Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

lacloudchaser(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:34 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

Folks,

   

  I'm sitting here with my copy of a newsletter dated Winter 1993 Vol 1, No 1. and titled "The CJ-6/Yak-18 Driver"

   

  In that first edition, page 1, the editor Bud Harrell asked this question:

   

  "...Will there be a Yak association like the T-34 association? I cannot answer that question. For now, we may be too few, and too far flung..."

   

  He reffered to the CJ-6 as a Yak-18 in those days and had some 23 pilots respond to this proposal to organize, out of a distribution list of 47 owners. 

   

  For many of you, the founding of the Yak Pilots Club and evolution to the RedStar Pilots Association, has been a positive addition to your interest in these aircraft and this great past time. The RPA (RedStar) is a unified all-aircraft aviators association, it was about the pilots flying, and not about one  type specific aircraft or another  - the name change proposal itself was done to cement that concept not long after a Yak 52 pilot called up before coming to a California fly-in we were forming in 2001 and said "This ain't one of those *$#(at) CJ club get togethers they just refer to as 'Yak' is it?".  No, this is RedStar...and we made it a goal to forever remove such an incorrect perception among aircraft owners of Eastern Block aircraft (and beyond, RPA membership is open to pilot-owners who simply commit to the goals of training and fun). 

   

  I've heard that the Yak 52 is 30 years old this year?  The CJ is 50 or maybe more.  Whats really important, as is being pointed out by Condor [pres] to the volunteers and seen through the agressive refocus of Oshkosh 2008, as you will read in this quarters Red Alert, is the realization that the RPA is 15 years old - and this  event is a National RedStar Celebration of the ENTIRE associations membership and it's collective accomplishments and evolution. 

   

  RPA ops at Oshkosh may highlight the CJ and Yak anniversaries in specialty publications, mass formations and other venues, but this event is getting a lot of planning effort (and RPA treasury and sponsor money) to support the pilots and members equally, doesn't matter what you fly or drive.

   

  And yes Bud, the community did indeed grow their association...from 23 in 1993 to well over 450 today.

   

  Food for thought,

   

  Drew

   

   

   

  

 



      [quote][b]

discrab(at)earthlink.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 3:37 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

Drew;

  

 Thanks for all you and the other organizers of Red Star have done.  I was one of the earlier originals with coming on board with Bud in '96, so 12 years for  me now.  Wow.  I have kept some of Bud's Yak "magazines"  crude in comparison to our slick color mag now but it brings back great memories.  

  

 All of you out there...a big thanks - the organization is working.  We haven't had a good - who does akro best, Yak or CJ? in a while - that one has hopefully died a gruesome death.

  

 Respectfully, Rick b

  

 



  

 [quote] ---

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 7:18 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

Rick,

 I'll respond to the question AND start the debate -  "....who does akro best, Yak or  CJ? in a while".  Answer -  no  comparison.  Yak 52 wins hands down.  )))  OK.  Let the  "debate" begin!

 Dennis

  

 [quote]   ---

brian-1927(at)lloyd.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 10:15 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

On Feb 17, 2008, at 7:16 AM, A. Dennis Savarese wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   Rick,

 I'll respond to the question AND start the debate - "....who does  

 akro best, Yak or CJ? in a while".  Answer -  no comparison.  Yak 52  

 wins hands down.  )))  OK.  Let the "debate" begin!


	


I fly both on a regular basis. Dennis is right. Yak-52 is a *much*  

better acro mount.



--

Brian Lloyd                         3191 Western Drive

brian HYPHEN 1927 AT lloyd DOT com    Cameron Park, CA 95682

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

— Antoine de Saint-Exupéry



PGP key ID:          12095C52A32A1B6C

PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0  CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 11:38 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

Ohhhh…….Nooooo…YUUUUUU…..d’it’nntt!! Being one of the few and the proud…the YAK-50!  

Now lets hear from the YAK 54/55 and Sukio boys….a well…the girls too!  

Doc  

       

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese

 Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 9:16 AM

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...  

  

  

     

Rick,  

    

I'll respond to the question AND start the debate - "....who does akro best, Yak or CJ? in a while".  Answer -  no comparison.  Yak 52 wins hands down.  )))  OK.  Let the "debate" begin!  

    

Dennis  

    

   

   	  Quote: 	
		      

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

    

From: Rick Basiliere (discrab(at)earthlink.net)   

    

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com (yak-list(at)matronics.com)   

    

Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 5:35 AM  

    

Subject: RE: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...  

