Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:57 AM - Re: Yak-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 02/26/22 (Frederick Slyfield)
2. 07:57 AM - Re: Yak-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 02/26/22 (Frederick Slyfield)
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: Yak-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 02/26/22 |
Great advice, Greg! Fly the airplane for a year and enjoy it in all its
steam-powered glory, John. As Clouddog says you'll probably find that
there's something else you'll need before an IFR panel. And the gyro that's
in it, if working, is perfectly capable of getting you through a cloud
layer on a radar penetration if you get caught out over the top of an
overcast. Don't ask me how I know that. For all the years I flew Delta
777's with its swanky glass, I found it a treat to get into my unmodified
CJ-6 and fly it "old style." Have fun!
Skip Ranger Slyfield
On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 12:52 AM Yak-List Digest Server <
yak-list@matronics.com> wrote:
> *
>
> =================================================
> Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive
> =================================================
>
> Today's complete Yak-List Digest can also be found in either of the
> two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted
> in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes
> and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version
> of the Yak-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor
> such as Notepad or with a web browser.
>
> HTML Version:
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 22-02-26&Archive=Yak
>
> Text Version:
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 22-02-26&Archive=Yak
>
>
> ===============================================
> EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
> ===============================================
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Yak-List Digest Archive
> ---
> Total Messages Posted Sat 02/26/22: 4
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Today's Message Index:
> ----------------------
>
> 1. 12:17 AM - Accident report from Australia (Stressmerchant)
> 2. 01:09 AM - Re: Accident report from Australia (Richard Goode)
> 3. 02:01 AM - Re: Accident report from Australia (Stressmerchant)
> 4. 08:57 AM - Re: Yak-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 02/25/22 (Greg Wrobel)
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 1
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 12:17:45 AM PST US
> Subject: Yak-List: Accident report from Australia
> From: "Stressmerchant" <mike_beresford@yahoo.co.uk>
>
>
> After several years, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) have
> finally
> issued the report for the Yak-52 accident in off Brisbane. I've attached a
> copy
> to this post.
>
> I guess the investigation was unlikely to find a definitive cause, given
> that there
> was no recorded flight data, the impact was not witnessed, and a
> significant
> amount of the wreckage was not recovered. Having said that, I am a little
> disappointed in the report, especially given the length of time it took to
> be
> released.
>
> Two aspects do interest me. The one is the issue of the fatigue life of
> the aircraft.
> My understanding was that the fatigue life is extended through the
> maintenance
> program and specific inspections. Noting the report statement that "At
> the time of publication, and with the exception of some aircraft that have
> been
> modified to a tail-wheel configuration, the remaining Yak-52s registered in
> Australia had exceeded their airframe life", ATSB seem to assume that no
> inspections
> have been taking place.
>
> The second is the issue of the bellcrank. My understanding was that the
> aluminium
> bellcrank required a recurring inspection, but that the requirement for the
> inspection terminated if a steel bellcrank was fitted. The ATSB report
> suggests
> that the inspection is required irrespective of the bellcrank fitted. Could
> someone who has more knowledge of the requirement comment in this?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=506150#506150
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/ao_2019_027_final_105.pdf
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 2
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 01:09:48 AM PST US
> From: "Richard Goode" <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Accident report from Australia
>
>
> Hello Mike,
>
> I think I'm right in saying that the yak-list can't accept attachments,
> but I'd
> be most grateful if you could send me an email with that attachment.
>
> Then in terms of fatigue life that is interesting. If they are saying that
> all
> 52 in Australia have exceeded their airframe life, one would assume that
> they
> are all being grounded. The practicality is that the situation is possibly
> correct
> in that in original Russian legislation, the 52 had a 600 hour airframe
> "life".
