Pics from Steve Ellison in the Horizon Hobby Extra 300
Discussion / Posted by jbourke / Nov 02, 2009 @ 11:10 AM / 3,835 Views / 28 Comments ( 
1 2 ) / Reply
1 2 ) / Reply
When I started flying "full scale" aerobatics, I was delighted to learn that I wasn't the only R/C industry figure to make the jump.
Steve Ellison, of Horizon Hobby, lives in Salem, Oregon just a half hour or so from me. He flies an Extra 300 which he has decked out nicely in his favorite logos.
Steve has a few years of experience on me and is the stronger pilot. We haven't had much of an opportunity to fly together yet, since Russian Thunder has spent so much time in the shop, so Steve sent me some pics during a practice session in Madras, Oregon.
Steve tells me he is excited about working toward further proficiency and hopes to someday get his aerobatics waiver to perform airshows. We're two peas in a pod, I guess.
I have some news on Russian Thunder. I purchased an engine from Jill and Carl at m-14p.com. It is scheduled to be installed next week. Hopefully, I'll be back in the air again soon. It's been a long wait. I still haven't said much about the shaky test flights I "enjoyed" over the summer...maybe I'll get to it next week.
Jim
Steve Ellison, of Horizon Hobby, lives in Salem, Oregon just a half hour or so from me. He flies an Extra 300 which he has decked out nicely in his favorite logos.
Steve has a few years of experience on me and is the stronger pilot. We haven't had much of an opportunity to fly together yet, since Russian Thunder has spent so much time in the shop, so Steve sent me some pics during a practice session in Madras, Oregon.
Steve tells me he is excited about working toward further proficiency and hopes to someday get his aerobatics waiver to perform airshows. We're two peas in a pod, I guess.
I have some news on Russian Thunder. I purchased an engine from Jill and Carl at m-14p.com. It is scheduled to be installed next week. Hopefully, I'll be back in the air again soon. It's been a long wait. I still haven't said much about the shaky test flights I "enjoyed" over the summer...maybe I'll get to it next week.
Jim
Mourning the loss of Vicki Cruse
Discussion / Posted by jbourke / Aug 22, 2009 @ 06:35 PM / 19,543 Views / 68 Comments ( 1 2 3 4 5 ) / Reply
1 2 3 4 5 ) / Reply
I just received word that IAC president and former world champion, Vicki Cruse, passed away earlier today during the World Aerobatic Championships in the UK.
Vicki was at the controls of a borrowed Edge 540 during her qualification run when a snaproll on a vertical downline ended in her passing. I don't have any further details, but I have to assume a mechanical problem of some kind. The official IAC announcement suggests this as well.
http://www.iac.org/news/2009%20-%200...html#TopOfPage
I didn't know Vicki well, but I mourn her loss along with every other member of the International Aerobatic Club. My every interaction with her was a pleasure. I looked up to her as a pilot, and feel she did a tremendous job of presiding over the IAC.
My heart goes out to her close friends and all the attendees at the WAC. It must seem impossible to continue on with the competition after witnessing such a tragedy. Fly well.
I never knew her family, and I doubt my words will reach them, but you are in my thoughts. I know nothing could make sense of what happened, but I hope it helps to know how exceptionally she represented herself, and her favorite sport, and how much everyone in the IAC will miss her.
Jim
IAC 434151
Vicki was at the controls of a borrowed Edge 540 during her qualification run when a snaproll on a vertical downline ended in her passing. I don't have any further details, but I have to assume a mechanical problem of some kind. The official IAC announcement suggests this as well.
http://www.iac.org/news/2009%20-%200...html#TopOfPage
I didn't know Vicki well, but I mourn her loss along with every other member of the International Aerobatic Club. My every interaction with her was a pleasure. I looked up to her as a pilot, and feel she did a tremendous job of presiding over the IAC.
My heart goes out to her close friends and all the attendees at the WAC. It must seem impossible to continue on with the competition after witnessing such a tragedy. Fly well.
I never knew her family, and I doubt my words will reach them, but you are in my thoughts. I know nothing could make sense of what happened, but I hope it helps to know how exceptionally she represented herself, and her favorite sport, and how much everyone in the IAC will miss her.
Jim
IAC 434151
My appearance on "Is it True?"
Discussion / Posted by jbourke / Aug 11, 2009 @ 04:39 PM / 9,826 Views / 63 Comments ( 1 2 3 4 5 ) / Reply
1 2 3 4 5 ) / Reply
Earlier this year I filmed a segment for the Discovery Channel's new show "Is it True?" hosted by Chuck Nice.
Now that the show has aired, I thought it would be a good time to type up some comments about the experience.
The segment was about a viral video that shows a clearly faked (to me at least) landing of an aircraft after losing a wing. Chuck and the crew saw my youtube video of me doing basically the same stunt with an R/C plane and wanted me to help them put the issue to rest.
It was a rewarding, educational experience that I deeply enjoyed and will remember fondly for years to come. Of course, like anyone involved as I was, there are little bits left out I wish the editors had used, but that's TV for you, I suppose.
It was a somewhat nostalgic experience for me because my first career choice was broadcasting. I snagged a job at a radio station in Omaha as a teenager, when, quite frankly I wasn't old enough to appreciate the opportunity. In my early adult years I switched careers several times, which I suppose is normal, but I've never felt very good about the haphazard way in which I went about it. Those decisions we make when young have far reaching consequences. Let that be a lesson for you youngsters. Working on "Is it True?" gave me an opportunity to consider how different my life would have been had I continued with a degree in Communications rather than switching to Computer Science.
For the shoot, we were asked to rig an airplane so we could lose a wing, then safely pilot said plane to the ground. We had very little time to prepare for the shoot, but I did find time to create a small bust of myself, which was dubbed "mini-Jim" for the show. Mini-Jim is still intact, happily retired, and now sits to my immediate right as I type this, on the shelf in my office.
It is unfortunate that due to the decision to showcase another simulator, the show did not feature the RealFlight segment we shot. For this segment, KE artist Alek Prelle-Tworek created a special RealFlight model of my Yak-54, Russian Thunder, complete with a mini-Jim pilot figure. Chuck and I had great fun trying out the one winged landing in the sim and I thought for sure this scene would feature prominently in the final cut. I was particularly hopeful they would show Chuck at the controls, as it was fun watching him try it out for himself.
For the first shoot with the real thing, we shortened the wing tube on one side and replaced the wing retaining bolt with a servo-driven eyelet and dowel arrangement. There was a lot of head scratching about how short to make the tube. Too short and the wing would come off prematurely, creating a possible safety hazard. Too long and the wing would not want to pull away from the fuselage.
The plan was that I would unlock the wing via a spare switch on the radio and then release the wing by quickly rolling the aircraft. It was reasoned that the wing would want to slide off when the plane was rolled. However, we found in the shop that, while it was easy to slide the wing off straight away from the fuselage, it was not so easy to do it once force was applied to the wing tip, the sort of force we would have during the actual event.
I created a small airfoil plate to attach to the wing tip, and planned on driving the angle of this plate with a servo. This would provide some aerodynamic force to help pull the wing off the plane. It was decided to leave this off initially and only add it if the wing stubbornly adhered to the fuse during the first flight.
My assumption was that the wing would either pull off cleanly or stay firmly stuck. I didn't expect it to come almost all the way off and rotate. But that is just what happened on the day of the shooting, resulting in the loss of the plane. Once the wing rotated it was all over. I did not have enough aileron authority to keep the plane level. Rather than let it roll on its back, I accepted what fate had dealt and ditched it in the best of all places: a ditch.
The ditch was naturally filled with water, which made extracting the plane a mess. I left the Lebanon municipal airport that day happy that I had been able to participate, but distressed over the outcome. At that point it wasn't clear to me whether there would be time for a reshoot. The production crew felt they had enough to produce the show, and I left the decision up to them, but ultimately came to the conclusion that I would never sleep properly unless I was successful. We came to our own decision to reshoot at our expense.
We rebuilt the plane with high torque servos in place to help push the wing off and shortened the tube further. We made the tube as short as we dared, and rounded the end a bit so that all the drag force wouldn't be applied to a single point. This approach worked like a charm. At the shop we played with the mechanism many times, holding the wing under all sorts of loads, and had no trouble reproducibly dropping the wing.
A few weeks rolled by when the weather and my schedule cleared up enough to try it again. This time things worked as planned and after a short take off roll and downwind passes, I pressed the switch.
Here is a youtube link showing the raw video taken from the wing mounted camera during this flight:
If you watch all the way to the end of the video you will see the plane flying toward the landing point in Knife Edge. It's a happy little accident.
As you can see from that video, the wing departed cleanly and landed in soft grass. This gave us a chance to try for another take.