    

   

      

Drew;  

    

   

    

Thanks for all you and the other organizers of Red Star have done.  I was one of the earlier originals with coming on board with Bud in '96, so 12 years for  me now.  Wow.  I have kept some of Bud's Yak "magazines"  crude in comparison to our slick color mag now but it brings back great memories.    

    

   

    

All of you out there...a big thanks - the organization is working.  We haven't had a good - who does akro best, Yak or CJ? in a while - that one has hopefully died a gruesome death.  

    

   

    

Respectfully, Rick b  

    

   

  

    

   

   	  Quote: 	
		      

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

    

From: Drew (lacloudchaser(at)yahoo.com)   

    

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com (yak-list(at)matronics.com)  

    

Sent: 2/16/2008 9:41:59 AM   

    

Subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...  

    

   

    

Folks,  

    

   

    

I'm sitting here with my copy of a newsletter dated Winter 1993 Vol 1, No 1. and titled "The CJ-6/Yak-18 Driver"  

    

   

    

In that first edition, page 1, the editor Bud Harrell asked this question:  

    

   

    

"...Will there be a Yak association like the T-34 association? I cannot answer that question. For now, we may be too few, and too far flung..."  

    

   

    

He reffered to the CJ-6 as a Yak-18 in those days and had some 23 pilots respond to this proposal to organize, out of a distribution list of 47 owners.   

    

   

    

For many of you, the founding of the Yak Pilots Club and evolution to the RedStar Pilots Association, has been a positive addition to your interest in these aircraft and this great past time. The RPA (RedStar) is a unified all-aircraft aviators association, it was about the pilots flying, and not about one type specific aircraft or another  - the name change proposal itself was done to cement that concept not long after a Yak 52 pilot called up before coming to a California fly-in we were forming in 2001 and said "This ain't one of those *$#(at) CJ club get togethers they just refer to as 'Yak' is it?".  No, this is RedStar...and we made it a goal to forever remove such an incorrect perception among aircraft owners of Eastern Block aircraft (and beyond, RPA membership is open to pilot-owners who simply commit to the goals of training and fun).   

    

   

    

I've heard that the Yak 52 is 30 years old this year?  The CJ is 50 or maybe more.  Whats really important, as is being pointed out by Condor [pres] to the volunteers and seen through the agressive refocus of Oshkosh 2008, as you will read in this quarters Red Alert, is the realization that the RPA is 15 years old - and this event is a National RedStar Celebration of the ENTIRE associations membership and it's collective accomplishments and evolution.   

    

   

    

RPA ops at Oshkosh may highlight the CJ and Yak anniversaries in specialty publications, mass formations and other venues, but this event is getting a lot of planning effort (and RPA treasury and sponsor money) to support the pilots and members equally, doesn't matter what you fly or drive.  

    

   

    

And yes Bud, the community did indeed grow their association...from 23 in 1993 to well over 450 today.  

    

   

    

Food for thought,  

    

   

    

Drew  

    

   

    

   

    

   

    



    

   	  Quote: 	
		     	
  href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.comhref="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c 	
   	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7 	  Quote: 	
		   	
8 	  Quote: 	
		   	
9 	  Quote: 	
		   	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7

       [quote][b]

scott-p(at)texas.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 1:36 pm Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

I think it is safe to say that the Su26/31 is the best Russian Acro 

plane available--how many World Championships? 7 now, I think (not 

counting the 4-minute Free, of course...)

I think it is safe to say that the Su29 is the best Russian 2-seat Acro 

plane. Possibly the best 2 seat acro plane of any sort.

The Yak 55/55M is probably the best acro VALUE anywhere--it will hold 

its own with any of the Sukhois (yes, it really is AT LEAST 80% of a 

Sukhoi) and is about 1/4-1/5 the price.

There were only about 7 Yak 54's ever made--if I ever get to fly one, 

I'll have an opinion about it. I have seen the I-3/E-3/SP91/SP95 

(whatever you want to call it), and it is in the same league with the 

Yak 55.



Now, if someone would come up with a symmetrical, 0-dihedral wing with a 

tailwheel conversion for a -52, THAT would be quite the trainer...



Scott

Yak 55M N155YK

former owner of Su29 N329SU



Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:

[quote]

 Ohhhh…….Nooooo…YUUUUUU…..d’it’nntt!! Being one of the few and the 

 proud…the YAK-50!



 Now lets hear from the YAK 54/55 and Sukio boys….a well…the girls too!



 Doc



 *From:* owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com 

 [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *A. Dennis 

 Savarese

 *Sent:* Sunday, February 17, 2008 9:16 AM

 *To:* yak-list(at)matronics.com

 *Subject:* Re: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...