> To an extent this is due to the fact that the aircraft sat at one airfield
> and did nothing but aerobatics and sometimes it quite hard G. But also that
> they were employing 250 million people in a quasi-military environment and
> needed
> work for them. So after 600 hours every aircraft would go back to a
> manufacturing
> factory; totally dismantled to its components and then rebuilt as a
> new aircraft. When we started importing them into Europe (and indeed
> elsewhere)
> we initially used a very "Mickey Mouse" registration which had no legal
> validity,
> but the various aviation authorities accepted them for about 14 years
> before
> clamping down.
>
> And of course the 52 is non-certified, and therefore there is no
> internationally
> accepted paperwork for the aircraft allowing it to automatically be
> registered
> in any country. So it is totally up to the local aviation authorities in
> each
> country whether to allow it to fly there. In the UK we have strange, but
> very
> helpful part of our aviation legislation whereby any aircraft that is
> airworthy
> and "ex-military" will be given a "permit to fly" i.e. restricted
> certification.
> But after a while UK CAA realised that there was the 600 hour "lifetime"
> affecting all 52 and were we going to follow it? Clearly that would have
> been
> economically absurd, so we organised a series of meetings between
> ourselves;
> UK CAA and Yakovlev in Moscow, which after a lot of discussion ended up
> with
> a new system of lifetime whereby every aircraft had a detailed inspection
> every
> 600 hours or 15 years.
>
> This meant that engine was removed; wings removed tail et cetera but only
> sufficiently
> to be able to NDT test all the structural parts. And of course a variety
> of other checks on different parts of the aircraft, but dramatically less
> than
> the total reconstruction which the Russians did. In terms of cost, this
> rather
> depends who does it, but around 7000, so not absurd every 15 years. And,
> for the time being, there has been a 3500 hour limit, but with a general
> understanding
> that that could be extended.
>
> But clearly owners in Australia need to have the situation clarified, in
> case there
> is suddenly some edict grounding the aircraft! However many countries in
> Europe, and indeed elsewhere have followed the UK 52 lifetime procedures.
>
> For the bellcrank, for strange reasons, the Russians, I believe, never
> made it
> mandatory to change but strongly advised. Then, in terms of how this is
> interpreted
> comes down to the fact that there is no international legislation for a
> 52 and it's up to each individual country to make up their own rules. But
> certainly
> the understanding is that if still aluminium it must be regularly checked
> but, I believe, is steel that requirement stops.
>
>
> RICHARD GOODE AEROBATICS
> Rhodds Farm, Lyonshall, Hereford, HR5 3LW, UK
> Tel: +44 (0)1544 340120 Fax: +44 (0)1544 340129
> e-mail: richard.goode@russianaeros.com
> www.russianaeros.com
> WORLD LEADERS IN RUSSIAN SPORTING AIRCRAFT & ENGINES
> In partnership with Aerometal Kft, Hungary.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
> On Behalf Of Stressmerchant
> Sent: 26 February 2022 08:17
> Subject: Yak-List: Accident report from Australia
>
> --> <mike_beresford@yahoo.co.uk>
>
> After several years, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) have
> finally
> issued the report for the Yak-52 accident in off Brisbane. I've attached a
> copy
> to this post.
>
> I guess the investigation was unlikely to find a definitive cause, given
> that there
> was no recorded flight data, the impact was not witnessed, and a
> significant
> amount of the wreckage was not recovered. Having said that, I am a little
> disappointed in the report, especially given the length of time it took to
> be
> released.
>
> Two aspects do interest me. The one is the issue of the fatigue life of
> the aircraft.
> My understanding was that the fatigue life is extended through the
> maintenance
> program and specific inspections. Noting the report statement that "At
> the time of publication, and with the exception of some aircraft that have
> been
> modified to a tail-wheel configuration, the remaining Yak-52s registered in
> Australia had exceeded their airframe life", ATSB seem to assume that no
> inspections
> have been taking place.