The second time I did a nice slow high-alpha knife edge pass for the camera. As long as the correct trim inputs are held, flying the plane in this manner is not all that difficult. At this point I had enough practice that I could nail the landing, and felt confident we had all the video we needed.
For the third run, I planned to do some aerobatics, having practiced this in RealFlight.
Unfortunately, on the third flight the wing decided "enough is enough" and decided to take the canopy and a good chunk of the rudder with it on the way down. Really, I'm surprised this didn't happen sooner. A lot of things have to go right to make this stunt work. Piloting ability is a small factor, and I think the piloting skills necessary to pull this off are somewhat overplayed. Yes, it is an abnormal type of flying, but I think there are many pilots who could do it given the good fortune I had.
So we lost two planes over a one month period to produce a few minutes of time on the show. The sequences were not filmed one day after another as presented on TV, and the host was only present for one day, despite the implications provided by the producer. There is a lot I learned about this process. I don't have any problem with TV being a lie, because it is an enjoyable one, but it was an eye-opening experience to see how so much material was condensed to tell the story, often a story presented out of order, with audio from one take dubbed over a smile from another. I almost didn't mention the fictional narrative of the show, but rolled over the "Is it True?" title a few times and decided that if life is going to give me a cute little joke like that, I might as well share it.
The only part of the show I object to on a factual basis is the incorrect explanation of lift using the totally incorrect Equal Transit Theory, e.g. "lift is a result of air travelling a farther distance over the top of the wing than the bottom, which forces the air on top to flow faster, thereby creating lower pressure due to the Bernoulli principle, thereby created a lifting force". While the Bernoulli principle is at play, lift should not be explained in this manner because it does more harm than good.
There is a better simplification to describe lift: Lift is created because the wing deflects air downwards. That's really all there is to say. We can go deeper into how the air is deflected downwards, and to what amount depending on the conditions, but the layman's understanding should be "a wing produces lift by meeting the oncoming air at an angle, thereby deflecting it downwards".
Without an understanding of the momentum transfer to the surrounding air, we can't fully appreciate how "knife edge flight" (and, therefore, a One Wing Landing) is possible.
Not only does the "downwash" explanation reveal more truth, it is also much more easily understood! Most people that graduate high school seem to know about the "Bernoulli thing" but ask them to explain how that process creates lift and they can't go any further. When you say "actually, the wing pushes air down, and that makes the airplane go up" a little light goes on. It seems that real physics is sometimes easier than the simplifications.
Contrary to the show's presentation, a lift-producing wing does not part the air evenly, top to bottom. The airflow does not separate at the leading edge (the separation will typically be under the leading edge). The air flowing along the top of the wing does not necessarily (or even often) meet the air that flows along the bottom of the wing. Somewhere a high school science book probably got this wrong many, many years ago when airplanes were new things, and now the myth is so pervasive it seems it will never die. I don't blame the producers for this, but simply want to point out that their slide showed the exact conditions necessary for a wing to produce absolutely zero lift, which is ironically opposite their intention, and I hope that pointing this out will further the understanding of those interested in such things.
Edit: Some of the commenters to this blog entry have taken issue with my explanation. I've slightly edited my wording to avoid a debate, and I'll simply point readers to the following link and ask them to review the section regarding "Equal Transit Time" if they are looking for further information about my criticism of the show's explanation.
Wikipedia's explanation of lift
That said, I can see how and why they structured the segment the way they did, don't mind the occasional simplification or reality shifting to make a good story, and am very grateful they didn't choose shots of me picking my nose or telling off color jokes. I also think they did a pretty good job of taking "everyman" Chuck Nice on a journey of discovery. While a lot of people viewing this site would have liked a more in-depth discussion, I'm sure, the show has a different audience in mind, and I think it accomplished its mission.
Eric Olsen and Neal Kuechler worked very hard on this project with me and came up with a lot of ideas that helped make things work better. Thanks guys.
It should go without saying that I am a professional and absolutely do not recommend repeating this project. We shut down a full scale airport to provide the appropriate safety margin. I did this stunt for TV because I thought it would help advance an understanding of aviation and of R/C modeling, but I would not want to see anyone trying this at their local field. It just isn't safe.
However, if you do become unlucky enough to be at the controls when such a thing happens, I hope you do whatever you can to bring the airplane down to meet the ground with the lowest relative velocity possible, and I would be very pleased if my example made you more able to consider ways in which that can be done.
Jim
Now that the show has aired, I thought it would be a good time to type up some comments about the experience.
The segment was about a viral video that shows a clearly faked (to me at least) landing of an aircraft after losing a wing. Chuck and the crew saw my youtube video of me doing basically the same stunt with an R/C plane and wanted me to help them put the issue to rest.
It was a rewarding, educational experience that I deeply enjoyed and will remember fondly for years to come. Of course, like anyone involved as I was, there are little bits left out I wish the editors had used, but that's TV for you, I suppose.
It was a somewhat nostalgic experience for me because my first career choice was broadcasting. I snagged a job at a radio station in Omaha as a teenager, when, quite frankly I wasn't old enough to appreciate the opportunity. In my early adult years I switched careers several times, which I suppose is normal, but I've never felt very good about the haphazard way in which I went about it. Those decisions we make when young have far reaching consequences. Let that be a lesson for you youngsters. Working on "Is it True?" gave me an opportunity to consider how different my life would have been had I continued with a degree in Communications rather than switching to Computer Science.
For the shoot, we were asked to rig an airplane so we could lose a wing, then safely pilot said plane to the ground. We had very little time to prepare for the shoot, but I did find time to create a small bust of myself, which was dubbed "mini-Jim" for the show. Mini-Jim is still intact, happily retired, and now sits to my immediate right as I type this, on the shelf in my office.
It is unfortunate that due to the decision to showcase another simulator, the show did not feature the RealFlight segment we shot. For this segment, KE artist Alek Prelle-Tworek created a special RealFlight model of my Yak-54, Russian Thunder, complete with a mini-Jim pilot figure. Chuck and I had great fun trying out the one winged landing in the sim and I thought for sure this scene would feature prominently in the final cut. I was particularly hopeful they would show Chuck at the controls, as it was fun watching him try it out for himself.
For the first shoot with the real thing, we shortened the wing tube on one side and replaced the wing retaining bolt with a servo-driven eyelet and dowel arrangement. There was a lot of head scratching about how short to make the tube. Too short and the wing would come off prematurely, creating a possible safety hazard. Too long and the wing would not want to pull away from the fuselage.
The plan was that I would unlock the wing via a spare switch on the radio and then release the wing by quickly rolling the aircraft. It was reasoned that the wing would want to slide off when the plane was rolled. However, we found in the shop that, while it was easy to slide the wing off straight away from the fuselage, it was not so easy to do it once force was applied to the wing tip, the sort of force we would have during the actual event.
I created a small airfoil plate to attach to the wing tip, and planned on driving the angle of this plate with a servo. This would provide some aerodynamic force to help pull the wing off the plane. It was decided to leave this off initially and only add it if the wing stubbornly adhered to the fuse during the first flight.
My assumption was that the wing would either pull off cleanly or stay firmly stuck. I didn't expect it to come almost all the way off and rotate. But that is just what happened on the day of the shooting, resulting in the loss of the plane. Once the wing rotated it was all over. I did not have enough aileron authority to keep the plane level. Rather than let it roll on its back, I accepted what fate had dealt and ditched it in the best of all places: a ditch.
The ditch was naturally filled with water, which made extracting the plane a mess. I left the Lebanon municipal airport that day happy that I had been able to participate, but distressed over the outcome. At that point it wasn't clear to me whether there would be time for a reshoot. The production crew felt they had enough to produce the show, and I left the decision up to them, but ultimately came to the conclusion that I would never sleep properly unless I was successful. We came to our own decision to reshoot at our expense.
We rebuilt the plane with high torque servos in place to help push the wing off and shortened the tube further. We made the tube as short as we dared, and rounded the end a bit so that all the drag force wouldn't be applied to a single point. This approach worked like a charm. At the shop we played with the mechanism many times, holding the wing under all sorts of loads, and had no trouble reproducibly dropping the wing.
A few weeks rolled by when the weather and my schedule cleared up enough to try it again. This time things worked as planned and after a short take off roll and downwind passes, I pressed the switch.
Here is a youtube link showing the raw video taken from the wing mounted camera during this flight:
| One Wing Landing video from wing camera (2 min 6 sec) |
If you watch all the way to the end of the video you will see the plane flying toward the landing point in Knife Edge. It's a happy little accident.
As you can see from that video, the wing departed cleanly and landed in soft grass. This gave us a chance to try for another take.