 Rick,



 I'll respond to the question AND start the debate - "....who does akro 

 best, Yak or CJ? in a while". Answer - no comparison. Yak 52 wins 

 hands down. ))) OK. Let the "debate" begin!



 Dennis



     ---

drc(at)wscare.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 7:46 pm Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

Yak 52TW and Yak 55MThey both are awesome fun to fly - The 52TW loses some performance solo in my opinion.  It takes a guy in the back seat to keep the CG and Center of lift closer so that acro such as tumbling improves.  With a solo pilot in the front the CG is so far forward it always wants to go nose down - safer but not as fun.  The Yak 52TW is cleaner - less induced drag and easier energy management than the 55.



The 55M has the better power to weight ratio, Shorter wing, faster roll, bigger ailerons and way more rudder authority.  Symetrical wing - close CG and center of lift.  Simpler systems - I would say it kicks the 52's ass in acro - but it was designed to fly acro - the 52 was designed as a trainer - thus the flying characteristics of the 52 are more capable with a moderate sized GIB - The only drawback to the 55 - you can't take a friend and energy management.  Otherwise It's my choice when I have time to squeeze in a 20-30 minute flight by myself before work.



Although another 10 inches of snow and its supposed to be below zero Monday again - I was in Miami and Orlando last week and kept thinking how nice it would be to fly year around....



Herb

On Feb 17, 2008, at 1:33 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:

[quote]Ohhhh…….Nooooo…YUUUUUU…..d’it’nntt!! Being one of the few and the proud…the YAK-50!

Now lets hear from the YAK 54/55 and Sukio boys….a well…the girls too!

Doc

 

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com) [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com)] On Behalf Of A. Dennis Savarese

Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 9:16 AM

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com (yak-list(at)matronics.com)

Subject: Re: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

 

Rick,



I'll respond to the question AND start the debate - "....who does akro best, Yak or CJ? in a while".  Answer -  no comparison.  Yak 52 wins hands down.  )))  OK.  Let the "debate" begin!



Dennis



 



[quote]---

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:32 pm Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

Well, between the Tornados and Hurricanes that is. Had 2 days of great flying Fri and Sat. If one could get away during the week, we had 3 other great days and it is Feb. Now it does get hot and humid during the summer.  

Move south, Herb, the water is fine. My hospital is always looking for good Ob Gyns’. You will have to deal the 800 lb Gorilla though. BC/BS of Al. Hate them!  

Roger “Doc” Kemp  

YAK 50 78YK and YAK 52 552SH.  

       

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Herb Coussons

 

   

  

    

   

    

Although another 10 inches of snow and its supposed to be below zero Monday again - I was in Miami and Orlando last week and kept thinking how nice it would be to fly year around....  

    

   

    

Herb  

    

   

    

   

        

On Feb 17, 2008, at 1:33 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:  

  



 

         

Ohhhh…….Nooooo…YUUUUUU…..d’it’nntt!! Being one of the few and the proud…the YAK-50!  

    

Now lets hear from the YAK 54/55 and Sukio boys….a well…the girls too!  

    

Doc  

    

   

  

  

  

  

  [quote] [b]

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 12:33 pm Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

I think the real answer is how you define the term "AKRO".  If you are

talking about slow, lazy, low G type stuff, the CJ is obviously in the

running.  If you are talking about competitive/judged aerobatics, the

answer is very simple.  Look at the number of CJ's entered for ANY level

of competitive events and compare that to YAK-52's.  I believe the CJ

will do very nice, very graceful stuff... Kind of like a T-34.  However,

the YAK-52 was built to do every Arresti move in the book, and the CJ

simply was not.  



Mark Bitterlich

 



--

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 12:38 pm Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

No way Doc.  The 50 is far from being the best Aerobatic Mount... And I

say that owning one.  For doing AIRSHOWS, it may very well be one of the

best.  Hang a 400HP motor on it with a good three bladed prop and look

out!  However for pure aerobatics I believe of all the Russian models,

the Sukhoi 31 would be the best, followed by the 26, and right there

equal with the 26, probably the 29.  Just a tiny notch down, and this is

of course debatable... Would be the YAK-55, and close to that.. The 54.

The 54 is very hard to judge... Very few of them flying and you hardly

ever see one at anything other than airshows.  



The difference between a 50 and a 31 is simply night and day.  Of

course... So is the freaking price!  



Getting the best bang for the buck, I would clearly put the 55 and 50

first.  



Sadly, I think we are about to see the end of the day where Russian

designs dominate.  A lot of models have either stopped production, or

are now asking SERIOUS prices.  