>
> The second is the issue of the bellcrank. My understanding was that the
> aluminium
> bellcrank required a recurring inspection, but that the requirement for the
> inspection terminated if a steel bellcrank was fitted. The ATSB report
> suggests
> that the inspection is required irrespective of the bellcrank fitted. Could
> someone who has more knowledge of the requirement comment in this?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=506150#506150
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/ao_2019_027_final_105.pdf
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 3
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 02:01:04 AM PST US
> Subject: Yak-List: Re: Accident report from Australia
> From: "Stressmerchant" <mike_beresford@yahoo.co.uk>
>
>
> I used the web-based forum to initiate the post, apologies to those that
> did not
> get the attachment.
>
> The report is available at the ATSB website:
>
> https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2019/aair/ao-2019-027/
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=506153#506153
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 4
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 08:57:43 AM PST US
> From: Greg Wrobel <clouddog22@gmail.com>
> Subject: Yak-List: Re: Yak-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 02/25/22
>
> John,
>
> First of all congrats on your purhase. You are in a great area. Besides the
> folks in Louisville, you have some folks in Columbus IN, Indianapolis, and
> Cincinnati areas. Best to go to the Redstar.org website, join if you have
> not already and you can look up membership in your area.
>
> Regarding panel upgrades and my opinion only. Fly and enjoy the aircraft
> for a bit. Get comfortable and see what you really want to do with it. Yes,
> you can spend a fortune on panel upgrades only to discover hey, I don't
> even use half this stuff. You may discover that your airplane needs other
> things first.
>
> If you have been flying glass cockpits you may think that going back to
> round dials is scary. Hey brother, that is half the fun with these
> aircraft. Regarding IFR. A standard YAK only has 2 hours of fuel. Subtract
> 45 minute reserve and the question is, where are you going to go in an hour
> and maybe 15 minutes. Need an alternate, forget it. Besides, my expierence
> is you will probably be going somewhere with a group (Oshkosh). Are you
> sticking with the flight or are you going solo? Well there goes your
> drinking buddies as you fly off into the murk.
>
> Again, all my opinion only. There are nice upgrades like COM RADIOS, easy
> switching of frequencies with a throttle or control stick button if you are
> in formation. Fuel computer, ADBS in and out, smoke system if you are so
> inclined. In any case, take your time. What excites you now may wane as you
> discover your real needs as opposed to wants.
>
> Happy and safe flying. Looking forward to you showing up at the Music City
> Mingle in October. There will be a host of folks to talk to and look into
> their magnificent cockpits. Send me you email off line and I'll add you to
> the distribution list for this annual event.
>
> Greg Clouddog Wrobel
>
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2022, 01:52 Yak-List Digest Server <yak-list@matronics.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > *
> >
> > ================================================
> > Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive
> > ================================================
> >
> > Today's complete Yak-List Digest can also be found in either of the
> > two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted
> > in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes
> > and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version
> > of the Yak-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor
> > such as Notepad or with a web browser.
> >
> > HTML Version:
> >
> >
> >
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter
> 22-02-25&Archive=Yak
> >
> > Text Version:
> >
> >
> >
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter
> 22-02-25&Archive=Yak
> >
> >
> > ==============================================
> > EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
> > ==============================================
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > Yak-List Digest Archive
> > ---
> > Total Messages Posted Fri 02/25/22: 1
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > Today's Message Index:
> > ----------------------
> >
> > 1. 04:39 PM - Yak cockpit upgrades (MDDRVR)
> >
> >
> > ________________________________ Message 1
> > _____________________________________
> >
> >
> > Time: 04:39:52 PM PST US
> > Subject: Yak-List: Yak cockpit upgrades
> > From: "MDDRVR" <jwl2002@live.com>
> >
> >
> > I am going to do some upgrades/updates to my Yaks cockpits to make it
> more
> > user
> > friendly and add the capability to go IFR if needed. Has anyone here
> > previously
> > done this? What are the pros/cons of your upgrades? Would you do it
> again?
