[f-AA] A65 TBO

[Rafael]

Does any one know what the TBO in a A65? Tks Rafael

[Daniel Michaels]

It has to be in the 1500 to 1800 range. It is a meaningless number though. There is no requirement that says you have to OH it. As long as the compressions are good.   Dan --- On Sun, 2/8/09, Rafael <bot...@verizon.net> wrote:

_______________________________________________ Aeronca mailing list Aer...@westmont.edu http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca

[John Joye]

If my OF memory serves, It is 1200 hours & 10 years.

[roger anderson]

It's 1800 hrs now.  But that has changed through the years.  I believe before the hrs were increased to 1800, it was previously 1200 hrs.  And way back when I was first familar with Champs, A65s, etc, I believe it was 1000 hrs.  So really the number doesn't mean much.  Back when, the thought was top  at 500 hrs, major at 1000.  Now with better oils, better engine care, and  because it's so expensive now to major, I still think a top is going to be necessary not much beyond 600 hrs or so, but a major only when it becomes obviously necessary. 

[Cy Galley]

Looking at SIL98-9A from Continental they state... A-65, A-76 TBO is 1800 hours with a time frame of 12 years.

 

Cy Galley
Editor - Aeronca Aviator
Supporting Aeroncas everyday
www.aeronca.org

[Rafael]

OK need more educating here.  TBO istime Between Overhaul but that is a myor or top? Tks Rafael --- On Sun, 2/8/09, Cy Galley <cga...@qcbc.org> wrote:

From: Cy Galley <cga...@qcbc.org> Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO

[Plain Carl]

Major.  All my grandsons should know that.<G>

 

PC

---

From: Rafael <bot...@verizon.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Sunday, February 8, 2009 10:16:56 PM

[Rafael]

Si abuelo ;) --- On Sun, 2/8/09, Plain Carl <cham...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

[roger anderson]

A top overhaul is just the cylinders and their related items reconditioned or replaced. 

[Mike Knemeyer]

The two (2) IA/A&P's that work on my stuff no longer put Major
Overhaul or Top Overhaul, they state it as Major "Repair" and list
what was done, this is due to the fact that they are not a FAA Repair
Facility??

Mike K

> --------------------------------------------------------------------

>
> _______________________________________________
> Aeronca mailing list
> Aer...@westmont.edu
> http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
>
> _______________________________________________
> Aeronca mailing list
> Aer...@westmont.edu
> http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
>
>
>
>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Aeronca mailing list
> Aer...@westmont.edu
> http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
>

--
Mike & Melva Knemeyer

[roger anderson]

I think that's catching on. When my cylinders were installed locally after
being "reconditioned" by Gibson, the local shop only put that they
reinstalled "repaired" cylinders in the engine log. However, the back of
the yellow tags from Gibsons does have "Overhauled" stamped on them. I
guess when you look at the repair ticket and see what was actually done,
then that's what you really want to know, not so much what the job was
called.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Knemeyer" <mkne...@gmail.com>
To: <aer...@westmont.edu>
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 7:49 AM
Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO

> The two (2) IA/A&P's that work on my stuff no longer put Major
> Overhaul or Top Overhaul, they state it as Major "Repair" and list
> what was done, this is due to the fact that they are not a FAA Repair
> Facility??
>
> Mike K

_______________________________________________

[Daniel Michaels]

Mike I am not totally sure about this but higher than not.   An A&P can do majors and tops as long as they are contracted to work on the plane. (Someone brings in the plane  and asks them to do a major or top). What they cannot do is overhaul something that someone brought in. You need to be a repair station to do it that way. Look at it on say a mag. They can remove the mag from your plane and totally OH it. They have to be an authorized repair station to OH one that was brought or sent in.   Dan --- On Mon, 2/9/09, Mike Knemeyer <mkne...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Daniel Michaels]

TBO is what the factory says that the engine should last as it was tested at the factory under what ever they used to determine this. Does this mean that your engine will last as long or fall apart at TBO, NO. An engine that is run every day, run at a certain RPM, run correctly will last longer than one that was run for 1 hr every month, never preheated, run wide open or just over idle and never run correct. The factory just needed a place to start. Most of the time engine manufactures start low and slowly raise it as the engines out last the TBO's that were given.

Dan --- On Sun, 2/8/09, Rafael <bot...@verizon.net> wrote:

[j...@joea.com]

Agree with the below but there is one thing that I do not agree with
concerning Continentals TBO hours and recommendations.

Continental says 1800 hours OR 12 years. For an engine that is properly
taken care of, 12 years is a joke. As well we have to factor into the mix that
Continental is trying to sell new engines and keept he lawyers at bay as well.

Joe A

Dan

hourswith a time frame of 12 years.

Cy Galley

_______________________________________________

[Tom Holmes]

"overhaul", "major repair", etc are carefully described in the regs and who can use the terminology, and under what circumstances.   Tom --- On Mon, 2/9/09, roger anderson <11...@comcast.net> wrote:

From: roger anderson <11...@comcast.net> Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO

[Mike Knemeyer]

>>For an engine that is properly
>>taken care of, 12 years is a joke.

An engine that is properly taken care of that means proper warm-up,
flown to the proper temperature, run for a hour ormore at that
temperature, properly cooled to shut down, will have the 1800 hrs and
some internal parts at the mid / low limit of serviceability.

Also, when you find that A-65 that has been stored on that 7AC frame
with wings for 12 years in a hangar and had 3 hrs and 12 years of 100
hrs inspections you would still want to open it up for a look. Might
not need to look if it was 12 hrs since REM.

In short 1800 TBO or 12 years if a factory approved overhaul if not TBO is ??

--
Mike & Melva Knemeyer

[Scott Johnson]

The rate on the Continental numbers are around 150 hours a year.  While it would be fun, I cant imagine a private pilot flying that much 12 years in a row.

 

Scott

 

---

[Scott Johnson]

I’m going to do a bit of research on this one but I think I may disagree.  As an A&P, I think I can repair a mag, overhaul a carb etc as long as I have the pertinent tools and manuals. 

 

One of the trip up points on engine overhauls is that a mechanic can sign off an overhaul but only the manufacturer can call it a “zero time” overhaul.  I need to look this up anyway as I will be finishing the C-85-12F for the 120 tomorrow.  It is going to sing baby.  I was able to do the overhaul with a local gent who has been building O-200’s to race at Reno for decades.  The engine is balanced to within 5 grams, and the CC’s of the cylinders are within 2 CC’s.  Working on the engine with him had me in full sponge mode, I learned a ton about how to make a little Continental breathe better.

 

Allright, now I have something to do this weekend in the crashpad!

 

Scott

 

---

[Spence, Mike]

That one Will be S w e e t !
I'd like to have it singing on the front of my Champ.

MS

________________________________

[Plain Carl]

I have for over 40 years.  Took about 10 years off with no airplane, working three jobs and raising a family, but the years prior to that logged at least 300/year.  Had really bad years in '01 and '07 when I only logged 125.