Mark Bitterlich

 



--

l39parts(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 1:13 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

I concur with your ranking of the aircraft in performance.  A foot note needs to added on price point: it's an exponential curve.  An Su-31 is maybe 5% better than a Yak 55 and costs three times as much.  If you want to win in unlimited, you will need the 5% improvement in performance and you will need to PAY big time to get.  The Yak 50 and 55 are at very good points in the price/performance curve, but if your only concern is performance you'll need to move way up the price curve.

  

 As far as airshows and competition, the former is show business, meant to dazzle and entertain.  It is unrelated to competition which is the archane, and dull as dishwater, persuit of technical perfection.



[quote] Subject: RE: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

 Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 15:36:21 -0500

 From: mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 

 --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil>

 

 No way Doc. The 50 is far from being the best Aerobatic Mount... And I

 say that owning one. For doing AIRSHOWS, it may very well be one of the

 best. Hang a 400HP motor on it with a good three bladed prop and look

 out! However for pure aerobatics I believe of all the Russian models,

 the Sukhoi 31 would be the best, followed by the 26, and right there

 equal with the 26, probably the 29. Just a tiny notch down, and this is

 of course debatable... Would be the YAK-55, and close to that.. The 54.

 The 54 is very hard to judge... Very few of them flying and you hardly

 ever see one at anything other than airshows. 

 

 The difference between a 50 and a 31 is simply night and day. Of

 course... So is the freaking price! 

 

 Getting the best bang for the buck, I would clearly put the 55 and 50

 first. 

 

 Sadly, I think we are about to see the end of the day where Russian

 designs dominate. A lot of models have either stopped production, or

 are now asking SERIOUS prices. 

 

 Mark Bitterlich

 

 

 --

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 6:46 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

Ron,  

You are absolutely correct as is Mark on this point. However, for shear ass fun on a truly inexpensive basis in a stead that just plain kick ass turns heads when fired up, taxied by, and doing fly-bys the YAK 50 is your machine. Now yes for the truly sublime expense of it, move up to a Su 31 but to me for looks and a plain ass sexy A/C , the Sukios nor the YAK 55 have that appeal. I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  If I wanted to just plain ass turn Ben Franklins to noise in a truly kick ass airplane at an ungodly expense, then I would buy that demilitarized F-16A  that appears occasionally in Trade-a-plane! Now from firsthand experience, that is truly a “KICK ASS” plane. Down- right expensive to operate though at over $6000/hour now! Granted, there are a few MIG 29’s floating around too that can be had for a song! Again, cost is going to kick your but unless you are the Collins Foundation or the likes of.  

Also, since I don’t do air shows (except rarely when I get together with bunch of my old squadron mates at our reunion about every three years) or compete, this is purely for fun and to escape from  some of the stress in my life!  

So for pure ass fun of flying in an economical to operate War-bird, pick your poison. CJ6 (rolls to slow for my taste), the YAK-52 (have one and enjoy flying her), or the YAK-50 (have one and absolutely love flying it). Not to ignore the others but I have no experience with them either. I have left the smokers intentionally out of this also except for my comments about the 16 and 29.  

Now If I were to seriously consider buying a smoker, then the L-39 is on my list simply because of acquisition cost. Its’ short field capability on a hot day suxs and it reminds me of an F-84 in that it is a runway loving hog on a warm day!   

An A-4 Scooter is also on that list! In the scheme of things, it is a very simple smoker to own and operate but not from a cost perspective. Now I  have gone an opened the door on who has the best Smoker with writing all this bs.  

 Doc  

       

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Davis

 Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 3:11 AM

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: RE: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...  

  

  

   

I concur with your ranking of the aircraft in performance.  A foot note needs to added on price point: it's an exponential curve.  An Su-31 is maybe 5% better than a Yak 55 and costs three times as much.  If you want to win in unlimited, you will need the 5% improvement in performance and you will need to PAY big time to get.  The Yak 50 and 55 are at very good points in the price/performance curve, but if your only concern is performance you'll need to move way up the price curve.

  

 As far as airshows and competition, the former is show business, meant to dazzle and entertain.  It is unrelated to competition which is the archane, and dull as dishwater, persuit of technical perfection.

 

 > Subject: RE: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

 > Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 15:36:21 -0500

 > From: mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil

 > To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 > 

 > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil>

 > 

 > No way Doc. The 50 is far from being the best Aerobatic Mount... And I

 > say that owning one. For doing AIRSHOWS, it may very well be one of the

 > best. Hang a 400HP motor on it with a good three bladed prop and look

 > out! However for pure aerobatics I believe of all the Russian models,

 > the Sukhoi 31 would be the best, followed by the 26, and right there

 > equal with the 26, probably the 29. Just a tiny notch down, and this is

 > of course debatable... Would be the YAK-55, and close to that.. The 54.