The second time I did a nice slow high-alpha knife edge pass for the camera. As long as the correct trim inputs are held, flying the plane in this manner is not all that difficult. At this point I had enough practice that I could nail the landing, and felt confident we had all the video we needed.
For the third run, I planned to do some aerobatics, having practiced this in RealFlight.
Unfortunately, on the third flight the wing decided "enough is enough" and decided to take the canopy and a good chunk of the rudder with it on the way down. Really, I'm surprised this didn't happen sooner. A lot of things have to go right to make this stunt work. Piloting ability is a small factor, and I think the piloting skills necessary to pull this off are somewhat overplayed. Yes, it is an abnormal type of flying, but I think there are many pilots who could do it given the good fortune I had.
So we lost two planes over a one month period to produce a few minutes of time on the show. The sequences were not filmed one day after another as presented on TV, and the host was only present for one day, despite the implications provided by the producer. There is a lot I learned about this process. I don't have any problem with TV being a lie, because it is an enjoyable one, but it was an eye-opening experience to see how so much material was condensed to tell the story, often a story presented out of order, with audio from one take dubbed over a smile from another. I almost didn't mention the fictional narrative of the show, but rolled over the "Is it True?" title a few times and decided that if life is going to give me a cute little joke like that, I might as well share it.
The only part of the show I object to on a factual basis is the incorrect explanation of lift using the totally incorrect Equal Transit Theory, e.g. "lift is a result of air travelling a farther distance over the top of the wing than the bottom, which forces the air on top to flow faster, thereby creating lower pressure due to the Bernoulli principle, thereby created a lifting force". While the Bernoulli principle is at play, lift should not be explained in this manner because it does more harm than good.
There is a better simplification to describe lift: Lift is created because the wing deflects air downwards. That's really all there is to say. We can go deeper into how the air is deflected downwards, and to what amount depending on the conditions, but the layman's understanding should be "a wing produces lift by meeting the oncoming air at an angle, thereby deflecting it downwards".
Without an understanding of the momentum transfer to the surrounding air, we can't fully appreciate how "knife edge flight" (and, therefore, a One Wing Landing) is possible.
Not only does the "downwash" explanation reveal more truth, it is also much more easily understood! Most people that graduate high school seem to know about the "Bernoulli thing" but ask them to explain how that process creates lift and they can't go any further. When you say "actually, the wing pushes air down, and that makes the airplane go up" a little light goes on. It seems that real physics is sometimes easier than the simplifications.
Contrary to the show's presentation, a lift-producing wing does not part the air evenly, top to bottom. The airflow does not separate at the leading edge (the separation will typically be under the leading edge). The air flowing along the top of the wing does not necessarily (or even often) meet the air that flows along the bottom of the wing. Somewhere a high school science book probably got this wrong many, many years ago when airplanes were new things, and now the myth is so pervasive it seems it will never die. I don't blame the producers for this, but simply want to point out that their slide showed the exact conditions necessary for a wing to produce absolutely zero lift, which is ironically opposite their intention, and I hope that pointing this out will further the understanding of those interested in such things.
Edit: Some of the commenters to this blog entry have taken issue with my explanation. I've slightly edited my wording to avoid a debate, and I'll simply point readers to the following link and ask them to review the section regarding "Equal Transit Time" if they are looking for further information about my criticism of the show's explanation.
Wikipedia's explanation of lift
That said, I can see how and why they structured the segment the way they did, don't mind the occasional simplification or reality shifting to make a good story, and am very grateful they didn't choose shots of me picking my nose or telling off color jokes. I also think they did a pretty good job of taking "everyman" Chuck Nice on a journey of discovery. While a lot of people viewing this site would have liked a more in-depth discussion, I'm sure, the show has a different audience in mind, and I think it accomplished its mission.
Eric Olsen and Neal Kuechler worked very hard on this project with me and came up with a lot of ideas that helped make things work better. Thanks guys.
It should go without saying that I am a professional and absolutely do not recommend repeating this project. We shut down a full scale airport to provide the appropriate safety margin. I did this stunt for TV because I thought it would help advance an understanding of aviation and of R/C modeling, but I would not want to see anyone trying this at their local field. It just isn't safe.
However, if you do become unlucky enough to be at the controls when such a thing happens, I hope you do whatever you can to bring the airplane down to meet the ground with the lowest relative velocity possible, and I would be very pleased if my example made you more able to consider ways in which that can be done.
Jim
The 2009 Apple Cup
I was unable to compete in this year's Apple Cup in Ephrata, Washington, because Russian Thunder is down for repairs, but I did manage to drive up and chit chat with my fellow IAC competitors.
While there I took a few shots of some of the aircraft.
The new MXS and Sbach aircraft were on the scene. I hooked up with Kevin Eldredge, of SloAir, who imports the Sbach aircraft into the US.
If you haven't seen the Sbach 342 yet, it is worth a look. The red, black, and white color scheme is very sharp. I was very excited to get close to it and sit it in. It isn't as roomy as my Yak, but it is much better ergonomically. The finish of the Sbach, of course, is simply amazing, and I imagine that the beauty is more than skin deep. The designer chose to use many curves that are aesthetically pleasing and also demonstrate a craftsman's touch. We could say that no corners were cut, if you will forgive the pun. I'm told that the fellow who designed the Sbach aircraft also designs R/C planes.
It was a good opportunity to look at other aircraft. I hate to say it, but it looks like Russian Thunder will be down for quite awhile. I'll tell the whole story in another blog entry, once I know for sure what to say, but at this point it looks like I'll need a whole new engine. If so, I may be sending the aircraft to Lithuania get a few service bulletins dealt with. While I'm mulling this decision over, I thought I'd share the pics I took with you.
Jim
While there I took a few shots of some of the aircraft.
The new MXS and Sbach aircraft were on the scene. I hooked up with Kevin Eldredge, of SloAir, who imports the Sbach aircraft into the US.
If you haven't seen the Sbach 342 yet, it is worth a look. The red, black, and white color scheme is very sharp. I was very excited to get close to it and sit it in. It isn't as roomy as my Yak, but it is much better ergonomically. The finish of the Sbach, of course, is simply amazing, and I imagine that the beauty is more than skin deep. The designer chose to use many curves that are aesthetically pleasing and also demonstrate a craftsman's touch. We could say that no corners were cut, if you will forgive the pun. I'm told that the fellow who designed the Sbach aircraft also designs R/C planes.
It was a good opportunity to look at other aircraft. I hate to say it, but it looks like Russian Thunder will be down for quite awhile. I'll tell the whole story in another blog entry, once I know for sure what to say, but at this point it looks like I'll need a whole new engine. If so, I may be sending the aircraft to Lithuania get a few service bulletins dealt with. While I'm mulling this decision over, I thought I'd share the pics I took with you.
Jim
A visit to American Propeller
Discussion / Posted by jbourke / Jun 28, 2009 @ 04:59 PM / 8,248 Views / 17 Comments ( 1 2 ) / Reply
1 2 ) / Reply
I took a side trip to American Propeller, the folks who made Russian Thunder's propeller. The purpose of the visit was to double check the prop after some vibration issues grounded the airplane. The shop manager, Todd, was kind enough to allow me a tour of the shop, and let me take some pictures.
It was nice to see that they still keep a duplicate of the propeller mounted to the wall, which now serves as a memorial to the former owner, Eric Beard.
After the static balance was fine tuned by the shop, we re-installed it and determined that there was still significant vibration present. The remedy for that involved replacing two cylinders and performing a dynamic balance test on the propeller. I've learned a lot from this experience, though it has been expensive and time-consuming.
Jim
It was nice to see that they still keep a duplicate of the propeller mounted to the wall, which now serves as a memorial to the former owner, Eric Beard.
After the static balance was fine tuned by the shop, we re-installed it and determined that there was still significant vibration present. The remedy for that involved replacing two cylinders and performing a dynamic balance test on the propeller. I've learned a lot from this experience, though it has been expensive and time-consuming.
Jim
More RT pics and an update
Discussion / Posted by jbourke / Jun 21, 2009 @ 07:19 PM / 9,890 Views / 22 Comments ( 1 2 ) / Reply
1 2 ) / Reply
What was supposed to be a 1 or 2 day trip to Red Bluff, Ca to pick up my Yak-54, Russian Thunder, turned into a 2 week stay. The delay was mostly due to minor issues unrelated to safety, but unfortunately we found a rather serious vibration problem near the end of my trip, just as I was about to leave for the XFC. To make a long story short, cylinders 5 and 9 required replacement.
I ended up attending XFC all the same, and greatly enjoyed myself, but look forward to getting back into Russian Thunder as soon as possible. The current plan is to go back down to California this Tuesday. RT now has two new cylinders to replace the ones that went south.