 

PC

---

From: Scott Johnson <n20...@provide.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu; nov3...@yahoo.com
Sent: Monday, February 9, 2009 6:41:15 PM

[Scott Johnson]

Can't wait to do the next one! My bet is that the 85 will put out close to
95 and the vast majority was just getting it to breathe.

_____

From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu] On
Behalf Of Spence, Mike
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 8:02 PM
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO

That one Will be S w e e t !

I'd like to have it singing on the front of my Champ.

MS

_____

From: aeronca...@westmont.edu on behalf of Scott Johnson

Sent: Mon 2/9/2009 7:55 PM
To: aer...@westmont.edu; nov3...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO

I'm going to do a bit of research on this one but I think I may disagree.
As an A&P, I think I can repair a mag, overhaul a carb etc as long as I have
the pertinent tools and manuals.

One of the trip up points on engine overhauls is that a mechanic can sign
off an overhaul but only the manufacturer can call it a "zero time"
overhaul. I need to look this up anyway as I will be finishing the C-85-12F
for the 120 tomorrow. It is going to sing baby. I was able to do the
overhaul with a local gent who has been building O-200's to race at Reno for
decades. The engine is balanced to within 5 grams, and the CC's of the
cylinders are within 2 CC's. Working on the engine with him had me in full
sponge mode, I learned a ton about how to make a little Continental breathe
better.

Allright, now I have something to do this weekend in the crashpad!

Scott

_____

From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu] On

[Plain Carl]

While you are cc'ng the combustion chambers you may as well flow match the ports.  Really makes for a smooth motor.  BTW, a small continental jug will fit a Harley flow bench

 

PC

---

From: "Spence, Mike" <mike....@tc.gc.ca>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Monday, February 9, 2009 7:02:21 PM

[Scott Johnson]

 

Wow, PC, I stand, or actually sit corrected since I am actually at my computer.  That is some fun life you lead.

 

Scott

 

---

Aeronca@westmont 10pt">http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca

[Ian Harvie]

Scott, what carburettor do you have on it?

Ian

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Plain Carl]

Flew an hour today and three on Saturday and two the Saturday before.  January was not too friendly. Only got in four hours in JYD and a couple in other types, but had to build a new exhaust system.   Open cockpit in winter tends to reduce the window of opportunity.  65F is about the minimum.  I am so ready to head for the beach and wet a line.  Love working at OI in the summer when a quick climb to 2000' is a great way to cool off before heading home.  TSA grounding in '01 produced some serious thumb sucking.

 

PC

---

From: Scott Johnson <n20...@provide.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu

Sent: Monday, February 9, 2009 8:37:42 PM

[Markl]

'Open cockpit in winter tends to reduce the window of opportunity'

 

Fly frequently, many times, often, over and over again, LOOK around,
practice strange stuff, train seriously, and hand prop safely!
Regards,
Tony Markl

 

Is this a test to see who pays any attention??

[Jerry Jackson]

I would like to see a description of the steps used to 'tweak' the motor.
Does anyone know where one can be found?

Jerry Jackson
7ECA
8T8

--------------

----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Johnson" <n20...@provide.net>
To: <aer...@westmont.edu>

Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO

> Can't wait to do the next one! My bet is that the 85 will put out close
> to
> 95 and the vast majority was just getting it to breathe.

snip

[Plain Carl]

 Trust me. The window of opportunity (for committing aviation) is pretty small when the ambient high is less than 65F.  The wind chill factor in the rear cockpit of JYD is akin to that in Chicago.  I have been puzzling over a way to incorporate a front cockpit cover which would reduce the air flow through the inside, but so far no joy.

 

PC

---

From: Markl <ma...@intercom.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:24:34 AM
Subject: Re: [f-AA] Flight time(was) A65 TBO

[Jerry Eichenberger]

A buddy on mine with a Starduster says that when the temp is below 65, regardless of how warmly he dresses, he can fly one minute per degree of temp.

 

So, when it's 30 degrees, he can fly 30 minutes before h gets so bone chilling cold that it's dangerous to continue to fly.

-----Original Message-----
From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu]On Behalf Of Plain Carl

Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 9:51 AM
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Subject: Re: [f-AA] Flight time(was) A65 TBO

[Joe Preston]

Hey Scott,

Is there any way you can document some of the ideas for me? My case halves are ready to go together after finising up the measuring

Thanks,

JoeP

[Plain Carl]

There is little that one can do at home, but all the old hot rod tricks help.  All are a job for a trained, experienced machinist.  Flow matching cylinders, gram balancing of reciprocating parts, ring seating, three angle valve grinds, valve spring matching, texturing of intake passages, gasket matching and lots of little assembly techniques can each in turn round up  a horsepower here and there.  Come look at the motor in I-gore, the Frankentruck.  Too bad most of the above are just marginally legal (if not totally illegal) in certificated motors.  Perhaps the biggest horsepower thief in Aeroncas is the "Y" exhaust.  Gives the unique Aeronca put-put, but that is only evidence of power loss.  Hanlon & Wilsons are a tad better, but not by much. Motor cooling baffles can be a culprit as well  I've never seen a study on the improvement of crowbar-tech magnetos, but a modern sparky system could surely help.

 

PC

---

From: Jerry Jackson <jer...@texas.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:02:15 AM

Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO

[Plain Carl]

He must have more blubber than I, and I'm well equipped.  At 40F the hangar door will not open

 

PC

---

From: Jerry Eichenberger <jeiche...@ehlawyers.com>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 8:55:01 AM

Subject: Re: [f-AA] Flight time(was) A65 TBO

[j...@joea.com]

Totally agree and have seen this done many times with good success.

Balancing the entire assy, getting everything to matching weights and
porting and polishing are all legal, they are just "massaging" the parts to
make them work better together.

Joe A

On 10 Feb 2009 at 7:13, Plain Carl wrote:

There is little that one can do at home, but all the old hot rod tricks help. All
are a job for a trained, experienced machinist. Flow matching cylinders,
gram balancing of reciprocating parts, ring seating, three angle valve grinds,
valve spring matching, texturing of intake passages, gasket matching and
lots of little assembly techniques can each in turn round up a horsepower
here and there. Come look at the motor in I-gore, the Frankentruck. Too
bad most of the above are just marginally legal (if not totally illegal) in
certificated motors. Perhaps the biggest horsepower thief in Aeroncas is the
"Y" exhaust. Gives the unique Aeronca put-put, but that is only evidence of
power loss. Hanlon & Wilsons are a tad better, but not by much. Motor
cooling baffles can be a culprit as well I've never seen a study on the
improvement of crowbar-tech magnetos, but a modern sparky system could
surely help.

PC

[Tom Holmes]

I've probably told this story already, but several years ago, I was in my TC65 from Selma to Evergreen in WA.  A flight of five Kinner powered PT22?s were ahead of me.  It was pretty cold and they were whining to each other about who was the coldest.