 > The 54 is very hard to judge... Very few of them flying and you hardly

 > ever see one at anything other than airshows. 

 > 

 > The difference between a 50 and a 31 is simply night and day. Of

 > course... So is the freaking price! 

 > 

 > Getting the best bang for the buck, I would clearly put the 55 and 50

 > first. 

 > 

 > Sadly, I think we are about to see the end of the day where Russian

 > designs dominate. A lot of models have either stopped production, or

 > are now asking SERIOUS prices. 

 > 

 > Mark Bitterlich

 > 

 > 

 > --

MarkWDavis

Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 104
Location: Syracuse, KS

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:06 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

Doc,

     I'm with you on the Scooter.  The only problem with them is needing a huffer to crank it up.  The ultimate A-4 would be Super Fox with a J52-P408.  Better than one to one at low fuel weights on a basic engine jet and a 720 degree/sec. roll rate can't be beat!  



Mark Davis

N44YK

  ---

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:24 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

Yes Sir! I believe that was the engine they put in the Blues!  

Sweat little jet!  

Doc  

       

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis

 Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 10:03 AM

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...  

  

  

     

Doc,  

    

     I'm with you on the Scooter.  The only problem with them is needing a huffer to crank it up.  The ultimate A-4 would be Super Fox with a J52-P408.  Better than one to one at low fuel weights on a basic engine jet and a 720 degree/sec. roll rate can't be beat!    

    

   

    

Mark Davis  

    

N44YK  

  [quote]    

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

    

From: Roger Kemp M.D. (viperdoc(at)mindspring.com)   

    

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com (yak-list(at)matronics.com)   

    

Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 7:42 AM  

    

Subject: RE: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...  

    

   

  

Ron,  

You are absolutely correct as is Mark on this point. However, for shear ass fun on a truly inexpensive basis in a stead that just plain kick ass turns heads when fired up, taxied by, and doing fly-bys the YAK 50 is your machine. Now yes for the truly sublime expense of it, move up to a Su 31 but to me for looks and a plain ass sexy A/C , the Sukios nor the YAK 55 have that appeal. I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  If I wanted to just plain ass turn Ben Franklins to noise in a truly kick ass airplane at an ungodly expense, then I would buy that demilitarized F-16A  that appears occasionally in Trade-a-plane! Now from firsthand experience, that is truly a “KICK ASS” plane. Down- right expensive to operate though at over $6000/hour now! Granted, there are a few MIG 29’s floating around too that can be had for a song! Again, cost is going to kick your but unless you are the Collins Foundation or the likes of.  

Also, since I don’t do air shows (except rarely when I get together with bunch of my old squadron mates at our reunion about every three years) or compete, this is purely for fun and to escape from  some of the stress in my life!  

So for pure ass fun of flying in an economical to operate War-bird, pick your poison. CJ6 (rolls to slow for my taste), the YAK-52 (have one and enjoy flying her), or the YAK-50 (have one and absolutely love flying it). Not to ignore the others but I have no experience with them either. I have left the smokers intentionally out of this also except for my comments about the 16 and 29.  

Now If I were to seriously consider buying a smoker, then the L-39 is on my list simply because of acquisition cost. Its’ short field capability on a hot day suxs and it reminds me of an F-84 in that it is a runway loving hog on a warm day!   

An A-4 Scooter is also on that list! In the scheme of things, it is a very simple smoker to own and operate but not from a cost perspective. Now I  have gone an opened the door on who has the best Smoker with writing all this bs.  

 Doc  

       

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Davis

 Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 3:11 AM

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: RE: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...  

  

  

   

I concur with your ranking of the aircraft in performance.  A foot note needs to added on price point: it's an exponential curve.  An Su-31 is maybe 5% better than a Yak 55 and costs three times as much.  If you want to win in unlimited, you will need the 5% improvement in performance and you will need to PAY big time to get.  The Yak 50 and 55 are at very good points in the price/performance curve, but if your only concern is performance you'll need to move way up the price curve.

  

 As far as airshows and competition, the former is show business, meant to dazzle and entertain.  It is unrelated to competition which is the archane, and dull as dishwater, persuit of technical perfection.