Since the plane was down for a bit longer, I asked the mechanics to take time to install an EFIS. I chose the Dynon D10A. This is a very small little unit that will sit in the middle of the panel. My plan is to move this baby EFIS to the front cockpit this winter, time and money permitting, and then do a completely makeover to the rear cockpit panel. For now, I just wanted something simple to save my bottom if I stupidly flew myself into a bad situation. Today's electronics make attitude indication possible with very little weight gain, and it is becoming more and more common to see unlimited class aircraft equipped with full IFR panels.
I don't have any photos of the EFIS installed in the panel yet, but I can share some additional photos I took while we were diagnosing the vibration issue and adjusting the aileron balance.
Jim
I ended up attending XFC all the same, and greatly enjoyed myself, but look forward to getting back into Russian Thunder as soon as possible. The current plan is to go back down to California this Tuesday. RT now has two new cylinders to replace the ones that went south.
Since the plane was down for a bit longer, I asked the mechanics to take time to install an EFIS. I chose the Dynon D10A. This is a very small little unit that will sit in the middle of the panel. My plan is to move this baby EFIS to the front cockpit this winter, time and money permitting, and then do a completely makeover to the rear cockpit panel. For now, I just wanted something simple to save my bottom if I stupidly flew myself into a bad situation. Today's electronics make attitude indication possible with very little weight gain, and it is becoming more and more common to see unlimited class aircraft equipped with full IFR panels.
I don't have any photos of the EFIS installed in the panel yet, but I can share some additional photos I took while we were diagnosing the vibration issue and adjusting the aileron balance.
Jim
The Return of Russian Thunder
I'm in Red Bluff, California for the next few days, picking up Russian Thunder from Cardan Aircraft.
I've attached some shots of the new paint scheme. It's similar to the original in most ways, but slightly more modernized. The big change is to the vertical stab, where we've added a graceful curve. I spent a few months mulling over all the ideas we had for changing it up, because i didn't feel totally secure about the conservative approach, but in the end I couldn't bring myself to make a dramatic change. Now that I see the plane with all the paint on it there I feel very solid that it looks how it should.
I went the extra mile and had them paint the engine. I'll try to get some better shots of it later.
It looks like I'm stuck here for a couple of days due to convective activity in the pass to Oregon, so we're going to use the time to adjust the harnesses and seats a bit more. I need to find a way to lower the seat a bit so I can perform negative Gs without pressing against the canopy. I only have about an inch of headroom right now and have bonked my head against the canopy a few times. Eric Beard, the previous owner, managed to break a canopy this way and I'd rather not do the same.
Once all of this work is completed, my plan is to return to Corvallis for a few days and then leave early next week for the XFC. That is a long trip in a Yak-54 but I look forward to the adventure!
Jim
I've attached some shots of the new paint scheme. It's similar to the original in most ways, but slightly more modernized. The big change is to the vertical stab, where we've added a graceful curve. I spent a few months mulling over all the ideas we had for changing it up, because i didn't feel totally secure about the conservative approach, but in the end I couldn't bring myself to make a dramatic change. Now that I see the plane with all the paint on it there I feel very solid that it looks how it should.
I went the extra mile and had them paint the engine. I'll try to get some better shots of it later.
It looks like I'm stuck here for a couple of days due to convective activity in the pass to Oregon, so we're going to use the time to adjust the harnesses and seats a bit more. I need to find a way to lower the seat a bit so I can perform negative Gs without pressing against the canopy. I only have about an inch of headroom right now and have bonked my head against the canopy a few times. Eric Beard, the previous owner, managed to break a canopy this way and I'd rather not do the same.
Once all of this work is completed, my plan is to return to Corvallis for a few days and then leave early next week for the XFC. That is a long trip in a Yak-54 but I look forward to the adventure!
Jim
Video: Safe landing after wing falls off
Discussion / Posted by jbourke / Sep 30, 2008 @ 01:03 PM / 51,786 Views / 106 Comments ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page ) / Reply
1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page ) / Reply
On Saturday we had a Chili Feed and Fun Fly at the local club. I showed up and was hoping to fly my 1/3rd scale Cap 580 model. Unfortunately, I had a problem during the flight and was forced to abort after only a few moments in the air.
A friend, Keith Ellis, felt a little bad for my situation and offered to let me fly his Yak-54. That seemed fitting, since I fly Russian Thunder, so I jumped at the chance.
I've flown Keith's model previously and it is a nice flying airplane. He broke the wing somehow and recently fixed it. We went over the repair and everything seemed solid. Unfortunately, it didn't hold together as well as we had hoped.
I started out flying in a careful way but as the flight went on I became more comfortable with the airplane. I started doing knife edge passes and spins. I did a few tumbles. Everything felt good so I did a knife edge spin. I made some high speed circuits across the field. The plane was really grooving and I was enjoying myself.
But then I did a snap roll at full throttle at mid-field and the left wing abruptly departed the aircraft. There was no warning, and I don't remember hearing anything. It just came off and started fluttering down.
The aircraft bobbled a bit as I held in what seemed like the proper correction. After a few seconds I found the new centering position needed to keep the plane trimmed in stable knife edge flight. I coaxed it around the field, lined it up, and prepared to ditch it on its side off the runway, but instinct took over, I guess, and I put it on the runway right side up instead.
I think this was a once in a lifetime opportunity. I've practiced the scenario on the RealFlight simulator many times, and I credit that experience with my ability to bring it in wheels down. I never thought I'd get a shot to do this in real life. Secretly, I've always hoped for it.
After the event we all sat and talked about it for quite awhile. We all agreed that it was pretty cool. Luckily, one of the club members, Mark Wilson, had a video camera running. Eric Olsen was there to take pictures.
Jim
A friend, Keith Ellis, felt a little bad for my situation and offered to let me fly his Yak-54. That seemed fitting, since I fly Russian Thunder, so I jumped at the chance.
I've flown Keith's model previously and it is a nice flying airplane. He broke the wing somehow and recently fixed it. We went over the repair and everything seemed solid. Unfortunately, it didn't hold together as well as we had hoped.
I started out flying in a careful way but as the flight went on I became more comfortable with the airplane. I started doing knife edge passes and spins. I did a few tumbles. Everything felt good so I did a knife edge spin. I made some high speed circuits across the field. The plane was really grooving and I was enjoying myself.
But then I did a snap roll at full throttle at mid-field and the left wing abruptly departed the aircraft. There was no warning, and I don't remember hearing anything. It just came off and started fluttering down.
The aircraft bobbled a bit as I held in what seemed like the proper correction. After a few seconds I found the new centering position needed to keep the plane trimmed in stable knife edge flight. I coaxed it around the field, lined it up, and prepared to ditch it on its side off the runway, but instinct took over, I guess, and I put it on the runway right side up instead.
I think this was a once in a lifetime opportunity. I've practiced the scenario on the RealFlight simulator many times, and I credit that experience with my ability to bring it in wheels down. I never thought I'd get a shot to do this in real life. Secretly, I've always hoped for it.
After the event we all sat and talked about it for quite awhile. We all agreed that it was pretty cool. Luckily, one of the club members, Mark Wilson, had a video camera running. Eric Olsen was there to take pictures.
Jim
| Jim Bourke One Wing Landing (1 min 38 sec) |
Video! Russian Thunder and I attend our first IAC contest!
Discussion / Posted by jbourke / Sep 09, 2008 @ 02:19 PM / 29,031 Views / 37 Comments ( 1 2 3 ) / Reply
1 2 3 ) / Reply
This past weekend I flew my Yak-54, Russian Thunder, to Ephrata, Washington. There I competed in my first International Aerobatics Club competition, the Apple Turnover.
I flew in Sportsman and placed well for my first outing. On my first flight, I finished in 11th, on the second flight, I finished in fourth, and on the third flight I finished in third. I did well enough overall to take fifth place.
More importantly, I met a lot of cool people and had a blast! The IAC-ers are a great bunch. I look forward to flying with them again soon.
The Sportsman sequence is pretty basic by R/C standards. I've attached it for your reference. Sportsman competitors may optionally perform a freestyle sequence or they may repeat the known sequence for their freestyle. I chose that option since this was my first time, and it worked well.
Some things I learned:
Here is a video I took from a Hobby-Lobby FlyCamOne2 mounted to my cap:
Unfortunately, it cuts out a few seconds before the end of the sequence, because I spent too much time goofing around with the camera. These things are fun!
Jim
I flew in Sportsman and placed well for my first outing. On my first flight, I finished in 11th, on the second flight, I finished in fourth, and on the third flight I finished in third. I did well enough overall to take fifth place.
