerations.
But, to each his own. I too support Doug and in
this case, support his direct replacement SS tank even if it costs a bit
more.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
334-546-8182
(mobile)
www.yak-52.com
Skype - Yakguy1
On 3/3/2015 8:37 AM, DaBear
wrote:
>
>
First, let me say I support Doug, always have, always will. He has supported
this community for decades.
>
> Agreed, there are a few things that need to be
considered to change to SCUBA. However, let's start with the cost of new
bottles. If I have to replace the main, I'm close to needing to replace
the
emergency, thats $700 each or $1400.
>
> Now, let's consider that Doug
designs and builds a replacement hold down for 2 scuba bottles and the
air
connections. Worst case it's probably around $200 (for 60 sets - let's
play
apples to apples). Then we add it up...
> $200 --- Hold down and connection
>
$320 ---- 4 hours for removal and install
> $400 ---- 2 SCUBA bottles
> $ 80
--- 1 hour for new W&B
>
> As to the paperwork in the US. I could argue that
there is no appreciable effect on W&B, etc. however, let's say there is
and you
have to/want to submit the paperwork, No different than the paperwork
for the
upgraded engine, fuel tanks, smoke system, etc.
>
>
> Come on, better tanks,
MUCH higher safety margin since the tanks support 3k air pressure. You
can go
with aluminum tanks which would weigh about the same. So the big concern
is
attachment and structural support. Please remember what used to be there
in the
form of radio, etc.
>
> Or $1,000 for a system that is better than before,
easier to maintain, and now cheaper and easier to test and replace. Remember,
you take the tank to the local dive shop for annual testing if you want
and find
a problem go get a new tank for less than HALF of the cost of an old CJ/Yak
tank.
>
> Come on, we've modified these planes from one end to the other.
M14P/PF, new exhaust, oil shut off, larger aluminum water trap, pre-oiler,
fuel
tanks, smoke systems, etc. and on and on. We've done that to improve
performance, improve safety, and make it easier and safer to maintain.
>
Replacing a tank with a more expensive tank with no other
> improvements....at
least really, seriously, think about an improvement
>
> No offense was
intended in the above post, please don't take any. They are your airplanes.
Make your own decision.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bear
>
>
> -----Original
Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com?> ] On Behalf Of A. Dennis
>
Savarese
> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:22 AM
> To:
yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Main Air Tanks
>
> -->
Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese"
> -->
<dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net>
>
> FWIW, there are a few things I believe
should be considered if one were to simply change the hold down and connector
and use off the shelf technology. First, it may not be cheaper in a long
run
when you factor in the cost of fabricating a new hold down; de-riveting
the
original hold downs, re-riveting the removed rivets, and finally drilling
and
riveting in the new hold downs. Second, the placement of the Scuba tank
most
likely will have an affect on weight and balance thus requiring a either
an
aircraft re-weighing or at a minimum, calculation of the new weight, balance
and
CG of the airplane. Third, the weight of the Scuba tank must be taken
into
account for structural considerations when designing the hold down and
the
placement of the tank.
>
> Finally, if one were to comply with the aircraft's
Ops Limits, I believe it does say any major modifications require approval
of
the FSDO. Now you've got the FAA involved. You may not consider it a
major
modification, but don't discount the insurance issue, should an accident
or
incident occur. From FAA Order 8130.2G under the section covering Experimental
Exhibition:
>
> The cognizant FSDO must be notified, and its response received
in writing, prior to flying this aircraft after incorporation of a major
change
as defined by 14 CFR 21.93 in order to determine whether new operating
limitations will be required.
> The FSDO response
> should be entered in the
aircraft's records and a copy sent the FAA Aircraft Registration Branch,
AFS-750, P.O. Box 25504, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125 for recording in
the
aircrafts permanent records.
>
> FAR 21.93 defines a major change as:
>
>
21.93 Classification of changes in type design.
> (a) In addition to changes in
type design specified in paragraph (b) of this section, changes in type
design
are classified as minor and major. Aminor change is one that has no
appreciable effect on the weight, balance, structural strength, reliability,
operational characteristics, or other characteristics affecting the
airworthiness of the product. _All other changes are major changes_.
