Monday, November 30, 2009

[Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

FWIW ... Dave at QCU said that certification of the R-503 for light
sport should be completed near the end of the year. He's the only one
I've heard say that but, if so, it would be great. The R-503 is a
great engine for light aircraft.

Dale
N28YD

--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, "ls78705" <lstavenhagen@...> wrote:

> The 503 is still my favorite aviation engine, even tho I don't like
> the leaky crank seal problem. I even still have my toolset for them.

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

I came extremely close to purchasing a Titan after I sold my
Challenger. I did like the view but putting pencil to paper brought me
to a very different conclusion. The Zodiac 601 was also on my list but
that one was rejected also for reasons I won't get into.

Like Roger I own a Sonex and I'm glad I went that way. There is much
more to an airplane than the view. The view, while it is different and
somewhat restrictive, isn't as horrible as is being reported. I
believe they are both fine airplanes and any perspective owner of
either owes it to themselves to do the research to find which aircraft
meets their mission profile. That only makes sense.

Many have asked about using VW power on a Titan but the thought of
using VW power is usually trashed pretty hard on this list. Many of
the better VW conversions work, and work well, on an airframe that can
take advantage of them. The Titan airframe isn't one of them.

Roger: The AeroCarb is prety easy to get used to. I set mine much as
you have set yours and then lean for all ground operations.

Dale
N28YD


--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, "Roger" <rtracy@...> wrote:

> I've got about 10 hrs on the Sonex I bought .. and to tell
> the truth I kind of wish I'd just built one of these in the
> first place. I flew the Titan S I built for 3 years and it was
> a lot of fun to fly .. quick .. responsive .. etc. The Sonex
> flies very nice though and I really like it. The forward visibility
> isn't all that great .. but I've had enough planes with a high
> panel .. it's not really an issue.

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

Try running a good 100:1 oil and premix it 100:1. I did that for a long time- less oil to buy, clean engine.

-- Guy

The oil injection helps with the carbon buildup as it reduces the oil to about 70:1 at idle. With premix you have 50:1 all the time so the engine will coke up a little faster.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

RE: [Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

I would never consider buying a low wing plane…unless the front of the wing
was well behind the cockpit.

I flew plenty of Piper's in my GA days, but generally only when the Cessna
dealer didn't have the size plane I wanted available.

For some reason, the low wing on the Seneca and the Aztec never bothered me.
Perhaps their wings are farther back, relative to the cockpit.

TCS

Question with Boldness -- Thomas Jefferson

Hold to the Truth -- George Washington

Speak Without Fear -- Martin Luther King

Terry C Savage

Senior Information Technology Manager

Science Fiction Author

The End of Winter

Circle of Fire

<http://tinyurl.com/end-of-winter-savage>
http://tinyurl.com/end-of-winter-savage

http://tcsendofwinter.blogspot.com/

<http://tcsendofwinter.blogspot.com/>

====================================

_____

From: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of ls78705
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 7:43 AM
To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

--- In Titanaircraft@ <mailto:Titanaircraft%40yahoogroups.com>
yahoogroups.com, Tim Hansen <togoforth@...> wrote:
>
> I have a friend at my airport who finished his tri-gear Sonex last summer.
After getting his airworthiness cert. it took him six months to get his
Aerovee to run properly so he could fly it. Countless tear-downs,
tweaking, electronics fiddling, carburator fiddling, fuel line fiddling, jet
fiddling... you get the idea. He's now getting some fairly consistent
performance and he has come to hate the airplane... primarily because of
the lousy view. Perhaps I jaded his thinking because I opined as to how I'd
never own another low-wing airplane because I don't like looking at the top
of the wing all day. It's a beautiful piece of work but I wouldn't trade my
tornado for one.
> Â
> Tim Hansen

JMO, but poor views is why I lost interest in general aviation shortly after
I got my ticket. So I know how I react to planes where you have too much
airplane in the view and not enough outside and avoid those designs.

It's amazing how even something simple like the view can be really critical
in your mission profile and can make or break even a otherwise really good
design and flier like the Sonex.

The only low wings tractors I'd consider are the RV 3,4 or 8. The tandem
seating helps with the view a little bit and they're great for travel. But
they're still borderline on the view. And since I won't hold a medical again
in this lifetime those are out for me.

Really, after years of researching it all the top choices in 3-axis LSA if
you like to look outside are the Tornado and the Kolb. If you go
weight-shift, the trikes are good for this too especially the 912 equipped
planes.

If your main objective is travel, tho, which is about 2 or 3 from the very
bottom for me, the choices widen a bunch including the sonex.

BTW, we had a sonex with jab 3300 based here for a while. It easily
performed on the level of an RV, particularly in climb. Amazing
performance....

LS

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, "Kess Blaswich" <kessb@...> wrote:
>
> Don't forget the Thundergulls in your high wing choices. The JT2 has the same fantastic forward view as the Titan, same wing, same tail group, same engine selections, same speeds. Not as many refinements, but still good flyers. Like Guy in his past cross country excersions in a Thundergull, I see an easy 100mph at 5800 rpm fast cruise in my 503 powered Gull 2000 single seater, probably because my maximum takeoff weight is only 696lbs, unless I didn't go to the bathroom that morning. I am concerned about the life expectany of the 503, as I have about 262 hours on it now, but it is oil-injected.
> Kess
>

Tell you the truth, my second choice over a titan would actually be a trike, but mostly because I flew weight shift for about 4 years and transitioning back probably wouldn't be that hard.
Some of the newer 912 equipped models can go 80 to 100mph now and are available as E/SLSA. Brand new and ready-to-fly they're half or less the cost of equivalent 3-axis SLSA.

But for 3-axis the titan is still top of the heap, IMO. Best combo of view and performance available....

LS

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, "Kess Blaswich" <kessb@...> wrote:
>
> Don't forget the Thundergulls in your high wing choices. The JT2 has the same fantastic forward view as the Titan, same wing, same tail group, same engine selections, same speeds. Not as many refinements, but still good flyers. Like Guy in his past cross country excersions in a Thundergull, I see an easy 100mph at 5800 rpm fast cruise in my 503 powered Gull 2000 single seater, probably because my maximum takeoff weight is only 696lbs, unless I didn't go to the bathroom that morning. I am concerned about the life expectany of the 503, as I have about 262 hours on it now, but it is oil-injected.
> Kess

The usual TBO out in the field for the 503 is around 500 hours, if it's not run too hard.
The 2-strokes tend to rot away before they actually wear out, due to too much sitting usually.

The oil injection helps with the carbon buildup as it reduces the oil to about 70:1 at idle. With premix you have 50:1 all the time so the engine will coke up a little faster.

The 503 is still my favorite aviation engine, even tho I don't like the leaky crank seal problem. I even still have my toolset for them.

I like my 912 but it's 5 times the cost and like the Byzantine Empire complexity-wise compared to the 503.....