 

 > Subject: RE: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

 > Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 15:36:21 -0500

 > From: mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil

 > To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 > 

 > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil>

 > 

 > No way Doc. The 50 is far from being the best Aerobatic Mount... And I

 > say that owning one. For doing AIRSHOWS, it may very well be one of the

 > best. Hang a 400HP motor on it with a good three bladed prop and look

 > out! However for pure aerobatics I believe of all the Russian models,

 > the Sukhoi 31 would be the best, followed by the 26, and right there

 > equal with the 26, probably the 29. Just a tiny notch down, and this is

 > of course debatable... Would be the YAK-55, and close to that.. The 54.

 > The 54 is very hard to judge... Very few of them flying and you hardly

 > ever see one at anything other than airshows. 

 > 

 > The difference between a 50 and a 31 is simply night and day. Of

 > course... So is the freaking price! 

 > 

 > Getting the best bang for the buck, I would clearly put the 55 and 50

 > first. 

 > 

 > Sadly, I think we are about to see the end of the day where Russian

 > designs dominate. A lot of models have either stopped production, or

 > are now asking SERIOUS prices. 

 > 

 > Mark Bitterlich

 > 

 > 

 > --

drc(at)wscare.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:51 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

No one has mentioned the mono-wing aerobatic designs such as the Edge, Extras, etc - and the Eastern European Zlin 50 the CAP etc.  The same price/performance argument applies there too.  Doc did mention the looks of the 50 over the SU31 and the Yak 55 - but all I have to say is the sound of the radials is enough to own one over any of the other aerobatic planes with Lycomings.  The horizontal 6 cylinders and the smaller props sound like they about to be thrown out of the plane and they sound they working at 110% to get the performance out of them, whereas the M14's sound like they are just rolling along with a nice deep rumble even though we may run them at 90-100% doing acro.  So from the ground they make such an impression...Herb



On Feb 21, 2008, at 3:10 AM, Ron Davis wrote:

[quote]I concur with your ranking of the aircraft in performance.  A foot note needs to added on price point: it's an exponential curve.  An Su-31 is maybe 5% better than a Yak 55 and costs three times as much.  If you want to win in unlimited, you will need the 5% improvement in performance and you will need to PAY big time to get.  The Yak 50 and 55 are at very good points in the price/performance curve, but if your only concern is performance you'll need to move way up the price curve.

 

As far as airshows and competition, the former is show business, meant to dazzle and entertain.  It is unrelated to competition which is the archane, and dull as dishwater, persuit of technical perfection.



[quote] Subject: RE: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

 Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 15:36:21 -0500

 From: mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil (mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil)

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com (yak-list(at)matronics.com)

 

 --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil (mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil)>

 

 No way Doc. The 50 is far from being the best Aerobatic Mount... And I

 say that owning one. For doing AIRSHOWS, it may very well be one of the

 best. Hang a 400HP motor on it with a good three bladed prop and look

 out! However for pure aerobatics I believe of all the Russian models,

 the Sukhoi 31 would be the best, followed by the 26, and right there

 equal with the 26, probably the 29. Just a tiny notch down, and this is

 of course debatable... Would be the YAK-55, and close to that.. The 54.

 The 54 is very hard to judge... Very few of them flying and you hardly

 ever see one at anything other than airshows. 

 

 The difference between a 50 and a 31 is simply night and day. Of

 course... So is the freaking price! 

 

 Getting the best bang for the buck, I would clearly put the 55 and 50

 first. 

 

 Sadly, I think we are about to see the end of the day where Russian

 designs dominate. A lot of models have either stopped production, or

 are now asking SERIOUS prices. 

 

 Mark Bitterlich

 

 

 --

brian-1927(at)lloyd.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:02 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

On Feb 21, 2008, at 8:02 AM, Mark Davis wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   Doc,

      I'm with you on the Scooter.  The only problem with them is  

 needing a huffer to crank it up.  The ultimate A-4 would be Super  

 Fox with a J52-P408.  Better than one to one at low fuel weights on  

 a basic engine jet and a 720 degree/sec. roll rate can't be beat!


	


Ed Heinemann was a f'n genius. He knew how to build a toy!



Brian Lloyd                         3191 Western Drive

brianl AT lloyd DOT com             Cameron Park, CA 95682

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



PGP key ID:          12095C52A32A1B6C

PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0  CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:08 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

Concure…Aint Nothing Like A RADIAL. The HISS of a SMOKER just does not do it. Now a Viper Standing on the LOUD PEDAL With 5 Stages of blower cooking (at) 480 50 ft off the deck on a low pass does stir my blood! Almost as much as the F-4 stepping on the loud pedal!  

Doc  

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Herb Coussons

 Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 10:49 AM

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...  