>
>
Given these facts and assuming one does not disregard the documents governing
the issuance of the Special Airworthiness Certificate and Operating Limitations
of the airplane, Doug's form, fit and function replacement tanks are THE
best
solution, by far, IMHO.
>
> A. Dennis Savarese
> 334-546-8182 (mobile)
>
www.yak-52.com
> Skype - Yakguy1
>
> On 3/2/2015 9:28 PM, DaBear wrote:
>> I
have to agree with the Scuba idea. Dont manufacture a new tank,
>> change the
hold down and connector and use off the shelf technology
>> cheaper. It would
work for the main and emergency. If you used
>> scuba tanks youd only have
to change how they were mounted and the
>> connection to the system.
>>
>>
Bear
>>
>> *From:*owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com?> ] *On Behalf Of *Ernest
>>
Martinez
>> *Sent:* Monday, March 02, 2015 8:43 PM
>> *To:* yak-list
>>
*Subject:* Re: Yak-List: Main Air Tanks
>>
>> Aluminum scuba tanks are
designed to be used in salt water, can be
>> hydro tested at any scuba shop,
can be replaced for $200, are rated
>> for 4000 PSI, so it would be a
looooooooong time before a tank
>> corroded to the point where it couldn't be
used to contain 750 PSI.
>>
>> I understand the allure of a direct replacement
so you don't need to
>> worry about mounting. I'm assuming Doug is talking
about these new
>> tanks with the same form factor as stock.
>>
>> Is that
correct Doug??
>>
>> Ernie
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Frank
Stelwagon
>> <pfstelwagon@earthlink.net <mailto:pfstelwagon@earthlink.net <mailto:pfstelwagon@earthlink.net?> >>
wrote:
>>
>> The Aluminum Scuba Tanks have the same problem as the steel
tanks,
>> corrosion. It would take longer but would happen - look at
the
>> aluminum air filter case.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> *
*
>>
>> * *
>>
>>
*et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List*
>>
>>
*tp://forums.matronics.com*
>>
>>
*_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
>>
>> * *
>>
>> *
*
>> * *
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> **
>>
*http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List*
>> **
>> **
>>
*http://forums.matronics.com*
>> **
>> **
>> **
>> **
>>
*http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
>> **
>> * *
>> *
>>
>>
>>
*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
- The Yak-List Email Forum -
browse
Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
Forums!
http://forums.matronics.com
- List Contribution Web Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
D============================================
ist"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
D============================================
//forums.matronics.com
D============================================
ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
D============================================
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: Emer gear ext, a better way? |
Ladies & gents,
1. I'm looking for a procedure of checking my CJ6's emergency air bottle
for gear extension. The RPA proc works well, but all too easily can slam
the gear down (brutal on the trunnions). Is there a smoother technique?
2. Marvel Mystery Oil: good idea for the fuel, oil on a 285hp Housai? Or a
disaster in a bottle? I've never used it, wondering if there's any value
to it.
Thoughts? Thanks-
Justin Drafts
N280NC @ KPAE
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: Emer gear ext, a better way? |
Justin,
Here's a link to a page on my web site, www.yak-52.com which provides
the gear retraction test INCLUDING the emergency gear extension AND how
NOT to cause the gear to slam down. Try it. I think you will be
satisfied with it.
http://www.yak-52.com/maintena.htm
Yes, use MMO in the fuel. Use it religiously and measure the amounts
based on the directions on the bottle. Use the MMO in the oil,
especially if you are experiencing a sticking valve. 1 quart is what I
recommend. Just helped a guy out in Georgia that had what I believed
was a sticking valve based on the symptoms we discussed. I suggested to
him to add 1 qt of MMO to the oil. He called me a couple of days later
totally amazed at how the engine ran now.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
334-546-8182 (mobile)
www.yak-52.com
Skype - Yakguy1
On 3/4/2015 3:04 PM, Justin Drafts wrote:
> Ladies & gents,
>
> 1. I'm looking for a procedure of checking my CJ6's emergency air
> bottle for gear extension. The RPA proc works well, but all too easily
> can slam the gear down (brutal on the trunnions). Is there a smoother
> technique?