LS
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: ls78705
> To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 5:47 AM
> Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, David King <pastordave45@> wrote:
> >
> > Ls,
> >
> > I agree, and believe me you don't have to sell me on the titan SS because I am a bigger guy and the performance i have heard is pretty awesome. Honestly I don't think the so called competitors are selling to hot as well. I saw a sonex that was a sharp plane but it had no room in it, for me to fly it would make it a single seater just not big enough.
> >
> > I have never flown in an SS but someday I will.
> > Take care and happy flying
>
> As an aside, I was considering the sonex for a while, mostly because the VW (Aerovee) was available as an option. Cheaper than even the Jab by quite a bit and the plane overall is a good deal financially.
>
> The most serious problem with the sonex is the view, which is actually really bad. Otherwise, it seemed like a fine plane, but the risk of getting bored with it due to the view was too high, so I rejected it right away.
>
> I've also looked at the RV12, the Rans S19, and sort of non-seriously looked at some of the import SLSA's. They all have the same problem of significantly impeded views. The high-wing models are a little better, but are nowhere near the tornado.
>
> The Tornado and the Kolb have the best views of all the LSA's on the market that I've found so far and generally are comparable in terms of cost. Of course the LSA trikes have better views but they're weight-shift which can be a problem if your mission profile involves a 3-axis.
>
> Of the two (Kolb and Tornado), the Tornado has quicker handling and better cruise speed. So, to me the Tornado is the best compromise.
>
> Anyway, I did push the pencil across the paper on the sonex during all this too and the tornado still won by a mile or two.
>
> LS
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.426 / Virus Database: 270.14.87/2534 - Release Date: 11/29/09 07:49:00
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

Don't forget the Thundergulls in your high wing choices. The JT2 has the same fantastic forward view as the Titan, same wing, same tail group, same engine selections, same speeds. Not as many refinements, but still good flyers. Like Guy in his past cross country excersions in a Thundergull, I see an easy 100mph at 5800 rpm fast cruise in my 503 powered Gull 2000 single seater, probably because my maximum takeoff weight is only 696lbs, unless I didn't go to the bathroom that morning. I am concerned about the life expectany of the 503, as I have about 262 hours on it now, but it is oil-injected.
Kess


----- Original Message -----
From: ls78705
To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 5:47 AM
Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada



--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, David King <pastordave45@...> wrote:
>
> Ls,
>
> I agree, and believe me you don't have to sell me on the titan SS because I am a bigger guy and the performance i have heard is pretty awesome. Honestly I don't think the so called competitors are selling to hot as well. I saw a sonex that was a sharp plane but it had no room in it, for me to fly it would make it a single seater just not big enough.
>
> I have never flown in an SS but someday I will.
> Take care and happy flying

As an aside, I was considering the sonex for a while, mostly because the VW (Aerovee) was available as an option. Cheaper than even the Jab by quite a bit and the plane overall is a good deal financially.

The most serious problem with the sonex is the view, which is actually really bad. Otherwise, it seemed like a fine plane, but the risk of getting bored with it due to the view was too high, so I rejected it right away.

I've also looked at the RV12, the Rans S19, and sort of non-seriously looked at some of the import SLSA's. They all have the same problem of significantly impeded views. The high-wing models are a little better, but are nowhere near the tornado.

The Tornado and the Kolb have the best views of all the LSA's on the market that I've found so far and generally are comparable in terms of cost. Of course the LSA trikes have better views but they're weight-shift which can be a problem if your mission profile involves a 3-axis.

Of the two (Kolb and Tornado), the Tornado has quicker handling and better cruise speed. So, to me the Tornado is the best compromise.

Anyway, I did push the pencil across the paper on the sonex during all this too and the tornado still won by a mile or two.

LS


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

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.426 / Virus Database: 270.14.87/2534 - Release Date: 11/29/09 07:49:00


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

I've got about 10 hrs on the Sonex I bought .. and to tell
the truth I kind of wish I'd just built one of these in the
first place. I flew the Titan S I built for 3 years and it was
a lot of fun to fly .. quick .. responsive .. etc. The Sonex
flies very nice though and I really like it. The forward visibility
isn't all that great .. but I've had enough planes with a high
panel .. it's not really an issue.

I think the Aerocarb is so butt simple it could be an issue. It's
not all that adjustable without playing with the needle shape. It's
a compromise between how it runs (lean/rich) at idle and at full
throttle. Mine seems to run a little rich at low RPM but I'm
reluctant to lean it up since it runs about right at full throttle.
I may get another needle and play with the shape at the the end
and the jetting when it warms up and I have time to fool with it.

Lots of people like the Aerocarb and run it on their Jabs. My
brother runs a VW conversion in his Cygnet .. and he didn't like
the Aerocarb and switched to a Revmaster carb.

I'm just going to fly it a while and get to know the engine and
carb .. then I'll see if I think I need to start tweeking on it.

RT

--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, Tim Hansen <togoforth@...> wrote:
>
> I have a friend at my airport who finished his tri-gear Sonex last summer. After getting his airworthiness cert. it took him six months to get his Aerovee to run properly so he could fly it.  Countless tear-downs, tweaking, electronics fiddling, carburator fiddling, fuel line fiddling, jet fiddling... you get the idea.  He's now getting some fairly consistent performance and he has come to hate the airplane... primarily because of the lousy view. Perhaps I jaded his thinking because I opined as to how I'd never own another low-wing airplane because I don't like looking at the top of the wing all day. It's a beautiful piece of work but I wouldn't trade my tornado for one.
>  
> Tim Hansen
>
> --- On Mon, 11/30/09, ls78705 <lstavenhagen@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: ls78705 <lstavenhagen@...>
> Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada
> To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, November 30, 2009, 8:47 AM
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, David King <pastordave45@ ...> wrote:
> >
> > Ls,
> >
> > I agree, and believe me you don't have to sell me on the titan SS because I am a bigger guy and the performance i have heard is pretty awesome.  Honestly I don't think the so called competitors are selling to hot as well.  I saw a sonex that was a sharp plane but it had no room in it, for me to fly it would make it a single seater just not big enough.
> >
> > I have  never flown in an SS but someday I will.
> > Take care and happy flying
>
> As an aside, I was considering the sonex for a while, mostly because the VW (Aerovee) was available as an option. Cheaper than even the Jab by quite a bit and the plane overall is a good deal financially.
>
> The most serious problem with the sonex is the view, which is actually really bad. Otherwise, it seemed like a fine plane, but the risk of getting bored with it due to the view was too high, so I rejected it right away.
>
> I've also looked at the RV12, the Rans S19, and sort of non-seriously looked at some of the import SLSA's. They all have the same problem of significantly impeded views. The high-wing models are a little better, but are nowhere near the tornado.
>
> The Tornado and the Kolb have the best views of all the LSA's on the market that I've found so far and generally are comparable in terms of cost. Of course the LSA trikes have better views but they're weight-shift which can be a problem if your mission profile involves a 3-axis.
>
> Of the two (Kolb and Tornado), the Tornado has quicker handling and better cruise speed. So, to me the Tornado is the best compromise.
>
> Anyway, I did push the pencil across the paper on the sonex during all this too and the tornado still won by a mile or two.
>
> LS
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, Tim Hansen <togoforth@...> wrote:
>
> I have a friend at my airport who finished his tri-gear Sonex last summer. After getting his airworthiness cert. it took him six months to get his Aerovee to run properly so he could fly it.  Countless tear-downs, tweaking, electronics fiddling, carburator fiddling, fuel line fiddling, jet fiddling... you get the idea.  He's now getting some fairly consistent performance and he has come to hate the airplane... primarily because of the lousy view. Perhaps I jaded his thinking because I opined as to how I'd never own another low-wing airplane because I don't like looking at the top of the wing all day. It's a beautiful piece of work but I wouldn't trade my tornado for one.
>  
> Tim Hansen

JMO, but poor views is why I lost interest in general aviation shortly after I got my ticket. So I know how I react to planes where you have too much airplane in the view and not enough outside and avoid those designs.