> >
> > John
> >
> > --------
> > John
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=506149#506149
> >
> >
>
>
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: Yak-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 02/26/22 |
Great advice, Greg! Fly the airplane for a year and enjoy it in all its
steam-powered glory, John. As Clouddog says you'll probably find that
there's something else you'll need before an IFR panel. And the gyro that's
in it, if working, is perfectly capable of getting you through a cloud
layer on a radar penetration if you get caught out over the top of an
overcast. Don't ask me how I know that. For all the years I flew Delta
777's with its swanky glass, I found it a treat to get into my unmodified
CJ-6 and fly it "old style." Have fun!
Skip Ranger Slyfield
On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 12:52 AM Yak-List Digest Server <
yak-list@matronics.com> wrote:
> *
>
> =================================================
> Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive
> =================================================
>
> Today's complete Yak-List Digest can also be found in either of the
> two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted
> in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes
> and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version
> of the Yak-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor
> such as Notepad or with a web browser.
>
> HTML Version:
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 22-02-26&Archive=Yak
>
> Text Version:
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 22-02-26&Archive=Yak
>
>
> ===============================================
> EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
> ===============================================
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Yak-List Digest Archive
> ---
> Total Messages Posted Sat 02/26/22: 4
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Today's Message Index:
> ----------------------
>
> 1. 12:17 AM - Accident report from Australia (Stressmerchant)
> 2. 01:09 AM - Re: Accident report from Australia (Richard Goode)
> 3. 02:01 AM - Re: Accident report from Australia (Stressmerchant)
> 4. 08:57 AM - Re: Yak-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 02/25/22 (Greg Wrobel)
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 1
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 12:17:45 AM PST US
> Subject: Yak-List: Accident report from Australia
> From: "Stressmerchant" <mike_beresford@yahoo.co.uk>
>
>
> After several years, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) have
> finally
> issued the report for the Yak-52 accident in off Brisbane. I've attached a
> copy
> to this post.
>
> I guess the investigation was unlikely to find a definitive cause, given
> that there
> was no recorded flight data, the impact was not witnessed, and a
> significant
> amount of the wreckage was not recovered. Having said that, I am a little
> disappointed in the report, especially given the length of time it took to
> be
> released.
>
> Two aspects do interest me. The one is the issue of the fatigue life of
> the aircraft.
> My understanding was that the fatigue life is extended through the
> maintenance
> program and specific inspections. Noting the report statement that "At
> the time of publication, and with the exception of some aircraft that have
> been
> modified to a tail-wheel configuration, the remaining Yak-52s registered in
> Australia had exceeded their airframe life", ATSB seem to assume that no
> inspections
> have been taking place.
>
> The second is the issue of the bellcrank. My understanding was that the
> aluminium
> bellcrank required a recurring inspection, but that the requirement for the
> inspection terminated if a steel bellcrank was fitted. The ATSB report
> suggests
> that the inspection is required irrespective of the bellcrank fitted. Could
> someone who has more knowledge of the requirement comment in this?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=506150#506150
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/ao_2019_027_final_105.pdf
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 2
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 01:09:48 AM PST US
> From: "Richard Goode" <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Accident report from Australia
>
>
> Hello Mike,
>
> I think I'm right in saying that the yak-list can't accept attachments,
> but I'd
> be most grateful if you could send me an email with that attachment.
>
> Then in terms of fatigue life that is interesting. If they are saying that
> all
> 52 in Australia have exceeded their airframe life, one would assume that
> they
> are all being grounded. The practicality is that the situation is possibly
> correct
> in that in original Russian legislation, the 52 had a 600 hour airframe
> "life".
> To an extent this is due to the fact that the aircraft sat at one airfield
> and did nothing but aerobatics and sometimes it quite hard G. But also that
> they were employing 250 million people in a quasi-military environment and
> needed
> work for them. So after 600 hours every aircraft would go back to a
> manufacturing
> factory; totally dismantled to its components and then rebuilt as a
> new aircraft. When we started importing them into Europe (and indeed
> elsewhere)
> we initially used a very "Mickey Mouse" registration which had no legal
> validity,
> but the various aviation authorities accepted them for about 14 years
> before
> clamping down.