More importantly, I met a lot of cool people and had a blast! The IAC-ers are a great bunch. I look forward to flying with them again soon.
The Sportsman sequence is pretty basic by R/C standards. I've attached it for your reference. Sportsman competitors may optionally perform a freestyle sequence or they may repeat the known sequence for their freestyle. I chose that option since this was my first time, and it worked well.
Some things I learned:
- The aerobatic box is 1000x1000 meters. The sequence has to be flown within that. Leaving the box incurs a penalty. This is much harder than it seems because planes move very fast and most of the time the box markers are hidden by the bottom of the plane, the wings, etc.
- During my first flight, a lot of my vertical lines weren't really vertical and a lot of my looping maneuvers weren't very round. I picked up some advice and that made a huge difference. It's so much easier to do this stuff with an R/C plane, where you can see exactly what the judge sees!
- Judges like the Yak-54. It's big and noisy and presents well. Several of them commented on the plane after I flew. I don't know if that got me any extra points, but if it did, I'll take 'em!
Here is a video I took from a Hobby-Lobby FlyCamOne2 mounted to my cap:
| Russian Thunder at the Apple Turnover (5 min 50 sec) |
Unfortunately, it cuts out a few seconds before the end of the sequence, because I spent too much time goofing around with the camera. These things are fun!
Jim
Sport Aerobatics article
Sport Aerobatics was foolish enough to let me write a short article for their July issue. The cover featured Russian Thunder. I wrote about my experience transitioning from model aerobatics to full scale aerobatics.
I'm attaching jpgs of the article, by permission.
Sport Aerobatics is the monthly magazine published by the International Aerobatics Club, the IAC.
More information on the IAC can be found here: http://www.iac.org/
Jim
I'm attaching jpgs of the article, by permission.
Sport Aerobatics is the monthly magazine published by the International Aerobatics Club, the IAC.
More information on the IAC can be found here: http://www.iac.org/
Jim
Video of a minor engine fire in Russian Thunder
I've uploaded a video to my YouTube account that shows what happens when a fuel leak goes unnoticed.
If you've read my blog you know that I previously had the carb inlet box rebuilt. It doesn't feel very good to see it surrounded by flames, but it seems to have held up just fine.
The post-fire analysis showed that the carb had developed a leak. Every time I primed the "Manifold" side of the priming handle, fuel would squirt out of the carb and into the bottom of the cowl. I gave the system a few extra shots on that morning because I have been having trouble getting a reliable start.
Luckily my friend and co-worker, Eric, was on hand video taping the start and he had a fire extinguisher close by. If he hadn't been there I doubt I would have noticed anything wrong at all. From the perspective of the cockpit, nothing seemed to be amiss. We were sort of scratching our heads when Eric put down the camera and started running around saying "Oh my God! Oh my God!".
The solution was as simple as a couple of turns of the bolts holding the carb together. These bolts were locked in place by tabs and couldn't have turned on their own. So at some point in the (distant?) past, someone disassembled the carb and reassembled it incorrectly. Could the old carb inlet box have failed due to heat stress caused by fuel burning within the cowl? That seems unlikely but I'll inspect the old carb inlet box again and consider the possibility further.
By the way, I've put in about 10 flights since the incident with no problems. It looks like the leak is resolved and I see no reason for any further problems in this area.
The only other downtime I've experienced with the plane so far is due to worn brake disks. I've been trying to find someone who can help me fit Cleveland Brakes, because the stock brakes are truly awful.
Present in the cockpit with me during the recording of this video is Rich Stowell, who kindly flew up to visit me in Oregon. More on my further training exploits at a later time.
| Fuel leak causes engine fire (0 min 28 sec) |
If you've read my blog you know that I previously had the carb inlet box rebuilt. It doesn't feel very good to see it surrounded by flames, but it seems to have held up just fine.
The post-fire analysis showed that the carb had developed a leak. Every time I primed the "Manifold" side of the priming handle, fuel would squirt out of the carb and into the bottom of the cowl. I gave the system a few extra shots on that morning because I have been having trouble getting a reliable start.
Luckily my friend and co-worker, Eric, was on hand video taping the start and he had a fire extinguisher close by. If he hadn't been there I doubt I would have noticed anything wrong at all. From the perspective of the cockpit, nothing seemed to be amiss. We were sort of scratching our heads when Eric put down the camera and started running around saying "Oh my God! Oh my God!".
The solution was as simple as a couple of turns of the bolts holding the carb together. These bolts were locked in place by tabs and couldn't have turned on their own. So at some point in the (distant?) past, someone disassembled the carb and reassembled it incorrectly. Could the old carb inlet box have failed due to heat stress caused by fuel burning within the cowl? That seems unlikely but I'll inspect the old carb inlet box again and consider the possibility further.
By the way, I've put in about 10 flights since the incident with no problems. It looks like the leak is resolved and I see no reason for any further problems in this area.
The only other downtime I've experienced with the plane so far is due to worn brake disks. I've been trying to find someone who can help me fit Cleveland Brakes, because the stock brakes are truly awful.
Present in the cockpit with me during the recording of this video is Rich Stowell, who kindly flew up to visit me in Oregon. More on my further training exploits at a later time.
Flying with Steve Wolf
My insurance company has required me to log a healthy number of flights with competent aerobatic professionals before allowing me to solo my Yak-54, Russian Thunder.
I've attached a photo of me with Steve Wolf, my instructor. I've been training in a Pitts S2B with Steve to prepare me for the Yak. Today was the first chance we had to fly Russian Thunder together.
Steve is the owner of Wingover Aerobatics, a top-notch show pilot, certified flight instructor, mechanic, and all around nice guy. Steve is also an airplane builder who has been involved in some really incredible projects, including Delmar Benjamin's Gee Bee replica, which Steve and his team built at his shop in Creswell, Oregon.
Steve and I had a great time today. I put in about 5 hours with him including a lot of touch and goes, some aerobatics, and of course a few high speed passes for the airport staff.
One snag that almost ended our day early was the air start system. The Vedenyev M-14 starts via air injected into the cylinders. It takes the air from a small tank that is charged by a pump in flight. You only get a few tries to get the engine started and I ended up running the tank empty. Luckily there was a scuba tank handy. I think I have the hang of it now. You hold the starter for just one or two blades and then let go. If it doesn't start by then, it isn't going to. It seems to need way more priming than I expected. After I got things figured out a bit it seemed to work much better. Just prime the heck out of it and it starts right up.
It seems like you need three hands to hit the start switch, fire off the magnetos, pump the throttle, and give it a shot of prime if it starts to chug. I'm already wondering if I wouldn't be happier with an aftermarket electric starter, but I'm going to wait until I have more experience with the air start to decide.
Since I've put some time into Decathlons and Pitts I have to say that I like the cockpit of the Yak a lot better. There is a lot more room to stretch out and the controls are all at the sides in a comfortable position. I found that my feet are a bit too big to fit in the S2B. When I would give full rudder deflection my shoes would get stuck in the narrow pedal slot. That is not a good feeling!
Speaking of the cockpit, I've attached a photo. The top row, from the left, we have a "G" meter, an airspeed indicator (in 10s of km/h so "10" indicates "100 km/h"), and cylinder head temperature. Bottom row, we have a clock (typical Russian plane, they like big clocks for some reason), an altimeter, carb temp, RPM (in 10s of %), and engine gauges. It's a bit haphazard, I know, with all kinds of different units. The manifold pressure gauge can't be seen in this shot.
Flying the Yak-54 takes a bit of concentration. Look down for a moment and you are pointed down, or rolled to the right, or yawed to one side, or facing the other way entirely! It isn't an unfriendly plane at all, don't get me wrong. It just does what you tell it to do and it does it right away. I think my R/C experience helps me here a bit because I'm used to model planes doing what I tell them and only what I tell them. Very few modelers would enjoy flying an R/C model set up like a full scale Cessna. The controls are highly coupled in real world aircraft, unless you are talking about an unlimited aerobat like the Yak.
One annoyance is that rudder deflection causes a considerable amount of opposite roll. Hold a bit of left rudder and it yaws left nicely. Hold a little more and you get left yaw and right roll. Hold a lot of left rudder and the opposing roll is strong enough to get your attention. This tendency is most pronounced when the airspeed is high. Other than that I haven't noticed any bad habits.
Aerobatics are so easy with the Yak that it feels like you are cheating. The Decathlon is a lot of work to fly aerobatically. A good Decathlon pilot is one who knows all the nuances of his plane. With the Yak if you want to roll you push the stick to the side. If you want to roll really, really fast (I mean really, really fast) then you push it all the way over.