They were cruising about 70 mph and I'm booming along about 75 mph.  I slipped my jacket off as I overtook them and waved as I went by in my T shirt.  I got a uniform "hiway" sign from the group.  It was hilarious. 

I met up with Poobah and Ron England and a couple other Aeroncas for our arrival "en masse" at Evergreen.

Tom

---

From: Plain Carl <cham...@sbcglobal.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:51:07 AM

Subject: Re: [f-AA] Flight time(was) A65 TBO

[Tom Holmes]

Joe,

I had the heads and intakes (C85 w/O200 stc) flowed and matched by Lycon, balanced the crankshaft, matched the (assembled) pistons and rods.  I had to replace the C90 cam with a C85 cam to comply with the STC tho.  It ran well on the test bed.  I am anxious to get it installed and going.

Tom

---

From: Joe Preston <J...@Preston-Company.com>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:57:01 AM

[Tom Holmes]

Carl is correct (as usual!).  HP is a function of rpm and we are bound by the TCDS as well as the mfg specs to what we can do.  I posted some drag tips the other day that will get "speed" (speed?? in an Aeronca) w/o more hp.

Tom

---

From: Plain Carl <cham...@sbcglobal.net>

To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 7:13:09 AM
Subject: [f-AA] Horses(was) A65 TBO

[Tom Phillips]

Hmmmmm
It was suggested to me that a 65hp and a 90hp chief would have the same speeds over all
That the big difference would be in takeoff and climb performance
CFJSS 11BC
"Talking about airplanes is a very pleasant mental disease."
— Sergei Sikorsky, 'AOPA Pilot' magazine February 2003

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Holmes <thomasth...@sbcglobal.net>

Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 10:47:45
To: <aer...@westmont.edu>
Subject: Re: [f-AA] Horses(was) A65 TBO

[piper...@charter.net]

I shoot for 100 hours per year in my 11AC. Last year came in at 101 and the year before at 107. I've got to tell you that it's hard to fly that many hours. Just finding the weather to make it happen in Michigan is a challenge. I consider myself a flying nut who's in the air every day the weather permits and it's just plain hard to get 100 hours.

Jay

---- Scott Johnson <n20...@provide.net> wrote:
>
>
> Wow, PC, I stand, or actually sit corrected since I am actually at my
> computer. That is some fun life you lead.
>
>
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> _____
>

> From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu] On
> Behalf Of Plain Carl
> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 9:02 PM
> To: aer...@westmont.edu
> Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO
>
>
>
> I have for over 40 years. Took about 10 years off with no airplane, working
> three jobs and raising a family, but the years prior to that logged at least
> 300/year. Had really bad years in '01 and '07 when I only logged 125.
>
>
>
> PC
>
>
>
> _____
>

> From: Scott Johnson <n20...@provide.net>
> To: aer...@westmont.edu; nov3...@yahoo.com
> Sent: Monday, February 9, 2009 6:41:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO
>
> The rate on the Continental numbers are around 150 hours a year. While it
> would be fun, I cant imagine a private pilot flying that much 12 years in a
> row.
>
>
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> _____
>

> www.aeronca.org <http://www.aeronca.org/>
>
> ----- Original Message -----

>
> From: John Joye <mailto:john...@pobox.com>
>
> To: aer...@westmont.edu ; bot...@verizon.net
>
> Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 9:37 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO
>
>
>
> If my OF memory serves, It is 1200 hours & 10 years.
>
>
>
> On Feb 8, 2009, at 10:11 PM, Rafael wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Does any one know what the TBO in a A65?
>
> Tks
>
> Rafael
>
> _______________________________________________
> Aeronca mailing list
> Aer...@westmont.edu
> http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
>

> _______________________________________________
> Aeronca mailing list
> Aer...@westmont.edu
> http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
>
> _______________________________________________
> Aeronca mailing list
> Aeronca@westmont
> 10pt">http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
>
> _______________________________________________
> Aeronca mailing list
> Aer...@westmont.edu
> http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
>
>
>

_______________________________________________

[Tom Holmes]

Agreed.  HP doesn't make much of a difference in cruise.  We run into the drag limitations pretty quickly.  Climb is better because you can turn more rpm thus drive a "bigger" prop.

Tom

---

From: Tom Phillips <tphi...@bell.blackberry.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 10:57:41 AM

Subject: Re: [f-AA] Horses(was) A65 TBO

[bruce snider]

Having flown a 7AC-Conv (7EC) with an O-200, a new Legend Cub with and O-200, and a 65 HP and 75 HP 7AC, it really seems to come down to climb rate.  ( prop differences aside)  Not a lot of noticable speed difference across 35 hp range, but the climb rate difference is dramatic! 

 

I am still quite happy with my 75 hp though!

 

Regards, Bruce

--
Bruce

[Plain Carl]

That has an element of truth, but there are a number of other factors that come into play.  I have made that swap and have kept the same prop from the 65 on the 85.  Not legal, but fast.  Can't recall the numbers, but the 85 turned somewhere in the vicinity of 2700 and the airspeed increased by perhaps 10.

 

PC

---

From: Tom Phillips <tphi...@bell.blackberry.net>

To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 12:57:41 PM

Subject: Re: [f-AA] Horses(was) A65 TBO

[Plain Carl]

Since I retired 11 years ago, I go to lunch in whatever I have to fly perhaps four times a week, weathr permitting.  A number of the local geezers fly in to a couple of airport cafe's.  Saturdays are usually devoted to flying with one of the grandkids, and there are always several summer trips.  Two grandkids are at Texas A&M which is 100 miles north and I like to have lunch with them when their schedule permit.  JYD's replacement is in a hangar 35 miles away, so it gets a visit several times a week.  I quit logging time a long time ago, but the recording tach tells the tale.  I can always use that for documentation if asked.  I usually record unusual events if I happen to remember

 

PC

---

From: "piper...@charter.net" <piper...@charter.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Cc: Scott Johnson <n20...@provide.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:29:27 PM

Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO

[Jerry Eichenberger]

Carl -

 

Don't ever have an accident, or otherwise need your insurance to be in force.

 

How do your prove currency?

 

How do you prove you're within the BFR time?

 

Recording tach means nothing - no way to prove you alone flew the airplane, or that it even flew.  Tach only proves that the engine ran.

 

Jerry E.

-----Original Message-----
From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu]On Behalf Of Plain Carl

[Plain Carl]

I'm self insured and carry a large PL rider.  What one writes in a log has equal voracity to a recording on a tach for different reasons.  I make an annual entry Dec 31. The guy that signs off my FR has no problem with the method and he is one of the geezers in the $100 burger gaggle.