It's amazing how even something simple like the view can be really critical in your mission profile and can make or break even a otherwise really good design and flier like the Sonex.

The only low wings tractors I'd consider are the RV 3,4 or 8. The tandem seating helps with the view a little bit and they're great for travel. But they're still borderline on the view. And since I won't hold a medical again in this lifetime those are out for me.

Really, after years of researching it all the top choices in 3-axis LSA if you like to look outside are the Tornado and the Kolb. If you go weight-shift, the trikes are good for this too especially the 912 equipped planes.

If your main objective is travel, tho, which is about 2 or 3 from the very bottom for me, the choices widen a bunch including the sonex.

BTW, we had a sonex with jab 3300 based here for a while. It easily performed on the level of an RV, particularly in climb. Amazing performance....

LS

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts

--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, "Randy Sill" <randy@...> wrote:
>
> While we're on the subject and Guy eluded to earlier in the thread...the main wing attach bolts should only be snug tight and NOT torqued down tight. These bolts are in sheer only and if over tightened puts the chromoly attach points in stress.
>
> Randy

Ok thanks Randy. I checked these while I was crawling around in the plane and they were snug. But I'll recheck and put these in the 60-85 in/lb range....

Can't be too anal about the stuff that holds the wing on ;)

LS
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of guy truex
> Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 11:15 PM
> To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts
>
> I got the torque values from AC 43.13 also. Most of the load is in shear so I don't see any need to go over 85 in/lbs., although the nuts supplied are AN365. The higher torque is proper and certainly won't hurt anything.
>
> -- Guy
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: ls78705 <lstavenhagen@...>
> To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sun, November 29, 2009 9:00:15 PM
> Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts
>
>
>
>
> --- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, guy truex <airbosss@ .> wrote:
> >
> > Jeeez... That was supposed to be in/lbs, not ft/lbs.
> >
> > Okay- I'll try it again- aft wing fitting bolts should be tightened to 60 to 85 in/lbs.
> >
> > Sorry about that.
> >
> > -- Guy
>
> Ok, thanks. I actually went ahead and looked up a range of torques in AC43.13, the bolts are AN5 and the locknuts on them are AN365 tension nuts. The range I found on the chart is 100 - 140 in/lbs plus the drag of the nyloc itself. So I torqued them down to 140 on my wrench which would put the torque around the middle of that range figuring about 15 in/lbs or so of drag due to the nyloc insert.
>
> I see 60 - 85 in/lbs listed for the AN364 shear nut, tho... But I have the AN365 nuts.
>
> Hope I didn't torque them down too hard?
>
> Thanks,
> LS
> >
> >
> > ____________ _________ _________ __
> > From: Kimberly Panos <kimberly@ .>
> > To: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com
> > Sent: Sun, November 29, 2009 1:16:55 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts
> >
> >
> > Guy,
> >
> > I was also thinking that 60-85 ft. lbs seems like a lot of torque for an AN-6 bolt. Wouldn't an AN-6 bolt yield, break, or pull the threads off the nut at that torque?. From my engine building days, I recall stock small-block Chevy 3/8" hardened connecting rod bolts were torqued to 45 ft.lbs, and high-performance, high-tensile strength connecting rod bolts in after-market rods may be torqued as high as 55-60 ft lbs. Our AN-6 prop bolts are torqued to just 30 ft. lbs. Anyway, just a thought or brain exercise (I need a lot of that). :-)
> >
> > --Kimberly
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Guy
> > To: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com
> > Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 1:59 AM
> > Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts
> >
> > The aft wing fitting attachment bolts need to be tight. If you want to torque them, 60 to 85 ft/lbs. is plenty.
> >
> > The main wing bolts (the front bolts) hold wing fittings in a clevis on the fuselage. Those bolts are in double shear. The nuts only have to hold the bolts in place. There are no flight loads on the nuts. Snug them up until they stop.
> >
> > -- Guy
> >
> > --- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, "ls78705" <lstavenhagen@ ...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > JD or anyone, here's a dumb question for you. Is there a particular torque you need to tighten the wing attach bolts to? I was doing a routine inspection of the wing attach areas yesterday and noticed the rear nuts were a little loose.
> > >
> > > However, I can quite see how the attachment is done and I'm reticent to crank the nuts down too tight, for fear of bending/squishin something. It looks like the mounting plate things riveted and glued to the rear of the wing fit flat against the tabs on the cage in the back, and so could (should?) be tightened pretty snug like the front ones are.
> > >
> > > Help me, Obiwan....
> > >
> > > LS
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>


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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

I have a friend at my airport who finished his tri-gear Sonex last summer. After getting his airworthiness cert. it took him six months to get his Aerovee to run properly so he could fly it.  Countless tear-downs, tweaking, electronics fiddling, carburator fiddling, fuel line fiddling, jet fiddling... you get the idea.  He's now getting some fairly consistent performance and he has come to hate the airplane... primarily because of the lousy view. Perhaps I jaded his thinking because I opined as to how I'd never own another low-wing airplane because I don't like looking at the top of the wing all day. It's a beautiful piece of work but I wouldn't trade my tornado for one.
 
Tim Hansen

--- On Mon, 11/30/09, ls78705 <lstavenhagen@hotmail.com> wrote:


From: ls78705 <lstavenhagen@hotmail.com>
Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada
To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, November 30, 2009, 8:47 AM


 

--- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, David King <pastordave45@ ...> wrote:
>
> Ls,
>
> I agree, and believe me you don't have to sell me on the titan SS because I am a bigger guy and the performance i have heard is pretty awesome.  Honestly I don't think the so called competitors are selling to hot as well.  I saw a sonex that was a sharp plane but it had no room in it, for me to fly it would make it a single seater just not big enough.
>
> I have  never flown in an SS but someday I will.
> Take care and happy flying

As an aside, I was considering the sonex for a while, mostly because the VW (Aerovee) was available as an option. Cheaper than even the Jab by quite a bit and the plane overall is a good deal financially.

The most serious problem with the sonex is the view, which is actually really bad. Otherwise, it seemed like a fine plane, but the risk of getting bored with it due to the view was too high, so I rejected it right away.

I've also looked at the RV12, the Rans S19, and sort of non-seriously looked at some of the import SLSA's. They all have the same problem of significantly impeded views. The high-wing models are a little better, but are nowhere near the tornado.

The Tornado and the Kolb have the best views of all the LSA's on the market that I've found so far and generally are comparable in terms of cost. Of course the LSA trikes have better views but they're weight-shift which can be a problem if your mission profile involves a 3-axis.

Of the two (Kolb and Tornado), the Tornado has quicker handling and better cruise speed. So, to me the Tornado is the best compromise.

Anyway, I did push the pencil across the paper on the sonex during all this too and the tornado still won by a mile or two.

