Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:27 AM - Re: [Non-DoD Source] M14 engine sale (Re: Thread Hi-Jacking (JON)
2. 07:41 AM - Yak 52 Question from Australia (Byron M Fox)
3. 08:17 AM - Re: Yak 52 Question from Australia (George S. Coy)
4. 08:49 AM - Re: [Non-DoD Source] M14 engine sale (Re: Thread Hi-Jacking (Rico Jaeger)
5. 09:02 AM - Re: Yak 52 Question from Australia (Byron Fox)
6. 09:43 AM - Re: Yak 52 Question from Australia (bill wade)
7. 12:19 PM - Re: [Non-DoD Source] M14 engine sale (Re: Thread Hi-Jacking (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
8. 12:26 PM - Re: [Non-DoD Source] M14 engine sale (Re: Thread Hi-Jacking (Ernest Martinez)
9. 12:36 PM - Re: [Non-DoD Source] M14 engine sale (Re: Thread Hi-Jacking (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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: [Non-DoD Source] M14 engine sale (re: Thread Hi-Jacking |
Great post Steve!=C2-
=C2-
JB
----- Original Message -----
From: "727gs" <727gs@att.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 5, 2016 9:08:20 PM
Subject: Yak-List: [Non-DoD Source] M14 engine sale (re: Thread Hi-Jacking
Folks,
I gotta say, I'm kinda with Curt on this one. Some of you folks on this lis
t can come off as pretty pompous. When I first got on the list when trying
to get my CJ flying, I didn't get a lot of help, mostly preaching except fo
r one or two pretty helpful guys who were extremely generous with their tim
e off list. Then, when I foolishly asked about putting the gear handle in t
he neutral position, the fun really started. Statements like "Ludicrous" an
d "You didn't know how the system works" came flying back at me. Pretty str
ong language for a self-identified newby asking for help as politely as I c
ould think how. When I said that some of the airplanes I fly at work had a
neutral position, someone thought it appropriate to point out that new Boei
ngs don't any more. Kind of pissy, I thought, but I needed the help.
If you guys want this group to grow, my suggestion would be to give some th
ought to how your "advice" sounds from the other side. I can certainly see
why Curt was getting frustrated and why he vented his displeasure. Instead
of a six paragraph rambling response invoking immigration, Mr. Dralle, the
history of the archives, and Rome, perhaps a 'Sorry, didn't mean it that wa
y" would have worked better. That was the most convoluted near-apology I ha
ve ever read.
I've watched this go on in almost every forum, aircraft or otherwise, I've
been involved with and it is counter-productive. It always eventually dwind
les down to four or five guys spouting off their political views.
If he's was the only one talking like this, you could write that off as one
disgruntled person. He isn't. Every time someone gets pissed and leaves, e
veryone loses.
"Straighten Curt out"? Really?
BTW, I ran into a couple of former Chinese military pilots last time I was
at Langley. I asked them about the gear handle. They said that SOP was to u
se the neutral position after the gear came up. Couldn't tell me why, thoug
h.
Steve Jones
CJ-6a near Chicago
--------
Steve near Chicago
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457767#457767
===========
===========
MS -
===========
WIKI -
===========
e -
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2--Matt Dralle, List Admin.
===========
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: | Yak 52 Question from Australia |
"I have a question that you guys may be able to help with: It seems there a
re some Yak-52s that have a lower G rating than others, and apparently (whet
her this is an Australian thing or not) are placarded with "No Aerobatics".
Are you aware of this, and if so are there any mods that are used in the St
ates to beef up the wing/center section on these planes? Apparently, the wi
ngs can be sent to Yak (Aerostar?) for reinforcing but that's all we're awar
e of."
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Mark Awad
> Chief Executive Officer
> Australian Warbirds Association Ltd
> mark.awad@australianwarbirds.com.au
>
Blitz Fox
415-307-2405
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: | Yak 52 Question from Australia |
The early aircraft developed spar problems and the yak design bureau
modified the wing spars and the carry through spar to a stronger design.
The later production aircraft and the aircraft with the service
bulletins that were modified with the later spars are +7 -5 G aircraft.
The aircraft that were not modified were reduced to +5 -3 G and used for
non-aerobatic training. Many of the +5 - 3 aircraft are still around.
The easiest way to see the difference is the triangular plate protruding
under the wings at the point where the wing bolts to the aircraft. The
+7 - 5 aircraft have a triangular plate about 8 inches on a side, while
the +5 -3 aircraft have a small square box.
The Aerostar factory no longer supports the Yak-52 aircraft
and does not produce the parts for the upgraded spar any longer. The
Motorstar factory in Romania was spun off from Aerostar in 1999 and
still produces engines, overhauls engines, provides parts and supports
the M14P engine series.
Regards,
George
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Byron M Fox
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 10:40 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Yak 52 Question from Australia
"I have a question that you guys may be able to help with: It seems
there are some Yak-52s that have a lower G rating than others, and
apparently (whether this is an Australian thing or not) are placarded
with "No Aerobatics". Are you aware of this, and if so are there any
mods that are used in the States to beef up the wing/center section on
these planes? Apparently, the wings can be sent to Yak (Aerostar?) for
reinforcing but that's all we're aware of."
Thanks!
Best regards,
Mark Awad
Chief Executive Officer
Australian Warbirds Association Ltd
mark.awad@australianwarbirds.com.au
Blitz Fox
415-307-2405
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: [Non-DoD Source] M14 engine sale (re: Thread Hi-Jacking |
The List is an invaluable resource due to the fact that we all operate the
same or similar aircraft and therefore many are able to offer 1st hand expe
rience information. There are a select few who have gathered VOLUMES of dat
a through personal and professional endeavors with these planes and are ref
reshingly approachable and generous with their time, knowledge and advice.
Unfortunately, there DOES appear to be somewhat of a fraternity (to which I
have not been accepted) that tends to ignore most posts / requests or verb
ally chastise those simply seeking enlightenment regarding what is apparent
ly seen as no-brainer basic & common knowledge. Speaking for myself, after
posting a few "dumb questions," (and being digitally spanked!) I now think
long and hard before offering up either advice or query. Kind of sad when y
ou think about it, as (to me, at least) the entire mantra of The List is to
be an information-exchange regarding what we do and love. And in my experi
ence as a teacher, pilot and human being, when you are afraid to ask - your
options are narrowed to "guessing." Knowledge = Longevity. Ignorance
= Brevity. Yes - there is merit in self-educating via experimentation - b
ut why reinvent the wheel when there is a Goodyear outlet across the street
? None of us could walk until we watched our parents from the floor. None o
f us could speak until we heard language all around us. Believe it or not,
there are Redstar Pilots / Owners who did NOT turn down a job at NASA becau
se we were over-qualified. And we are hear cuz we LOVE this s**t, want to L
EARN and be INCLUDED - and strive to do so RESPECTFULLY and SAFELY.
Consider it from this perspective: You can tell your girl "you look fat in
those shorts" (enjoy last week's cold meatloaf!) or you can say "Awe. I was
hoping you would wear those sexy jeans that I can't stop ogling!" and grab
surf & turf together.... It's all in the DELIVERY. :)
And I will throw out my 2 stale invitations again: 1) FORMATION CLINIC / Wa
usau, WI / July 21 - 22 (30 minutes from OSH - One [1] person whom is NOT a
local has responded w/ four [4] area pilots / planes attending, led very c
apably by John "Thud" Casper....sure wanted more attendees than that, but o
h well) and 2) ME ("Sonic Circus") crooning all the glorious 80's Rock N' R
oll you can handle in the SOS Beer Tent / AirVenture / Tuesday, July 26th /
8 - 12.
Tendered w/ all due respect and humility, your "perpetual newbe." :-/
Rico Jaeger
915 S. 11th Ave.
Wausau, WI. 54401
715.529.7426
//
1966 Cessna 150F ^/---//-X
N8558G //
Hangar #35 / AUW
//
1992 Yakovlev Yak 52 ^/---//-X
N21YK //
Hangar #21 / AUW
Rico Jaeger
915 S. 11th Ave.
Wausau, WI. 54401
715.529.7426
//
1966 Cessna 150F ^/---//-X
N8558G //
Hangar #35 / AUW
//
1992 Yakovlev Yak 52 ^/---//-X
N21YK //
Hangar #21 / AUW
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <owner-yak-list-server@matronics.
com> on behalf of Ernest Martinez <erniel29@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 6, 2016 12:46:23 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: [Non-DoD Source] M14 engine sale (re: Thread Hi-Jack
ing
Just when I thought the horse stopped breathing.......
On Tuesday, July 5, 2016, 727gs <727gs@att.net<mailto:727gs@att.net>> wrote
:
Folks,
I gotta say, I'm kinda with Curt on this one. Some of you folks on this lis
t can come off as pretty pompous. When I first got on the list when trying
to get my CJ flying, I didn't get a lot of help, mostly preaching except fo
r one or two pretty helpful guys who were extremely generous with their tim
e off list. Then, when I foolishly asked about putting the gear handle in t
he neutral position, the fun really started. Statements like "Ludicrous" an
d "You didn't know how the system works" came flying back at me. Pretty str
ong language for a self-identified newby asking for help as politely as I c
ould think how. When I said that some of the airplanes I fly at work had a
neutral position, someone thought it appropriate to point out that new Boei
ngs don't any more. Kind of pissy, I thought, but I needed the help.
If you guys want this group to grow, my suggestion would be to give some th
ought to how your "advice" sounds from the other side. I can certainly see
why Curt was getting frustrated and why he vented his displeasure. Instead
of a six paragraph rambling response invoking immigration, Mr. Dralle, the
history of the archives, and Rome, perhaps a 'Sorry, didn't mean it that wa
y" would have worked better. That was the most convoluted near-apology I ha
ve ever read.
I've watched this go on in almost every forum, aircraft or otherwise, I've
been involved with and it is counter-productive. It always eventually dwind
les down to four or five guys spouting off their political views.
If he's was the only one talking like this, you could write that off as one
disgruntled person. He isn't. Every time someone gets pissed and leaves, e
veryone loses.
"Straighten Curt out"? Really?
BTW, I ran into a couple of former Chinese military pilots last time I was
at Langley. I asked them about the gear handle. They said that SOP was to u
se the neutral position after the gear came up. Couldn't tell me why, thoug
h.
Steve Jones
CJ-6a near Chicago
--------
Steve near Chicago
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=457767#457767
List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
FORUMS -
_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
WIKI -
lank">http://wiki.matronics.com
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
target="_blank">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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Yak 52 Question from Australia |
Thanks, George. You're the fount.
Blitz Fox
415-307-2405
> On Jul 6, 2016, at 8:17 AM, George S. Coy <george.coy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The early aircraft developed spar problems and the yak design bureau modif
ied the wing spars and the carry through spar to a stronger design. The late
r production aircraft and the aircraft with the service bulletins that were m
odified with the later spars are +7 -5 G aircraft. The aircraft that were no
t modified were reduced to +5 -3 G and used for non-aerobatic training. Many
of the +5 - 3 aircraft are still around. The easiest way to see the differe
nce is the triangular plate protruding under the wings at the point where th
e wing bolts to the aircraft. The +7 - 5 aircraft have a triangular plate ab
out 8 inches on a side, while the +5 -3 aircraft have a small square box.
> The Aerostar factory no longer supports the Yak-52 aircraft and d
oes not produce the parts for the upgraded spar any longer. The Motorstar fa
ctory in Romania was spun off from Aerostar in 1999 and still produces engin
es, overhauls engines, provides parts and supports the M14P engine series.
> Regards,
> George
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@ma
tronics.com] On Behalf Of Byron M Fox
> Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 10:40 AM
> To: LIst Yak
> Subject: Yak-List: Yak 52 Question from Australia
>
> "I have a question that you guys may be able to help with: It seems there
are some Yak-52s that have a lower G rating than others, and apparently (wh
ether this is an Australian thing or not) are placarded with "No Aerobatics"
. Are you aware of this, and if so are there any mods that are used in the S
tates to beef up the wing/center section on these planes? Apparently, the w
ings can be sent to Yak (Aerostar?) for reinforcing but that's all we're awa
re of."
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Mark Awad
>
> Chief Executive Officer
>
> Australian Warbirds Association Ltd
> mark.awad@australianwarbirds.com.au
>
>
>
> Blitz Fox
> 415-307-2405
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: Yak 52 Question from Australia |
Wing spar problems - completely not true
There is wing spar modification history, but never a problem or failure. Th
e 52 was designed as an +7/-5 g aircraft. In 1982, new limits were establis
hed limiting it to +5/-3 g until a factory upgrade was fitted, increasing t
he strength of the spar carry through. In 1986 (s/n 866501 and above) this
modification was incorporated from the factory and the overhaul facilities
began to incorporate the modifications during the late '80s. Since all 52s
in service were required to be overhauled every five years, all servicable
aircraft should have been upgraded by now. Of course, there were a few airc
raft that did not receive the upgrade. It is easy to identify these aircraf
t since the modification yields a "pie slice" shaped bump on the underside
wingroot fairings by the main spar. There is nothing wrong with non-modifie
d, pre-86 52s, just respect the limitations.
See my tips page for more info including an identification animation
Wing Spar Modification History The 52 was designed as an +7/-5 g aircraft.
In 1982, new limits were established limiting it to +5/-3 g until a factory
upgrade was fitted, increasing the strength of the spar carry through (ser
vice bulletins 59 & 60). In 1986 (s/n 866501 and above) this modification w
as incorporated from the factory and the overhaul facilities began to incor
porate the modifications during the late '80s. Since all 52s in service wer
e required to be overhauled every five years, all servicable aircraft shoul
d have been upgraded by now. Of course, there were a few aircraft that did
not receive the upgrade. It is easy to identify these aircraft since the mo
dification yields a "pie slice" shaped bump on the underside wingroot fairi
ngs by the main spar. There is nothing wrong with non-modified, pre-86 52s,
just respect the limitations. Later, the factory issued another modificati
on (spar straps) to extend the service hours of the airframe (service bulle
tin 107).
The most known is the 59R/60R couple introducing a heavy main spar and stro
nger wing attachments, following the 1983 fatal accident in Vilnius attribu
ted to the failure of the main spar. It was introduced as service bulletin
in November 1986 both on the newly produced and overhauled aircraft. In fac
t, the Bacau factory began regularly implementing it from early 1987 and th
e overhaul facilities, in the early 1990-s, meaning that some of the aircra
ft produced before early 1987 and overhauled before 1992 may still have the
original less solid spar. Conscious of this, the Yakovlev Design Bureau in
itially limited operation of these aircraft to G factor of +5/-3. As of tod
ay, the Bureau refuse to deal with the aircraft without the 59R/60R modific
ation. This is the most crucial and complex Yak-52 modification. It has to
be performed using certified parts in a jig at a certified facility.The nex
t important is the bulletin 107BD.
Yakovlev Design Bureau Russia, 125315, Moscow, Leningradsky prospect, 68=C2
- okb@yak.ru=C2- Public relations and marketing tel. +7 (495)158-34-32
Shakhty Aviation Repair Plant
Rostov reg., Russia
- JSC "TERMIKAS"
- Liepu Str. 198, Vazatkiemis village, LT-59327 Prienai region, Lithuani
a
- Phone: +370 319 60520
- Fax: +370 319 60530
- E-mail: secret@termikas.com
- Web page: www.termikas.com
Disclaimer - All info was found on the NET but I do have a 5G airframe and
the crossover main spar is noticeably smaller and the wing attach bolts are
smaller. I've dealt with Termikas and Aerostar s.a. both were good experie
nces
Bill Wade Yak 52 N4450Y
From: Byron M Fox <byronmfox@gmail.com>
To: LIst Yak <yak-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 6, 2016 10:40 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Yak 52 Question from Australia
"I have a question that you guys may be able to help with: =C2-It seems t
here are some Yak-52s that have a lower G rating than others, and apparentl
y (whether this is an Australian thing or not) are placarded with "No Aerob
atics". =C2-Are you aware of this, and if so are there any mods that are
used in the States to beef up the wing/center section on these planes? =C2
-Apparently, the wings can be sent to Yak (Aerostar?) for reinforcing but
that's all we're aware of."
Thanks!
Best regards,
Mark Awad
Chief Executive Officer
Australian Warbirds Association Ltd
mark.awad@australianwarbirds.com.au
Blitz Fox415-307-2405
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: | [Non-DoD Source] M14 engine sale (re: Thread Hi-Jacking |
Regardless of who's feelings got hurt, regardless of those that do not understand
the term "with all due respect", regardless of those that don't understand
"it was a joke", regardless of those that are afraid to ask questions, regardless
of those who feel that their questions were not answered with the proper "tone
of voice"..... all that aside .....
I think the most important question is this: Of everyone here that asks and answers
questions, whether they be brand new, or old timers .... how many contribute
cash money to Matt Dralle every year so this list (and a ton of others)
can be maintained to the benefit of all concerned?
If you have ... GREAT! Because we *ALL* should. To those that have not contributed
one red cent and have the gonads to come on this list and complain about
ANYTHING AT ALL ..... well, good luck with that and I can guess who you're
voting for. And by the way, this is called "Opening Pandora's Box".
Big smile... Big smile.
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: [Non-DoD Source] M14 engine sale (re: Thread Hi-Jacking |
The horse lives!
On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <
mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
> mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Regardless of who's feelings got hurt, regardless of those that do not
> understand the term "with all due respect", regardless of those that don't
> understand "it was a joke", regardless of those that are afraid to ask
> questions, regardless of those who feel that their questions were not
> answered with the proper "tone of voice"..... all that aside .....
>
> I think the most important question is this: Of everyone here that asks
> and answers questions, whether they be brand new, or old timers .... how
> many contribute cash money to Matt Dralle every year so this list (and a
> ton of others) can be maintained to the benefit of all concerned?
>
> If you have ... GREAT! Because we *ALL* should. To those that have not
> contributed one red cent and have the gonads to come on this list and
> complain about ANYTHING AT ALL ..... well, good luck with that and I can
> guess who you're voting for. And by the way, this is called "Opening
> Pandora's Box".
>
> Big smile... Big smile.
>
>
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: | [Non-DoD Source] M14 engine sale (re: Thread Hi-Jacking |
I think I am offended. Let me think about it and I'll get back to you.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ernest Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: [Non-DoD Source] M14 engine sale (re: Thread Hi-Jacking
The horse lives!
On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
Regardless of who's feelings got hurt, regardless of those that do not
understand the term "with all due respect", regardless of those that don't understand
"it was a joke", regardless of those that are afraid to ask questions,
regardless of those who feel that their questions were not answered with the
proper "tone of voice"..... all that aside .....
I think the most important question is this: Of everyone here that asks
and answers questions, whether they be brand new, or old timers .... how many
contribute cash money to Matt Dralle every year so this list (and a ton of
others) can be maintained to the benefit of all concerned?
If you have ... GREAT! Because we *ALL* should. To those that have
not contributed one red cent and have the gonads to come on this list and complain
about ANYTHING AT ALL ..... well, good luck with that and I can guess who
you're voting for. And by the way, this is called "Opening Pandora's Box".
Big smile... Big smile.
==========
List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
==========
FORUMS -
eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
==========
WIKI -
errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
==========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|