 

PC

---

From: Jerry Eichenberger <jeiche...@ehlawyers.com>
To: aer...@westmont.edu

Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:13:05 PM
Subject: Re: [f-AA] Logging time(was)A65 TBO

[Jerry Eichenberger]

You didn't mention the annual entry.  That will work.

[Mike Knemeyer]

Jerry,

Mike here, do not think that logging annual time in one entry as TT
123.6 hrs some under PIC DAY, Night, SEL will do. If things go wrong
and you are still around, you might be able to show the reqiurements
for last 90 days takeoff and landings, tailwheel full stop, day and
night requirements. If not look out

I am not with the FAA, Insurance or the other family's attorney. Will
look at the Reg's but I think they spell it out.

Mike K who does not log every flight but do shouw the currency requirements.

On 2/10/09, Jerry Eichenberger <jeiche...@ehlawyers.com> wrote:
> You didn't mention the annual entry. That will work.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu]On
> Behalf Of Plain Carl
> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 3:23 PM
> To: aer...@westmont.edu
> Subject: Re: [f-AA] Logging time(was)A65 TBO
>
>
> I'm self insured and carry a large PL rider. What one writes in a log has
> equal voracity to a recording on a tach for different reasons. I make an
> annual entry Dec 31. The guy that signs off my FR has no problem with the
> method and he is one of the geezers in the $100 burger gaggle.
>
> PC
>
>
>
>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

> From: "piper...@charter.net" <piper...@charter.net>
> To: aer...@westmont.edu
> Cc: Scott Johnson <n20...@provide.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:29:27 PM
> Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO
>
> I shoot for 100 hours per year in my 11AC. Last year came in at 101 and
> the year before at 107. I've got to tell you that it's hard to fly that
> many hours. Just finding the weather to make it happen in Michigan is a
> challenge. I consider myself a flying nut who's in the air every day the
> weather permits and it's just plain hard to get 100 hours.
>
> Jay
>
>
> ----
>

--
Mike & Melva Knemeyer

[Plain Carl]

The only reason I log anything is for the grandkids.  I enjoy looking at my uncles logs from the '20's, '30's and '40's.  Back then the logs were much more involved.. My first airplane ride was logged in Uncle Bob's book from September1, 1941, in a Curtiss Robin at Humphry Airport in Baytown TX.

 

PC

---

From: Jerry Eichenberger <jeiche...@ehlawyers.com>
To: aer...@westmont.edu

Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:33:32 PM

[Jerry Eichenberger]

Mike -

You definitely have the better answer. Yes, you have to LOG 3 take offs and
landings every 90 days to show currency. Not logged, you're in violation if
you get caught.

Personally, I don't understand not logging time. I soloed in 1965, and have
flown continuously since, and currently have about 6500 hours, total. In
all of that time, I doubt if I have more than 5 or 6 flights that aren't
logged.

Jerry

[Mike Knemeyer]

I quess there are a few that leave some lines blank so if there is a
job requiring DC3 time you can fill it in.

I log the dual I give, BFR's I sign and 30% time in my champ.

Spring is coming, will make it up to your place.

Mike

[roger anderson]

I with you on that. When I do a 100 hrs a year, I feel like I'm living at
the airport.

----- Original Message -----
From: <piper...@charter.net>
To: <aer...@westmont.edu>
Cc: "Scott Johnson" <n20...@provide.net>

Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO

>I shoot for 100 hours per year in my 11AC. Last year came in at 101 and
>the year before at 107. I've got to tell you that it's hard to fly that
>many hours. Just finding the weather to make it happen in Michigan is a
>challenge. I consider myself a flying nut who's in the air every day the
>weather permits and it's just plain hard to get 100 hours.
>
> Jay

_______________________________________________

[roger anderson]

I think I remember a formula that says to double the speed you must square
the horsepower. I don't remember our 85 hp Champ being really any quicker
than our 65 hp Champ, just much better climb, especially with 2 persons on a
warm day.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Phillips" <tphi...@bell.blackberry.net>
To: <aer...@westmont.edu>

Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 12:57 PM
Subject: Re: [f-AA] Horses(was) A65 TBO

Hmmmmm
It was suggested to me that a 65hp and a 90hp chief would have the same
speeds over all
That the big difference would be in takeoff and climb performance
CFJSS 11BC
"Talking about airplanes is a very pleasant mental disease."
— Sergei Sikorsky, 'AOPA Pilot' magazine February 2003

_______________________________________________

[Jerry Jackson]

Roger

Horsepower has a cubic relationship to speed--it takes an 800% power
increase to double the speed. Going from 65 to 85 would yield a 9% increase
in speed, at best. It might be lower if something like new airflow
separations caused an unusual increase in drag. Like you and others said,
the real payoff from more HP is in the TO and climb numbers.

Jerry Jackson'
7ECA
8T8

----------------

----- Original Message -----
From: "roger anderson" <11...@comcast.net>
To: <aer...@westmont.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: [f-AA] Horses(was) A65 TBO

I think I remember a formula that says to double the speed you must square

snip

[E. O. Lake]

I'm with Carl on this. I log every flight but with some resentment, feeling
myself under an anal, obsessive duress to do so.

Why am I doing this? My memoirs?

Ed

[Plain Carl]

The idea is to get away from the airport.<G>

 

PC

---

From: roger anderson <11...@comcast.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu

Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:15:39 PM

Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO

[Spence, Mike]

Logged monthly totals by type, for years, up until I started with Transport 7 years ago. I'm sure I missed a few flights. Went from an average of 600 to 800 a year down to 150, so I figure I can log each flight again.

MS

________________________________

[roger anderson]

Thanks Jerry. Is it the "the speed gain will be the cube root of the
increase in horsepower". I believe a second delicious Samual Smith Oatmeal
Stout had interfered with my recollections....but it was well worth it. I
remember in sailing, boats had a maximum hull speed, based on water line
length, at which the wind could blow hard but the boat wouldn't really go
any faster. roger

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Jackson" <jer...@texas.net>
To: <aer...@westmont.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: [f-AA] Horses(was) A65 TBO

> Roger
>
> Horsepower has a cubic relationship to speed--it takes an 800% power
> increase to double the speed. Going from 65 to 85 would yield a 9%
> increase
> in speed, at best. It might be lower if something like new airflow
> separations caused an unusual increase in drag. Like you and others said,
> the real payoff from more HP is in the TO and climb numbers.
>
> Jerry Jackson'
> 7ECA
> 8T8

_______________________________________________

[Markl]

Sounds good to me.  When I had my UPF7 30 minutes was my limit in winter in CT.  What you do notice under these conditions is that descending, at about 1000agl it actually gets Warmer - which is nice as your hands and feet work better for landing.

 

Fly frequently, many times, often, over and over again, LOOK around,
practice strange stuff, train seriously, and hand prop safely!
Regards,
Tony Markl

----- Original Message -----

From: Jerry Eichenberger

To: aer...@westmont.edu

Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 9:55 AM

Subject: Re: [f-AA] Flight time(was) A65 TBO

A buddy on mine with a Starduster says that when the temp is below 65, regardless of how warmly he dresses, he can fly one minute per degree of temp.

 

So, when it's 30 degrees, he can fly 30 minutes before h gets so bone chilling cold that it's dangerous to continue to fly.

-----Original Message-----
From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu]On Behalf Of Plain Carl
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 9:51 AM
To: aer...@westmont.edu

Subject: Re: [f-AA] Flight time(was) A65 TBO

 Trust me. The window of opportunity (for committing aviation) is pretty small when the ambient high is less than 65F.  The wind chill factor in the rear cockpit of JYD is akin to that in Chicago.  I have been puzzling over a way to incorporate a front cockpit cover which would reduce the air flow through the inside, but so far no joy.

 

PC

---

From: Markl <ma...@intercom.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu

Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:24:34 AM
Subject: Re: [f-AA] Flight time(was) A65 TBO

'Open cockpit in winter tends to reduce the window of opportunity'

 

Fly frequently, many times, often, over and over again, LOOK around,
practice strange stuff, train seriously, and hand prop safely!
Regards,
Tony Markl

 

Is this a test to see who pays any attention??

 

[Jerry Jackson]

Roger

It is easy to confuse the issues of drag versus speed and horsepower versus
speed. The drag goes up as the square of speed. But the thrust from a
given HP goes down as the inverse of speed, so you need one more dose of HP
to make up for that decrease.

Jerry Jackson
7ECA
8T8

--------

[aeron...@yahoo.com]

I log every flight, my logbooks are a quasi journal/ledger, I sometmes open one at random just to savor a memory, only in the early and mid 90's when I was practically living in the Douglas ,and flying over a 1000 hours a year, did I fall behind, and had to mount a marathon effort to bring myself up to date. to each their own.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: "E. O. Lake" <eol...@rogers.com>

Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:26:17

[Rafael]

Hey and for us that do not have a hangar yet, the idea of living at the airport sounds very good :) Rafael Who has 2 Chief and a vw in a a 2 car garage --- On Tue, 2/10/09, Plain Carl <cham...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

[Tom Holmes]

Rafael,

I have the other problem.  I have two hangars in FL and two in Selma, and my beloved doesn't bring it up more than 25 to the 25th per day!! ;-)

Tom

---

From: Rafael <bot...@verizon.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:39:16 PM

[Rafael]

See Tom....I can help wit with that, you can donate one to the Spanish Flying Orfans Fund located in Lakewood, California.  Not sure if tax deductible but.....you will make me and my little one very happy ;) Rafael --- On Tue, 2/10/09, Tom Holmes <thomasth...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

[Tom Holmes]

Hey, I thought you were PCs nieto??  How can you also be huerfano?? 

Tom

---

From: Rafael <bot...@verizon.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu

Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:18:48 PM

[Scott Johnson]

It will have the Strombone.

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu] On

Behalf Of Ian Harvie
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 9:51 PM
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO

Scott, what carburettor do you have on it?

Ian

Scott Johnson wrote:
> Can't wait to do the next one! My bet is that the 85 will put out close
to
> 95 and the vast majority was just getting it to breathe.
>
>
>
> _____

>
> From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu]
On

> Behalf Of Spence, Mike
> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 8:02 PM
> To: aer...@westmont.edu
> Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO
>
>
>

> That one Will be S w e e t !
>
> I'd like to have it singing on the front of my Champ.
>
>
>
> MS
>
> _____

>
> From: aeronca...@westmont.edu on behalf of Scott Johnson
> Sent: Mon 2/9/2009 7:55 PM
> To: aer...@westmont.edu; nov3...@yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO
>

> I'm going to do a bit of research on this one but I think I may disagree.
> As an A&P, I think I can repair a mag, overhaul a carb etc as long as I
have
> the pertinent tools and manuals.
>
>
>
> One of the trip up points on engine overhauls is that a mechanic can sign
> off an overhaul but only the manufacturer can call it a "zero time"
> overhaul. I need to look this up anyway as I will be finishing the
C-85-12F
> for the 120 tomorrow. It is going to sing baby. I was able to do the
> overhaul with a local gent who has been building O-200's to race at Reno
for
> decades. The engine is balanced to within 5 grams, and the CC's of the
> cylinders are within 2 CC's. Working on the engine with him had me in
full
> sponge mode, I learned a ton about how to make a little Continental
breathe
> better.
>
>
>
> Allright, now I have something to do this weekend in the crashpad!
>
>
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> _____

>
> From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu]
On

> Behalf Of Daniel Michaels
> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 11:38 AM
> To: aer...@westmont.edu
> Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO
>
>
>
>

> Mike I am not totally sure about this but higher than not.
>
>
>
> An A&P can do majors and tops as long as they are contracted to work on
the
> plane. (Someone brings in the plane and asks them to do a major or top).
> What they cannot do is overhaul something that someone brought in. You
need
> to be a repair station to do it that way. Look at it on say a mag. They
can
> remove the mag from your plane and totally OH it. They have to be an
> authorized repair station to OH one that was brought or sent in.
>
>
>
> Dan
>
> --- On Mon, 2/9/09, Mike Knemeyer <mkne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> From: Mike Knemeyer <mkne...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO
> To: aer...@westmont.edu

> Date: Monday, February 9, 2009, 7:49 AM
>
> The two (2) IA/A&P's that work on my stuff no longer put Major
> Overhaul or Top Overhaul, they state it as Major "Repair" and list
> what was done, this is due to the fact that they are not a FAA Repair
> Facility??
>
> Mike K
>
> On 2/9/09, roger anderson <11...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> A top overhaul is just the cylinders and their related items
reconditioned
>> or replaced.

>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Rafael
>> To: aer...@westmont.edu
>> Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 10:16 PM
>> Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO
>>
>>

>> OK need more educating here. TBO istime Between Overhaul but
that
>> is a myor or top?
>> Tks
>> Rafael
>>
>> --- On Sun, 2/8/09, Cy Galley <cga...@qcbc.org> wrote:

>>
>> From: Cy Galley <cga...@qcbc.org>
>> Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO
>> To: aer...@westmont.edu

>> Date: Sunday, February 8, 2009, 8:12 PM
>>
>>
>> Looking at SIL98-9A from Continental they state... A-65, A-76
> TBO
>> is 1800 hours with a time frame of 12 years.
>>
>> Cy Galley
>> Editor - Aeronca Aviator
>> Supporting Aeroncas everyday
>> www.aeronca.org

>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: John Joye
>> To: aer...@westmont.edu ; bot...@verizon.net
>> Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 9:37 PM
>> Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO
>>
>>

>> If my OF memory serves, It is 1200 hours & 10 years.
>>
>>
>> On Feb 8, 2009, at 10:11 PM, Rafael wrote:
>>
>>
>> Does any one know what the TBO in a A65?
>> Tks
>> Rafael

>> _______________________________________________
>> Aeronca mailing list
>> Aer...@westmont.edu
>> http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
>>
>>
>>
>>

>> --------------------------------------------------------------------

>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Aeronca mailing list
>> Aer...@westmont.edu
>> http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Aeronca mailing list
>> Aer...@westmont.edu
>> http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --

>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Aeronca mailing list
>> Aer...@westmont.edu
>> http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
>>
>
>

> --
> Mike & Melva Knemeyer

> _______________________________________________
> Aeronca mailing list
> Aer...@westmont.edu
> http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
>
>
>
>
>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Scott Johnson]

That's it Joe, the majority of the horsepower gain comes from cleaning up
the intake. Everything from the cylinder heads to the spider to the elbows
with the outside turns of the intake being particularly important. One
thing that my guru told me was that while porting in still considered a good
idea, polishing has lost traction at least with the guys doing the formula
one stuff.

On our little engines, you can clean up the sand cast marks and
imperfections and as long as you do not increase the diameter, you are good
to go. Essentially you make the surface equal to about 80 grit sandpaper.
Polishing has lost some favor due as with a polished surface you can make
some of the of the fuel in the fuel air mixture condense out. Also believe
it or not, you need some turbulence in the intake system to keep a better
flow. I know that sounds exactly opposite of what you would think but it
has to do with boundary layer air and some other stuff that went well over
my head. Air hates making turns so anything you can do to make it easier
will benefit the engine. The claim on cleaning up the intake system was a
gain of 5-8% depending on how dirty it was to begin with. The outside of
the turn is more important due to a the fuel air mixture being more dense
and centrifugal force pushing it towards the outside as it makes a turn

I will try to write down more as I think of it.

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu] On
Behalf Of j...@joea.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 12:26 PM
To: aer...@westmont.edu

Subject: Re: [f-AA] Horses(was) A65 TBO

Totally agree and have seen this done many times with good success.

Balancing the entire assy, getting everything to matching weights and
porting and polishing are all legal, they are just "massaging" the parts to
make them work better together.

Joe A

On 10 Feb 2009 at 7:13, Plain Carl wrote:

There is little that one can do at home, but all the old hot rod tricks
help. All
are a job for a trained, experienced machinist. Flow matching cylinders,
gram balancing of reciprocating parts, ring seating, three angle valve
grinds,
valve spring matching, texturing of intake passages, gasket matching and
lots of little assembly techniques can each in turn round up a horsepower
here and there. Come look at the motor in I-gore, the Frankentruck. Too
bad most of the above are just marginally legal (if not totally illegal) in
certificated motors. Perhaps the biggest horsepower thief in Aeroncas is the
"Y" exhaust. Gives the unique Aeronca put-put, but that is only evidence of
power loss. Hanlon & Wilsons are a tad better, but not by much. Motor
cooling baffles can be a culprit as well I've never seen a study on the
improvement of crowbar-tech magnetos, but a modern sparky system could
surely help.

PC

From: Jerry Jackson <jer...@texas.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu

Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:02:15 AM
Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO

I would like to see a description of the steps used to 'tweak' the motor.
Does anyone know where one can be found?

Jerry Jackson
7ECA
8T8

--------------

----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Johnson" <n20...@provide.net>
To: <aer...@westmont.edu>
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO

> Can't wait to do the next one! My bet is that the 85 will put out close
> to
> 95 and the vast majority was just getting it to breathe.

snip

[Ian Harvie]

Ah, I had my Strombone was overhauled in the States by D&G Supply in
Nile Michigan. At the moment it is running very rich at idle even though
leaning it as much as possible on the idle mixture, It seems it may be
rich above 2000 RPM also. I'm in contact with the guy who did the
overhaul and tomorrow will strip it as he wants to know what the main
jet is. It sounds rough between 1200 and 1400 RPM but runs sweet above
and below. I have the mixture wired in so could lean it out at cruise.
I'll also check the primer isn't leaking, can't remember if it is shut
of by the fuel shut off or not, but doesn't leak when off.

Ian

[Rafael]

Yes but Im the president of the organization ;)

[Rich Dugger]

If you hate making entries in a log book and balancing the times like it was a check book as bad as I do:

You might like this.

www.forpilotslogbook.com

 

I have used it for years and it does all the math, allows for different types and n numbers of airplanes,

and will draw graphs and it makes adding a log entry enjoyable.

 

I paid for it but it wasn't too expensive maybe 25 or 30 bucks.

 

When I got a new computer I just down loaded it from the site and used the same "key" to register the license and picked up where I left off.

It runs on your computer not on a website.

 

But my main concern for folks who don't log currency is what the federallies might say if there was an incident

or just a ramp check.

I know you aren't required to have it with you but you might be required to produce it after the ramp check?

 

And you know how those slippery insurance companies are?

 

Sorry Joe.

 

Rich

 

 

 

[Rich Dugger]

What about currency to carry passengers?

 

Aren't you required to show 3 take offs and landings in the last 90 days (to a full stop for night time)?

 

Or did I dream that?

 

Rich

 

 

[Mark McAtee]

and  3 full stop during the day if Tdragger.

 
 
 
Mark 


 
"All airplanes bite fools "        borrowed from a message to an Aeronca newsgroup
 



 

---

From: 66l...@verizon.net
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 21:35:29 -0600

---

See how Windows Mobile brings your life together—at home, work, or on the go. See Now

[EarleR]

Is it this one?

http://www.forpilots.com/logbook/index.html

[Rich Dugger]

Yes,

That is it.

 

In political speak I did not make a mistake.

I misremembered the url.

Thanks for setting me straight.

[Daniel Michaels]

Should be part of any preflight. Check weather, NOTAMs, Check currency (Enter if necessary), Since you do not have to carry a log book in the plane it really does not matter you only have to do the landings. I do not log anything only my FR each year and any training I get.   Dan --- On Tue, 2/10/09, Rich Dugger <66l...@verizon.net> wrote:

From: Rich Dugger <66l...@verizon.net> Subject: Re: [f-AA] Logging time(was)A65 TBO

[Tom Boyle]

Selma and Evergreen, WA?!./?  Are you guys sure of that?  Sounds a lot like two towns in LA (Lower Alabama) :-)

 

T²

[Thomas DeWinter]

Mu understanding as a CFI is that you MUST legally log to show your currency in order to take passengers.  It is the only way to provide evidence of currency.  You also have to document your flight review.  Nothing else is required.

 

So I would think that if you want to take passengers, you must have at least one entry every 90 days that documents your three take off and landings.  And to full stop for tailwheel and night.

---

From: Mike Knemeyer <mkne...@gmail.com>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:46:24 PM

Subject: Re: [f-AA] Logging time(was)A65 TBO

Jerry,

Mike here, do not think that logging annual time in one entry as TT
123.6 hrs some under PIC DAY, Night, SEL will do. If things go wrong
and you are still around, you might be able to show the reqiurements
for last 90 days takeoff and landings, tailwheel full stop, day and
night requirements. If not look out

I am not with the FAA, Insurance or the other family's attorney.  Will
look at the Reg's but I think they spell it out.

Mike K who does not log every flight but do shouw the currency requirements.



On 2/10/09, Jerry Eichenberger <jeiche...@ehlawyers.com> wrote:

> You didn't mention the annual entry.  That will work.
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu]On
> Behalf Of Plain Carl
>  Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 3:23 PM
>  To: aer...@westmont.edu
>  Subject: Re: [f-AA] Logging time(was)A65 TBO
>
>
>  I'm self insured and carry a large PL rider.  What one writes in a log has
> equal voracity to a recording on a tach for different reasons.  I make an
> annual entry Dec 31. The guy that signs off my FR has no problem with the
> method and he is one of the geezers in the $100 burger gaggle.
>
>  PC
>
>
>
>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

>    From: "piper...@charter.net" <piper...@charter.net>
>    To: aer...@westmont.edu
>    Cc: Scott Johnson <n20...@provide.net>
>    Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:29:27 PM
>    Subject: Re: [f-AA] A65 TBO
>
>    I shoot for 100 hours per year in my 11AC.  Last year came in at 101 and
> the year before at 107.  I've got to tell you that it's hard to fly that
> many hours.  Just finding the weather to make it happen in Michigan is a
> challenge.  I consider myself a flying nut who's in the air every day the
> weather permits and it's just plain hard to get 100 hours.
>
>    Jay
>
>
>    ----
>

--
Mike & Melva Knemeyer

[Chris Murray]

Seems to me that it’s fairly well established that you use a Model A gage kit to repair the prewar aux tank. Does the outer nut that comes with Ford’s tank fit the opening in the Aeronca tank, which is ¾”? I’m repairing mine and instead of a metal outer ring, there was a phenolic one that refused to budge. If the Ford ring fits, has any one got the tool kit for the gage?

Chris

NC31986

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.233 / Virus Database: 270.10.19/1941 - Release Date: 02/09/09 06:50:00

[Daniel Michaels]

You have your log book at home. You are on a long CC. You stop to see some friends, and one would like to go for a ride. You just did 3 TO and landings because it was a very long CC. You do not have to go home and get your log book to log the time before giving the friend a ride.   You are far from home with a friend and it is getting late. You will not make it to your destination before dark. You are not current. You stop for supper before dark. Before TO you do 3 TO and landings, load your friend and continue on your way. You do not have to go home and get your log book to log the time.   You can prove currency both times by your friends acknowledgment. Writing something in a log book is not really proof of anything. I can log all kinds of stuff, I still have to prove that I did it. You can log it on a napkin if you want. The FAA may take your word for what you logged, then again they may not and will want you to prove that you actually did it.   Dan --- On Wed, 2/11/09, Thomas DeWinter <toms...@yahoo.com> wrote:

[Jerry Eichenberger]

Dan -

 

Fortunately, you're wrong.

 

FAA does take your log as truthful, unless and until them think entries are fraudulent.

 

I do a ton of FAA enforcement representation of pilots, and FAA has to prove their case - you don't, if they charge you with fraudulent log entries.

 

You're right that you can do the currency flights, take your passenger, and then log them when you get home.  Otherwise, it's just picking nits.

[Markl]

I may have a tool for this.  Can you tell me the diameter of the ring??

 

Fly frequently, many times, often, over and over again, LOOK around,
practice strange stuff, train seriously, and hand prop safely!
Regards,
Tony Markl

[Chris Murray]

Tony,

            There is no diameter because the phenolic (which broke) was smooth around the outside, and the inner ring only has two small slots for a spanner.

Chris

 

---

From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu] On Behalf Of Markl

Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 5:08 PM
To: aer...@westmont.edu

[Spence, Mike]

Up here in the GWN we must have an entry in an a/c "Journey Log" to validate the entries in our personal logs.

MS

________________________________

[Plain Carl]

The best thing would be to order a gauge and tool set from Mac's.  The tool is only about 5 bucks.  I have one I can send, but postage would be more than the cost. The phenolic gauge nut is long since gone from stocks, but the threads for the later style is the same

 

PC

---

From: Chris Murray <murr...@cox.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 6:35:40 PM

[Plain Carl]

Correction.  Gauge is $32 and change and the tool is $620 at Mac's Antique Auto Parts

 

PC

---

From: Chris Murray <murr...@cox.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu

Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 3:57:27 PM

Subject: [f-AA] Aux tank gage repair

[Rick Dover]

That's $6.20. Here is the link.

 

http://www.parts123.com/parts123/yb.dll?Parta~PartSort~A0~~~~~A20~A1

 

Rick

[Plain Carl]

That would have been a pretty expensive tool!  My bad

 

PC

---

From: Rick Dover <rdo...@mmr-inc.net>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 7:55:37 PM

[Hunter Heath]

I haven't reviewed the regs on logging time, but whatever it says, what is "legal" or "allowed" and what is smart to do may be two different things, as others have indicated.  I have kept a paper logbook from the first lesson, and will continue to do so, logging the time at the end of each flight, with any worthy details.  This is the best proof of total time, currency, etc. and in combination with my ownership of the plane and the logic of the tach times, I'd be pretty confident of agency acceptance of the truth of the logs.

Perhaps as important, the log is my memory book... altho still active, I still like to go through it and recall pleasant flights and... um... learning experiences!

Hunter

[Rich Dugger]

Your log book is like an amateur radio operator's log book.

 

It is a legal document.

 

If anybody thinks they want to falsify one and get away with it, be my guest.

But my advice is to keep one up to date.

 

Like the IRS or Watergate, the cover up will get you in more trouble than the crime.

 

I don't think you want to drag your friend into court to testify for you, especially if you ask him to lie under oath.

He might be a good friend, but he might not want to go the distance for you.

 

It is so much easier just to do it right.

 

Rich @ PPO

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Daniel Michaels

To: aer...@westmont.edu

[Spence, Mike]

"It is so much easier just to do it right."

 

Amen - Isn't that the truth with anyting in life !

 

MS

---

From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu] On Behalf Of Rich Dugger
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 11:07 PM
To: aer...@westmont.edu; nov3...@yahoo.com

[Richard Holcombe]

I log every flight in a book.  Only a paper log can survive a hard disk crash.

I have found that if I delay the entry I sometimes put it off more and then forget.

Often when I am on a cross country and I've settled on my next stop, I make the log entry before I do the final prep and landing. Being slightly superstitious I'm always a little nervous about putting on paper something I haven't done yet, but so far it's working for me.

[Daniel Michaels]

Your right Hunter, it is fun for some to go back and review these things for others it is not. It is a good thing to keep a record of your check book also, but it is a pain in the butt, so I just make sure I have enough money in to cover any check. My Dad keeps a journal, I just can't see that, it is no fun for me. Everyone is different. After the 90th day it does not mean squat to the FAA.   Dan --- On Wed, 2/11/09, Hunter Heath <calci...@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Hunter Heath <calci...@gmail.com> Subject: [f-AA] Logging time(was)A65 TBO To: aer...@westmont.edu

_______________________________________________ Aeronca mailing list Aer...@westmont.edu http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca

[E. O. Lake]

[E. O. Lake]

Look, I’m no outlaw! I did have a couple of speeding tickets as a young man forty years ago but that’s about it.

 

Why do I have to log every little flight?

 

Why am I required to enter my weight, my oil weight,  my fuel weight, my engine start up time, my air time, my times up and down – all in a journey log required to be carried aboard and thus subject to destruction in the event of a crash so it is of no use whatever to investigators?

 

I didn’t face this chore on my Chevy Malibu trips to coffee and the grocery store this morning. Is flying my Chief especially solo somehow more critical or romantic or otherwise epic in scope and moment?

 

I’m listening, Big and Little Brothers!

 

Ed

 

 

 

---

From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu] On Behalf Of Spence, Mike

Sent: February 12, 2009 7:48 AM

[Rich Dugger]

Dan wrote:

 

 After the 90th day it does not mean squat to the FAA.

 

Dan

 

 

 

Well Dan, you got my feeble little mind creating more hypothetical situations.

If asked by your insurance co., how would show them you actually had the total time or total tail wheel time you quoted them over the phone?

 

They might claim you made that stuff up.

 

How would you show you had a BFR in the last  2 years?

 

How would you show you got a tail wheel sign off?

 

If you were a sport pilot, how would you show you received instruction in flying into a towered airport?

Or any of the other stuff for which  sport pilots need a log book entry

 

Do it any way you like but I think it would all  go much smoother if you had a log book with each flight logged individually.

 

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

 

Regards,

Rich

[Spence, Mike]

Dear "Eddie The Kid" : )

Take a look at http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regserv/Affairs/cars/PART6/a60501.htm

CAR 605 Schedule 1 - Particulars to be entered in the Journey Log

Anything else is extra.

Mike S.

________________________________

From: aeronca...@westmont.edu on behalf of E. O. Lake
Sent: Thu 2/12/2009 12:21 PM
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Subject: Re: [f-AA] Logging time(was)A65 TBO

Look, I'm no outlaw! I did have a couple of speeding tickets as a young man forty years ago but that's about it.

Why do I have to log every little flight?

Why am I required to enter my weight, my oil weight, my fuel weight, my engine start up time, my air time, my times up and down - all in a journey log required to be carried aboard and thus subject to destruction in the event of a crash so it is of no use whatever to investigators?

Ed

________________________________

MS

________________________________

Rich @ PPO

----- Original Message -----

[Markl]

You do not have to log every flight -- only those needed to substantiate currency etc.

 

Fly frequently, many times, often, over and over again, LOOK around,
practice strange stuff, train seriously, and hand prop safely!
Regards,
Tony Markl

[Thomas DeWinter]

In order for your insurance and for you to retain your drivers liscense it is not necessary to document the recency and experience of your last drive in your car.  Heck most states you do not even have to take a drivers test to renew your drivers liscense.  Instead just send in the check by mail.

 

Aviation is differnt.  For better or worse.  And you do NOT have to log each and every flight.  You only need to have logged enough to show currency..  That includes the 90 day take off and landings as well as  your flight reviews. Other than that do what ever you want.

---

From: E. O. Lake <eol...@rogers.com>
To: aer...@westmont.edu
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 11:21:53 AM

[JODY WITTMEYER]

The threads are on the inside of the tank neck. Either style nut will work. The knurled round one, phenolic or the Model "A" hex nut.

 

JODY WITTMEYER

jod...@earthlink.net

EarthLink Revolves Around You.

 

[Chris Murray]

Well, I got the repair kit, and the two wrenches. Now, there’s a bigger problem. The inner nut on the gage itself is smaller than the Model A inner nut. Therefore the glass and the gaskets to go on the inner nut are the wrong size. I have 2 aux tanks and they both have the same type of float. The inner nut on them has a round smooth round opening with a small keyway in the opening to let one apply torque to turn it. One tank had the phenolic outer nut and the other has a metal one. The Model A outer nut fits okay and would seal the inner assembly. With what I have, fuel would seep around the viewing glass.

            Also, has anyone repainted the black on the indicator? What type of fuel- resistant paint did you use?

Chris

NC31986

 

---

[Joe Preston]

Chris,

Can you send some pictures? It would help to better understand your issue.

Joe

[j...@joea.com]

Pls remember everyone that I believe that Chris is restoring a Pre-War Aeronca, not a Chief
or Champ with the later style fuel tank.

Do not know if the parts are the same on the prewar airplanes but wanted to bring it up just
in case they were different.

Joe A

On 25 Feb 2009 at 13:22, Chris Murray wrote:

>
> Well, I got the repair kit, and the two wrenches. Now, there´s a bigger problem. The inner
> nut on the gage itself is smaller than the Model A inner nut. Therefore the glass and the gaskets
> to go on the inner nut are the wrong size. I have 2 aux tanks and they both have the same type of
> float. The inner nut on them has a round smooth round opening with a small keyway in the
> opening to let one apply torque to turn it. One tank had the phenolic outer nut and the other has a
> metal one. The Model A outer nut fits okay and would seal the inner assembly. With what I have,
> fuel would seep around the viewing glass.
> Also, has anyone repainted the black on the indicator? What type of fuel- resistant paint
> did you use?
> Chris
> NC31986
>
>
>

> From: aeronca...@westmont.edu [mailto:aeronca...@westmont.edu] On Behalf
> Of Rick Dover
> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 6:56 PM
> To: aer...@westmont.edu
> Subject: Re: [f-AA] Aux tank gage repair
>
>
> That's $6.20. Here is the link.
>
>
>
> http://www.parts123.com/parts123/yb.dll?Parta~PartSort~A0~~~~~A20~A1
>
>
>
> Rick
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Plain Carl
>
> To: aer...@westmont.edu
>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 7:58 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [f-AA] Aux tank gage repair
>
>
>
> Correction. Gauge is $32 and change and the tool is $620 at Mac's Antique Auto Parts
>
>
>
> PC
>
>
>
>

> From: Chris Murray <murr...@cox.net>
> To: aer...@westmont.edu
> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 3:57:27 PM
> Subject: [f-AA] Aux tank gage repair
> Seems to me that it´s fairly well established that you use a Model A gage kit to repair the prewar
> aux tank. Does the outer nut that comes with Ford´s tank fit the opening in the Aeronca tank,
> which is ¾"? I´m repairing mine and instead of a metal outer ring, there was a phenolic one that
> refused to budge. If the Ford ring fits, has any one got the tool kit for the gage?
> Chris
> NC31986