Search results

They were prior to the AD. It was an article in Aviation Consumer, circa 1984. I am not a subscriber, so don't have access to their archive, but perhaps you can look it up. I was in Mike Smith's shop a few times in 1984 while work was being done to beef up the ruddervators. Smith clearly...

Actually, when the V-tails broke up in flight, it was the failure of the ruddervator. The straight tails do not have a ruddervator.

Statistics prove that wrong. IIRC, from the Aviation Consumer expose on it, there were a couple of hundred V-tail break ups and less than five straight tail break ups.

That lead, among other things, are found in an engine that runs leaded fuel, it not exactly a revelation, brought down the mountain by Mike Busch. The fact that Mike Busch as recently discovered lead in valve guides after leaded fuel has been used for 100 years, does not negate my point that SB...

That is a misrepresentation. This SB has been around a lot longer than lead has been an issue. It is aimed at valve guide issues in the form of wear, or carbon restriction of the exhaust guide.

Mike Smith recognized the real problem with the V-tail and first certified a stub spar that anchored the front of the root rib of the ruddervator to the adjacent empennage bulkhead. He later came up with a cheaper formed cuff, top and bottom. The FAA came out with the AD a couple of years...

I don't like to see more then 435F in the climb and 400-420F in cruise. I ran a set of TIO-540-A2C engines in the Upper Midwest from installation to TBO (Lyc OH) running between 375-400F in winter and 400-420 in summer, with only occasionally higher in the climb, with no significant cylinder...

Once they finally fixed the tail, the breakup of V-tails have been much rarer. This one does look like it did lose the LH ruddervator in flight, so the v-tail was apparently involved in the sequence of parts breaking formation.

More likely they have bigger fish to fry given the moribund anti-trust enforcement under prior administrations.

What ship was listing? Certainly not Hartzell after their accumulation of monopolies or near monopolies on combustion heaters, engine accessories, exhaust systems, etc.

Two companies. The equity was private. Mine! Other family members have been very involved at the upper level of companies owned by private equity. Very much a mixed bag.

You apparently don't understand math. We have not had 30% inflation in the last year, or even the last three years in total. You apparently also don't understand monopolies or are just a fan of them. Poor, struggling Hartzell, over the last decade, as bought all the major aircraft exhaust...

Did these things happen, or are you just spinning a hypothetical here? Seems unlikely that Hartzell wasn't profitable as it has been buying up other entities at a great rate over the last decade.

You must have been asleep during the 2012 election and missed all the discussion about Bain Capital, etc. Lots of examples if you want to Google it. As for Hartzell, all I need to know is that prices jumped overnight about upwards of 30%.

We can watch Hartzell in real time.

Yours is a malformed question in that I never said that there were private equity firms that "specialized" in off-shoring. However, they certainly indulge in it. Further, you give some generalized examples of motivations and likely occasionally things worked out that way. Which category do...

Sometimes it works that way. Many times it does not.

All things in balance.

Or they put their money into private equity firms which buy out companies, which do not universally provide working capital. They are as likely to cuts costs by moving the manufacturing overseas thereby increasing the profit margin and then taking it public again, or loading it up with debt...

Do you have data to prove that or just dogma?