>
> 2. Marvel Mystery Oil: good idea for the fuel, oil on a 285hp Housai?
> Or a disaster in a bottle? I've never used it, wondering if there's
> any value to it.
>
>
> Thoughts? Thanks-
>
> Justin Drafts
> N280NC @ KPAE
> *
>
>
> *
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 |
|
I recently purchased a large inventory from a Chinese parts vendor, in it
were a few 28 volt turn coordinators. They are factory new, in the factory
boxes and packing, absolutely perfect. Each unit has the factory
test/certification data with it. I'm told they are now factory standard in
the CJ6. From China they are over $350.00 each. While they last $100.00
each.
Doug
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: Cleaning house |
Doug,
Please reserve 2, turn coordinator for me.
Thanks
Phil Salter
-----Original Message-----
From: doug sapp <dougsappllc@gmail.com>
Sent: Wed, Mar 4, 2015 7:15 pm
Subject: Yak-List: Cleaning house
I recently purchased a large inventory from a Chinese parts vendor, in it were
a few 28 volt turn coordinators. They are factory new, in the factory boxes and
packing, absolutely perfect. Each unit has the factory test/certification
data with it. I'm told they are now factory standard in the CJ6. From China
they are over $350.00 each. While they last $100.00 each.
Doug
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: | Re: Emer gear ext, a better way? |
Concur.
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]
on behalf of A. Dennis Savarese [dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: Emer gear ext, a better way?
Justin,
Here's a link to a page on my web site, www.yak-52.com<http://www.yak-52.com/> which provides
the gear retraction test INCLUDING the emergency gear extension AND how
NOT to cause the gear to slam down. Try it. I think you will be
satisfied with it.
http://www.yak-52.com/maintena.htm
Yes, use MMO in the fuel. Use it religiously and measure the amounts
based on the directions on the bottle. Use the MMO in the oil,
especially if you are experiencing a sticking valve. 1 quart is what I
recommend. Just helped a guy out in Georgia that had what I believed
was a sticking valve based on the symptoms we discussed. I suggested to
him to add 1 qt of MMO to the oil. He called me a couple of days later
totally amazed at how the engine ran now.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
334-546-8182 (mobile)
www.yak-52.com<http://www.yak-52.com/>
Skype - Yakguy1
On 3/4/2015 3:04 PM, Justin Drafts wrote:
> Ladies & gents,
>
> 1. I'm looking for a procedure of checking my CJ6's emergency air
> bottle for gear extension. The RPA proc works well, but all too easily
> can slam the gear down (brutal on the trunnions). Is there a smoother
> technique?
>
> 2. Marvel Mystery Oil: good idea for the fuel, oil on a 285hp Housai?
> Or a disaster in a bottle? I've never used it, wondering if there's
> any value to it.
>
>
> Thoughts? Thanks-
>
> Justin Drafts
> N280NC @ KPAE
> *
>
>
> *
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 |
|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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: Cleaning house |
Doug;
Please hold one of these for me.
Thanks
Walt
From: doug sapp
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 5:14 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Cleaning house
I recently purchased a large inventory from a Chinese parts vendor, in
it were a few 28 volt turn coordinators. They are factory new, in the
factory boxes and packing, absolutely perfect. Each unit has the
factory test/certification data with it. I'm told they are now factory
standard in the CJ6. From China they are over $350.00 each. While they
last $100.00 each.
Doug
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: | CJ-6 prop blade query |
Hi all,
We have a standard J9-G1 prop that a previous operator has blended the face
of each blade at the tips and then filled with bog.
Understandably, my prop shop wants to take crop the blades to remove the
severely thinned material but are unable to as the only information we have
on the blades (from the PT-6 component overhaul manual states that radius
of the prop shall be 1200mm. There is no allowance or mention of cropping
limits.
Anyone out there operating a CJ with cropped blades? Do you have any info
to support cropping the blades?
(We want to remove @ 19mm from each blade)
Regards, Jay
New Zealand
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! --
|