No one has mentioned the mono-wing aerobatic designs such as the Edge, Extras, etc - and the Eastern European Zlin 50 the CAP etc.  The same price/performance argument applies there too.  Doc did mention the looks of the 50 over the SU31 and the Yak 55 - but all I have to say is the sound of the radials is enough to own one over any of the other aerobatic planes with Lycomings.  The horizontal 6 cylinders and the smaller props sound like they about to be thrown out of the plane and they sound they working at 110% to get the performance out of them, whereas the M14's sound like they are just rolling along with a nice deep rumble even though we may run them at 90-100% doing acro.  So from the ground they make such an impression...    

Herb  

On Feb 21, 2008, at 3:10 AM, Ron Davis wrote:  

I concur with your ranking of the aircraft in performance.  A foot note needs to added on price point: it's an exponential curve.  An Su-31 is maybe 5% better than a Yak 55 and costs three times as much.  If you want to win in unlimited, you will need the 5% improvement in performance and you will need to PAY big time to get.  The Yak 50 and 55 are at very good points in the price/performance curve, but if your only concern is performance you'll need to move way up the price curve.

 As far as airshows and competition, the former is show business, meant to dazzle and entertain.  It is unrelated to competition which is the archane, and dull as dishwater, persuit of technical perfection.

 > Subject: RE: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

 > Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 15:36:21 -0500

 > From: mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil (mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil)

 > To: yak-list(at)matronics.com (yak-list(at)matronics.com)

 > 

 > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil (mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil)>

 > 

 > No way Doc. The 50 is far from being the best Aerobatic Mount... And I

 > say that owning one. For doing AIRSHOWS, it may very well be one of the

 > best. Hang a 400HP motor on it with a good three bladed prop and look

 > out! However for pure aerobatics I believe of all the Russian models,

 > the Sukhoi 31 would be the best, followed by the 26, and right there

 > equal with the 26, probably the 29. Just a tiny notch down, and this is

 > of course debatable... Would be the YAK-55, and close to that.. The 54.

 > The 54 is very hard to judge... Very few of them flying and you hardly

 > ever see one at anything other than airshows. 

 > 

 > The difference between a 50 and a 31 is simply night and day. Of

 > course... So is the freaking price! 

 > 

 > Getting the best bang for the buck, I would clearly put the 55 and 50

 > first. 

 > 

 > Sadly, I think we are about to see the end of the day where Russian

 > designs dominate. A lot of models have either stopped production, or

 > are now asking SERIOUS prices. 

 > 

 > Mark Bitterlich

 > 

 > 

 > --

brian-1927(at)lloyd.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:09 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

On Feb 21, 2008, at 8:49 AM, Herb Coussons wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   No one has mentioned the mono-wing aerobatic designs such as the  

 Edge, Extras, etc - and the Eastern European Zlin 50 the CAP etc.   

 The same price/performance argument applies there too.  Doc did  

 mention the looks of the 50 over the SU31 and the Yak 55 - but all I  

 have to say is the sound of the radials is enough to own one over  

 any of the other aerobatic planes with Lycomings.  The horizontal 6  

 cylinders and the smaller props sound like they about to be thrown  

 out of the plane and they sound they working at 110% to get the  

 performance out of them, whereas the M14's sound like they are just  

 rolling along with a nice deep rumble even though we may run them at  

 90-100% doing acro.  So from the ground they make such an  

 impression...


	


So true. But then comes the $64 question: who are you doing it for,  

you or them?



And I don't know about you but I am finding that I don't like pulling  

more than 5G anymore. I am no longer in a place where the airplane is  

the limiting factor. Yak-50 sounds pretty spiffy to me.



That being said, my next airplane is going to be an SF-260. I'll  

provide details as to why if anyone is interested.



Brian Lloyd                         3191 Western Drive

brianl AT lloyd DOT com             Cameron Park, CA 95682

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



PGP key ID:          12095C52A32A1B6C

PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0  CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C

MarkWDavis

Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 104
Location: Syracuse, KS

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:42 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

Doc,

     P408's and the slats bolted up to avoid asymetric deployment while 36" wingtip to canopy!



Mark Davis

N44YK

  ---

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:49 am Post subject: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

Mark,  

Was it not he J58 that the Blues had? I understand the P408 mod now.  

Doc  

       

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis

 Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 11:39 AM

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...  

  

  

     

Doc,  

    

     P408's and the slats bolted up to avoid asymetric deployment while 36" wingtip to canopy!  

    

   

    

Mark Davis  

    

N44YK  

  [quote]    

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

    

From: Roger Kemp M.D. (viperdoc(at)mindspring.com)   

    

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com (yak-list(at)matronics.com)   

    

Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 9:21 AM  

    

Subject: RE: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...  