>
> And of course the 52 is non-certified, and therefore there is no
> internationally
> accepted paperwork for the aircraft allowing it to automatically be
> registered
> in any country. So it is totally up to the local aviation authorities in
> each
> country whether to allow it to fly there. In the UK we have strange, but
> very
> helpful part of our aviation legislation whereby any aircraft that is
> airworthy
> and "ex-military" will be given a "permit to fly" i.e. restricted
> certification.
> But after a while UK CAA realised that there was the 600 hour "lifetime"
> affecting all 52 and were we going to follow it? Clearly that would have
> been
> economically absurd, so we organised a series of meetings between
> ourselves;
> UK CAA and Yakovlev in Moscow, which after a lot of discussion ended up
> with
> a new system of lifetime whereby every aircraft had a detailed inspection
> every
> 600 hours or 15 years.
>
> This meant that engine was removed; wings removed tail et cetera but only
> sufficiently
> to be able to NDT test all the structural parts. And of course a variety
> of other checks on different parts of the aircraft, but dramatically less
> than
> the total reconstruction which the Russians did. In terms of cost, this
> rather
> depends who does it, but around 7000, so not absurd every 15 years. And,
> for the time being, there has been a 3500 hour limit, but with a general
> understanding
> that that could be extended.
>
> But clearly owners in Australia need to have the situation clarified, in
> case there
> is suddenly some edict grounding the aircraft! However many countries in
> Europe, and indeed elsewhere have followed the UK 52 lifetime procedures.
>
> For the bellcrank, for strange reasons, the Russians, I believe, never
> made it
> mandatory to change but strongly advised. Then, in terms of how this is
> interpreted
> comes down to the fact that there is no international legislation for a
> 52 and it's up to each individual country to make up their own rules. But
> certainly
> the understanding is that if still aluminium it must be regularly checked
> but, I believe, is steel that requirement stops.
>
>
> RICHARD GOODE AEROBATICS
> Rhodds Farm, Lyonshall, Hereford, HR5 3LW, UK
> Tel: +44 (0)1544 340120 Fax: +44 (0)1544 340129
> e-mail: richard.goode@russianaeros.com
> www.russianaeros.com
> WORLD LEADERS IN RUSSIAN SPORTING AIRCRAFT & ENGINES
> In partnership with Aerometal Kft, Hungary.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com <
> owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com>
> On Behalf Of Stressmerchant
> Sent: 26 February 2022 08:17
> Subject: Yak-List: Accident report from Australia
>
> --> <mike_beresford@yahoo.co.uk>
>
> After several years, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) have
> finally
> issued the report for the Yak-52 accident in off Brisbane. I've attached a
> copy
> to this post.
>
> I guess the investigation was unlikely to find a definitive cause, given
> that there
> was no recorded flight data, the impact was not witnessed, and a
> significant
> amount of the wreckage was not recovered. Having said that, I am a little
> disappointed in the report, especially given the length of time it took to
> be
> released.
>
> Two aspects do interest me. The one is the issue of the fatigue life of
> the aircraft.
> My understanding was that the fatigue life is extended through the
> maintenance
> program and specific inspections. Noting the report statement that "At
> the time of publication, and with the exception of some aircraft that have
> been
> modified to a tail-wheel configuration, the remaining Yak-52s registered in
> Australia had exceeded their airframe life", ATSB seem to assume that no
> inspections
> have been taking place.