LS

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

RE: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts

While we're on the subject and Guy eluded to earlier in the thread...the main wing attach bolts should only be snug tight and NOT torqued down tight. These bolts are in sheer only and if over tightened puts the chromoly attach points in stress.

Randy

-----Original Message-----
From: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of guy truex
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 11:15 PM
To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts

I got the torque values from AC 43.13 also. Most of the load is in shear so I don't see any need to go over 85 in/lbs., although the nuts supplied are AN365. The higher torque is proper and certainly won't hurt anything.

-- Guy

________________________________
From: ls78705 <lstavenhagen@hotmail.com>
To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 29, 2009 9:00:15 PM
Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts


--- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, guy truex <airbosss@.. .> wrote:
>
> Jeeez... That was supposed to be in/lbs, not ft/lbs.
>
> Okay- I'll try it again- aft wing fitting bolts should be tightened to 60 to 85 in/lbs.
>
> Sorry about that.
>
> -- Guy

Ok, thanks. I actually went ahead and looked up a range of torques in AC43.13, the bolts are AN5 and the locknuts on them are AN365 tension nuts. The range I found on the chart is 100 - 140 in/lbs plus the drag of the nyloc itself. So I torqued them down to 140 on my wrench which would put the torque around the middle of that range figuring about 15 in/lbs or so of drag due to the nyloc insert.

I see 60 - 85 in/lbs listed for the AN364 shear nut, tho... But I have the AN365 nuts.

Hope I didn't torque them down too hard?

Thanks,
LS
>
>
> ____________ _________ _________ __
> From: Kimberly Panos <kimberly@.. .>
> To: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Sun, November 29, 2009 1:16:55 PM
> Subject: Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts
>
>
> Guy,
>
> I was also thinking that 60-85 ft. lbs seems like a lot of torque for an AN-6 bolt. Wouldn't an AN-6 bolt yield, break, or pull the threads off the nut at that torque?. From my engine building days, I recall stock small-block Chevy 3/8" hardened connecting rod bolts were torqued to 45 ft.lbs, and high-performance, high-tensile strength connecting rod bolts in after-market rods may be torqued as high as 55-60 ft lbs. Our AN-6 prop bolts are torqued to just 30 ft. lbs. Anyway, just a thought or brain exercise (I need a lot of that). :-)
>
> --Kimberly
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Guy
> To: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 1:59 AM
> Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts
>
> The aft wing fitting attachment bolts need to be tight. If you want to torque them, 60 to 85 ft/lbs. is plenty.
>
> The main wing bolts (the front bolts) hold wing fittings in a clevis on the fuselage. Those bolts are in double shear. The nuts only have to hold the bolts in place. There are no flight loads on the nuts. Snug them up until they stop.
>
> -- Guy
>
> --- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, "ls78705" <lstavenhagen@ ...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > JD or anyone, here's a dumb question for you. Is there a particular torque you need to tighten the wing attach bolts to? I was doing a routine inspection of the wing attach areas yesterday and noticed the rear nuts were a little loose.
> >
> > However, I can quite see how the attachment is done and I'm reticent to crank the nuts down too tight, for fear of bending/squishin something. It looks like the mounting plate things riveted and glued to the rear of the wing fit flat against the tabs on the cage in the back, and so could (should?) be tightened pretty snug like the front ones are.
> >
> > Help me, Obiwan....
> >
> > LS
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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

Yahoo! Groups Links


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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, David King <pastordave45@...> wrote:
>
> Ls,
>
> I agree, and believe me you don't have to sell me on the titan SS because I am a bigger guy and the performance i have heard is pretty awesome.  Honestly I don't think the so called competitors are selling to hot as well.  I saw a sonex that was a sharp plane but it had no room in it, for me to fly it would make it a single seater just not big enough.
>
> I have  never flown in an SS but someday I will.
> Take care and happy flying

As an aside, I was considering the sonex for a while, mostly because the VW (Aerovee) was available as an option. Cheaper than even the Jab by quite a bit and the plane overall is a good deal financially.

The most serious problem with the sonex is the view, which is actually really bad. Otherwise, it seemed like a fine plane, but the risk of getting bored with it due to the view was too high, so I rejected it right away.

I've also looked at the RV12, the Rans S19, and sort of non-seriously looked at some of the import SLSA's. They all have the same problem of significantly impeded views. The high-wing models are a little better, but are nowhere near the tornado.

The Tornado and the Kolb have the best views of all the LSA's on the market that I've found so far and generally are comparable in terms of cost. Of course the LSA trikes have better views but they're weight-shift which can be a problem if your mission profile involves a 3-axis.

Of the two (Kolb and Tornado), the Tornado has quicker handling and better cruise speed. So, to me the Tornado is the best compromise.

Anyway, I did push the pencil across the paper on the sonex during all this too and the tornado still won by a mile or two.

LS

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Sunday, November 29, 2009

[Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts

--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, guy truex <airbosss@...> wrote:
>
> I got the torque values from AC 43.13 also. Most of the load is in shear so I don't see any need to go over 85 in/lbs., although the nuts supplied are AN365. The higher torque is proper and certainly won't hurt anything.
>
> -- Guy

Ah, ok thanks Guy. Yeah I checked to be sure today when I got out the wrench, the nuts are the full height AN365 so just used that range on the chart. But you're right it's a primarily shear loading joint. But I'll just keep them at 140 in/lbs on the wrench.
Oh well, since they hold the wing on it was good for me to research all this I guess ;)

Thanks all,

LS
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: ls78705 <lstavenhagen@...>
> To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sun, November 29, 2009 9:00:15 PM
> Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts
>
>
>
>
> --- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, guy truex <airbosss@ .> wrote:
> >
> > Jeeez... That was supposed to be in/lbs, not ft/lbs.
> >
> > Okay- I'll try it again- aft wing fitting bolts should be tightened to 60 to 85 in/lbs.
> >
> > Sorry about that.
> >
> > -- Guy
>
> Ok, thanks. I actually went ahead and looked up a range of torques in AC43.13, the bolts are AN5 and the locknuts on them are AN365 tension nuts. The range I found on the chart is 100 - 140 in/lbs plus the drag of the nyloc itself. So I torqued them down to 140 on my wrench which would put the torque around the middle of that range figuring about 15 in/lbs or so of drag due to the nyloc insert.
>
> I see 60 - 85 in/lbs listed for the AN364 shear nut, tho... But I have the AN365 nuts.
>
> Hope I didn't torque them down too hard?
>
> Thanks,
> LS
> >
> >
> > ____________ _________ _________ __
> > From: Kimberly Panos <kimberly@ .>
> > To: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com
> > Sent: Sun, November 29, 2009 1:16:55 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts
> >
> >
> > Guy,
> >
> > I was also thinking that 60-85 ft. lbs seems like a lot of torque for an AN-6 bolt. Wouldn't an AN-6 bolt yield, break, or pull the threads off the nut at that torque?. From my engine building days, I recall stock small-block Chevy 3/8" hardened connecting rod bolts were torqued to 45 ft.lbs, and high-performance, high-tensile strength connecting rod bolts in after-market rods may be torqued as high as 55-60 ft lbs. Our AN-6 prop bolts are torqued to just 30 ft. lbs. Anyway, just a thought or brain exercise (I need a lot of that). :-)
> >
> > --Kimberly
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Guy
> > To: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com
> > Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 1:59 AM
> > Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts
> >
> > The aft wing fitting attachment bolts need to be tight. If you want to torque them, 60 to 85 ft/lbs. is plenty.
> >
> > The main wing bolts (the front bolts) hold wing fittings in a clevis on the fuselage. Those bolts are in double shear. The nuts only have to hold the bolts in place. There are no flight loads on the nuts. Snug them up until they stop.
> >
> > -- Guy
> >
> > --- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, "ls78705" <lstavenhagen@ ...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > JD or anyone, here's a dumb question for you. Is there a particular torque you need to tighten the wing attach bolts to? I was doing a routine inspection of the wing attach areas yesterday and noticed the rear nuts were a little loose.
> > >
> > > However, I can quite see how the attachment is done and I'm reticent to crank the nuts down too tight, for fear of bending/squishin something. It looks like the mounting plate things riveted and glued to the rear of the wing fit flat against the tabs on the cage in the back, and so could (should?) be tightened pretty snug like the front ones are.
> > >
> > > Help me, Obiwan....
> > >
> > > LS
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts

I got the torque values from AC 43.13 also. Most of the load is in shear so I don't see any need to go over 85 in/lbs., although the nuts supplied are AN365. The higher torque is proper and certainly won't hurt anything.

-- Guy

________________________________
From: ls78705 <lstavenhagen@hotmail.com>
To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 29, 2009 9:00:15 PM
Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts


--- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, guy truex <airbosss@.. .> wrote:
>
> Jeeez... That was supposed to be in/lbs, not ft/lbs.
>
> Okay- I'll try it again- aft wing fitting bolts should be tightened to 60 to 85 in/lbs.
>
> Sorry about that.
>
> -- Guy

Ok, thanks. I actually went ahead and looked up a range of torques in AC43.13, the bolts are AN5 and the locknuts on them are AN365 tension nuts. The range I found on the chart is 100 - 140 in/lbs plus the drag of the nyloc itself. So I torqued them down to 140 on my wrench which would put the torque around the middle of that range figuring about 15 in/lbs or so of drag due to the nyloc insert.

I see 60 - 85 in/lbs listed for the AN364 shear nut, tho... But I have the AN365 nuts.

Hope I didn't torque them down too hard?

Thanks,
LS
>
>
> ____________ _________ _________ __
> From: Kimberly Panos <kimberly@.. .>
> To: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Sun, November 29, 2009 1:16:55 PM
> Subject: Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts
>
>
> Guy,
>
> I was also thinking that 60-85 ft. lbs seems like a lot of torque for an AN-6 bolt. Wouldn't an AN-6 bolt yield, break, or pull the threads off the nut at that torque?. From my engine building days, I recall stock small-block Chevy 3/8" hardened connecting rod bolts were torqued to 45 ft.lbs, and high-performance, high-tensile strength connecting rod bolts in after-market rods may be torqued as high as 55-60 ft lbs. Our AN-6 prop bolts are torqued to just 30 ft. lbs. Anyway, just a thought or brain exercise (I need a lot of that). :-)
>
> --Kimberly
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Guy
> To: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 1:59 AM
> Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts
>
> The aft wing fitting attachment bolts need to be tight. If you want to torque them, 60 to 85 ft/lbs. is plenty.
>
> The main wing bolts (the front bolts) hold wing fittings in a clevis on the fuselage. Those bolts are in double shear. The nuts only have to hold the bolts in place. There are no flight loads on the nuts. Snug them up until they stop.
>
> -- Guy
>
> --- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, "ls78705" <lstavenhagen@ ...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > JD or anyone, here's a dumb question for you. Is there a particular torque you need to tighten the wing attach bolts to? I was doing a routine inspection of the wing attach areas yesterday and noticed the rear nuts were a little loose.
> >
> > However, I can quite see how the attachment is done and I'm reticent to crank the nuts down too tight, for fear of bending/squishin something. It looks like the mounting plate things riveted and glued to the rear of the wing fit flat against the tabs on the cage in the back, and so could (should?) be tightened pretty snug like the front ones are.
> >
> > Help me, Obiwan....
> >
> > LS
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts

--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, guy truex <airbosss@...> wrote:
>
> Jeeez... That was supposed to be in/lbs, not ft/lbs.
>
> Okay- I'll try it again- aft wing fitting bolts should be tightened to 60 to 85 in/lbs.
>
> Sorry about that.
>
> -- Guy

Ok, thanks. I actually went ahead and looked up a range of torques in AC43.13, the bolts are AN5 and the locknuts on them are AN365 tension nuts. The range I found on the chart is 100 - 140 in/lbs plus the drag of the nyloc itself. So I torqued them down to 140 on my wrench which would put the torque around the middle of that range figuring about 15 in/lbs or so of drag due to the nyloc insert.

I see 60 - 85 in/lbs listed for the AN364 shear nut, tho... But I have the AN365 nuts.

Hope I didn't torque them down too hard?

Thanks,
LS
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Kimberly Panos <kimberly@...>
> To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sun, November 29, 2009 1:16:55 PM
> Subject: Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts
>
>
> Guy,
>
> I was also thinking that 60-85 ft. lbs seems like a lot of torque for an AN-6 bolt. Wouldn't an AN-6 bolt yield, break, or pull the threads off the nut at that torque?. From my engine building days, I recall stock small-block Chevy 3/8" hardened connecting rod bolts were torqued to 45 ft.lbs, and high-performance, high-tensile strength connecting rod bolts in after-market rods may be torqued as high as 55-60 ft lbs. Our AN-6 prop bolts are torqued to just 30 ft. lbs. Anyway, just a thought or brain exercise (I need a lot of that). :-)
>
> --Kimberly
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Guy
> To: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 1:59 AM
> Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts
>
> The aft wing fitting attachment bolts need to be tight. If you want to torque them, 60 to 85 ft/lbs. is plenty.
>
> The main wing bolts (the front bolts) hold wing fittings in a clevis on the fuselage. Those bolts are in double shear. The nuts only have to hold the bolts in place. There are no flight loads on the nuts. Snug them up until they stop.
>
> -- Guy
>
> --- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, "ls78705" <lstavenhagen@ ...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > JD or anyone, here's a dumb question for you. Is there a particular torque you need to tighten the wing attach bolts to? I was doing a routine inspection of the wing attach areas yesterday and noticed the rear nuts were a little loose.
> >
> > However, I can quite see how the attachment is done and I'm reticent to crank the nuts down too tight, for fear of bending/squishin something. It looks like the mounting plate things riveted and glued to the rear of the wing fit flat against the tabs on the cage in the back, and so could (should?) be tightened pretty snug like the front ones are.
> >
> > Help me, Obiwan....
> >
> > LS
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts

Jeeez... That was supposed to be in/lbs, not ft/lbs.

Okay- I'll try it again- aft wing fitting bolts should be tightened to 60 to 85 in/lbs.

Sorry about that.