On landing the visibility is a bit of a problem at small airports. My local field has a nice wide runway so it isn't an issue, but landing in nearby Albany, Oregon reminded me of what Phil told me when we flew into his airpark home in Tucson: "If you can't see the runway, you're lined up!". I have notes from a Yak pilot to approach at about 150 km/h but I found myself more comfortable at almost 200. Once the throttle is brought back and the flare begins the plane loses its airspeed really fast. I don't see a need to slow it down until we're over the runway. By the 20th landing or so I started doing 180 degree approaches from pattern height (1000' AGL) to the runway. Piece of cake. The titanium gear are very forgiving when a mistake is made.
Taxiing on a narrow taxiway involves a lot of S-turns. You can't see over the nose of the plane when you are moving into position to take off. Taxiing is probably the riskiest part of piloting the Yak, in fact, because once it is in the air it seems really predictable.
At cruise (70 to 75% RPM) we had an airspeed of about 250 km/h. That's about 155 mph. If you don't mind beating the heck out of the engine I suppose you could go a few mph faster, but it gets noisy and the vibration level picks up. I think 155 is fast enough.
One of the things I love about what I'm doing with Russian Thunder is that it gets me a chance to meet interesting people like Steve. It's a real pleasure to learn from him.
I feel fully qualified to solo the aircraft at this point. The insurance company wants to see me get a few more hours with Steve first. After that I will need to build up a few hours in solo flight before I can carry passengers.
Jim
I've attached a photo of me with Steve Wolf, my instructor. I've been training in a Pitts S2B with Steve to prepare me for the Yak. Today was the first chance we had to fly Russian Thunder together.
Steve is the owner of Wingover Aerobatics, a top-notch show pilot, certified flight instructor, mechanic, and all around nice guy. Steve is also an airplane builder who has been involved in some really incredible projects, including Delmar Benjamin's Gee Bee replica, which Steve and his team built at his shop in Creswell, Oregon.
Steve and I had a great time today. I put in about 5 hours with him including a lot of touch and goes, some aerobatics, and of course a few high speed passes for the airport staff.
One snag that almost ended our day early was the air start system. The Vedenyev M-14 starts via air injected into the cylinders. It takes the air from a small tank that is charged by a pump in flight. You only get a few tries to get the engine started and I ended up running the tank empty. Luckily there was a scuba tank handy. I think I have the hang of it now. You hold the starter for just one or two blades and then let go. If it doesn't start by then, it isn't going to. It seems to need way more priming than I expected. After I got things figured out a bit it seemed to work much better. Just prime the heck out of it and it starts right up.
It seems like you need three hands to hit the start switch, fire off the magnetos, pump the throttle, and give it a shot of prime if it starts to chug. I'm already wondering if I wouldn't be happier with an aftermarket electric starter, but I'm going to wait until I have more experience with the air start to decide.
Since I've put some time into Decathlons and Pitts I have to say that I like the cockpit of the Yak a lot better. There is a lot more room to stretch out and the controls are all at the sides in a comfortable position. I found that my feet are a bit too big to fit in the S2B. When I would give full rudder deflection my shoes would get stuck in the narrow pedal slot. That is not a good feeling!
Speaking of the cockpit, I've attached a photo. The top row, from the left, we have a "G" meter, an airspeed indicator (in 10s of km/h so "10" indicates "100 km/h"), and cylinder head temperature. Bottom row, we have a clock (typical Russian plane, they like big clocks for some reason), an altimeter, carb temp, RPM (in 10s of %), and engine gauges. It's a bit haphazard, I know, with all kinds of different units. The manifold pressure gauge can't be seen in this shot.
Flying the Yak-54 takes a bit of concentration. Look down for a moment and you are pointed down, or rolled to the right, or yawed to one side, or facing the other way entirely! It isn't an unfriendly plane at all, don't get me wrong. It just does what you tell it to do and it does it right away. I think my R/C experience helps me here a bit because I'm used to model planes doing what I tell them and only what I tell them. Very few modelers would enjoy flying an R/C model set up like a full scale Cessna. The controls are highly coupled in real world aircraft, unless you are talking about an unlimited aerobat like the Yak.
One annoyance is that rudder deflection causes a considerable amount of opposite roll. Hold a bit of left rudder and it yaws left nicely. Hold a little more and you get left yaw and right roll. Hold a lot of left rudder and the opposing roll is strong enough to get your attention. This tendency is most pronounced when the airspeed is high. Other than that I haven't noticed any bad habits.
Aerobatics are so easy with the Yak that it feels like you are cheating. The Decathlon is a lot of work to fly aerobatically. A good Decathlon pilot is one who knows all the nuances of his plane. With the Yak if you want to roll you push the stick to the side. If you want to roll really, really fast (I mean really, really fast) then you push it all the way over.
On landing the visibility is a bit of a problem at small airports. My local field has a nice wide runway so it isn't an issue, but landing in nearby Albany, Oregon reminded me of what Phil told me when we flew into his airpark home in Tucson: "If you can't see the runway, you're lined up!". I have notes from a Yak pilot to approach at about 150 km/h but I found myself more comfortable at almost 200. Once the throttle is brought back and the flare begins the plane loses its airspeed really fast. I don't see a need to slow it down until we're over the runway. By the 20th landing or so I started doing 180 degree approaches from pattern height (1000' AGL) to the runway. Piece of cake. The titanium gear are very forgiving when a mistake is made.
Taxiing on a narrow taxiway involves a lot of S-turns. You can't see over the nose of the plane when you are moving into position to take off. Taxiing is probably the riskiest part of piloting the Yak, in fact, because once it is in the air it seems really predictable.
At cruise (70 to 75% RPM) we had an airspeed of about 250 km/h. That's about 155 mph. If you don't mind beating the heck out of the engine I suppose you could go a few mph faster, but it gets noisy and the vibration level picks up. I think 155 is fast enough.
One of the things I love about what I'm doing with Russian Thunder is that it gets me a chance to meet interesting people like Steve. It's a real pleasure to learn from him.
I feel fully qualified to solo the aircraft at this point. The insurance company wants to see me get a few more hours with Steve first. After that I will need to build up a few hours in solo flight before I can carry passengers.
Jim
Wild Blue Aviation
Jerry Painter, flight instructor, raconteur, Yak broker, and head honcho of Wild Blue Aviation just released a blog entry about me and Russian Thunder.
http://mysite.verizon.net/ressxbx3/id32.html
Jerry was tremendously helpful to me in my decision to buy the plane. The guy knows Yaks better than anybody. If you need a CFI in the Arlington, WA area I highly recommend him.
Jim
http://mysite.verizon.net/ressxbx3/id32.html
Jerry was tremendously helpful to me in my decision to buy the plane. The guy knows Yaks better than anybody. If you need a CFI in the Arlington, WA area I highly recommend him.
Jim
Yak service
Russian Thunder is currently somewhat disassembled and being given a thorough review. The aircraft is in great shape structurally but does have some issues to be resolved. I created a list of "squawks" and came up with about 3 pages of things to be checked or fixed. That might seem like a lot but most of them are really minor.
One fairly major issue that came up is the carb inlet box. The box was cracked beyond repair. Since replacement parts aren't available (unless you know someone in Saratov, Russia who can root around in a parts bin for me) we were forced to contract a machinist to do the work.
The net loss for this part is $3200. Ouch. But that's the price you pay for getting involved in rare aircraft.
Of more concern is the wire mesh filter that protects the carburator from ingesting things like bird feathers, rocks, and other debris. At some point this filter failed and portions of it may have been ingested by the engine. It's impossible to say when this happened or even if it happened with any certainty. The only thing for sure is that it wouldn't be good for the engine if it did. We're going to perform some oil analysis and see what we can find out.
Jim
One fairly major issue that came up is the carb inlet box. The box was cracked beyond repair. Since replacement parts aren't available (unless you know someone in Saratov, Russia who can root around in a parts bin for me) we were forced to contract a machinist to do the work.
The net loss for this part is $3200. Ouch. But that's the price you pay for getting involved in rare aircraft.
Of more concern is the wire mesh filter that protects the carburator from ingesting things like bird feathers, rocks, and other debris. At some point this filter failed and portions of it may have been ingested by the engine. It's impossible to say when this happened or even if it happened with any certainty. The only thing for sure is that it wouldn't be good for the engine if it did. We're going to perform some oil analysis and see what we can find out.
Jim
My parachutes arrived
Attached are pictures of my girlfriend, Annette, modeling my new parachute. I bought two of the Softie parachutes for my Yak-54. Dan at Softie was very helpful.
I'll see if he'll let me stop by his place in Arlington, Washington when the first re-pack date comes around and take some pics of his establishment. From the look of the parachutes they appear to be of very high quality.
Of course, I can't really attest to the quality of Dan's work unless I get a chance to make use of the parachutes, and I'd hate to see that happen. I've been running through the scenarios in my mind and I have to say that it would take a very good reason for me to bail out of my airplane.
Hopefully my Emergency Maneuver Training with Rich will pay off and I'll make the right call if an emergency situation develops. One thing I learned is that humans have a tendency to make bad decisions in emergencies partially because we try to avoid risk rather than minimize it. A pilot who loses an engine on take off might try, for example, to make it back to the airport rather than risk an off field landing, even though the chances of surviving the off field landing are much higher.
Of course, we can take risk minimization strategies to the extreme and choose not to fly at all. All of life involves some risk, I suppose. My goal with the Yak, therefore, is not to eliminate risk altogether, but rather to keep the risk at an acceptable level.
Jim
I'll see if he'll let me stop by his place in Arlington, Washington when the first re-pack date comes around and take some pics of his establishment. From the look of the parachutes they appear to be of very high quality.
Of course, I can't really attest to the quality of Dan's work unless I get a chance to make use of the parachutes, and I'd hate to see that happen. I've been running through the scenarios in my mind and I have to say that it would take a very good reason for me to bail out of my airplane.
Hopefully my Emergency Maneuver Training with Rich will pay off and I'll make the right call if an emergency situation develops. One thing I learned is that humans have a tendency to make bad decisions in emergencies partially because we try to avoid risk rather than minimize it. A pilot who loses an engine on take off might try, for example, to make it back to the airport rather than risk an off field landing, even though the chances of surviving the off field landing are much higher.
Of course, we can take risk minimization strategies to the extreme and choose not to fly at all. All of life involves some risk, I suppose. My goal with the Yak, therefore, is not to eliminate risk altogether, but rather to keep the risk at an acceptable level.
Jim
Santa Paula wrap-up
I'm back at home and rested up from my trip to Santa Paula, California. I put in several flights every day at CP Aviation with 2006 FAA CFI of the year, Rich Stowell, and Patrick Dugan. I learned so much during the trip that it would be hard to put it all into words so I'll just try to cover the most important stuff.
First, though, I want to mention that I uploaded pics to the blog entries I made during the trip. Make sure you take a look.
Rich doesn't need any help from me because he has already made a big name for himself, which is hard to do as a CFI. But Rich does much more than any other CFI I've met. His Emergency Maneuvers Training program is solid and well executed. I highly recommend it to any pilots in my audience. It has forever changed the way I think about emergency situations.
When it comes to spin training, I can't see anyone topping Rich. The guy has been teaching spin training for years, has logged literally tens of thousands of spins. He lectures on the topic and has authored the definitive book on the subject, "Stall/Spin Awareness".
Each lesson in his EMT syllabus includes a pre-flight segment where the instructor draws out diagrams to explain what the student will be learning during the next flight. After the ground school portion is complete, the student takes to the air with Rich in the back seat of the Decathlon. Rich's flight tutoring is superb. He dictates each step of the maneuvers in a calm cadence. His tone of voice never changes no matter how madly the world spins about the cockpit.
Rich and I talked a bit about taking a pilot like myself into the "full scale" aerobatic world from R/C. He said that the R/C pilots he has worked with have come along rather quickly. That makes sense because there is a spatial understanding that comes along with R/C as well as familiarity with the control inputs needed to perform a maneuver.
However, I did find some things that are quite different and I think it might help to pass them along.
First off, the control geometry makes symmetric control inputs much more difficult. Most of you probably know that the rudder is controlled with the feet. I find it very hard to control how much foot power I'm applying to the pedals. When coordinating turns and recoveries, Rich teaches students to "walk" the pedals, meaning that he wants you to apply pulsing alternating stabs on the pedals and feel your way through the maneuvers in that way rather than pressing down on one rudder or the other. I found that this helped immensely, though it was tough at times to remember to practice this technique.
Also, there are strong sides and weak sides to your body. Pushing the control stick to the right involves using the rotator cuff. To the left you get to use your right pec, which is much easier. Pulling the stick toward you often adds some roll. Since the sticks aren't spring loaded, as they are with an R/C transmitter, you have to use the feelings within your body and your eyesight to see if you are adding roll inadvertently.
Another factor is that real aircraft do not have the power or control authority of models. Not even close. Most models are set up very neutral, can be stessed to 20 Gs, and have power to spare. A Decathlon is somewhat positively stable, rolls slowly, and barely has enough oomph for a short vertical climb. And lets not even talk Gs! This pilot can be "stressed" to about 3.5 or 4, thank you very much! You have to work much harder and coordinate the controls much more efficiently to squeeze out a nice looking roll or loop without getting the G loading through the roof.
Lastly, and I know this is probably obvious, there is a huge difference between performing a maneuver from a stable frame of reference outside of an aircraft and performing the same maneuver while inside the airplane. Airsickness was a real problem for me initially. I didn't throw up, but I had to stop a couple of flights for fear I was headed in that direction. Over time I grew accustomed to the new sensations.
Putting airsickness aside, being inside the aircraft provides additional challenges. It is very easy, for example, to visually ascertain the roundness of a loop when flying R/C, whereas this comes only with great practice from inside the airplane.
I came away from the experience feeling that, overall, vast amounts of R/C aerobatic experience doesn't help that much with the physical aspects of full scale aerobatics. It might help you understand Aresti symbols, visualize maneuvers, and grasp what the instructor is trying to tell you, but it will not let you walk into an aerobatic school and impress the instructor right off. It just isn't the same thing.
But that said, I think R/C-ers are much more prepared mentally and they are typically very eager to experience anything airplane-related. That drive makes for a happy, productive student. That might be the biggest advantage you can have. Maybe that is why Rich says they are succesful. Maybe they have less anxiety and more enthusiasm to power them through the hard stuff and engage their learning circuits when the going gets tough.
All I know is that I had a blast, learned a lot, and am pumped up with the idea of pursuing this further. I've been asked a lot about what my goals are for the Yak. I'm still working on that one but I think I got a taste of what the future holds and I like it very much.
Jim
First, though, I want to mention that I uploaded pics to the blog entries I made during the trip. Make sure you take a look.
Rich doesn't need any help from me because he has already made a big name for himself, which is hard to do as a CFI. But Rich does much more than any other CFI I've met. His Emergency Maneuvers Training program is solid and well executed. I highly recommend it to any pilots in my audience. It has forever changed the way I think about emergency situations.
When it comes to spin training, I can't see anyone topping Rich. The guy has been teaching spin training for years, has logged literally tens of thousands of spins. He lectures on the topic and has authored the definitive book on the subject, "Stall/Spin Awareness".
Each lesson in his EMT syllabus includes a pre-flight segment where the instructor draws out diagrams to explain what the student will be learning during the next flight. After the ground school portion is complete, the student takes to the air with Rich in the back seat of the Decathlon. Rich's flight tutoring is superb. He dictates each step of the maneuvers in a calm cadence. His tone of voice never changes no matter how madly the world spins about the cockpit.
Rich and I talked a bit about taking a pilot like myself into the "full scale" aerobatic world from R/C. He said that the R/C pilots he has worked with have come along rather quickly. That makes sense because there is a spatial understanding that comes along with R/C as well as familiarity with the control inputs needed to perform a maneuver.
However, I did find some things that are quite different and I think it might help to pass them along.
First off, the control geometry makes symmetric control inputs much more difficult. Most of you probably know that the rudder is controlled with the feet. I find it very hard to control how much foot power I'm applying to the pedals. When coordinating turns and recoveries, Rich teaches students to "walk" the pedals, meaning that he wants you to apply pulsing alternating stabs on the pedals and feel your way through the maneuvers in that way rather than pressing down on one rudder or the other. I found that this helped immensely, though it was tough at times to remember to practice this technique.
Also, there are strong sides and weak sides to your body. Pushing the control stick to the right involves using the rotator cuff. To the left you get to use your right pec, which is much easier. Pulling the stick toward you often adds some roll. Since the sticks aren't spring loaded, as they are with an R/C transmitter, you have to use the feelings within your body and your eyesight to see if you are adding roll inadvertently.
Another factor is that real aircraft do not have the power or control authority of models. Not even close. Most models are set up very neutral, can be stessed to 20 Gs, and have power to spare. A Decathlon is somewhat positively stable, rolls slowly, and barely has enough oomph for a short vertical climb. And lets not even talk Gs! This pilot can be "stressed" to about 3.5 or 4, thank you very much! You have to work much harder and coordinate the controls much more efficiently to squeeze out a nice looking roll or loop without getting the G loading through the roof.
Lastly, and I know this is probably obvious, there is a huge difference between performing a maneuver from a stable frame of reference outside of an aircraft and performing the same maneuver while inside the airplane. Airsickness was a real problem for me initially. I didn't throw up, but I had to stop a couple of flights for fear I was headed in that direction. Over time I grew accustomed to the new sensations.
Putting airsickness aside, being inside the aircraft provides additional challenges. It is very easy, for example, to visually ascertain the roundness of a loop when flying R/C, whereas this comes only with great practice from inside the airplane.
I came away from the experience feeling that, overall, vast amounts of R/C aerobatic experience doesn't help that much with the physical aspects of full scale aerobatics. It might help you understand Aresti symbols, visualize maneuvers, and grasp what the instructor is trying to tell you, but it will not let you walk into an aerobatic school and impress the instructor right off. It just isn't the same thing.
But that said, I think R/C-ers are much more prepared mentally and they are typically very eager to experience anything airplane-related. That drive makes for a happy, productive student. That might be the biggest advantage you can have. Maybe that is why Rich says they are succesful. Maybe they have less anxiety and more enthusiasm to power them through the hard stuff and engage their learning circuits when the going gets tough.
All I know is that I had a blast, learned a lot, and am pumped up with the idea of pursuing this further. I've been asked a lot about what my goals are for the Yak. I'm still working on that one but I think I got a taste of what the future holds and I like it very much.
Jim
Another day of aerobatic training
Today I worked with Rich on spin recovery techniques. Rich teaches a method called P.A.R.E. which is a mnemonic for Power, Aileron, Rudder, and Elevator. Rich teaches students to follow the PARE sequence in a cadence from start to finish.
We also worked on distinguishing between a spiral and a spin. I find most of the information easy to grasp due to such long exposure to aircraft (both RC and piloted) but the execution of the maneuvers is challenging at times. While I think my RC skills are translating fairly well, there is a big difference between controlling an airplane from a stable third-person point of view and controlling it while being subjected to the discomfort and disorienting effects of the aircraft's gyrations.
In the afternoon I was handed over to CP Aviation's Patrick, who taught me techniques for coordinated rolls on a straight line. Following that we worked on flying the pattern from the rear seat.
This has all been really fun and exciting but unfortunately I'm having some trouble with motion sickness. I haven't actually thrown up but I do get queasy by the end of each flight. I'm sure this will improve with more exposure to the unusual sights and feelings I'm experiencing.
Another side effect of all this flying is fatigue. I'm beat. I felt like taking a nap at about 2 o'clock. So that's all from me tonight.
Jim
We also worked on distinguishing between a spiral and a spin. I find most of the information easy to grasp due to such long exposure to aircraft (both RC and piloted) but the execution of the maneuvers is challenging at times. While I think my RC skills are translating fairly well, there is a big difference between controlling an airplane from a stable third-person point of view and controlling it while being subjected to the discomfort and disorienting effects of the aircraft's gyrations.
In the afternoon I was handed over to CP Aviation's Patrick, who taught me techniques for coordinated rolls on a straight line. Following that we worked on flying the pattern from the rear seat.
This has all been really fun and exciting but unfortunately I'm having some trouble with motion sickness. I haven't actually thrown up but I do get queasy by the end of each flight. I'm sure this will improve with more exposure to the unusual sights and feelings I'm experiencing.
Another side effect of all this flying is fatigue. I'm beat. I felt like taking a nap at about 2 o'clock. So that's all from me tonight.
Jim
More Cali blogging
I have to write these entries on my cell phone so they will be a little short. I'll come back to them and do some additional formatting and add some pics so keep watching.
Today I worked with Rich on spin training and on flying the Decathlon from the rear seat. The latter exercise is designed to give me familiarity with the sort of visibility I can expect in the Yak (e.g. very very little).
Following my lessons I happened to run into Vicki Cruse, the current unlimited aerobatics champion. She suggested I attend the IAC contest in Pendleton, Oregon this year. Since that is in my own backyard (in aviation terms that is), I think I'll be seeing her again this summer.
I left my meeting with Vicki to hook up with Jason Somes, cool guy of the year. I call him that because he let me get some time in on his Pitts S2C. It is practically brand new with about 50 hrs on it.
I then drove with Jason to a meeting of the 99s, a woman pilot's association. Jason entertained the crowd with the story of his Reno racing experience. Json was very fortunate to survive a mid-air collision this year and has retired from racing. His talk was fascinating as he recounted all the details and shared video of the tragic event, which instantly claimed the life of fellow pilot Gary Hubler.
Jason's hospitality still not expended, I was then given a private tour of the Commemorative Air Force's stable of warbirds. Jason has the duty of flying their various fighter aircraft to airshows. I got to climb around a Hellcat and a Zero. It was a real thrill.
Jason and Vicki both represent what I love about aviation. These are people who are living the dream and they stillfind time to make new friends and pass on their love for what they do.
I'm having the time of my life in Cali. More soon.
Jim
Today I worked with Rich on spin training and on flying the Decathlon from the rear seat. The latter exercise is designed to give me familiarity with the sort of visibility I can expect in the Yak (e.g. very very little).
Following my lessons I happened to run into Vicki Cruse, the current unlimited aerobatics champion. She suggested I attend the IAC contest in Pendleton, Oregon this year. Since that is in my own backyard (in aviation terms that is), I think I'll be seeing her again this summer.
I left my meeting with Vicki to hook up with Jason Somes, cool guy of the year. I call him that because he let me get some time in on his Pitts S2C. It is practically brand new with about 50 hrs on it.
I then drove with Jason to a meeting of the 99s, a woman pilot's association. Jason entertained the crowd with the story of his Reno racing experience. Json was very fortunate to survive a mid-air collision this year and has retired from racing. His talk was fascinating as he recounted all the details and shared video of the tragic event, which instantly claimed the life of fellow pilot Gary Hubler.
Jason's hospitality still not expended, I was then given a private tour of the Commemorative Air Force's stable of warbirds. Jason has the duty of flying their various fighter aircraft to airshows. I got to climb around a Hellcat and a Zero. It was a real thrill.
Jason and Vicki both represent what I love about aviation. These are people who are living the dream and they stillfind time to make new friends and pass on their love for what they do.
I'm having the time of my life in Cali. More soon.
Jim
Aerobatics training with Rich Stowell
I'm in Santa Paula, CA this week training with Rich Stowell at CP Aviation. I'll be blogging about my experience here. Rich has the arduous task of making me a safe pilot in my Yak-54, Russian Thunder.
Today I flew a Citabria with Rich and this afternoon I will be flying a Decathlon. I'm taking a break for lunch right now. I've only known Rich a couple of hours but I can already see that he is an excellent instructor.
One of the things I've noticed since I bought the Yak is just how many caring people there are in the world. Many people have approached me to ask me if I'm trying to commit suicide! Absolutely not! If I'm dead, I can't fly aerobatics! Rest assured that I'm approaching my training with a sober mindset and keen attention to safety at all times.
Meanwhile, the fine folks at Corvallis Aero Services are working on the Yak. I wrote up a "short" list of things for them to look at. I put "short" in quotes because I thought it would be a small list but I ended up with about three pages! There has been a little bit of bad news but for the most part Russian Thunder is in good condition. The bad news came in the form of a broken carb inlet box. The housing is cracked and the screen has been partially sucked into the engine. Since there aren't any replacement parts available we've been forced to take the piece to a machinist. The estimate is $3200. Ouch! Unforunately that is just the price you pay to have a plane like this.
More later. I'm taking pics but I might not be able to upload them this week.
Jim
Today I flew a Citabria with Rich and this afternoon I will be flying a Decathlon. I'm taking a break for lunch right now. I've only known Rich a couple of hours but I can already see that he is an excellent instructor.
One of the things I've noticed since I bought the Yak is just how many caring people there are in the world. Many people have approached me to ask me if I'm trying to commit suicide! Absolutely not! If I'm dead, I can't fly aerobatics! Rest assured that I'm approaching my training with a sober mindset and keen attention to safety at all times.
Meanwhile, the fine folks at Corvallis Aero Services are working on the Yak. I wrote up a "short" list of things for them to look at. I put "short" in quotes because I thought it would be a small list but I ended up with about three pages! There has been a little bit of bad news but for the most part Russian Thunder is in good condition. The bad news came in the form of a broken carb inlet box. The housing is cracked and the screen has been partially sucked into the engine. Since there aren't any replacement parts available we've been forced to take the piece to a machinist. The estimate is $3200. Ouch! Unforunately that is just the price you pay to have a plane like this.
More later. I'm taking pics but I might not be able to upload them this week.
Jim
See you at the AMA Convention in California this weekend!
Just a quick note that I'll be attending the AMA Convention this weekend in Ontario, California and I look forward to meeting up with many of you.
Jim
Jim