>
> The second is the issue of the bellcrank. My understanding was that the
> aluminium
> bellcrank required a recurring inspection, but that the requirement for the
> inspection terminated if a steel bellcrank was fitted. The ATSB report
> suggests
> that the inspection is required irrespective of the bellcrank fitted. Could
> someone who has more knowledge of the requirement comment in this?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=506150#506150
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/ao_2019_027_final_105.pdf
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 3
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 02:01:04 AM PST US
> Subject: Yak-List: Re: Accident report from Australia
> From: "Stressmerchant" <mike_beresford@yahoo.co.uk>
>
>
> I used the web-based forum to initiate the post, apologies to those that
> did not
> get the attachment.
>
> The report is available at the ATSB website:
>
> https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2019/aair/ao-2019-027/
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=506153#506153
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 4
> _____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 08:57:43 AM PST US
> From: Greg Wrobel <clouddog22@gmail.com>
> Subject: Yak-List: Re: Yak-List Digest: 1 Msgs - 02/25/22
>
> John,
>
> First of all congrats on your purhase. You are in a great area. Besides the
> folks in Louisville, you have some folks in Columbus IN, Indianapolis, and
> Cincinnati areas. Best to go to the Redstar.org website, join if you have
> not already and you can look up membership in your area.
>
> Regarding panel upgrades and my opinion only. Fly and enjoy the aircraft
> for a bit. Get comfortable and see what you really want to do with it. Yes,
> you can spend a fortune on panel upgrades only to discover hey, I don't
> even use half this stuff. You may discover that your airplane needs other
> things first.
>
> If you have been flying glass cockpits you may think that going back to
> round dials is scary. Hey brother, that is half the fun with these
> aircraft. Regarding IFR. A standard YAK only has 2 hours of fuel. Subtract
> 45 minute reserve and the question is, where are you going to go in an hour
> and maybe 15 minutes. Need an alternate, forget it. Besides, my expierence
> is you will probably be going somewhere with a group (Oshkosh). Are you
> sticking with the flight or are you going solo? Well there goes your
> drinking buddies as you fly off into the murk.
>
> Again, all my opinion only. There are nice upgrades like COM RADIOS, easy
> switching of frequencies with a throttle or control stick button if you are
> in formation. Fuel computer, ADBS in and out, smoke system if you are so
> inclined. In any case, take your time. What excites you now may wane as you
> discover your real needs as opposed to wants.
>
> Happy and safe flying. Looking forward to you showing up at the Music City
> Mingle in October. There will be a host of folks to talk to and look into
> their magnificent cockpits. Send me you email off line and I'll add you to
> the distribution list for this annual event.
>
> Greg Clouddog Wrobel
>
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2022, 01:52 Yak-List Digest Server <yak-list@matronics.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > *
> >
> > ================================================
> > Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive
> > ================================================
> >
> > Today's complete Yak-List Digest can also be found in either of the
> > two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted
> > in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes
> > and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version
> > of the Yak-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor
> > such as Notepad or with a web browser.
> >
> > HTML Version:
> >
> >
> >
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter
> 22-02-25&Archive=Yak
> >
> > Text Version:
> >
> >
> >
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter
> 22-02-25&Archive=Yak
> >
> >
> > ==============================================
> > EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
> > ==============================================
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > Yak-List Digest Archive
> > ---
> > Total Messages Posted Fri 02/25/22: 1
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > Today's Message Index:
> > ----------------------
> >
> > 1. 04:39 PM - Yak cockpit upgrades (MDDRVR)
> >
> >
> > ________________________________ Message 1
> > _____________________________________
> >
> >
> > Time: 04:39:52 PM PST US
> > Subject: Yak-List: Yak cockpit upgrades
> > From: "MDDRVR" <jwl2002@live.com>
> >
> >
> > I am going to do some upgrades/updates to my Yaks cockpits to make it
> more
> > user
> > friendly and add the capability to go IFR if needed. Has anyone here
> > previously
> > done this? What are the pros/cons of your upgrades? Would you do it
> again?
> >
> > John
> >
> > --------
> > John
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=506149#506149
> >
> >
>
>
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! --
|