-- Guy

________________________________
From: Kimberly Panos <kimberly@motionaero.com>
To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 29, 2009 1:16:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts


Guy,

I was also thinking that 60-85 ft. lbs seems like a lot of torque for an AN-6 bolt. Wouldn't an AN-6 bolt yield, break, or pull the threads off the nut at that torque?. From my engine building days, I recall stock small-block Chevy 3/8" hardened connecting rod bolts were torqued to 45 ft.lbs, and high-performance, high-tensile strength connecting rod bolts in after-market rods may be torqued as high as 55-60 ft lbs. Our AN-6 prop bolts are torqued to just 30 ft. lbs. Anyway, just a thought or brain exercise (I need a lot of that). :-)

--Kimberly

----- Original Message -----
From: Guy
To: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 1:59 AM
Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts

The aft wing fitting attachment bolts need to be tight. If you want to torque them, 60 to 85 ft/lbs. is plenty.

The main wing bolts (the front bolts) hold wing fittings in a clevis on the fuselage. Those bolts are in double shear. The nuts only have to hold the bolts in place. There are no flight loads on the nuts. Snug them up until they stop.

-- Guy

--- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, "ls78705" <lstavenhagen@ ...> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> JD or anyone, here's a dumb question for you. Is there a particular torque you need to tighten the wing attach bolts to? I was doing a routine inspection of the wing attach areas yesterday and noticed the rear nuts were a little loose.
>
> However, I can quite see how the attachment is done and I'm reticent to crank the nuts down too tight, for fear of bending/squishin something. It looks like the mounting plate things riveted and glued to the rear of the wing fit flat against the tabs on the cage in the back, and so could (should?) be tightened pretty snug like the front ones are.
>
> Help me, Obiwan....
>
> LS
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

Ls,

I agree, and believe me you don't have to sell me on the titan SS because I am a bigger guy and the performance i have heard is pretty awesome.  Honestly I don't think the so called competitors are selling to hot as well.  I saw a sonex that was a sharp plane but it had no room in it, for me to fly it would make it a single seater just not big enough.

I have  never flown in an SS but someday I will.
Take care and happy flying


________________________________
From: ls78705 <lstavenhagen@hotmail.com>
To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 29, 2009 9:01:01 AM
Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

 


--- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, David King <pastordave45@ ...> wrote:
>
> LS,
>
> That is why the SS isn't turning over, it has went up to high with economy like it is.  I love those planes, but couldn't sink 50 grand into it, just couldn't happen unless i got a money tree somewhere.  I think this is representative of most, they love the planes, but just can't afford them.
>
> Dave

Hi Dave,

The small sample size also makes it hard to determine market value too. We just don't have that many SS's even built and flying, much less for sale. That just makes it hard for a price to settle in.

The other thing of course is the cost of new. Just to get an SS kit with a 912uls is at least 43K if you go by the quick-pricing charts on titan's website. But that doesn't include avionics, options, etc, which is going to easily push that into the 50 or more grand range. And you haven't even built the plane yet!

That adds more complexity to the value of used planes. For instance, in my case, the main (but only) downside to mine is that I'm not the original builder. So I have to get the annual done or at least supervised by an AnP - this just makes me cringe for months leading up to when I have to take it in. Especially when they get anywhere near my 20K plus engine with a wrench that they have no idea about how to inspect or maintain. Not too worried about the airframe, but I don't want em anywhere near my engine so I have to muscle in when it comes to inspecting that. Overall, all this is a pain in the butt.

But.... as the cost of replacement skyrockets, it becomes less and less a viable option, even with the downsides. That increases (significantly) the amount I'd accept if I were to try to sell it. In fact, up to the point that noone would reasonably buy it for what I'd want for it! So, I came to my senses and just slap took the plane off the selling block period. Even if the AnP strips out the spark plug threads in a head or does something else stupid, fixing that is still far cheaper than trying to replace.....
And since JD built it, it's an airframe I can trust for a long long time.

One other final aspect to all this that adds complexity to the price: the alternatives. If you think the SS is expensive at 50 large, that's _dirt cheap_ compared to its competitors that offer similar flight characteristics.
There's no prebuilt kit plane that has anything like the flight envelope of an S or SS available anywhere for under twice what they cost.

The kit competitors are in the neighborhood of the cost, but virtually all have some kind of compromise that the titan does better. I.e. most are front-engined tractors and thus have a poor view. Those get boring to fly pretty quick even tho they might go a little faster or have some special handling characteristics.

I.e. I flew to taos, NM and back day before yesterday and the view was simply spectacular in my plane, better than anything else I've flown in that can take a trip like that in a reasonable amount of time.

The standard category alternatives have their problems too. I.e. the purchase price, tho it may be lower than the titan, is the cheapest part on those. Cost of operation and maintenance on a standard category over time will make your hair stand on end. Either that or they don't meet LSA (and still cost a fortune to fly).

So, to sum up..... valuating our planes is pretty complicated. I've been researching this for a long time and the bang/buck ratio is still very very good on the titan, especially the S and SS....

LS

>
>
>
> ____________ _________ _________ __
> From: ls78705 <lstavenhagen@ ...>
> To: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Sun, November 29, 2009 7:40:24 AM
> Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada
>
>  
>
>
> --- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, "Terry Savage" <chaosrider@ ...> wrote:
> >
> > I dunno.back when I was keeping track of Titan prices on Barnstormers, I saw
> > a number of 2S listed for under $30K. Of course, I can't testify to their
> > condition, since I never inspected any of them. I'm sure they're out there,
> > just based on the data I saw then.
> >
>
> Everything's gone up since then. Even with the economic downturn, under 30K is generally just the I's and II's and the occasional fixer-upper here and there.
>
> The cost of new has crept up probably 5 to even 10 grand since I bought my plane a few years ago. That's assuming the 912 series engines which keep on jacking up and up. The jabirus seem to be holding fairly steady tho.
>
> Course, so far the couple of the SS fleet that are for sale aren't moving, so we're probably still trying to find the market price for those. Either that or Bob and Don, etc. are still having too much fun with them ;)
>
> I was thinking about selling mine for a while but finally came to my senses here a few months ago. With all the costs of new going up replacement is less and less a good idea and the plane is too good and too much fun to get rid of. Unless catastrophe strikes or something, I kind of don't want to know what mine's worth ;).
>
> LS
> LS
> >
> >
> > I never saw a 2SS for under $30K, though.
> >
> >
> >
> > TCS
> >
> > Question with Boldness -- Thomas Jefferson
> >
> > Hold to the Truth -- George Washington
> >
> > Speak Without Fear -- Martin Luther King
> >
> >
> >
> > Terry C Savage
> >
> > Senior Information Technology Manager
> >
> > Science Fiction Author
> >
> > The End of Winter
> >
> > Circle of Fire
> >
> > <http://tinyurl. com/end-of- winter-savage>
> > http://tinyurl. com/end-of- winter-savage
> >
> > http://tcsendofwint er.blogspot. com/
> >
> > <http://tcsendofwint er.blogspot. com/>
> >
> >
> >
> > ============ ========= ========= ======
> >
> > _____
> >
> > From: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:Titanaircra ft@ yahoogroups. com]
> > On Behalf Of Kimberly Panos
> > Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 7:53 AM
> > To: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com
> > Subject: Re: [Titanaircraft] Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately, a Tornado 2S for under $30k is very unlikely, and a 2SS for
> > under $30k is likely impossible. Just a kit for an SS is $20k, and a 912
> > with its support equipment alone is more than $20k by itself. Then add
> > avionics, assembly and paint. Just the box of parts, instruments, avionics
> > and paint without any labor for a 2S costs more than $50k, and the 2SS over
> > $55k.
> >
> > --Kimberly
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Kimber Bennett
> > To: titanaircraft@ <mailto:titanaircra ft%40yahoogroups .com> yahoogroups. com
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 12:34 PM
> > Subject: [Titanaircraft] Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada
> >
> > Looking to purchase a Tornado S or SS for trainer with a Rotax 912 under
> > $30,000.oo. Must be flying, and in good condition. Anyone have one they are
> > thinking of selling. Pictures would be appreciated!
> > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
> > Windows Live: Keep your friends up to date with what you do online.
> > http://go.microsoft <http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9691815>
> > .com/?linkid= 9691815
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts

Guy,

I was also thinking that 60-85 ft. lbs seems like a lot of torque for an AN-6 bolt. Wouldn't an AN-6 bolt yield, break, or pull the threads off the nut at that torque?. From my engine building days, I recall stock small-block Chevy 3/8" hardened connecting rod bolts were torqued to 45 ft.lbs, and high-performance, high-tensile strength connecting rod bolts in after-market rods may be torqued as high as 55-60 ft lbs. Our AN-6 prop bolts are torqued to just 30 ft. lbs. Anyway, just a thought or brain exercise (I need a lot of that). :-)

--Kimberly


----- Original Message -----
From: Guy
To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 1:59 AM
Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts



The aft wing fitting attachment bolts need to be tight. If you want to torque them, 60 to 85 ft/lbs. is plenty.

The main wing bolts (the front bolts) hold wing fittings in a clevis on the fuselage. Those bolts are in double shear. The nuts only have to hold the bolts in place. There are no flight loads on the nuts. Snug them up until they stop.

-- Guy

--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, "ls78705" <lstavenhagen@...> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> JD or anyone, here's a dumb question for you. Is there a particular torque you need to tighten the wing attach bolts to? I was doing a routine inspection of the wing attach areas yesterday and noticed the rear nuts were a little loose.
>
> However, I can quite see how the attachment is done and I'm reticent to crank the nuts down too tight, for fear of bending/squishin something. It looks like the mounting plate things riveted and glued to the rear of the wing fit flat against the tabs on the cage in the back, and so could (should?) be tightened pretty snug like the front ones are.
>
> Help me, Obiwan....
>
> LS
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: Tail cracks

From an engineering standpoint, the short area of compression of the aft vertical spar to the tailboom is not supported by anything other than the thin conjoining external skin to the boom tube, which is reflected by the bulging of the skin on the vertical stab skin where the cracks are located as there is no actual hard-point connection from the vertical spar to the tailboom. However, the Aerobat upgrades should likely alleviate the problem. Notice the concentration and location of the cracks. I would think the cracks would be most likely to propagate on the right side, due to the buffeting caused by the direction of rotation of the prop on the 4-strokes. On the geared two-strokes, I would suggest the cracks may be more likely to appear on the left side, but you're usually talking a lot less horsepower and smaller props which might be below the threshold to cause a problem.

From a user standpoint, it could be caused by dropping tail on the ground when exiting the airplane, having the tail hop and bounce on a rough tarmac or in and out of a hangar with big bumps and concrete cracks when moving it by hand, or hitting the tailwheel frequently on takeoff and/or landing. I also wonder if the tail was bonded with Urelane during assembly. If you're having those problems at the tail, I would also examine the welds surrounding the support tubes at the aft boom tube socket, as well as the motor-mount area thoroughly. I just can't imagine having these kinds of problems with riveted and bonded construction, while treating the airframe with care. This discussion has prompted me to examine the vertical stab and aft frame welds closely on our 3300-powered 2S while it is here in our shop, but it all looks just like it did when it rolled out 7-1/2 years ago.

--Kimberly

----- Original Message -----
From: titjab
To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2009 8:54 AM
Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: Tail cracks



Another issue found. I looked at mine today but did not find any cracks, however I did find another issue. The rivit line on the port side that attaches the vertical strake to the vertical stabilizer were becoming loose. The paint was cracking from the rivit to the aluminum lip, and also cracking paint around the rivit. There was the typical gray streaks from spinning rivits. The paint line between the two attached skins was also cracked looking like someone took a thin line marker and drew a line along the seem of the two skins. The first 5 inches of rivits from the boom tube and upward were all fine, the rest from that point to the top of the vertical strake were loose. Upon drilling out the loose rivits it was found that section was not glued, the glue was applied to adhere the two skins from the boom tube to 5" up the vertical skins. With the loose rivits removed I could push on the vertical stabilizer skin and it would seperate from the vertical strake skin. I have some glue coming and will glue and rivit this section. Not sure what the build manual says about gluing these to skins, but something to check periodically. The starboard side shows no issues and the paint is still like new.

--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, "fleepdx" <bobcoombs@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Haven't been here for a week. I see that there are a few people who have asked about the cracks. Most unfortunately I didn't get any pictures of them before doing a repair. This would have been an obvious thing to do. The description I made of their location is pretty much accurate. They were irregular, shaped like lightening bolts. The metal immediately next to them was elevated which might suggest the problem is one of compression rather than tension.
> My reasoning on the repair was to increase the amount of metal in the area, at least doubling and even tripling the strength. I've learned in the past that a repair can be stronger than the original componant and that's what I'm shooting for. Using adhesive would bond all three layers together and would presumably prevent any recurrance.
> The hangar owner where I'm at once had a Thundergull that had the rivets break in the same location. The tails of these two planes (as far as I know anyway) are identical or nearly so. He replaced the rivets with Cherrymax rivets which apparently give much greater shear strength. I intend to do this as well thinking that the increased strength of the sheet metal I now have will move the stresses elsewhere, ie. the rivets.
> The original construction had the sheet metal glued to the boom tube and I will do this as well.
> I continue to think this has happened because of my regular use of grass strips where it would seem that the lateral shaking/jarring of the tail section would be much sharper than that encountered in the air. Comments from those who also have found cracks??
> Bob
>
> > > I recently discovered 2 cracks in the vertical stabilizer on my Tornado II. Each is at the lower aft corner where the sheet metal is cut at a 120 degree angle. The cracks are about 1-2". I have repaired them with a double layer of .025 aluminum, one inside and one out, and have fixed them with epoxy. It seems this would be sturdy enough to prevent the cracks from recurring. The metal of the tail seems to be .016" or perhaps .020".
> > >
> > > My big concern is why these might have happened in the first place. I've followed this group through from the first message ever posted and don't recall anyone else mentioning this kind of problem so I'm inviting any input there might be about this.
> > >
> > > Construction of the kit was supervised and assisted by Mike and Jeromy in Richland WA so it was probably done right. About the only thing I can think of is that I operate mainly out of a slightly rough grass strip and perhaps the jarring on the ground is causing the cracks. This seems kind of unlikely but it's the only thing that comes to mind.
> > >
> > > Thanks for any input, Bob Coombs
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts

Guy,

Isn't 60 to 85 foot-pounds a lot of torque for an AN-6 passing through an aluminum end-tang with the hole so close to the edge? I know you don't want the wing moving around, but just wondering.

--Kimberly

----- Original Message -----
From: Guy
To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 1:59 AM
Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: rear wing hold-down bolts



The aft wing fitting attachment bolts need to be tight. If you want to torque them, 60 to 85 ft/lbs. is plenty.

The main wing bolts (the front bolts) hold wing fittings in a clevis on the fuselage. Those bolts are in double shear. The nuts only have to hold the bolts in place. There are no flight loads on the nuts. Snug them up until they stop.

-- Guy

--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, "ls78705" <lstavenhagen@...> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> JD or anyone, here's a dumb question for you. Is there a particular torque you need to tighten the wing attach bolts to? I was doing a routine inspection of the wing attach areas yesterday and noticed the rear nuts were a little loose.
>
> However, I can quite see how the attachment is done and I'm reticent to crank the nuts down too tight, for fear of bending/squishin something. It looks like the mounting plate things riveted and glued to the rear of the wing fit flat against the tabs on the cage in the back, and so could (should?) be tightened pretty snug like the front ones are.
>
> Help me, Obiwan....
>
> LS
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada

--- In Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com, David King <pastordave45@...> wrote:
>
> LS,
>
> That is why the SS isn't turning over, it has went up to high with economy like it is.  I love those planes, but couldn't sink 50 grand into it, just couldn't happen unless i got a money tree somewhere.  I think this is representative of most, they love the planes, but just can't afford them.
>
> Dave

Hi Dave,

The small sample size also makes it hard to determine market value too. We just don't have that many SS's even built and flying, much less for sale. That just makes it hard for a price to settle in.

The other thing of course is the cost of new. Just to get an SS kit with a 912uls is at least 43K if you go by the quick-pricing charts on titan's website. But that doesn't include avionics, options, etc, which is going to easily push that into the 50 or more grand range. And you haven't even built the plane yet!

That adds more complexity to the value of used planes. For instance, in my case, the main (but only) downside to mine is that I'm not the original builder. So I have to get the annual done or at least supervised by an AnP - this just makes me cringe for months leading up to when I have to take it in. Especially when they get anywhere near my 20K plus engine with a wrench that they have no idea about how to inspect or maintain. Not too worried about the airframe, but I don't want em anywhere near my engine so I have to muscle in when it comes to inspecting that. Overall, all this is a pain in the butt.

But.... as the cost of replacement skyrockets, it becomes less and less a viable option, even with the downsides. That increases (significantly) the amount I'd accept if I were to try to sell it. In fact, up to the point that noone would reasonably buy it for what I'd want for it! So, I came to my senses and just slap took the plane off the selling block period. Even if the AnP strips out the spark plug threads in a head or does something else stupid, fixing that is still far cheaper than trying to replace.....
And since JD built it, it's an airframe I can trust for a long long time.

One other final aspect to all this that adds complexity to the price: the alternatives. If you think the SS is expensive at 50 large, that's _dirt cheap_ compared to its competitors that offer similar flight characteristics.
There's no prebuilt kit plane that has anything like the flight envelope of an S or SS available anywhere for under twice what they cost.

The kit competitors are in the neighborhood of the cost, but virtually all have some kind of compromise that the titan does better. I.e. most are front-engined tractors and thus have a poor view. Those get boring to fly pretty quick even tho they might go a little faster or have some special handling characteristics.

I.e. I flew to taos, NM and back day before yesterday and the view was simply spectacular in my plane, better than anything else I've flown in that can take a trip like that in a reasonable amount of time.

The standard category alternatives have their problems too. I.e. the purchase price, tho it may be lower than the titan, is the cheapest part on those. Cost of operation and maintenance on a standard category over time will make your hair stand on end. Either that or they don't meet LSA (and still cost a fortune to fly).

So, to sum up..... valuating our planes is pretty complicated. I've been researching this for a long time and the bang/buck ratio is still very very good on the titan, especially the S and SS....


LS

>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: ls78705 <lstavenhagen@...>
> To: Titanaircraft@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sun, November 29, 2009 7:40:24 AM
> Subject: [Titanaircraft] Re: Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada
>
>  
>
>
> --- In Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com, "Terry Savage" <chaosrider@ ...> wrote:
> >
> > I dunno.back when I was keeping track of Titan prices on Barnstormers, I saw
> > a number of 2S listed for under $30K. Of course, I can't testify to their
> > condition, since I never inspected any of them. I'm sure they're out there,
> > just based on the data I saw then.
> >
>
> Everything's gone up since then. Even with the economic downturn, under 30K is generally just the I's and II's and the occasional fixer-upper here and there.
>
> The cost of new has crept up probably 5 to even 10 grand since I bought my plane a few years ago. That's assuming the 912 series engines which keep on jacking up and up. The jabirus seem to be holding fairly steady tho.
>
> Course, so far the couple of the SS fleet that are for sale aren't moving, so we're probably still trying to find the market price for those. Either that or Bob and Don, etc. are still having too much fun with them ;)
>
> I was thinking about selling mine for a while but finally came to my senses here a few months ago. With all the costs of new going up replacement is less and less a good idea and the plane is too good and too much fun to get rid of. Unless catastrophe strikes or something, I kind of don't want to know what mine's worth ;).
>
> LS
> LS
> >
> >
> > I never saw a 2SS for under $30K, though.
> >
> >
> >
> > TCS
> >
> > Question with Boldness -- Thomas Jefferson
> >
> > Hold to the Truth -- George Washington
> >
> > Speak Without Fear -- Martin Luther King
> >
> >
> >
> > Terry C Savage
> >
> > Senior Information Technology Manager
> >
> > Science Fiction Author
> >
> > The End of Winter
> >
> > Circle of Fire
> >
> > <http://tinyurl. com/end-of- winter-savage>
> > http://tinyurl. com/end-of- winter-savage
> >
> > http://tcsendofwint er.blogspot. com/
> >
> > <http://tcsendofwint er.blogspot. com/>
> >
> >
> >
> > ============ ========= ========= ======
> >
> > _____
> >
> > From: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com]
> > On Behalf Of Kimberly Panos
> > Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 7:53 AM
> > To: Titanaircraft@ yahoogroups. com
> > Subject: Re: [Titanaircraft] Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately, a Tornado 2S for under $30k is very unlikely, and a 2SS for
> > under $30k is likely impossible. Just a kit for an SS is $20k, and a 912
> > with its support equipment alone is more than $20k by itself. Then add
> > avionics, assembly and paint. Just the box of parts, instruments, avionics
> > and paint without any labor for a 2S costs more than $50k, and the 2SS over
> > $55k.
> >
> > --Kimberly
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Kimber Bennett
> > To: titanaircraft@ <mailto:titanaircra ft%40yahoogroups .com> yahoogroups. com
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 12:34 PM
> > Subject: [Titanaircraft] Any Tornado S or SS for sale in US or Canada
> >
> > Looking to purchase a Tornado S or SS for trainer with a Rotax 912 under
> > $30,000.oo. Must be flying, and in good condition. Anyone have one they are
> > thinking of selling. Pictures would be appreciated!
> > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
> > Windows Live: Keep your friends up to date with what you do online.
> > http://go.microsoft <http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9691815>
> > .com/?linkid= 9691815
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Titanaircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Titanaircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Titanaircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Titanaircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/