    

   

  

Yes Sir! I believe that was the engine they put in the Blues!  

Sweat little jet!  

Doc  

       

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com) [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis

 Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 10:03 AM

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com (yak-list(at)matronics.com)

 Subject: Re: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...  

  

  

     

Doc,  

    

     I'm with you on the Scooter.  The only problem with them is needing a huffer to crank it up.  The ultimate A-4 would be Super Fox with a J52-P408.  Better than one to one at low fuel weights on a basic engine jet and a 720 degree/sec. roll rate can't be beat!    

    

   

    

Mark Davis  

    

N44YK  

  [quote]    

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

    

From: Roger Kemp M.D. (viperdoc(at)mindspring.com)   

    

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com (yak-list(at)matronics.com)   

    

Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 7:42 AM  

    

Subject: RE: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...  

    

   

  

Ron,  

You are absolutely correct as is Mark on this point. However, for shear ass fun on a truly inexpensive basis in a stead that just plain kick ass turns heads when fired up, taxied by, and doing fly-bys the YAK 50 is your machine. Now yes for the truly sublime expense of it, move up to a Su 31 but to me for looks and a plain ass sexy A/C , the Sukios nor the YAK 55 have that appeal. I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  If I wanted to just plain ass turn Ben Franklins to noise in a truly kick ass airplane at an ungodly expense, then I would buy that demilitarized F-16A  that appears occasionally in Trade-a-plane! Now from firsthand experience, that is truly a “KICK ASS” plane. Down- right expensive to operate though at over $6000/hour now! Granted, there are a few MIG 29’s floating around too that can be had for a song! Again, cost is going to kick your but unless you are the Collins Foundation or the likes of.  

Also, since I don’t do air shows (except rarely when I get together with bunch of my old squadron mates at our reunion about every three years) or compete, this is purely for fun and to escape from  some of the stress in my life!  

So for pure ass fun of flying in an economical to operate War-bird, pick your poison. CJ6 (rolls to slow for my taste), the YAK-52 (have one and enjoy flying her), or the YAK-50 (have one and absolutely love flying it). Not to ignore the others but I have no experience with them either. I have left the smokers intentionally out of this also except for my comments about the 16 and 29.  

Now If I were to seriously consider buying a smoker, then the L-39 is on my list simply because of acquisition cost. Its’ short field capability on a hot day suxs and it reminds me of an F-84 in that it is a runway loving hog on a warm day!   

An A-4 Scooter is also on that list! In the scheme of things, it is a very simple smoker to own and operate but not from a cost perspective. Now I  have gone an opened the door on who has the best Smoker with writing all this bs.  

 Doc  

       

From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Davis

 Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 3:11 AM

 To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: RE: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...  

  

  

   

I concur with your ranking of the aircraft in performance.  A foot note needs to added on price point: it's an exponential curve.  An Su-31 is maybe 5% better than a Yak 55 and costs three times as much.  If you want to win in unlimited, you will need the 5% improvement in performance and you will need to PAY big time to get.  The Yak 50 and 55 are at very good points in the price/performance curve, but if your only concern is performance you'll need to move way up the price curve.

  

 As far as airshows and competition, the former is show business, meant to dazzle and entertain.  It is unrelated to competition which is the archane, and dull as dishwater, persuit of technical perfection.

 

 > Subject: RE: Yak n CJ Aircraft anniversaries and Oshkosh...

 > Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 15:36:21 -0500

 > From: mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil

 > To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 > 

 > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich(at)navy.mil>

 > 

 > No way Doc. The 50 is far from being the best Aerobatic Mount... And I

 > say that owning one. For doing AIRSHOWS, it may very well be one of the

 > best. Hang a 400HP motor on it with a good three bladed prop and look

 > out! However for pure aerobatics I believe of all the Russian models,

 > the Sukhoi 31 would be the best, followed by the 26, and right there

 > equal with the 26, probably the 29. Just a tiny notch down, and this is

 > of course debatable... Would be the YAK-55, and close to that.. The 54.

 > The 54 is very hard to judge... Very few of them flying and you hardly

 > ever see one at anything other than airshows. 

 > 

 > The difference between a 50 and a 31 is simply night and day. Of

 > course... So is the freaking price! 

 > 

 > Getting the best bang for the buck, I would clearly put the 55 and 50

 > first. 

 > 

 > Sadly, I think we are about to see the end of the day where Russian

 > designs dominate. A lot of models have either stopped production, or

 > are now asking SERIOUS prices. 

 > 

 > Mark Bitterlich

 > 

 > 

 > --

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum