RV-Archive.digest.vol-aj
February 07, 1995 - April 04, 1995
________________________________________________________________________________
Question:
What would you get if you built an RV design to identical dimensions
using fiberglass/composites instead of metal?
Answer:
A design with all of the negatives of composite, some of
the negatives of metal, some of the positives of
composite but none of the positives of metal.
It would be a design that is not as good as an rv.
I just felt that this answer was so simple it had to
be stated.
I don't own a metal or a composite. Hey, I don't even own a plane.
I wonder what you'd get if you copied an RV and modified it to
take advantage of composites? What plane resembles this the
most? If a plane were designed to truely take advantage of
composites, how much more than an RV would it cost and would
the additional cost make it an apples to oranges comparison?
Don Karl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Reichert" <reichera(at)clark.net> |
| Subject: | Re: weenie wheels |
Or drag chutes!
On Tue, 7 Feb 1995 tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil!davehyde(at)matronics.com wrote:
> C'mon, we're all weenies! REAL airplanes have tailhooks!
>
> DH
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Andreas Meyer <meyer(at)hpanis.an.hp.com> |
| Subject: | Re: weenie wheels |
>
> C'mon, we're all weenies! REAL airplanes have tailhooks!
>
> DH
>
Nah, real planes have hulls! Ask anybody that's learned to fly
in the 20's or early 30's (probably not many pilots of that era
left).
Andreas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James M Wilson <James_M_Wilson(at)ccm.jf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: weenie wheels |
Text item:
Is it the Navy that says Air Force pilots
flair to land and squat to pee?
jmw
C'mon, we're all weenies! REAL airplanes have tailhooks!
DH
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: weenie wheels
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 95 07:56:28 EDT
From: tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil!davehyde(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ray Belbin <Ray.Belbin(at)jcu.edu.au> |
| Subject: | Weenie Wheels - Final Word! |
I can't resist this one from Alan Tolle...
"He was certainly the person to seek out for information, because he
still owns his taildragger RV-6, which currently makes him the only
person other than Dick Van Grunsvan who owns both versions of the
side-by-side RV." .....
.... "Both handle beautifully on the ground and are quite good in
crosswinds. I have no complaints about my taildragger RV-6. I've got 450
hours on it and about 4000 hours taildragger of time, so I've never had any
trouble handling it. It's a taildragger, however, and like even the best
of them, which the RVs certainly are, it will swap ends on the ground if
you let it. The RV6A is just so much easier...it's such a pleasure to fly
around in and never worry about landings."
Extract from Sport Aviation July 1991 Vol 40, No 7
17 Alan Tolle's RV-6A
Ray
Weenie wheeled RV6-'A' 'A' for Absolutely Good looking plane!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John H Henderson <John.H.Henderson(at)Eng.Auburn.EDU> |
I mailed this the other day, but I don't know to whom since
it did not appear on rv-list.
Compare the RV-6 to a Glasair IITD. Both are fixed-gear taildraggers
with 2-place side-by-side seating and use the Lycoming 320/360.
The RV weighs about 1000lb empty, where the cozier (smaller) Glasair
weighs about 1300lb empty. Both kits provide the parts for a similar
level of completion yet the Glasair costs something like $17k compared
to the RV's $11k. The Glasair is supposed to have a higher top
speed. This may be in small part to the smooth body and compound
curves available with composite construction, but is probably due
more to smaller fuselage size and trading off landing speed.
For typical airframe loads, a structure with a given strength can
typically be built lighter in aluminum than with composites, unless
you go with very expensive Kevlar or carbon fibers. Note the already-
more-expensive-than-an-RV Glasair uses conventional 7781 fiberglass
and vinylester resins. It's very impressive when Stan Montgomery
from Alexander Aeroplane hammers a composite layup with apparently
no damage and offers the hammer to an audience member, asking them
to hit the Cessna or Piper of their choice. This is not a typical
airframe load, however. (It's also interesting that he mentions
his cancer treatments.)
Aluminum does not give me migraines.
I always wear my RV-6 T-shirt at composite workshops and demonstrations
out of defiance.
DISCLAIMER: Above figures are from memory. They may be old. They may
be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that they are in the ballpark.
John Henderson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Chandler <mauser(at)claris.com> |
licence. I did my engine-out all the way to the ground at Daybreak (for all
you people with Seattle charts).
Pardon me while I go bounce off the walls some more.
(Hey Don, can I borrow your plane? :-)
--
"Wait a minute, you expect us innocent children to climb up dangerous
scaffolding and paint naked people all over a church? We'll do it!!"
-- Yakko Warner, Animaniacs
"Yeah, I've got ADD, you wanna make something of.... oooh, cool. Look!"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KingM(at)coopext.cahe.wsu.edu (Monte King) |
| Subject: | Re: Oil Resonance |
>At about 100 TSO a resonance started. It was found to be originating
>from the oil line to the cooler. The line is not shaking, but has a buzz
>or a hoot. It is felt in the structure and heard even in flight, but only
>in a range between 800 to 1200 RPM.
>...............
>We are concerned that the resonance will fatique & fail lines/fittings
>and want is stopped. Any help, Lycoming is at a lost and has no
>more suggestions.
>
If the noise is truly a resonance, it is related to the natural frequency of
the oil cooler line. The natural frequency can be altered by adding a
support on the line, or changing its stiffness. You'll have to experiment
to find the correct support point. Every object has a natural frequency,
i.e.- a specific rpm, at which it might vibrate violently. This does not
necessarily mean there are any other mechanical problems, although there are
some other good suggestions already posted you might want to investigate. A
resonance can eventually fatigue the line.
Monte King
RV-6A, building fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
I hate to burden the entire mailing list, but I can't remember Rion's E-Mail
addreess.
Rion B. : The shipping guy here at work says the cost of shipping Everett's
Gas Grill up here from L.A. would cost us about $30 to $34/100lbs. or about
$150 to $170 for a 500lb. crate. We would save a little if we picked it up
at the Airport.
The "Aileron Cafe'" could certainly use it and the price is pretty cheap!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: What would you get? |
At the speeds we're talking about, round head rivets wouldn't slow
you down, let alone flush ones!
You'd get a 2-300 pound heavier, slower airplane that would cost
20K more to build. yech!
dw
My answers to the question aluminum vs. fiberglass are as follows:
- it could be done
- it would be heavier
- it would fly at probably the same speed (slightly
less drag due to no rivets) but wouldn't be as
spirited (lower ROC, longer TO run, etc.) because
of the weight penalty
- it would cost more
Aluminum wins this contest.
Andreas Meyer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: composite rv |
As to weight and cost, you did notice that Glasair's slick
little GlaStar has aluminum wings...
dw
I mailed this the other day, but I don't know to whom since
it did not appear on rv-list.
Compare the RV-6 to a Glasair IITD. Both are fixed-gear taildraggers
with 2-place side-by-side seating and use the Lycoming 320/360.
The RV weighs about 1000lb empty, where the cozier (smaller) Glasair
weighs about 1300lb empty. Both kits provide the parts for a similar
level of completion yet the Glasair costs something like $17k compared
to the RV's $11k. The Glasair is supposed to have a higher top
speed. This may be in small part to the smooth body and compound
curves available with composite construction, but is probably due
more to smaller fuselage size and trading off landing speed.
For typical airframe loads, a structure with a given strength can
typically be built lighter in aluminum than with composites, unless
you go with very expensive Kevlar or carbon fibers. Note the already-
more-expensive-than-an-RV Glasair uses conventional 7781 fiberglass
and vinylester resins. It's very impressive when Stan Montgomery
from Alexander Aeroplane hammers a composite layup with apparently
no damage and offers the hammer to an audience member, asking them
to hit the Cessna or Piper of their choice. This is not a typical
airframe load, however. (It's also interesting that he mentions
his cancer treatments.)
Aluminum does not give me migraines.
I always wear my RV-6 T-shirt at composite workshops and demonstrations
out of defiance.
DISCLAIMER: Above figures are from memory. They may be old. They may
be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that they are in the ballpark.
John Henderson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John H Henderson <John.H.Henderson(at)Eng.Auburn.EDU> |
| Subject: | Re: composite rv |
>
> As to weight and cost, you did notice that Glasair's slick
> little GlaStar has aluminum wings...
> dw
In Sport Aviation (I think...or maybe US Aviator...or Kitplanes)
I read that the designer of the Glastar said that he was influenced
by Van's design of the RV wings and admitted that they couldn't
make the wings light enough in composites and maintain the "low"
cost that they were trying to achieve.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: composite rv |
'nuff said
>
> As to weight and cost, you did notice that Glasair's slick
> little GlaStar has aluminum wings...
> dw
In Sport Aviation (I think...or maybe US Aviator...or Kitplanes)
I read that the designer of the Glastar said that he was influenced
by Van's design of the RV wings and admitted that they couldn't
make the wings light enough in composites and maintain the "low"
cost that they were trying to achieve.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
> From claris.com!mauser(at)matronics.com Tue Feb 7 18:11:48 1995
> Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 15:22:02 -0800
> From: Richard Chandler <claris.com!mauser(at)matronics.com>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: FYI
Yakko:
Congratulations! I'm jealous -- I never even _knew_ about Daybreak
until after I had my license for a couple of years. Of course it wasn't
on the chart back then....
Welcome to the ranks!
Randall
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "'John H. Henderson'" <johnh(at)Eng.Auburn.EDU> |
| Subject: | Re: What would you get? |
> What would you get if you built an RV design to identical dimensions using
> fiberglass/composites instead of metal?
Compare an RV-6 to a Glasair IITD. Both are 2-place, side-by-side seating,
Lycoming 320/360 powered aircraft. The RV seems much roomier to me
(larger) and weighs ~1000lbs empty. The Glasair weighs ~1300lbs empty.
The RV kit runs about $11,000. I think the Glasair is about $17,000.
(Both kits bring you to about the same level of completion.) The Glasair
is a little faster. This may be due a little to a slicker shape because
of the ability of composites to make compound curves, but probably due
more to small size, and trading off low stall speed.
Typically, for the kind of loads experienced in an aircraft, aluminum
provides a stronger structure for the same weight of composites unless
you're building in the very expensive Kevlars and carbon fibers. (plain,
ordinary 7781 fiberglass and vinlyester resins are used in the already-
more-expensive-than-an-RV Glasair.) Although it's very impressive
when Stan Montgomery from Alexander Aeroplane hammers a composite layup
with no apparent damage (and then offers to let a member of the audience
take his hammer to the Cessna or Piper of his choice), this is not
a typical airframe load.
Also, aluminum doesn't give me migraines.
C23456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012
C
C John H. Henderson E-mail: johnh(at)eng.auburn.edu
C Dept. of Electrical Engineering Finger: johnh(at)finger.eng.auburn.edu
C Auburn University Mosaic: http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~johnh
C
As of November 9th, Rush declared the hostage crisis over,
so the hostage crisis countdown will no longer appear here.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | FACCHINETTI <Claudio.Facchinetti(at)imt.unine.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: composite RV |
Reading replies to the message asking what would a composite RV
be like, it's quite apparent that most advantages of aluminium
airframes were cited...as well as most composite disadvantages!
I have been looking around for kitplanes since about a year now
and my experience is limited to what I'm reading hearing and
seeing, but it seems quite evident to me that composite has three
main advantages over aluminium.
i) The airframe may be built faster than with aluminium if most
of the parts are premolded. Think of a KIS kit (Tri-R Tech.), which
is certainly the best example of a modern composite kit.
ii) Mistakes while building (or small damages while landing ;-)
are very easy to repair. I have a good friend flying sailplanes
saying that he would certainly not fly aluminium. Not only because
of performance, but also because of maintenance (ok, ok, we're
talking about sportplanes here ;^).
iii) Smooth curves are easy to achieve and hence may help reduce
drag. But more important is the fact that the surface aspect is
not altered by age, while with aluminium you can read most of the
plane history just by looking at the bumps, scratches, etc.
Briefly, disadvantages of composites over aluminium are price, weight
(unless going carbon), stiffness (unless going carbon bis) and heat
sensibility (unless going ceramic...Oops! Just forget it). Concerning
building, it's up to the builder's taste: you might as well hate epoxy
as hate driving 10'000+ rivets! Most of the people buying kits are
first-time builders anyway. Wether they go composite or aluminium,
they will build adequate skills and more than anything else... start
nagging friends that went the other way!
I unsubscribed from the RV-list today, so I won't be able to read
replies, unless you email me directly. Next step for me is rather
tough: decide what kit is going to drive my life for the next few years.
If it's the RV-4, catch you later, otherwise Adios!
Happy flying to all!
--Claudio
_____________________________________________________________________
Claudio Facchinetti | Voice : +41 38 301 653
Institute of Microtechnology | Fax : +41 38 301 845
Rue de Tivoli 28 | e-mail : facchinetti(at)imt.unine.ch
CH-2003 Neuchatel | claudio(at)flamingo.stanford.edu
(Switzerland) |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
| Subject: | Re GlasStar wing |
They were a little insulted at Oshkosh when I said their wing
is kind of like a RV. Actually, it is quite different.
It does not use ribs like a conventional wing. It uses lots
of D shaped stiffners just like the Luscombe did.
I think the Glasstar is a nice design, based on using the best
materials for each component. I like a 4130 fuselage cabin section.
It has good protection and good strength (hard points) to attach
the engine, wings, gear, etc. That may be a weak link for RV's
as the motor mount and parts of the fuselage have been weak points
(but have hopefully been fixed).
It also supports both tailwheel and nose wheel with the same
fuselage structure so you can switch whenever you want.
I thought the cabin was a bit cramped and did not like the
fixed position seats however.
> In Sport Aviation (I think...or maybe US Aviator...or Kitplanes)
> I read that the designer of the Glastar said that he was influenced
> by Van's design of the RV wings and admitted that they couldn't
> make the wings light enough in composites and maintain the "low"
> cost that they were trying to achieve.
>
--------------------------------------------------------
*NOTICE for internet mail*: Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my
own and are independent of my employer.
Herman Dierks, Dept. D29, AWSD Austin, Texas
mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com VNET: DIERKS at AUSVM6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Fried" <t42444(at)alvin.dehavilland.ca> |
Anybody who can put together the time, money and effort that is required to
build and fly an aircraft is anything but a weenie. It doesn't matter what
configuration, construction material or performance level.
David Fried
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Fried" <t42444(at)alvin.dehavilland.ca> |
Just a note to say hello.
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
David Fried
43 Sego Royalway
Willowdale, Ontario
M2H 1L6
(416) 498-5708 Home
(416) 375-3016 Work
Occupation: Aerodynamics Engineer at de Havilland in Toronto
Project: Modified RV-6 (Tapered wing planform)
Kit 21145
Structurally complete, currently installing engine and systems
IO-360B1A with Hartzell
4 years down, 1+ to go
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
| Subject: | Re: composite RV |
CLAUDIO said:
>
>ii) Mistakes while building (or small damages while landing ;-)
>are very easy to repair. I have a good friend flying sailplanes
>saying that he would certainly not fly aluminium. Not only because
>of performance, but also because of maintenance (ok, ok, we're
>talking about sportplanes here ;^).
>
Being the owner of both a fibreglass sailplane (Mini-Nimbus) and a
aluminum one (Schweitzer 1-36), I have to disagree with the above
statement.
The 1-36 was on lease-back, and a customer landed it 100 yds. short
of, and 10 feet above, the runway. The high(!!) flare out caused a severe
buckling of the rear fuselage - with the tail ending up 18 inches lower
than normal, and buckling around the wheel well. The insurance fixed this
for about $4,000, while a landing like this would have totally written off
the fuselage of a glass glider, as well as damaging the wings through
excessive downward flexing, with the tips hitting the ground. Why do you
think the insurance companys charge more for glass gliders?? This accident
in a glass glider would have certainly caused pilot injury, but the
customer walked away without even sore joints!
Glass gliders flex well, but once the elastic point is reached,
they just shatter. A broken wing spar on a glass glider usually means a
new wing, whereas a broken spar on a Schweitzer aluminum glider means a
spar splice, a couple of ribs, and a piece of new skin. If your glider is
out of production, then the major replacement parts may not be available --
same is true for glass homebuilts, if the moulds no longer exist, are parts
available?? (anyone remember the Polliwagen??, or what Express customers
went through during the bancruptcy??).
I like my glass glider for performance, but not on a cost saving
basis (refinishing the wings alone cost $6000+ over 5 years ago). I'll
stick to aluminum for power flying.
Gil Alexander, weenie wheeled RV6A, #20701
aft fus. skins riveted.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James M Wilson <James_M_Wilson(at)ccm.jf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: composite RV |
Text item:
Not trying to antagonize, this is my opinion. The glass is
pretty, I'm just partial to metal. Maybe because I'm building
a RV-4. Lota good historical data on the RV.
Response to:
i) There are enough "RV builders for hire" building RV kits,
like empennage and wing kits, that if your willing to pay the
additional $$$ (puts the price at equal, approx. $20K +) for
ready to go stuff. This soft of equates to "ready to go
plastic parts" in time and money. Sure feels good to the
aircraft evolve though. There are also some fast build kits
available with prefab parts.
ii) As far as repairable damage, metal repair seems less risky.
Metal is maintained with accepted conventional techniques.
Glass repair leaves a fair amount of question to unseen
fracture damage which can be very expensive and time consuming
or very risky. I like be able to verify the repair integrity.
Another safety point for the RV (besides lower forced landing
speed) is, metal tends to deform and absorb energy (somewhat
protecting you) while Glass and Wood tend to resist change
until some point of disintegration.
As far as RV crash integrity on forced impact, a forced smash
landing by a local Portland RV4 (actually two forced impacts
probably due to wind shear) caused little significant damage.
The significant damage after a fall from about 30 feet, which
took out two wire fences and left the aircraft airborne with
engine running, included broken motor mount at the gear attach
points and the lower firewall cross member broken. Other than
that, subsequent damage was cosmetic only and relatively easily
repaired. The aircraft flew to another airport and landed on
the broken gear without further incident. I'm sure there was
some emotional impact as well. FAA could only say, that's a
good airplane. I saw the aircraft and don't think a Glass
plane would have faired as well.
iii) I must agree, the plastic SURFACE is more durable than the
metal and it sure does make some nice lines. There are quite a
few high time RV's out there that look pretty nice though.
Also, not that I would but...
If one were to buy a used Experimental Sport Plane, I would
sure be more comfortable purchasing metal RV over glass. You
can see the integrity of a metal aircraft where the lack of
which may be hidden in a glass one.
jmw, RV-4
Reading replies to the message asking what would a composite RV
be like, it's quite apparent that most advantages of aluminium
airframes were cited...as well as most composite disadvantages!
I have been looking around for kitplanes since about a year now
and my experience is limited to what I'm reading hearing and
seeing, but it seems quite evident to me that composite has three
main advantages over aluminium.
i) The airframe may be built faster than with aluminium if most
of the parts are premolded. Think of a KIS kit (Tri-R Tech.), which
is certainly the best example of a modern composite kit.
ii) Mistakes while building (or small damages while landing ;-) are
very easy to repair. I have a good friend flying sailplanes saying
that he would certainly not fly aluminium. Not only because of
performance, but also because of maintenance (ok, ok, we're talking
about sportplanes here ;^).
iii) Smooth curves are easy to achieve and hence may help reduce
drag. But more important is the fact that the surface aspect is
not altered by age, while with aluminium you can read most of the
plane history just by looking at the bumps, scratches, etc.
Briefly, disadvantages of composites over aluminium are price, weight
(unless going carbon), stiffness (unless going carbon bis) and heat
sensibility (unless going ceramic...Oops! Just forget it). Concerning
building, it's up to the builder's taste: you might as well hate epoxy
as hate driving 10'000+ rivets! Most of the people buying kits are
first-time builders anyway. Wether they go composite or aluminium, they
will build adequate skills and more than anything else... start
nagging friends that went the other way!
I unsubscribed from the RV-list today, so I won't be able to read
replies, unless you email me directly. Next step for me is rather
tough: decide what kit is going to drive my life for the next few years.
If it's the RV-4, catch you later, otherwise Adios!
Happy flying to all!
--Claudio
_____________________________________________________________________
Claudio Facchinetti | Voice : +41 38 301 653
Institute of Microtechnology | Fax : +41 38 301 845
Rue de Tivoli 28 | e-mail : facchinetti(at)imt.unine.ch
CH-2003 Neuchatel | claudio(at)flamingo.stanford.edu
(Switzerland) |
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: Re: composite RV
From: FACCHINETTI <imt.unine.ch!Claudio.Facchinetti(at)matronics.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 09:47:59 +0100
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
That's about the smartest thing said about this so far!
thx David.
dw
Anybody who can put together the time, money and effort that is required to
build and fly an aircraft is anything but a weenie. It doesn't matter what
configuration, construction material or performance level.
David Fried
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: composite RV |
Don't want to get into "Claudio bashing" (glass bashing is fun enuff :-), but,
notice that he DIDN'T mention flight characteristics in his summary...
There isn't a plane built that has the overall capability of an RV, no matter
what it's made of, for any price.
Besides, isn't this the wrong forum to be trying to tout the "virtues" of
composites? You wouldn't expect a lot of sympathy or agreement from most of the
folks on THIS list. :-)
By the way Herman, nice summary of the Glastar. That is a really nice design,
refreshing to see them MIX all types of construction, using each in the area
where they work the best. I bet they will sell a TON of them.
Not that it could replace an RV, not enough performance (for me, I mean). But
for those folks that like high wing 2 seaters, it will be a very nice, low
operating cost machine.
dw
CLAUDIO said:
>
>ii) Mistakes while building (or small damages while landing ;-)
>are very easy to repair. I have a good friend flying sailplanes
>saying that he would certainly not fly aluminium. Not only because
>of performance, but also because of maintenance (ok, ok, we're
>talking about sportplanes here ;^).
>
Being the owner of both a fibreglass sailplane (Mini-Nimbus) and a
aluminum one (Schweitzer 1-36), I have to disagree with the above
statement.
The 1-36 was on lease-back, and a customer landed it 100 yds. short
of, and 10 feet above, the runway. The high(!!) flare out caused a severe
buckling of the rear fuselage - with the tail ending up 18 inches lower
than normal, and buckling around the wheel well. The insurance fixed this
for about $4,000, while a landing like this would have totally written off
the fuselage of a glass glider, as well as damaging the wings through
excessive downward flexing, with the tips hitting the ground. Why do you
think the insurance companys charge more for glass gliders?? This accident
in a glass glider would have certainly caused pilot injury, but the
customer walked away without even sore joints!
Glass gliders flex well, but once the elastic point is reached,
they just shatter. A broken wing spar on a glass glider usually means a
new wing, whereas a broken spar on a Schweitzer aluminum glider means a
spar splice, a couple of ribs, and a piece of new skin. If your glider is
out of production, then the major replacement parts may not be available --
same is true for glass homebuilts, if the moulds no longer exist, are parts
available?? (anyone remember the Polliwagen??, or what Express customers
went through during the bancruptcy??).
I like my glass glider for performance, but not on a cost saving
basis (refinishing the wings alone cost $6000+ over 5 years ago). I'll
stick to aluminum for power flying.
Gil Alexander, weenie wheeled RV6A, #20701
aft fus. skins riveted.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John H Henderson <John.H.Henderson(at)Eng.Auburn.EDU> |
>
> Project: Modified RV-6 (Tapered wing planform)
Ooooo!!! Tell us more!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
>
> Anybody who can put together the time, money and effort that is required to
> build and fly an aircraft is anything but a weenie. It doesn't matter what
> configuration, construction material or performance level.
>
> David Fried
> dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
Unless it's a modified tapered wing RV that is....
HEY, IT'S A JOKE! >>> :-) :-) :-) <<<
Seriously though, it sounds like an interesting project -- I don't
remember hearing of it before. You should post a write-up on it.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Busick <rbusick(at)nmsu.edu> |
Dave
How did you modify the wings and why?
Bob
>
> Project: Modified RV-6 (Tapered wing planform)
> Kit 21145
> Structurally complete, currently installing engine and systems
> IO-360B1A with Hartzell
> 4 years down, 1+ to go
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
via C2SMTP 3.19.b9F MHS to SMTP Gateway;
| From: | RON GRAHAM <rgraham(at)ozemail.com.au> |
| Subject: | New Member & Oz News |
G'day,
My name is Ron Graham, located in Sydney, Australia, and I have
decided after about five years of researching all the homebuilts approved
in Oz that the RV6 is for me.
Most of my flying time these days is in a Citabria, and I would appreciate
any input on the relative ground-handling traits of the Citabria vs the RV's.
The decision between an RV6 and an RV4 was very difficult, I like tandem
seating but my wife does not, plus I am 6ft 2in and about 200lbs with a son
the same size, so the extra room in the 6 seems more practical. I expect to
order the kit from Vans mid-year.
A bit of RV news from Oz that I would like to pass on is from the March
issue of Australian Aviation about a local RV4. Jon Johanson from Adelaide
recently flew his RV4 non-stop Adelaide - Hobart - Melbourne - Adelaide in
ten hours, and followed that up nine days later with a non-stop trip from
Adelaide to Auckland, New Zealand, a distance of 3350km, in 13hrs 57mins,
in the process setting several new Australian under 1000kg fixed wing class
records.
With his auxiliary tank he carried a total of 300 litres of fuel, what his
personal internal capacity was I can only guess:-) That equates to a fuel burn
around 5.7gph and a ground speed of 129kts.
Regards,
Ron Graham
(rgraham(at)ozemail.com.au)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dralle (Matt G. Dralle 1+ 510-447-9886) |
| Subject: | RV-LIST Archives Via FTP! |
The RV-LIST archive files are now available via anonymous FTP at
roxy.llnl.gov in the Public directory. The Achive is in three different
formats:
RV-Archive.txt Raw ASCII text ( ~5Mb )
RV-Archive.zip PKZIP Format ( ~2Mb )
RV-Archive.Z Standart UNIX compress ( ~2.5Mb )
The archive is updated daily at midnight and contains all of the current day's
mailings.
Also available in the Public directory is the latest version of the
RV-LIST FAQ.
Check it out...
Matt Dralle
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dralle (Matt G. Dralle 1+ 510-447-9886) |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
| Subject: | Re: Alodine Corrosion Protection |
>Bob Busick's questions...
>I've read all of last month's comments on alodining and have a few questions.
>
>On interior parts can you just alodine and not prime to insure corrosion
>protection?
No. The alodine film is soft and will just rub off (perhaps even
wash off) very quickly.
>
>Aircraft spruce sells an alodine that is a clear coating and
>one that gives a gold coating, is there any difference besides the color?
The gold is easier to use since you can see how much, and where, it
is applied. Either will work OK. The clear is really for corrosion
protection of natural aluminum when is is to be painted with a clear paint
- for those who want a polished look without the polishing!
>
>If I don't paint the exterior surfaces can I alodine the aluminum to get
>corrosion protection?
See above answer ... use clear Imron (or similar) for that polished
look. If you polish, don't bother with the alodine.
>
I'm going with paint (but etched and alodined first) ...
.... Gil Alexander RV6A #20701
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: New Member & Oz News |
Ron Graham wrote:
> Most of my flying time these days is in a Citabria, and I would appreciate
> any input on the relative ground-handling traits of the Citabria vs the RV's.
I currently fly a Citabria but only have about 1 hour and 10 or so left
seat landings in the RV-6 (other peoples' :-( ) so I speak from minimal
experience, but from the little bit of exposure I've had I can tell you
the following:
I consider the Citabria to be almost a "cheater taildragger", since you
can see so well over the nose compared to other tailwheel airplanes, and
those oleos are mighty forgiving. The RV-6 has about average over the
nose visibility, not as good as the Citabria but better than a T-craft
I think. In addition, the RV-6s spring steel landing gear is much less
forgiving than the oleos on the Citabria.
All my landings in RV-6s (except one!) have been in relatively calm
conditions and weren't a big deal other than getting used to the
differences to be expected. But don't expect to be able to just plomp
an RV-6 down like you can the Citabria -- no oleos, so it will sure
bounce! Also the prevailing opinion is that it's tough to three-point
the RV-6 at full stall -- I won't venture to say whether or not that is
true, but you might want to check the back postings to this group to
see the discussions on that.
Takeoffs in the RV-6 are a bit different as well -- there's a lot more
P-factor in a 180hp or even 160hp RV-6 than in a 100hp Citabria, so you
have to be more on the rudders. In addition, the stick forces are much
lighter so it barely takes any stick to bring the tail up or to
rotate.
My overall impression in comparing the two is about what you'd expect
-- the RV-6 is much quicker and takes a much lighter touch both on the
ground and in the air than the Citabria. Not so much that it's
difficult, but it takes some getting used to.
Ken Scott flew this Citabria for several years before I got into it, so
he should be a good source for information on this subject as well.
You might try to contact him through Van's support address
(76455.1602(at)compuserve.com). I'm sure he'd have some advice.
Randall Henderson
RV-6 (no n-number yet)
Citabria N11067
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Alodine Corrosion Protection |
> >Bob Busick's questions...
>
> >I've read all of last month's comments on alodining and have a few questions.
> >
> >On interior parts can you just alodine and not prime to insure corrosion
> >protection?
>
> No. The alodine film is soft and will just rub off (perhaps even
> wash off) very quickly.
Mind you I don't know much more about this than what I've learned from
reading, talking with folks, and working with the stuff on my own RV,
but I'm not sure I agree completely -- if I lived in a drier
environment than the Pacific Northwest I'd consider Alodyning only,
just to make sure the holes, pits and scratches got some extra protection, and
skip the primer except on non-alclad parts. The stuff should stay in
the scratches ok, and after it dries I've found that the the gold
alodyne surface color will stay on there pretty well even if it gets
wet again, especially if the surface is etched first. And if it's in
the interior it won't be likely to get rubbed on much. I do agree that
Alodyne alone won't be as good as a good etch/alodyne/prime, but I
think it would give you a reasonable level of protection on its own
nonetheless.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Skorupa <72575.34(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | RV Builders list |
I would like to subscribe to the RV builders list. I am building an RV-6A and
have the empenage nearly complete.
Chuck Skorupa
Renton, WA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)NtwkServ.MTS.MB.CA> |
| Subject: | Bolt hole chamfering on B-17 |
Just spent a week in Mesa, where I had the wonderful opportunity to look
at the CAF's dismantled B-17, "Sentimental Journey". Naturally, I
couldn't help but compare the internal structure of the -17 to my RV. The
wing attachment fittings on the -17 look to be only perhaps 3 or 4 times
larger than an RV (at most)! And, the bolt holes showed no sign of
chamfering or deburring, but had sharp square edges that looked like they
had simply been drilled, then bolted together as is. There were no visible
cracks. Having just chamfered/deburred all of my wing attachment bolt
holes, was it really necessary?
Curt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RUSS_NICHOLS(at)fire.ca.gov |
| Subject: | Still gearing up... |
Hello All,
after a couple of very hectic months, I'm still trying to get under
way. I've purchased an overkill air compressor and have spoken to
Avery (should actually be holding tools in a very short time).
Now for the real stuff...
During my wait, I have found a local gent that has decided not to
continue on his RV-6 project. He has an empenage kit partially built
and a wing kit still in the crate. He purchased both of these last
year (spring of 94). I haven't seen the products, but have spoken to
other locals builders that have. They indicate that the quality of
work done so far (just the rudder and elevator) is fine.
I spoke with Tom at Van's and told him my story. He seemed to support
the idea of buying the existing kit. Tom indicated that the only real
change since then has been the pre-drilled wing skins.
Does anyone out there have any "look for ...." or "watch out for ...."
advice? It looks like I'd save about $500 plus shipping. I may be
able to deal a little more on price.
Thanks for the help,
Russ Nichols
RV-6 (soon)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JerryFlyRV(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Airspeeds - again |
A. Reichert
wrote
>I posted a small survey a few weeks back about RV airspeeds. I have
>received only two replies.
>I am posting this again in hopes I get a few more responses.
>Thanks!
****************
>Model of plane (-6/-6A):
>Size/HP of engine:
>Diameter/pitch of prop:
>Maker of prop:
>Airspeed (indicate IAS or TAS) at 75% at altitude:
> (If CS prop, give settings)
>With/without wheel pants:
>With/without nav lights:
>Airframe mods affecting speed:
>Any comments/additional info:
>- Alan
______________________
>| Alan Reichert |
>| reichera(at)clark.net |
>|----------------------|
>|The debate continues..|
>| -6 or -6A |
>|______________________|
Alan
Will try to give you some of the info that you requested
Model of plane (-6/-6A: I built and fly a RV-6 (N906GS) mine was the third
customer RV-6 to fly I started flying it on July 14, 1989.
Size/HP of engine: O-360 180hp solid crank out of a PA-28
Diameter/pitch of prop: Wood prop 72x74
Maker of prop: Warnke (Bernie Warnke)
Airspeed (indicate IAS or TAS) at 75% at altitude: TAS at 7500 ft is 204mph
Rate of climb is very sensitive to the amount of weight that you have in the
airplane and how heavy your airplane is to start with. My airplane is heavy
(1090lb) with gyros, two coms, transponder,GPS, full upolstery, 12lb.prop
hermonic dampener, all lights for night flying,plus my 235+lb. lead a**. AT
110 mph IAS I can still climb 1900-2100 fpm by myself or 1400-1600 fpm with
passenger. Type of weather conditions also has a effect on rate of climb.
With/without wheel pants: I have always had the wheel pants on my airplane.
With/without nav lights: I fly with the nav. lights on most of the time
(could'nt resist) I have my nav lights and strobes recessed in the wing tips
useing Van's nav light option.
Airframe mods affecting speed: The only mod I have done is to make wing root
fillets copied from the RV-4. which slowed my stall speed 2 mph.
Any comments/additional info: I have been watching the comments about -6 vs
-6A, both airplanes fly great and there is not enough difference in
performance to use that as a reason to choose one over the other,
I am a instructor and have checked several people out who have never flown a
taildraggers, they are ready to solo in their RV in about 5-10 hrs. so 5 -10
hours of dual in a taildragger should not be a to reason to build one
airplane over another. It just depends on which airplane -6 or -6A that a
person likes the most.
Jerry
Jerryflyrv(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bolt hole chamfering on B-17 |
Text item:
>And, the bolt holes showed no sign of
>chamfering or deburring, but had sharp square edges that looked like they
>had simply been drilled, then bolted together as is. There were no visible
>cracks. Having just chamfered/deburred all of my wing attachment bolt
>holes, was it really necessary?
The purpose of deburring/chamfering is to prevent the sharp edge from cutting a
burr off the fastener which might them be jammed between the materials and cause
either a stress point or prevent the two materials from being forced together.
This could weaken the joint for certain types of stresses. If you are installing
a steel fastener in an aluminum hole this is less likely, so all you have to do
is get rid of any drilling residue by sanding. Also, the holes in my spar were
drilled rather poorly (some undersized, some did not line up between all of the
flange strips) so chamfering helps you get the pieces lined up and the rivets
put in.
Also, maybe they figured the average B-17 was only good for about 100 hours of
flying anyway.
FKJ
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: Bolt hole chamfering on B-17
From: Curt Reimer <NtwkServ.MTS.MB.CA!Curt_Reimer(at)matronics.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 19:58:57 -0600 (CST)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Bolt hole chamfering on B-17 |
Cirt Reimer wrote:
> Just spent a week in Mesa, where I had the wonderful opportunity to look
> at the CAF's dismantled B-17, "Sentimental Journey". Naturally, I
> couldn't help but compare the internal structure of the -17 to my RV. The
> wing attachment fittings on the -17 look to be only perhaps 3 or 4 times
> larger than an RV (at most)! And, the bolt holes showed no sign of
> chamfering or deburring, but had sharp square edges that looked like they
> had simply been drilled, then bolted together as is. There were no visible
> cracks. Having just chamfered/deburred all of my wing attachment bolt
> holes, was it really necessary?
Probably not, but I'll bet if you didn't you'd be thinking about it
when you see that needle on the G-meter start to climb! :-)
I've also noticed that on production planes the edges and holes are
generally deburred much less agressively than we RV builders tend to
do. I've also seen plenty of cracks in production plane components.
Since I don't presume to know where the high stress or high vibration
areas are going to be, I'll continue to debur the hell out of every-
thing. And I'll bet you do too! :-)
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | alodyne in fuel tanks |
Anybody have an opinion on what effect alodyning the fuel tank
parts would have on the bonding of pro-seal with the metal?
OK, now anybody have an _informed_ opinion? :-)
I know, I know, corrosion isn't likely to happen in there since it'll
be full of fuel most of the time, but at the rate that I'm going my
tanks may sit in my cold damp garage for a while before they even ever
SEE any fuel. And what with the etching and roughing up of the
surfaces I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea to alodyne them, just
in case.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Still gearing up... |
Text item:
> Does anyone out there have any "look for ...." or "watch out for ...."
> advice? It looks like I'd save about $500 plus shipping. I may be
> able to deal a little more on price.
Sounds like a good deal; he already did the hard parts. The stabilizers are
easier. When you build the stabilizers, fix the locations of the control surface
mounting hardware using the existing rudder and elevators rather than the
drawings, in case the former builder got those off a little bit. On the left
elevator you should look to see that the trim tab trailing edge lines up with
the trailing edge of the rest of the elevator. Make sure you cannot see bumps
next to the trailing edges of the control surfaces indicating that the
stiffeners were not trimmed down enough there or that the trailing edge bend was
not overdone.
FKJ
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: Still gearing up...
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 17:35:12 -0800
From: fire.ca.gov!RUSS_NICHOLS(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Fried" <t42444(at)alvin.dehavilland.ca> |
The metal work on my RV-6 is nearly complete. Looking back it seems that I
have been rather busy. Consider this...
Assumptions:
12000 Rivets
Each rivet holds 2 parts
75% of the holes require dimples
25% are 1/8 and the rest 3/32
12000 marks
12000 3/32 holes
3000 3/32 holes drilled to 1/8
48000 deburrs (2 parts * 12000 holes * 2 sides)
18000 dimples (2 parts * 12000 holes * .75)
8000 clecos while drilling ( in & out every third hole)
8000 clecos while riveting "
12000 set 12000 rivets
------
121000 Things to do
I'm glad it is behind me. There is some information on my tapered wing coming
soon. Until then keep on drilling (and deburring and dimpling and ...).
David Fried
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
**********************************************
* Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are *
* my own and are independent of my employer. *
**********************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Still gearing up... |
Russ Nichols said:
> During my wait, I have found a local gent that has decided not to
> continue on his RV-6 project. He has an empenage kit partially built
> and a wing kit still in the crate. He purchased both of these last
> year (spring of 94). I haven't seen the products, but have spoken to
> other locals builders that have. They indicate that the quality of
> work done so far (just the rudder and elevator) is fine.
[...]
> Does anyone out there have any "look for ...." or "watch out for ...."
> advice? It looks like I'd save about $500 plus shipping. I may be
> able to deal a little more on price.
Sounds like a good deal to me. I'd "watch out for" someone else who wants to
grab it before you do!
One thing that may help you talk him down more is if it doesn't have the pre-
notched wing ribs. That's a nice addition.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Fried" <t42444(at)alvin.dehavilland.ca> |
| Subject: | Tapered wing planform |
Here is some information about the tapered wing planform I have been working
on. There isn't enough here to repeat what I have done, just a few details
to think about. If you want to know more drop me a line.
My future plans for it will have to wait until it is proven in flight.
Why I did it
I set out to design my own aircraft and found that the task was
too great to complete in a reasonable time. After several years
of paper studies and no cut metal, I met Danny Burns who was working
on a RV-6 and a spark was struck. Van doesn't have to spend too much
on marketing this design as it sells itself. The people involved
with it are a big part of this.
Van got his start in this game by designing a new wing for
a popular homebuilt design. I figured that I could satisfy my
creative need with a similar project starting from the RV-6.
The RV-6 is a beautiful aircraft, the only thing I felt it was missing
was the tapered wing. That is the artist in me talking and is purely
subjective. Van has done a super job on this design. Any performance
improvements that I may achieve will be small, but well worth the
personal challenge.
It's fun.
What I did
To use the fuselage design without modification, the wing chord at the
fuselage side is unchanged (58 in. @ Y=22.5 in.). Inboard of this
point the spars mate to the fuselage in the usual way.
Although the structure has been restressed and resized as required, it
goes together like the standard wing. Things generally scale down
moving out toward the tip.
The airfoil section, incidence, dihedral and twist are unchanged. The
mainspar remains at 30% chord and is unswept.
Aspect ratio was increased from 4.76 to 6.0 Fixing the span at 25 ft.
set the average chord to 50 in. at Y=75 in.. With the chord known
at the fuselage side and mid span, a linear taper gave a tip chord of
38.6 in. at Y=150 in.. Wing area of the new planform is 104.2 ft.^2
compared with 111.2 ft.^2 for the rectangular wing. Each flap is 1 ft.
longer and the fuel tanks one rib bay longer. Fuel capacity is
40 USG in total.
Building it was like doing the wing from scratch only more so. At
last count I have 41 form blocks. The biggest obstacles were bending
large radii and finding a long brake for the spar web.
What I expect
Between the increased planform efficiency, extra flap span and reduced
wing area, I figure that the stall speed will not increase noticeably.
A reduction in profile drag is expected due to the change in wing
area. I'm not looking to be the fastest 6 around. For a given speed I
should see something on my fuel flowmeter. The other way around, it
may be a few knots.
Despite the wing area change there will be a induced drag reduction
due to the higher aspect ratio. The climb rate should improve by a
few hundred feet per minute. The rate of speed loss should be reduced
when manoeuvring at low speed on approach.
Oooh's and aaah's are always nice.
What I have achieved so far
The wing is essentially complete requiring only riveting of the flaps
and ailerons. The tips will be made using glass and epoxy layups.
I will reserve judgment on composite aircraft until I have some
experience working with the material. The rest of the structure is
complete and is awaiting installation of the engine and systems.
Meeting people who are contributing to the evolution of the design
or just enjoying it just as it is.
The members of Van's Airforce, Ontario Wing 60+ and growing
Danny Burns RV-6 Avmix mixture sensor
Luke De Sadeleer RV-6 First in Ontario
Ken Hitchmough RV-6A Air Beetle main gear
Al Ludford African explorer, author and spare hands
Darlene Colton Who finds all this rather amusing.
That's all for now I will try to post updates as I go.
David Fried
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
**********************************************
* Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are *
* my own and are independent of my employer. *
**********************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | richards(at)sofkin.ca (Mark Richardson) |
| Subject: | Re: Still gearing up... |
Hi Russ,
I have only one word to say - BEWARE!!!!!!
I did the same thing as you plan, but I'm going to have to buy a whole tail
new kit. Some of things you should look out for are :
- make sure everything is there
- everything is straight (no twists in the surfaces, esp. the elevators
and rudder
- the rivet holes are centered on the ribs/spars etc
- the trim tab is straight and lines up with the elevator
- any scribe lines used to line things up aren't too deep
- anything already riveted together is properly corrosion proofed
- the skins haven't been trimmed too short
- the skins aren't all gouged or deeply scratched
If you can find a local builder to have a look with you, do it. I'm not
saying don't buy it, because this fellow probably has done a good job.
Just remember: caveat emptor.
Enjoy
Mark
>Russ Nichols said:
>> During my wait, I have found a local gent that has decided not to
>> continue on his RV-6 project. He has an empenage kit partially built
>> and a wing kit still in the crate. He purchased both of these last
>> year (spring of 94). I haven't seen the products, but have spoken to
>> other locals builders that have. They indicate that the quality of
>> work done so far (just the rudder and elevator) is fine.
>[...]
>> Does anyone out there have any "look for ...." or "watch out for ...."
>> advice? It looks like I'd save about $500 plus shipping. I may be
>> able to deal a little more on price.
>
>Sounds like a good deal to me. I'd "watch out for" someone else who wants to
>grab it before you do!
>
>One thing that may help you talk him down more is if it doesn't have the pre-
>notched wing ribs. That's a nice addition.
>
>Randall Henderson
>RV-6
>
>
************************************************************************
* Mark Richardson Software Kinetics Ltd *
* Senior Systems Analyst 65 Iber Rd. *
* VOX 613-831-0888 Stittsville, Ont *
* FAX 613-831-1836 richards(at)sofkin.ca K2S 1E7 *
************************************************************************
* RV-6 20819 '85 Virago 750 *
* EAA# - 367635 DoD# - 1506 *
************************************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Airspeeds - again |
Jerry's RV-6 is very similar to mine, in fact, he test flew my prop for
me and got tach and airspeed #'s basically identical to what I get now.
My prop is a Bernie Warnke 72x73, but of a somewhat different design
than Jerry's (more blade area).
Flying side-by-side with him flat-out we were basically even straight
and level (although my rpm is 150-180 less), but when we did a climb
test from 100 mph he outclimbed me like I was dragging a parachute! Jim
Anglin's 160hp -6 was also a better climber (similar prop to Jerry's).
So, my prop is at Bernie's right now getting a slight re-pitch so I can
gain back a little rpm and hopefully, climb performance (then maybe I
can keep-up with Jerry :-).
dw
Alan
Will try to give you some of the info that you requested
Model of plane (-6/-6A: I built and fly a RV-6 (N906GS) mine was the third
customer RV-6 to fly I started flying it on July 14, 1989.
Size/HP of engine: O-360 180hp solid crank out of a PA-28
Diameter/pitch of prop: Wood prop 72x74
Maker of prop: Warnke (Bernie Warnke)
Airspeed (indicate IAS or TAS) at 75% at altitude: TAS at 7500 ft is 204mph
Rate of climb is very sensitive to the amount of weight that you have in the
airplane and how heavy your airplane is to start with. My airplane is heavy
(1090lb) with gyros, two coms, transponder,GPS, full upolstery, 12lb.prop
hermonic dampener, all lights for night flying,plus my 235+lb. lead a**. AT
110 mph IAS I can still climb 1900-2100 fpm by myself or 1400-1600 fpm with
passenger. Type of weather conditions also has a effect on rate of climb.
With/without wheel pants: I have always had the wheel pants on my airplane.
With/without nav lights: I fly with the nav. lights on most of the time
(could'nt resist) I have my nav lights and strobes recessed in the wing tips
useing Van's nav light option.
Airframe mods affecting speed: The only mod I have done is to make wing root
fillets copied from the RV-4. which slowed my stall speed 2 mph.
Any comments/additional info: I have been watching the comments about -6 vs
-6A, both airplanes fly great and there is not enough difference in
performance to use that as a reason to choose one over the other,
I am a instructor and have checked several people out who have never flown a
taildraggers, they are ready to solo in their RV in about 5-10 hrs. so 5 -10
hours of dual in a taildragger should not be a to reason to build one
airplane over another. It just depends on which airplane -6 or -6A that a
person likes the most.
Jerry
Jerryflyrv(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | twg(at)blink.att.com (Tom Goeddel(x5278)) |
| Subject: | re: Things to do |
> 121000 Things to do
Thanks, David. That makes me feel a lot better - only 100000 or so things
left to do. Ugh...
Tom Goeddel
RV-6A (see you at Oshkosh 2095)
t.goeddel(at)att.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
> - any scribe lines used to line things up aren't too deep
I can't pass this one up. Don't ever scribe Aluminum!!
Use the 'Sharpie' extra fine line marker pens or something
similar. These work great and you can use different colors.
They have red, blue, and black for example.
It wipes off with MEK or some paint reducers.
If the Sharpie markers are not on the 'tool list', please
add them.
I agree that buying a project (esp. a tail kit) you need to
look for stupid mistakes like this.
--------------------------------------------------------
*NOTICE for internet mail*: Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my
own and are independent of my employer.
Herman Dierks, Dept. D29, AWSD Austin, Texas
mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Fried" <t42444(at)alvin.dehavilland.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Oshkosh 2095 |
> 121000 Things to do
>Thanks, David. That makes me feel a lot better - only 100000 or so things
>left to do. Ugh...
>Tom Goeddel
>RV-6A (see you at Oshkosh 2095)
Take heart. It is possible to eat an elephant if you do it a bite at a time.
With any luck you will get used to the taste. I like mine done medium-well
with fries and a nice red wine.
David Fried
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
RV-6T
________________________________________________________________________________
for rv-list(at)matronics.com
| From: | hovan(at)apple.com (John Hovan) |
| Subject: | 187 Newsletter on Web Page |
Hi All,
The February issue of EAA Chapter 187's newsletter is now available for
your reading pleasure on the RV Web page. The address is...
http://atlantis.austin.apple.com/people.pages/jhovan/news/news.html
The EAA Chapter 187 Newsletter was voted to be one of the top ten
newsletters in the country. It was ranked 9th from 794 newsletters! Paul
McKinley has been the editor of the newsletter since 1991. A special thanks
to Paul for permission to post the newsletter to the Web page. It is a
great pleasure to be able to share our newsletter with you!
I believe this is a world's first... having a Chapter newsletter available
on a Web page. It took some work to do, but I hope you feel it was worth
it! ( See page 15 for a photograph of two RV's.)
Additionally, John Melton of NASA contacted me and wanted to share his
EGADS "Easy General Aviation Design System" for the Macintosh with
everyone. As a result, there is now a link to this software on the RV web
page. There are currently a couple planes modeled, but it doesn't look
difficult to add in RV dimensions for modeling. If you have a Macintosh,
check out his software!
enjoy,
John Hovan
Austin, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | hsutphin(at)ix.netcom.com (Harold Sutphin) |
Is anyone going to Sun n Fun this year? Would be nice to meet some of
the faces behind all the great tips posted here! I will be there, most
certainly for the RV forum (hoping Van will show up again this year).
Harold
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dralle (Matt G. Dralle 1+ 510-447-9886) |
Hey RVer's!
My service provider some how removed my domain (matronics.com) from their
nameserver about Tuesday 2/21/95. This basically means that there is no
*incoming* mail to matronics.com until they get it fixed, and that the RV-LIST
is broken as well.
I will keep on them until it's fixed - I know that a lot of you really need
your RV-LIST fix on a regular basis!
I will post another message to everyone when everything is working correctly
again. Until then, do not try to post any messages to the
rv-list(at)matronics.com as it will bounce.
Sorry about this!
Matt Dralle
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | lgroom(at)millcomm.com (Larry Groom) |
| Subject: | Fwd H/S Spar Help |
Howdy all! I must confess I've been lurking here on this list since October and
have enjoyed what I've seen. Instead of running up my phone bill and seeing
North Plains, Ore. on my telephone bill 80 times a month I thought I should use
the experience of all those on this super list!
I'm building a RV-6, have finished the rear spar, and am working on the
forward one. (For the Horizontal Stab) My question is this.....
How do most folks put the forward spar together? The manual if I read it right
(which is no guarentee!) has the builder fabricate HS-610 and 614, make the 6
degree bends, then fabricate the HS-602 spar channels, make the 6 degree bends.
Now this is the confusing part, the way I read it, I don't drill the 610 and
614 to the 602's until the skeleton is fixed in the jig and the 602's are
basically
clecoed to most of the rear ribs and spar. I'm worried about keeping the fwd
spar alligned. By having the skeleton plumbed properly ie the vertical lines on
the jig and using the level will that assure allignment?
I do have the Orndorf video, which shows putting the spar together somewhat
before you make the bends. I figured the manual had a reason to do it the way
they did and I've already made the bends but now wish I'd done it George's way.
As you all can tell I'm still a rookie and sweat out alot of things. I'm sure
North Plains already recognizes my voice already!
Any help would be appreceiated!
Larry RV-6 23782
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
I hope to be going to Sun N Fun. Van and Bill Benedict will be there
plus one or two others from Van's. Also some others from around here
(Don, you're going right?)
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Hyde <nauga(at)windvane.umd.edu> |
Is the list working or did my system go dumb?
Dave Hyde
davehyde(at)tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JIM SCHMIDT <JIM.SCHMIDT(at)mail.mei.com> |
| Subject: | Sun n Fun -Reply |
I will be there would certainly like to
meet as many people as possible. I'm not
sure what days yet though. If we can put
something together lets do it.
Jim Schmidt
>>> Harold Sutphin
02/17/95 07:09pm >>>
Is anyone going to Sun n Fun this year?
Would be nice to meet some of the faces
behind all the great tips posted here! I
will be there, most certainly for the RV
forum (hoping Van will show up again this
year).
Harold
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dralle (Matt G. Dralle 1+ 510-447-9886) |
| Subject: | RV-LIST Back Online... |
The domain nameserver has been fixed and matronics.com can now be resolved for
email access. Bottom line? Start posting those RV messages!
Matt Dralle
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Hyde <nauga(at)windvane.umd.edu> |
subscribe nauga(at)windvane.umd.edu
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RUSS_NICHOLS(at)fire.ca.gov |
>From RUSS_NICHOLS Wed Feb 22 09:23:27 0800 1995 remote from fire.ca.gov
From: RUSS_NICHOLS(at)fire.ca.gov
Subject: Taildragger time
OK... I know this is one of those religious, political, inflammatory
topics, but I really do want to know.
I currently have zero taildragger time. I'm just starting on a RV-6.
Before I finish it, I would like to have "plenty" of taildragger time.
My FBO has a "Texan 152", but charges more than I really want to pay
if I'm going to put in a lot of hours. I do know of another FBO that
has a Cessna 140 available.
Now.... the airframe-battle-prompting question. I recently saw an
add for a Cassutt. The price looks right and it would be cheap to run
(C-90 in it). Has anyone out there ever flown one? I'm guessing that
it is similar to an RV-3. While my goal is still the RV-6, I was
wondering if the Cassutt would be a good way to inexpensively build
taildragger time and have a plane with some performance to boot.
I'm guessing that most of my flying will be alone, so that's not an
issue.
While owning a plane is more expensive than renting, would this type
of time be more beneficial that the same time in a 140? Is it even
worth worrying about at this point? I do have some 1.2 billion tasks
yet to complete on my -6...
thanks,
Russ Nichols
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Seibert" <Bob_Seibert(at)oakqm3.sps.mot.com> |
rv-list(at)matronics.com
Reply to: RE>Sun n Fun
I plan on making Sun & Fun in my RV-6. It is N691RV. It is solid red with a
slider. I may be over in the aircraft camping area. Please look me up.
I plan on being there on April 8, 9 &10.
Bob Seibert -- Georgetown, Texas
--------------------------------------
Date: 2/18/95 5:13 AM
From: Harold Sutphin
Is anyone going to Sun n Fun this year? Would be nice to meet some of
the faces behind all the great tips posted here! I will be there, most
certainly for the RV forum (hoping Van will show up again this year).
Harold
------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 95 04:15:27 MST
From: ix.netcom.com!hsutphin(at)matronics.com (Harold Sutphin)
Subject: Sun n Fun
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
| Subject: | Re: Bolt hole chamfering on B-17 |
Sorry for the late follow-up ... work got in the way!!
For riveting, the deburring spec. allows countersinking as a debur
method, but only a depth of 10% of the material thickness (this is only 2.5
thousands of an inch for 0.025 material).... so don't get carried away with
cutting tools!! Shear strength will be lost as the rivet won't be able to
expand enough to fill in the countersink, and a lesser % of the material
thickness will contact the rivet.
As a side note, I have found that when I have to drill through
sheet that is epoxy primed, that the primer seems to "hold" the surface
together as the drill exits, and little (or no) burrs occur. It is much
like having a good backing plate tightly held against the rear surface.
Although I haven't done this yet, I may prime the insides of my skins
before skin drilling, and dispense with the deburring step, but still
checking for burrs (only got 3 skins left though). This would save some
time, and every little bit helps.
Has anyone else noted this effect with the epoxy primers???
Gil Alexander, RV6A, #20701, fitting the wings and gear legs
on this weekend. Luckily I got
the pre-drilled gear legs!!
>Curt Reimer wrote:
>> Just spent a week in Mesa, where I had the wonderful opportunity to look
>> at the CAF's dismantled B-17, "Sentimental Journey". Naturally, I
>> couldn't help but compare the internal structure of the -17 to my RV. The
>> wing attachment fittings on the -17 look to be only perhaps 3 or 4 times
>> larger than an RV (at most)! And, the bolt holes showed no sign of
>> chamfering or deburring, but had sharp square edges that looked like they
>> had simply been drilled, then bolted together as is. There were no visible
>> cracks. Having just chamfered/deburred all of my wing attachment bolt
>> holes, was it really necessary?
>
>Probably not, but I'll bet if you didn't you'd be thinking about it
>when you see that needle on the G-meter start to climb! :-)
>
>I've also noticed that on production planes the edges and holes are
>generally deburred much less agressively than we RV builders tend to
>do. I've also seen plenty of cracks in production plane components.
>Since I don't presume to know where the high stress or high vibration
>areas are going to be, I'll continue to debur the hell out of every-
>thing. And I'll bet you do too! :-)
>
>Randall Henderson
>RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)NtwkServ.MTS.MB.CA> |
| Subject: | Spar Rivets Not Seated? |
Just finished riveting my first spar (hooray). The only major goof was
cutting all the #6 rivets to length before riveting. Unfortunately, I
measured them with a #5 rivet length gauge. Fortunately, I noticed before
setting any.
I drove a couple of rivets, checked both shop and bucked head carefully,
and proceeded with the rest. But, when I was inspecting the finished
spar, I noticed that the shop heads had a slight gap between the spar and
the head, as if it wasn't fully seated. The 'lip' of the head does make
contact with the spar over part of it's circumference. Its as if:
1) The hole was drilled at an angle (factory drilled spar).
2) or, a burr got caught under one side of the head, preventing it from
fully seating.
Now, I did lightly ream each rivet hole, primarily to get the paint out,
and I made sure that each rivet was a gentle press fit, so as not to roll
up any burrs on the rivet, so I can't see how a burr could have caused this.
All of the rivets were fully seated (or so I thought) before I started
driving them.
Most of the problem rivets are at the thick end of the spar, and only
about 20% the rivets are affected, to various degrees. The maximum gap
looks like about .01 ".
Anyone else have this problem? Should I worry about it?
Regards,
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JIM SCHMIDT <JIM.SCHMIDT(at)mail.mei.com> |
Before I finish it, I would like to
have "plenty" of taildragger time.
--->
I would say this is a good plan.
My FBO has a "Texan 152", but charges
more than I really want to pay
if I'm going to put in a lot of hours.
I do know of another FBO that
has a Cessna 140 available.
Now.... the airframe-battle-prompting
question. I recently saw an
add for a Cassutt. The price looks
right and it would be cheap to run
(C-90 in it). Has anyone out there
ever flown one? I'm guessing that
it is similar to an RV-3. While my
goal is still the RV-6, I was
wondering if the Cassutt would be a
good way to inexpensively build
taildragger time and have a plane with
some performance to boot.
I'm guessing that most of my flying
will be alone, so that's not an
issue.
While owning a plane is more expensive
than renting, would this type
of time be more beneficial that the
same time in a 140? Is it even
worth worrying about at this point? I
do have some 1.2 billion tasks
yet to complete on my -6...
thanks,
Russ Nichols
Take first things first. You must get
checked out the Tail Dragger. Don't
underestimate the importance of instruction
here. I converted 1 year ago. I had about
200 hours, 70 in gliders the rest in
trikes.
I took me 6 hours to be turned loose in a
J-3 Cub. It took another 2 or 3 before I
felt fairly competent. I still sweat plenty
when the wind starts going sideways.
I have not flown a Cassutt but I would bet
it is high wing loading which means speed.
Speed means energy and that spells trouble
in landing. If you could handle the Cassutt
the RV would be no problem. But how are you
going to get up to the level to handle the
Cassutt. My advice is go get checked out in
the 140 because you will have to do that
anyway. Joystick would be preferable.
You may be able to buy a champ for little
more than the Cassutt. I have the same
dilemma the FBO left and took the Cub with
him. Now I have nothing that requires
rudder pedals. Don't underestimate the cost
of ownership either. If your like me you
will spend so much time fooling with the
plane you will never get the RV finished.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | davehyde(at)tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil |
It's time for me to start thinking about a research topic for
my Masters thesis, so that I can get it out of the way and
return to real work, like finishing my -4 wings. I'm studying aerospace
engineering, with concentrations in flight dynamics and structural dynamics,
and I thought that something RV-related or general aviation related would
hold my interest and let me give something back to the community
(after all, you guys are paying for my education :) ). Anyone got any
suggestions/burning questions related to RV flying qualities that
could use some back- and brain-breaking research and/or evaluation?
Any subject, however vague, will be taken seriously. :)
Dave Hyde
Real Work: davehyde(at)tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil
Surreal Work: nauga(at)windvane.umd.edu
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | davehyde(at)tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil |
| Subject: | Frederick Forum :( |
I got a letter from Dave Liston a few weeks back - it seems
the Frederick, MD RV forum has been cancelled this year due
to a lack of participation from Frederick EAA chapter members.
Anyone who has attended in the past knows that this is a real
shame. Are there any other east coast gatherings I should
know about so that I can get my annual fix?
DH
davehyde(at)tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil
Proposed thesis topic: "A Carrier-Capable RV-4"?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Reichert" <reichera(at)clark.net> |
______________________
| Alan Reichert |
| reichera(at)clark.net |
|----------------------|
|The debate continues..|
| -6 or -6A |
|______________________|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
> Now.... the airframe-battle-prompting question. I recently saw an
> add for a Cassutt. The price looks right and it would be cheap to run
> (C-90 in it). Has anyone out there ever flown one?
There is a fellow on the field here who recently bought a Cassutt.
He flys the Heck out of it and thoroughly enjoys it. He has never
mentioned any poor ground handling qualities.
Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 sn 23744
WOrking on the right elevator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Barnhart <70275.1360(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Test Message, Ingore |
This is a test message. Ignore it. Mail to rv-list from
my normal e-mail address is bouncing back "Unknown Host".
I am now trying to send this message from a different
e-mail address. Ignore it.
Dave Barnhart
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd H/S Spar Help |
Text item: Text_1
Assembling the forward spar first can work just fine, and is less
awkward than trying to assemble and drill it in the jig. The 6 degree
bends in the 610 and 614 are not real critical, but it helps if both are
bent exactly the same. The tricky part is that the centerline of the two
602's together must form a straight line, and this is hard to determine
without some kind of fixture. Final assembly is then just a matter of
mounting the rear spar in the jig with the ribs attached to it, then
lining up the forward spar on them. You can determine that the forward
spar is straight in the jig by setting the two end ribs vertical and
then seeing if the centerline of the spar at the middle is directly
above the centerline of the rear spar before drilling the 610 and 614.
There is an alternate method that makes this even easier and more
accurate. Make a jig consisting of a piece of heavy plywood that is a
little bigger than half of the horizontal stabilizer. Mount 5-inch high
blocks on it that define the locations of the spars and the ribs; it is
easy to get these dimensions off the plans. Make reference marks on all
these blocks three inches up from the base board. This defines the
centerline of the spars and the ribs (the horizontal stabilizer is
symmetric about the horizontal plan, which explains why you can use half
a jig to do both sides). This method will take you about the same length
of time as trying to align everything in the usual manner, and it will
save your neighbor several hours when you give the jig to him to build
his RV. Just note that some of the dimensions on the plans are to the
edges of rib flanges which are never exacly 5/8" wide. Mount your blocks
to pick up the webs instead of the flanges to avoid problems here.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
| Subject: | Re: Spar Rivets Not Seated? |
Curt,
since these are critical rivets, they probably should conform to
the applicable MIL specifications. They are as follows:
"Rivet installations showing evidence of the following defects shall be
classed defective.....
...
...
m. The occurence of any gap around a continous 60% of the circumference of
the driven head. In the other 40%, gaps which allow a feeler guage larger
than 0.002 inch to be inserted. Any gap under the manufactured head. "
Translated into normal English, you can have a gap of up to 0.002
inch around of the shop head, as long as none of this gap is a continuous
gap that is greater than 60% of the circumference, and no gap under the
manufacturers head.
I would rework the rivets that fail the above inspection. I have
noticed similar effects when riveting with the Avery tool and a hammer.
While this is usaully a great way to rivet, the pieces must be tightly held
together and the tool prevented from bouncing .... difficult to do with the
spar.
good luck ... Gil Alexander
PS ... I would get a second opinion from Vans phone support line.
>Just finished riveting my first spar (hooray). The only major goof was
>cutting all the #6 rivets to length before riveting. Unfortunately, I
>measured them with a #5 rivet length gauge. Fortunately, I noticed before
>setting any.
>
>I drove a couple of rivets, checked both shop and bucked head carefully,
>and proceeded with the rest. But, when I was inspecting the finished
>spar, I noticed that the shop heads had a slight gap between the spar and
>the head, as if it wasn't fully seated. The 'lip' of the head does make
>contact with the spar over part of it's circumference. Its as if:
>
>1) The hole was drilled at an angle (factory drilled spar).
>
>2) or, a burr got caught under one side of the head, preventing it from
>fully seating.
>
>Now, I did lightly ream each rivet hole, primarily to get the paint out,
>and I made sure that each rivet was a gentle press fit, so as not to roll
>up any burrs on the rivet, so I can't see how a burr could have caused this.
>All of the rivets were fully seated (or so I thought) before I started
>driving them.
>
>Most of the problem rivets are at the thick end of the spar, and only
>about 20% the rivets are affected, to various degrees. The maximum gap
>looks like about .01 ".
>
>Anyone else have this problem? Should I worry about it?
>
>
>Regards,
>Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Bolt hole chamfering on B-17 |
Gil Alexander said:
> As a side note, I have found that when I have to drill through
> sheet that is epoxy primed, that the primer seems to "hold" the surface
> together as the drill exits, and little (or no) burrs occur. It is much
> like having a good backing plate tightly held against the rear surface.
> Although I haven't done this yet, I may prime the insides of my skins
> before skin drilling, and dispense with the deburring step, but still
> checking for burrs (only got 3 skins left though). This would save some
> time, and every little bit helps.
> Has anyone else noted this effect with the epoxy primers???
Yes I have noticed this as well, but not to the point that I'd skip
deburring altogether.
I primed all my wing skins and ribs before drilling. One big advantage
was that it made it a lot harder to scratch the skins and parts when
fitting and drilling. The main disadvantage was that I did enough work
on the material that I had a fair amount of touch-up priming to do
before riveting, so it actually added some extra priming time for me.
Also if you alodyne before drilling you will eliminate that protection
from the holes and trimmed edges, if that matters. Since I'm
fastidious (anal?) about deburring but also about corrosion proofing,
I've decided I'll etch/alodyne/prime after drilling from now on. Also,
I've added an extra step to deburring -- I touch each hole lightly
(after deburring with the cutter) with a die grinder/scotch-brite
wheel. This takes extra time, but removes any hint of extra burr, and
helps the rivets seat as well as possible.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
| Subject: | Re: cassut (owning while building) |
Russ, some comments on buying and owning a homebuilt while you are
building another homebuilt. I am close to finishing a RV4 but it
has been a long time in process. I wanted it for a sport and some
aerobatics. The more I learned about the RV's and the fact that I
was not aerobatic rated, I decided to find a biplane to learn acro in.
I bought a Super AcroSport I (180 HP) and flew it for a little over
a year and flew Sportsman competition. I then sold it and bought a
Pitts S1 with Ultimate wings (160 HP) and flew Intermediate competition
with it last yr and just got my Advanced patch. Anyway, I would not
trade all I have learned in the last 3 years with these two planes
for anything. HOWEVER, my 4 is still not done. If you have a second
plane, you will have to fly and maintain it. I found LOTS of little
things that needed changed or corrected on these two planes and that
took away time and $$ from the RV4. Flying aerobatics consumed a lot
of time also. Then the Pitts needed an engine overhaul so that ate up
3 months and more $$. There annual inspections, etc. etc.
You need to decide what your priorities are. If you buy a second plane,
it will take away time from your RV. If what you really want is
to have that RV-6, then I would stay focused on it and get some tailwheel
time when you get close to finishing the 6. If you are not in a big
hurry on the 6 and want to spend some time flying NOW and learing in
a more challenging plane, then the Cassutt may be the correct decision.
I would warn you that the cassutt is probably not an airplane to learn
tailwheel handling in. That is a small fast aircraft and things will
happen in it much faster than some champ or C152 taildrager.
Also, it is single seat so there is NO checkout. I can tell you from
getting into the acrosport I for the first time that the pucker factor
goes up when you know you have to land it all by yourself without
any checkout time and after you just handed over all the $$ for it.
And, I had over 1,000 hours tailwheel but most in C170 or Luscome where
you have good visibility. You don't see the runway in the Acrosport
or Pitts when the nose comes up for landing.
The Cassutt should have better over the nose visibility but it will still
be a challenge.
One other factor, there is probably not a big resale market for a
plane like the cassutt due to the fact it is single place and tailwheel.
You also have some liability when you go to resell it.
Don't you just hate those 'good deals' that are hard to pass up!
> Now.... the airframe-battle-prompting question. I recently saw an
> add for a Cassutt. The price looks right and it would be cheap to run
> (C-90 in it). Has anyone out there ever flown one? I'm guessing that
> it is similar to an RV-3. While my goal is still the RV-6, I was
> wondering if the Cassutt would be a good way to inexpensively build
> taildragger time and have a plane with some performance to boot.
>
> I'm guessing that most of my flying will be alone, so that's not an
> issue.
>
> While owning a plane is more expensive than renting, would this type
> of time be more beneficial that the same time in a 140? Is it even
> worth worrying about at this point? I do have some 1.2 billion tasks
> yet to complete on my -6...
>
> thanks,
>
> Russ Nichols
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------
*NOTICE for internet mail*: Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my
own and are independent of my employer.
Herman Dierks, Dept. D29, AWSD Austin, Texas
mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: Sun n Fun |
I was considering it heavily for awhile, but we will be in the middle
of a small addition to our house then so I won't be able to. I also
hear that the weather is not great for crossing the whole US that time
of year.
So no, I am wimping-out. Maybe next year...
dw
I hope to be going to Sun N Fun. Van and Bill Benedict will be there
plus one or two others from Van's. Also some others from around here
(Don, you're going right?)
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
I mentioned to Randall that I might be flying (via jet) down to Sun 'n Fun
to stay with my folks in Bradenton FL. He wrote back saying he already
"Brown-Nosed" a ride with Van! Although I'm green with envy, I wouldn't have
the time to take the scenic route anyway.
If anyone else is thinking of taking an "express mailing tube" to the fly-in
this year I wouldn't mind coordinating flights for some company.
Like I mentioned to Randall; it sounds like there will be a lot of folks
from this area going. Maybe we could all get together for an RV6A "weenie"
roast!
>Yes I will be going to Sun-n-fun. But it will be in the right
>seat of Van's RV-6T.
>
>EAT YOUR HEART OUT! HAHAHAHAHAHA!
>
>I'm going to have to work for it though, bummer. I'm so sad I
>have to man Van's booth and pretend to be a "representative".
>
>:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: taildragger time |
> While my goal is still the RV-6, I was wondering if the Cassutt
>would be a good way to inexpensively build taildragger time and have a
>plane with some performance to boot.
>While owning a plane is more expensive than renting, would this type
>of time be more beneficial that the same time in a 140? Is it even
>worth worrying about at this point? I do have some 1.2 billion
>tasks yet to complete on my -6...
>thanks, Russ Nichols
Russ, it really depends on your goal: Do you want to be flying YOUR VERY
OWN RV sometime soon (<4 years), or, is it OK with you if you fly some in
the meantime and finish your RV in 5-10 years?
Our builder's group (the totally awesome PORTLAND RVATORS) formed during
the same month I started my RV-6. During the 4 years it took me to finish,
I flew very little (<40 hours). Our group has consistently had >30-40
'active' builders, but only 5 aircraft have flown, and all of them had been
started before the group formed.
For most of those builders, that is OK. Many of them have aircraft, or are
partners in aircraft, or are members of a great flying club. They do lots
of flying and are willing to trade that for longer build times on their
RVs.
I was flying very little and NOT enjoying 'spam can' flying much anyway
(after getting a look at homebuilts), so I gave up flying for most of my
project time. The result, I was sitting in the left seat of my RV-6 a lot
sooner, instead of diverting time to some other kind of plane.
Either choice is fine, depends on the individual needs of the builder.
don wentz, RV-6 N790DW.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fuel Tank Access |
This is a basic question:
What method does one use to cut out the 6-3/4" diameter fuel tank access
cover. Bandsaw and sander? Fly cutter with the center pilot drill removed?
Is it possible to turn the fly cutter bit around so that it is accurate for
the male piece instead of the female piece? Just curious, I'm going to have
to do this pretty soon. I'm installing an inverted tank so the access cover
cannot have any holes in the center.
Thanks
Ted
RV-4
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mr. Jeremy Benedict" <jbenedic(at)uofport.edu> |
| Subject: | Weather is our friend!!! |
> I was considering it heavily for awhile, but we will be in the middle
> of a small addition to our house then so I won't be able to. I also
> hear that the weather is not great for crossing the whole US that time
> of year.
>
> So no, I am wimping-out. Maybe next year...
> dw
Weather?!?!? Isn't that the stuff that's supposed to get out of your way
when you want it to?
Last year, the trip back from SF was great. Only problem was very solid
fog at JAX, FL (nearly mistook a 150 painted red with yeller stripes for
the -6T). Oh yeah, and the greeting line of 18000+ feet
cumulus clouds right on the Oregon border. Now, the short hop to
OSH is another story, weatherwise.
[Sorry about saying anything, but extending my break from Theology
studies just sounds like a good idea. :) ]
Jeremy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | richards(at)sofkin.ca (Mark Richardson) |
| Subject: | Rv Builders Forum - When ? Where ? |
Hi folks,
What is the scoop on the builders forum in Maryland this year ? Figured
maybe I'd bite the bullet and drive 10 hours to check it out.
Mark
************************************************************************
* Mark Richardson Software Kinetics Ltd *
* Senior Systems Analyst 65 Iber Rd. *
* VOX 613-831-0888 Stittsville, Ont *
* FAX 613-831-1836 richards(at)sofkin.ca K2S 1E7 *
************************************************************************
* RV-6 20819 '85 Virago 750 *
* EAA# - 367635 DoD# - 1506 *
************************************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Scratches - was: Bolt hole chamfering |
>
> One big advantage
> was that it made it a lot harder to scratch the skins and parts when
> fitting and drilling.
>
> Randall Henderson
> RV-6
>
Try using one inch clear plastic tape on the surface of the skins to
keep the skins scratch free. I use a .003" thick tape that is sold by a
tape store here in Milpitas (say, "mill-`pee'-tus"). They sell all kinds
of tape, and only tape. If anybody is intrested I can make a bulk
purchase. The stuff is cheep (about $1.50 a roll) and not very sticky so
it can be removed without very much effort.
It's not necessary to compleatly cover the skin. A one inch strip with
2-3 inches between is enough to keep the skin off the table. Don't put it
to close to the holes during the dimpling operation. It will cause a
slight crease in the skin if the dimple die overlaps onto the tape. It
does take a little extra time to apply the tape, but it helps the skins
keep that fresh from the mill look.
I also use it as riveting tape. It works as good as the tape sold as
"riveting tape" and saves lots of $$.
Chris Ruble
Starting work on the fuel tanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank Access |
> From aol.com!TLump(at)matronics.com Fri Feb 24 02:12:16 1995
> From: aol.com!TLump(at)matronics.com
>
> This is a basic question:
> What method does one use to cut out the 6-3/4" diameter fuel tank access
> cover. Bandsaw and sander? Fly cutter with the center pilot drill removed?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Don't try this at home!
> Is it possible to turn the fly cutter bit around so that it is accurate for
> the male piece instead of the female piece?
Remove the bit from the cutter and gring another cutting edge on the
other end that will put the 90 Deg. cut on the hole insted of the blank.
This will take alot of grinding and it's east to get impatient. Don't rush
the grinding. Don't let the cutter get hot. If the cutter gets too hot
even for a fraction of a second it will remove the temper from the steel
and it won't keep an edge. Quench it in water frequently to keep it cool.
> I'm installing an inverted tank so the access cover cannot have any
> holes in the center.
>
Try filling the hole with a rivet or putting in an AN fitting of some
sort. If you don't want a hole at all, find sombody that has a lathe and
a face plate. A sheet of metal can be held between two blocks of wood by
pressure from the tailstock and turned to size without putting a hole in
the center.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank Access |
Text item:
> What method does one use to cut out the 6-3/4" diameter fuel tank access
>cover. Bandsaw and sander? Fly cutter with the center pilot drill removed?
Use the fly cutter as-is and plug the hole with a rivet the same way you plug
the tooling holes in the end ribs.
> Is it possible to turn the fly cutter bit around so that it is accurate for
>the male piece instead of the female piece?
Yes. And be sure you also have the cutter turned the right way when making the
two cuts that form the reinforcing ring.
Another tidbit: some fly cutter blades do not have a relief behind the cutting
edge so you need to grind it. (relief means the blade curves back from the
cutting edge so the rear of the blade doesn't scrape on the cut surface and chew
it up.)
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: Fuel Tank Access
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 00:49:33 -0500
From: aol.com!TLump(at)matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: taildragger time |
I agree with everything Don said. I'm in the "Red Carpet Flyers" flying
club, 4 guys, one gal, and one beat up old Champion Citabria. Rion
Bourgeois (RV-4 project) is one of the partners, and Ken Scott was
until he finished his RV-6. Steve Harris (RV-4 project) was in it for a
while too -- it's kind of a an "until you get your RV done" airplane
partnership. I got into it as a way to keep flying for cheap, without
having to rent spam cans. I'm glad I still get to fly, but we end up
spending a fair amount of time doing "owner assisted" maintenance on
it, which takes away from the RV building time. I think I'd probably
cut my time to finish the RV by about 20% if I wasn't in that. But I
do love to fly, and don't much like renting spam cans, so it's not a
bad compromise.
Randall Henderson
> > While my goal is still the RV-6, I was wondering if the Cassutt
> >would be a good way to inexpensively build taildragger time and have a
> >plane with some performance to boot.
>
> >While owning a plane is more expensive than renting, would this type
> >of time be more beneficial that the same time in a 140? Is it even
> >worth worrying about at this point? I do have some 1.2 billion
> >tasks yet to complete on my -6...
> >thanks, Russ Nichols
>
> Russ, it really depends on your goal: Do you want to be flying YOUR VERY
> OWN RV sometime soon (<4 years), or, is it OK with you if you fly some in
> the meantime and finish your RV in 5-10 years?
>
> Our builder's group (the totally awesome PORTLAND RVATORS) formed during
> the same month I started my RV-6. During the 4 years it took me to finish,
> I flew very little (<40 hours). Our group has consistently had >30-40
> 'active' builders, but only 5 aircraft have flown, and all of them had been
> started before the group formed.
>
> For most of those builders, that is OK. Many of them have aircraft, or
are
> partners in aircraft, or are members of a great flying club. They do lots
> of flying and are willing to trade that for longer build times on their
> RVs.
>
> I was flying very little and NOT enjoying 'spam can' flying much anyway
> (after getting a look at homebuilts), so I gave up flying for most of my
> project time. The result, I was sitting in the left seat of my RV-6 a lot
> sooner, instead of diverting time to some other kind of plane.
>
> Either choice is fine, depends on the individual needs of the builder.
>
> don wentz, RV-6 N790DW.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "'John H. Henderson'" <johnh(at)Eng.Auburn.EDU> |
Get this: I'm going to Sun 'n' Fun AND Oskkosh all expenses paid
PLUS salary!! I'll be an exhibitor for Archangel Avionics.
Where do we meet?
C23456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012
C
C John H. Henderson E-mail: johnh(at)eng.auburn.edu
C Dept. of Electrical Engineering Finger: johnh(at)finger.eng.auburn.edu
C Auburn University Mosaic: http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~johnh
C
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Charles Ruble's tape |
On Fri, 24 Feb 1995, Chris Ruble wrote:
> Try using one inch clear plastic tape on the surface of the skins to
> keep the skins scratch free. I use a .003" thick tape that is sold by a
> tape store here in Milpitas
Charles, maybe if you could post the brand and part number of that tape
some of us couls acquire it locally. I know that if it is a 3M
product, I can get it from the local distributor here in town. All
I need is the 3M part number.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank Access |
> > I'm installing an inverted tank so the access cover cannot have any
> > holes in the center.
> >
> Try filling the hole with a rivet or putting in an AN fitting of some
> sort. If you don't want a hole at all, find sombody that has a lathe and
> a face plate. A sheet of metal can be held between two blocks of wood by
> pressure from the tailstock and turned to size without putting a hole in
> the center.
Or use a bandsaw if you have one, it's barely any more work than using
a flycutter, and no hole to fill. You will need to use the flycutter
for the reinforcing ring (the inner circle at least).
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Non-corrosive RTV, Part 2 |
A couple of weeks ago I posted a message here that I'd found a
non-corrosive RTV, but the price was outrageous ($42 per tube).
SInce then I've called Dow Corning's Tech support, and have
learned that Dow Corning #738 RTV is non-corrosive, and costs
about $10 per tube. I've not found it in any of the stores or
at any of the aircraft supply houses, but my local Dow Corning
Distributor will sell it by the tube.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 sn 23744
working on the right elevator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank Access |
> Chris R. said ***
>> Ted originally said ***
>> This is a basic question:
>> What method does one use to cut out the 6-3/4" diameter fuel tank access
>> cover. Bandsaw and sander? Fly cutter with the center pilot drill removed?
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Don't try this at home!
I have used this method sucessfully at home. I used my bench mounted drill
press (the smallest Delta model) and the lowest rpm possible. Clamping the
work down is most important, and I made an oversized overlay to the drill
press work surface out of 3/4" plywood. With the work clamped down flat and
tightly to this wood surface, and with low drill pressures, the fly cutter
can be used with no pilot. Of course, wear the right personal safety
equipment.
>
>
>> Is it possible to turn the fly cutter bit around so that it is accurate for
>> the male piece instead of the female piece?
>
> Remove the bit from the cutter and gring another cutting edge on the
>other end that will put the 90 Deg. cut on the hole insted of the blank.
>This will take alot of grinding and it's east to get impatient. Don't rush
>the grinding. Don't let the cutter get hot. If the cutter gets too hot
>even for a fraction of a second it will remove the temper from the steel
>and it won't keep an edge. Quench it in water frequently to keep it cool.
That's the way I did it too, but I don't remember it taking a lot of effort.
>
> **** stuff deleted ****
>
good luck with the tanks ... Gil Alexander RV6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank Access |
I used my snips and did it in 2 cuts: a rough first cut to about 1/8" from the
line, a second-cut to the line. The second cut has a thin piece of 'remnant'
which makes the cutting easier and less distortion.
You could use the fly cutter and just proseal/rivet a patch over the center
hole, the plans call for plugging the tooling holes in the end ribs already
anyway.
dw N790DW
(remember, REAL men build an RV with hacksaw and snips, no wimpy bandsaws for
US! :-)
This is a basic question:
What method does one use to cut out the 6-3/4" diameter fuel tank access
cover. Bandsaw and sander? Fly cutter with the center pilot drill removed?
Is it possible to turn the fly cutter bit around so that it is accurate for
the male piece instead of the female piece? Just curious, I'm going to have
to do this pretty soon. I'm installing an inverted tank so the access cover
cannot have any holes in the center.
Thanks
Ted
RV-4
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | chris(at)ashtech.ashtech.com |
| Subject: | Re[2]: Fuel Tank Access |
I just drew a circle patern on the plate, took it over to the bandsaw,
wacked it out the smoothed things out on the grinding wheel...
no problem :)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Reichert" <reichera(at)clark.net> |
| Subject: | Make us feel bad. Was: Sun 'n' Fun |
Oh, okay....
Rub it in, why don'tchya!
On Fri, 24 Feb 1995, 'John H. Henderson' wrote:
> Get this: I'm going to Sun 'n' Fun AND Oskkosh all expenses paid
> PLUS salary!! I'll be an exhibitor for Archangel Avionics.
> Where do we meet?
>
- Alan :-)
______________________
| Alan Reichert |
| reichera(at)clark.net |
|----------------------|
|The debate continues..|
| -6 or -6A |
|______________________|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Standley <Gary_Standley(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: Fuel Tank Access |
Text item:
Yea!! a hacksaw and a file!! Us early RV builders had to make our own
hinge brackets and everything.
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel Tank Access
Date: 2/24/95 2:11 PM
I used my snips and did it in 2 cuts: a rough first cut to about 1/8"
from the
line, a second-cut to the line. The second cut has a thin piece of 'remnant'
which makes the cutting easier and less distortion.
You could use the fly cutter and just proseal/rivet a patch over the center
hole, the plans call for plugging the tooling holes in the end ribs already
anyway.
dw N790DW
(remember, REAL men build an RV with hacksaw and snips, no wimpy bandsaws for
US! :-)
This is a basic question:
What method does one use to cut out the 6-3/4" diameter fuel tank access
cover. Bandsaw and sander? Fly cutter with the center pilot drill removed?
Is it possible to turn the fly cutter bit around so that it is accurate for
the male piece instead of the female piece? Just curious, I'm going to have
to do this pretty soon. I'm installing an inverted tank so the access cover
cannot have any holes in the center.
Thanks
Ted
RV-4
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: Re: Fuel Tank Access
From: Don Wentz <ccm2.hf.intel.com!Don_Wentz(at)matronics.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 95 12:34:02 PST
________________________________________________________________________________
So There Randall, I think John Henderson has you beat!
I'm still not sure I can get the time away from work, but if I can make it,
we could all meet at Van's display. We just need to pick a time.
>Get this: I'm going to Sun 'n' Fun AND Oskkosh all expenses paid
>PLUS salary!! I'll be an exhibitor for Archangel Avionics.
>Where do we meet?
>
>C
>C John H. Henderson E-mail: johnh(at)eng.auburn.edu
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Standley <Gary_Standley(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Make us feel bad. Was: Sun 'n' Fun |
Text item:
How 'bout an RV3, then you don't have all those decisions to make about
where to place all the tires and things.
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Make us feel bad. Was: Sun 'n' Fun
Date: 2/24/95 3:11 PM
Oh, okay....
Rub it in, why don'tchya!
On Fri, 24 Feb 1995, 'John H. Henderson' wrote:
> Get this: I'm going to Sun 'n' Fun AND Oskkosh all expenses paid
> PLUS salary!! I'll be an exhibitor for Archangel Avionics.
> Where do we meet?
>
- Alan :-)
______________________
| Alan Reichert |
| reichera(at)clark.net |
|----------------------|
|The debate continues..|
| -6 or -6A |
|______________________|
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: Make us feel bad. Was: Sun 'n' Fun
From: "A. Reichert" <clark.net!reichera(at)matronics.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 16:50:00 -0500 (EST)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank Access |
Don Wentz said:
> I used my snips and did it in 2 cuts: a rough first cut to about 1/8" from the
> line, a second-cut to the line. The second cut has a thin piece of 'remnant'
> which makes the cutting easier and less distortion.
Don: are your access plates .063 like mine? That's thicker than I've
ever tried to do with snips. Hmmm, maybe I'll try it sometime.
> (remember, REAL men build an RV with hacksaw and snips, no wimpy bandsaws for
US! :-)
Yeah, and pound rivets with two rocks! :-) :-)
Which reminds me -- my Sears variable speed table top bandsaw that I
bought in March of 1994 started having problems a couple of months ago,
and after a few trips to the service center I finally talked them into
taking it back for a full refund. I wasn't real happy with the quality
of the saw, I didn't use it very heavily but it didn't hold up well and
their repair service was really poor. So anyway, if anyone has any
recommendations for a good brand/model of moderately priced moderate
duty bandsaw, I'd appreciate it.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Chris Ruble's tape |
> From crl.com!barnhart(at)matronics.com Fri Feb 24 13:33:08 1995
> X-Deleted-Errors-To: bounces(at)matronics.com
> Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 11:39:06 -0800 (PST)
> From: "David A. Barnhart" <crl.com!barnhart(at)matronics.com>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Charles Ruble's tape
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type> : > TEXT/PLAIN> ; > charset=US-ASCII>
, maybe if you could post the brand and part number of that tape
> some of us couls acquire it locally. I know that if it is a 3M
> product, I can get it from the local distributor here in town. All
> I need is the 3M part number.
>
It's not a 3M product. but I will try and get the info for you.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Weather is our friend!!! |
No problem Jeremy, I was half expecting to get lectured on the 'merits' of an
instrument rating. No, after 4 years and a wheelbarrow full of $$$ in the
garage, I can't complain about this addition, my wife has earned it.
We'll look at it again for next year... :-(
dw
> I was considering it heavily for awhile, but we will be in the middle
> of a small addition to our house then so I won't be able to. I also
> hear that the weather is not great for crossing the whole US that time
> of year.
>
> So no, I am wimping-out. Maybe next year...
> dw
Weather?!?!? Isn't that the stuff that's supposed to get out of your way
when you want it to?
Last year, the trip back from SF was great. Only problem was very solid
fog at JAX, FL (nearly mistook a 150 painted red with yeller stripes for
the -6T). Oh yeah, and the greeting line of 18000+ feet
cumulus clouds right on the Oregon border. Now, the short hop to
OSH is another story, weatherwise.
[Sorry about saying anything, but extending my break from Theology
studies just sounds like a good idea. :) ]
Jeremy
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: alodyne in fuel tanks |
When I bought my already flying RV-4, the fuel tanks were a little less than,
ah, you know. Anyhow, I took 'em apart (drilled, acetone, MEK, tank dipped,
all kinds of vile stuff). Turns out the tanks had not been alodyned, and the
ProSeal had not adhered. Then again, I don't know if the aluminum was cleaned
or not when the ProSeal was applied. Anyhow, my very knowledgable buddies
told me that alodyne was appropriate for ProSeal to grab onto, and so I did
on the new tanks. No need to rough up the surface if you alodyne.
Ed Wischmeyer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: Fuel Tank Access |
I don't think I could do it now, my 'he-man' forearms have gone away now that I
don't do the clecoe plier excercises all the time any more.
dw
Don Wentz said:
> I used my snips and did it in 2 cuts: a rough first cut to about
1/8" from the
> line, a second-cut to the line. The second cut has a thin piece
of 'remnant'
> which makes the cutting easier and less distortion.
Don: are your access plates .063 like mine? That's thicker than I've
ever tried to do with snips. Hmmm, maybe I'll try it sometime.
> (remember, REAL men build an RV with hacksaw and snips, no wimpy
bandsaws for
US! :-)
Yeah, and pound rivets with two rocks! :-) :-)
Which reminds me -- my Sears variable speed table top bandsaw that I
bought in March of 1994 started having problems a couple of months ago,
and after a few trips to the service center I finally talked them into
taking it back for a full refund. I wasn't real happy with the quality
of the saw, I didn't use it very heavily but it didn't hold up well and
their repair service was really poor. So anyway, if anyone has any
recommendations for a good brand/model of moderately priced moderate
duty bandsaw, I'd appreciate it.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Elev. trim tabs ends |
I'm working on the elevators, and thinking ahead a little bit to
the trim tab. I'd like to make a little rib to close each end
of the trim tab, instead of trying to close it by beding the
little flanges over.
I think the little 'V' section coutout from the elevator
V-blocks might make a good form.
Any suggestions or ideas, anyone?
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 sn 23744
working on the elevators
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)NtwkServ.MTS.MB.CA> |
| Subject: | Re: Elev. trim tabs ends |
On Sun, 26 Feb 1995, David A. Barnhart wrote:
> I'm working on the elevators, and thinking ahead a little bit to
> the trim tab. I'd like to make a little rib to close each end
> of the trim tab, instead of trying to close it by beding the
> little flanges over.
>
> I think the little 'V' section coutout from the elevator
> V-blocks might make a good form.
David, I went with the little rib idea myself. I also tried using the "V"
section cutout, but the angle is wrong. Use a sanding block to rework it
until it fits the inside of the elevator skin. I would also recommend
radiusing the edges of the block so you don't get too sharp of a bend
(potential of cracking). I used the CS4-4 pop rivets to attach it. Make
sure you stagger the positions of the upper and lower rivets near the
trailing edge so the rivets won't interfere with each other. I guess it
might be possible to use solid AN rivets here, but you would have to have
the rib flanges facing outboard, whereas I have my flanges facing inward
to allow the rib to be flush with the edge fo the trim tab skin. The
little rib idea also worked for the adjacent end of the elevator, next to
the trim tab.
The rib method is probably more work than the method shown in the plans,
but the advantage is you get to do it over again until you get it right.
I think I made at least 2 or 3 ribs before I got it right.
I'd also recommend leaving the last 1/4 " of the tab open as a drain hole.
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)NtwkServ.MTS.MB.CA> |
| Subject: | Re: Spar Rivets Not Seated? |
Just a follow up note on this issue. Upon checking with a .0015 feeler
gauge (the smallest I have), per Gil Axexander's advice, I did find a
couple of shop heads that had a gap over part of the
head circumference. However, a couple of blows with the Avery tool on the
shop head side seems to have seated them satisfactorily. There was also a
bit of an optical illusion here. It seems that the #6-25 rivets have a
slight radius at the lip of the shop head. This caused a shadow which
_looked_ like a gap, but wasn't, at least I couldn't get a feeler gauge
underneath.
Anyway, on the second spar I made sure that the rivets could be seated
solidly with finger pressure alone, and I also used a hammer and a block
of wood on the spar flange to make SURE each rivet was seated, on the
Avery tool, just prior to riveting. I also recommend using sandbags or
another person to keep the spar from bouncing off the tool as the rivet is
set. I managed to put a small smiley on one of my rivets when it jumped
halfway out of the cup set. Luckily it was an outboard rivet. I havn't
decided whether it is worth replacing. I could drill it out, but which is
worse, a small smiley on the head or a possible damaged/oversized hole
and a replacement rivet?
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Elev. trim tabs ends |
> I would also recommend radiusing the edges of the block so you don't
> get too sharp of a bend
Yes, I planned on that. In fact, I keep several small blocks of wood
around that I have radiused the edges to various dimensions. That way
when I need to bend a piece of aluminum, the radius is no problem.
> The rib method is probably more work than the method shown in the plans,
> but the advantage is you get to do it over again until you get it right.
amen.
Regards,
Dave Barnhart
rv-6 sn 23744
working on the elevators
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | auer(at)teleport.com (Dell Auer) |
Matt Dralle,
Sir,
Please enclude my name on you email list. Im thinking of building a
rv6a and would like all the infomation possible before I make the big step.
Thank you in advance.
dell
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Hyde <nauga(at)windvane.umd.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Elev. trim tabs ends |
> the trim tab. I'd like to make a little rib to close each end
> of the trim tab, instead of trying to close it by beding the
> little flanges over.
>
I made cardboard templates and bent the 'riblets' by hand. After
about 15 ribs I finally got two that fit to my standards.
DH
davehyde(at)tenet1.jcte.jcs.mil
nauga(at)windvane.umd.edu
________________________________________________________________________________
This thread about hole chamfering has quite frankly made me a little
nervous. I have been "aggressively" deburring both sides of each hole,
which consumes what I consider to be an unfortunately large amount of
material from around the whole. I'm using a single hole deburring tool
that mounts in my cordless screwdriver. About one or two revolutions
and I get a nice smooth hole. (I got it from Cleveland tools after
they talked me into believing that it is superior to the three flute
style - I do feel that it is a very good device).
I've just started on a -6A and today I primed all of the parts of the
Horizontal Stabilizer. I am ready to start driving rivets tomorrow night.
But some of the holes on my HS-603s seem to have somewhat more than the
10% of material removed that another poster mentioned is the maximum amount
that should be removed. I don't exactly relish the thought of my HS rear spar
working loose so I'm planning on adding about 8 rivets to each HS-409/HS-603
inboard of the HS-412 brackets. This will put rivets about every 1/2 inch
through most of this area (the minimum pitch for 1/8" rivets is 3/8" so I
can barely squeak by with this modification) which should add substantially
to the strength in this area. It won't add hardly any weight, but it sure
will take a great weight off of my mind! I anyone can think of a reason
why I shouldn't do this, please speak up.
But back to the issue of deburring, perhaps I am missing the point. Is it
only necessary to debur the exit side of a drilled hole? Should I skip the
entry side altogether? I seem to have spent an extraordinary amount of time
smoothing the edges of metal parts until they have a very soft, smooth,
satin-like finish. Am I going to far? I seem to spend about 30% of my time
measuring, 45% deburring/smoothing, and 25% everything else (priming,
straightening, drilling, riveting). I thought that the whole idea was to get
rid of _all_ scratches (even the most minute) so that they won't provide a
place for stress to concentrate. Can someone enlighten me as to just how
much is enough?
Bill Pace
RV-6A #23878
Only about 12994 rivets and 10 years to go...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Assembling Elevator spar |
For anyone about to build their elevators, and had the foresight
to leave the skins of the horizontal stab untrimmed, I've discovered
that a slight deviation from the assembly order found in the
construction manual and in Frank Justice's instructions makes life
a little easier:
Fit the root rib and control horn to the spar, but don't rivet the
tip rib(s) to the elevator spar yet. Now, as per the construction manual,
trial-fit the elevator spar to the horizontal stab and locate the holes for
the rod-ends. With no tip rib in the way, you can get the elevator
spar right up next to the hinge brackets on the H.S., making this
process easy.
After locating the holes for the rod-ends, THEN mount the tip ribs.
BTW, for those on this list who may be just trying to decide whether
or not they want to build an RV: There is this almost indescribable
exhilaration when you mount two independantly-constructed assemblies
together (like the elevator and horizontal stab), and they FIT!
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 sn 23744
working on the elevators
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John H Henderson <John.H.Henderson(at)Eng.Auburn.EDU> |
I start flight training in two weeks -- only I'm not going to
end with a power-out landing -- I'm going to start with a power-out
take-off. I fell in with the local soaring club Saturday and discovered
that it was actually affordable to me! Maybe I'll solo and fly to Sun
'n' Fun...just kidding.
I decided that blowing my money on flight training was better use for
it now than starting construction on a plane. It'll be several years
before I'll start construction, though. (I'm a student trying
to finish a PhD) If anyone is interested, I'll make a deal on my
unused, less-than-a-year-old RV-6/6A plans (23687). (Although now that
Van's is going to start including plans with the kit components, I
don't know if anyone would want them.)
Looking forward to meeting everyone at Lakeland.
John Henderson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John H Henderson <John.H.Henderson(at)Eng.Auburn.EDU> |
| Subject: | Re: alodyne in fuel tanks |
> all kinds of vile stuff). Turns out the tanks had not been alodyned, and the
> ProSeal had not adhered. Then again, I don't know if the aluminum was cleaned
> or not when the ProSeal was applied. Anyhow, my very knowledgable buddies
> told me that alodyne was appropriate for ProSeal to grab onto, and so I did
> on the new tanks. No need to rough up the surface if you alodyne.
Are you sure that's alodyne and not alumiprep? I understand that Alumiprep
etches the surface, where alodyne does a chemical conversion.
John Henderson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: De-burrrring |
Text item:
> I'm using a single hole deburring tool
>that mounts in my cordless screwdriver. About one or two revolutions
>and I get a nice smooth hole. (I got it from Cleveland tools after
>they talked me into believing that it is superior to the three flute
>style - I do feel that it is a very good device).
I have been using the three-flute style all along and find that it won't always
get rid of the burrs unless you go fairly deep. It sometimes just makes a new
burr that sticks up. Is the one-hole bit better in that you don't have to
chamfer the hole as much?
> I don't exactly relish the thought of my HS rear spar
>working loose so I'm planning on adding about 8 rivets to each HS-409/HS-603
>inboard of the HS-412 brackets.
You won't have a problem with the rivets coming loose because of overchamfering
as much as it makes it harder to get a well-driven rivet. If the hole is
chamfered too much more of the rivet will be used up in filling the hole and
less will be left to form the shop head. You can compensate by using the next
larger rivet size but then there is more chance that they will bend over. This
is the same as the reason for using a #41 drill rather than a #40 for holes you
plan to dimple.
>But back to the issue of deburring, perhaps I am missing the point. Is it
>only necessary to debur the exit side of a drilled hole? Should I skip the
>entry side altogether?
You need to get the burrs off both sides; if you don't the bits of metal can
create stress points that can cause the skin to start cracking or they can
prevent two pieces of material from being forced together when riveted. To this
end, sanding rathere than rotary deburring is adequate. A reason for chamfering
is to prevent a burr from being scraped up from the rivet as it is being put in
and also to help the rivet align the two pieces of metal exactly. This only
requires chamfering on the rivet entry side, and only if you are not dimpling or
countersinking. Another reason for chamfering is to eliminate a sharp corner at
the shop head. This requires chamfering at the exit side.
>I seem to have spent an extraordinary amount of time
>smoothing the edges of metal parts until they have a very soft, smooth,
>satin-like finish. Am I going to far? I thought that the whole idea was to
>get
>rid of _all_ scratches (even the most minute) so that they won't provide a
>place for stress to concentrate. Can someone enlighten me as to just how
>much is enough?
In the Alclad material (skins and ribs and anything else that is shiny) there is
a layer of very soft aluminum a few thousanths of an inch thick. This scratches
very easily, but as long as the scratches don't get down into the harder
aluminum alloy underneath there is little likelihood of cracks forming as a
result. Scratches in Alclad look much worse than they really are. On your
external surfaces you do want to scotchbrite the whole thing and then sand out
any scratches you can still see. Otherwise, they will show through the paint.
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: De-burrrring
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 1995 03:16:55 -0500
4.1)
From: aol.com!WBPace(at)matronics.com
4.1)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
When I deburr a hole, All I'm interested in doing is removing
any burrs that stick up above the surface of the material --
burs that would prevent the rivet head from fully contacting
the surface, or would prevent two components from resting flush
against each other. I only deburr just enough to remove such
burrs. If I use a good sharp brill bit, then a very light
deburring is all that's needed.
Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 sn 23744
working on the elevators
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Assembling Elevator spar |
>Fit the root rib and control horn to the spar, but don't rivet the
>tip rib(s) to the elevator spar yet. Now, as per the construction manual,
>trial-fit the elevator spar to the horizontal stab and locate the holes for
>the rod-ends. With no tip rib in the way, you can get the elevator
>spar right up next to the hinge brackets on the H.S., making this
>process easy.
>
>After locating the holes for the rod-ends, THEN mount the tip ribs.
Great idea. Even after two years I can see how handy this would be.
Unfortunately, since I never wrote horizontal stabilizer instructions, I have no
way of telling people to leave the tips of the skins untrimmed.
We have a bunch of new builders in this area and they are all asking good
questions about how to build the stabilizers. There is still no way I can safely
write this up, so how about a volunteer for it? Although most people can muddle
through the stabilizers and rudders, some added assistance would really be good.
FKJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
Dave Barnhart said ***
"BTW, for those on this list who may be just trying to decide whether
or not they want to build an RV: There is this almost indescribable
exhilaration when you mount two independantly-constructed assemblies
together (like the elevator and horizontal stab), and they FIT!"
Well, I mated my wings and the fuselage for the -6A main gear
support drilling yesterday, and I fully agree (even more exiting with three
major independantly-constructed assemblies!!). Lots of help is needed,
and 7 local RV builders turned up in two shifts, working from 10:00am to
5:00pm.
Ken Scott's admonition "if something doesn't look right, it
probably isn't" is very true, and one wing went on and off 5 times clearing
up one minor interference at a time. Even a slight touching of the top of
the spar against the fuselage skin was enough to make it look as if one
wing was built with more incidence than the other. When all these minor
fit problems were fixed, then the rear spar fittings lined up identically
on each side.
The new pre-drilled gear legs make fitting the gear mounts
relatively easy, taking a lot of degrees of freedom out of the problem. I
didn't even use the angle iron to connect the axles, since there is no way
the toe-in can be adjusted. I just set the height of the axles above
(below?) the wing, and the axle distance aft from the spar face. with
clamps and enough hands, this was easy to set. A check with my SmartLevel
showed both axles to have the camber within 0.2 degrees of each other. I
had a #12 transfer punch bought from Boeing Surplus, and found this was an
ideal way of getting accurate holes. I transfer punched from the aft side
into the mount, removed the mount, punched again with an automatic center
punch, drilled # 50, drilled 3/16 with a Black and Decker "Bullet" drill,
and then reamed to #12. This seemed to give good holes.
I used a two diagonal holes, check, opposite diagonal holes, check,
then mark the rest of the holes, methodology. This means taking the gear
leg on and off many times, and all the helpers really made this easy.
A few things I found:
1. The rear spar fuselage cross brace is shipped oversize, and needs to be
trimmed in place to prevent the wings being forced into a 'sweep forward'
condition. When everything is just right, the aft spar fittings just rest
loosely in place.
2. A letter "D" drill is a tight fit for a AN4 bolt. Letter "D" is 0.246,
and AN4 is from 0.0246 to 0.249, my bolts measured on the high end.
Perhaps a slightly larger reamer is in order here.
3. Lots of help is good, other RV builders are interested in this step.
Two builders called back to ask if they could bring other builders.
4. I had to drop (as it sits up-side down) the outer edge of the left gear
mount a 1/16 inch to ensure equal camber, and get good bolt clearance on
the inner-most AN4 bolts.
5. The pre-drilled gear legs are wonderful.
6. The 1/16 'spacer' on the top side of the gear support (it compensates
for the thickness of the foward flange of the bulkhead for the outer 3 AN3
holes) was too short, and one punch-mark landed right on the edge of the
spacer. I still need to resolve what to do with this hole.
7. The fuselage skin needs some relief notches for the innermost spar
rivets. See revision R4 on the spar assembly drawing.
A QUESTION FOR -6A GUYS ONLY...
Access to the nuts for the bolts that attach the gear mounts on is
difficult. Suggestions include tack-welding nuts on, or floating nut
plates. Anyone else have any ideas, or know of any alternative methods to
plain nuts that have been implemented by other builders???
keep on building .....
Gil Alexander ... ready for the bottom fuselage skins
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Pre-punched skin report |
I've just finished drilling all the pre-punched skins for the first (left)
wing of my RV-6A. Other builders considering the pre-punched route might
be interested in my experience.
When you think about the implications of pre-punched skins, you quickly
realize that the accuracy of the spar/rib skeleton assembly is critical.
Since you can't move any of the holes in the skins, your spar and rib
flanges have to be in the right place.
Fortunately, the accuracy of the kit parts is impressive. The pre-drilled
holes in the spar that determine the rib locations were all right-on. I
carefully measured for the locations of all rib webs, clamped the
stiffener angles to the spar at those points and drilled for the AN3 bolts
that hold the angles to the spar. All the holes came out right in the
center of the stiffener angle flanges. Van's pre-punched skin instruction
sheet makes suggestions for handling mis-alignments here, but they were not
needed.
Drilling the main ribs to the rear spar offers another opportunity to
screw up. There are no pre-drilled holes in the rear spar to help
cross-check your measurements. I managed to let some small errors
creep in here and ended up with some rib webs not quite vertical with
respect to level flight orientation. The end result at assembly was
that some skin rivet holes in the wing walk area ended up closer to the
rib webs than I would have liked. Fortunately there was enough clearance
remaining that I could still get a flat-sided dimple die in next to the
web to dimple the rib flanges.
Another thing to look out for is sag in the center of the spar as it
sits in the jig. Make sure to brace under the center of the skeleton
and use the taut string method to make sure that the spar is absolutely
straight before attempting to apply any skins. Also plan on correcting
the rib fluting during the skin drilling process. For example, after
drilling the main skins to the spar, I marked through any hole onto the
main ribs where I couldn't see my flange centerlines. After removing
the skin I went at those places with fluting pliers and hand seamer to
try moving things into perfect alignment.
A minor problem I ran into that I couldn't blame on my own sloppy
technique was a hole along the trailing edge of the outboard top
skin which just nicked the edge of the flange on the W-607E rear
spar reinforcement (near the inboard aileron mount). Before I can
rivet this hole, I'll have to remove the W-607E and trim 1/4" off the
flange so it won't interfere with the shop head at that location.
Mounting the tank skin was the greatest test of the whole drilling
process but also the greatest triumph. Since all the other skins
are in place when the tank is drilled, any accumulated mis-alignments
have to be corrected if it is to fit well. I had the tank skin on and
off about 15 times as I fiddled with the size of the spacers behind
the tank baffle and filed the edges along the joints with the leading
edge and bottom skins. The ratcheting cargo straps that some builders
use for holding the leading edge skins down for drilling really paid
for themselves here. When I finally drilled, the lines of screw and
rivet holes along the rear tank baffle came out perfectly straight
and centered on the hidden spar flanges. Yes!
So, at this point, I'm pretty happy with the pre-punched skin option.
However, there are certainly pros and cons. There are several
points on the pro side: First, all my rivet lines are perfectly
straight with exactly even spacing. I know I would not have achieved
that level of perfection with a hand layout. All worry about rivet
layout and plans interpretation is eliminated. This was particularly
valuable when drilling the tank skin. The factory joggle around
the inspection hole is a nice touch that eliminates some assembly
complexity in that area and looks good. Finally, I'm sure I saved
a ton of time. Ie never built a wing any other way, and I'm
not really and "hour counter" anyway,
Pro's and Con's
Fluting template
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I'm gonna fly |
>
>
> I start flight training in two weeks -- only I'm not going to
> end with a power-out landing -- I'm going to start with a power-out
> take-off. I fell in with the local soaring club Saturday and discovered
> that it was actually affordable to me!
>
> John Henderson
>
Sounds like you fell for the old "gliders are cheep to fly" lie.
If they told you what it was going to cost, your head would spin around
several times and you would never start training. Look at it this way;
To fly airplanes of any kind you need the following things.
Powered Flight Gliders
Airplane 1 2 (glider and tow)
Fuel 1 1 (tow plane)
Pilot 1 2 (you & tow pilot)
Airport 1 (2 for X-country) 2 (TO & landing?)
X-country flight:
Chase Crew 0 1 (at least 1 person)
Chase Food 0 Lots
Chase Vehicle 0 1
Chase Fuel 0 Lots
I started flying in gliders. They're Fun, but not cheep. I'm by no
means trying to talk you out of flying gliders. Glider training will
make you a better pilot. Just don't go into it thinking that it will be
cheeper than powered flight. It's not. There is no cheep way to fly
except to high-jack or die and come back as a bird. The former doesn't
work very often and the there is no proof that the latter works at all.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Pre-punched skins [Again!] |
[ Sorry about the unfinished version of this posting that leaked out.
This is the completed message. - Dan ]
I've just finished drilling all the pre-punched skins for the first (left)
wing of my RV-6A. Other builders considering the pre-punched route might
be interested in my experience.
When you think about the implications of pre-punched skins, you quickly
realize that the accuracy of the spar/rib skeleton assembly is critical.
Since you can't move any of the holes in the skins, your spar and rib
flanges MUST be in the right place.
Fortunately, the accuracy of the kit parts is impressive. The pre-drilled
holes in the spar that determine the rib locations were all right-on. I
carefully measured for the locations of all rib webs, clamped the
stiffener angles to the spar at those points and drilled for the AN3 bolts
that hold the angles to the spar. All the holes came out right in the
center of the stiffener angle flanges. Van's pre-punched skin instruction
sheet makes suggestions for handling mis-alignments here, but they were not
needed.
Drilling the main ribs to the rear spar offers another opportunity to
screw-up. There are no pre-drilled holes in the rear spar to help
cross-check your measurements. I managed to let some small errors
creep in here and ended up with some rib webs not quite vertical with
respect to level flight orientation. The end result at assembly was
that some skin rivet holes in the wing walk area ended up closer to the
rib webs than I would have liked. Fortunately there was enough clearance
remaining that I could still get a flat-sided dimple die in next to the
web to dimple the rib flanges.
Another thing to look out for is sag in the center of the spar as it
sits in the jig. Make sure to brace under the center of the skeleton
and use the taut string method to make sure that the spar is absolutely
straight before attempting to apply any skins. Also plan on correcting
the rib fluting during the skin drilling process. For example, after
drilling the main skins to the spar, I marked through the skin holes onto
the main ribs anywhere I couldn't see my flange centerlines. After
removing the skin I went at those places with fluting pliers and hand
seamer to try moving things into perfect alignment.
A minor problem I ran into that I couldn't blame on my own sloppy
technique was a hole along the trailing edge of the outboard top
skin which just nicked the edge of the flange on the W-607E rear
spar reinforcement (near the inboard aileron mount). Before I can
rivet this hole, I'll have to remove the W-607E and trim 1/4" off the
flange so it won't interfere with the shop head at that location.
Mounting the tank skin was the greatest test of the whole drilling
process but also the greatest triumph. Since all the other skins
are in place when the tank is drilled, any accumulated mis-alignments
have to be corrected if it is to fit well. I had the tank skin on and
off about 15 times as I fiddled with the size of the spacers behind
the tank baffle and filed the edges along the joints with the leading
edge and bottom skins. The ratcheting cargo straps that some builders
use for holding the leading edge skins down for drilling really paid
for themselves here. When I finally drilled, the lines of screw and
rivet holes along the rear tank baffle came out perfectly straight
and centered on the hidden spar flanges. Yes!
So, at this point, I'm pretty happy with the pre-punched skin option.
However, there are certainly pros and cons. There are several
points on the pro side: First, all my rivet lines are perfectly
straight with exactly even spacing. I know I would not have achieved
that level of perfection with a hand layout. All worry about rivet
layout and plans interpretation is eliminated. This was particularly
valuable when drilling the tank skin. The factory joggle around
the inspection hole is a nice touch that eliminates some assembly
complexity in that area and looks good. Finally, I'm sure I saved
a ton of time. I can't say exactly how much, since I've never built
a wing any other way, and I'm not really an "hour counter" anyway.
Nevertheless, it was definitely worth the money paid.
On the con side, the pre-punched skins take away some of your options
to repair mistakes made earlier in the building process. If you
mount a rib off-center, or you start drilling before things are
perfectly square in the jig, you could be hosed. In an extreme case,
you might have to start over with a non-punched skin. Another issue
to consider is that single piece top skins are not available
pre-punched. I decided to go with the two-piece top skins both for
weight savings and so I could take advantage of the pre-punched option.
Anyway, with those minor reservations, I would recommend the pre-punched
option to any builder willing to pay a little more for faster and
easier wing assembly. If you're planning to "customize" anything,
(or just love drawing rivet layouts :-) you should stick with the
standard skins.
- Dan Benua
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)NtwkServ.MTS.MB.CA> |
| Subject: | Re: De-burrrring |
I wondered about that 10% chamfer rule myself. Certainly I have exceeded
it in the past, although I certainly have been a LOT more careful lately.
But think about a flush rivet between two dimpled skins: even without
deburring, the sides of the rivet hole are anything _but_ square. In
fact, the "example of good riveting" drawings I have seen show the 90
degree sharp edges of the skin directly against the rivet, yet the rivet
seems to "flow" into the gaps just fine when it is set. Wouldn't it do
the same thing with a deburred/chamfered hole?
Also, a guy at my builders club recently visited the Zenair factory. He
said the guys there deburr holes by rubbing the sheet metal with some kind
of scouring stone! This is apparently the standard technique for
production aircraft. Is this so? It sure would be quick, but obviously
would leave sharp corners on the holes, which is bad, isn't it?
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)NtwkServ.MTS.MB.CA> |
| Subject: | Spar Rivets Finally Seated...but... |
Well, I spoke too soon last time. I eliminated the factory head gap by
resetting the head, but when I checked the _shop_ head, I now had a gap
there!
So, I reset the shop head, and now I finally had a properly seated rivet.
But - The shop heads were now slightly overdriven. They were under the
1/2 D limit by .001 to .010. About 6 rivets were affected. Now I was
really scared. I didn't sleep much last night. Called Van's today and
spoke with Tom who assured me that the spar is overbuilt enough that this
is no problem whatsoever. He also confirmed that a small smiley in a
rivet head is also no problem.
This raised an interesting point. We generally use go/no go criteria to
judge our workmanship i.e. either the rivet shop head has 1/2D of height,
or it is rejected. The reality is, of course, that an overdriven head is
weaker, but by how much? Someone figured out a long time ago what the
_optimal_ rivet head is, but I sure would like to know the relationship
between rivet strength and head size. I have often replaced less critical
rivets and ended up with an oversized hole and probably a weaker rivet
then the original poorly set one.
SPAR BUILDERS TAKE NOTE: I used a piece of wood under my Avery
tool to protect my concrete floor, as advised by Bob Orendorf in his
video. Van's does not recommend putting anything between the Avery tool
and the floor. Tom felt that the "bounce" caused by the wood created my
original problem. A piece of steel or nothing at all is recommended.
Sleep should come easier tonight...
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Busick <rbusick(at)nmsu.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: I'm gonna fly |
Chris Ruble stated there is no cheap way to fly. I started fyling Hang
Gliders at the beach on a section six miles long, 150 feet high sand
dunes. Cost was $1000 for instruction and $3000 for a Glider and
equipment. Total investment was about $5000-6000 and I have about 500+
hours, I flew for about $10.00 an hour and I still own the glider and
equipment. Flying the ridge I was able to get about 500 feet high, 50+ mph
and flew for two to three hours nonstop, quit the flight because I got
bored. The beach was about 15 miles from home. This is about the
cheapest flying I have experienced. Good training for engine out
emergency landings, you learn not to panic.
However when flying cross country in the mountains the cost went up
significantly, even needed oxygen! Mountain flying easily cost me $30-40
an hour. The highest I have flown as pilot was in a Hang Glider
about 15000+ feet!
May the thermals be with you
Bob Busick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
| Subject: | Re[2]: De-burrrring & Special Offer |
Guys ... I seem to have started this thread by quoting the MIL spec. I
will copy some sections below:
3.2.1 Rivet holes
3.2.1.1 Drilling
Oversize, obolong and irregular-shaped holes shall be cause
for rejection. Rivet holes shall be drilled in accordance with the
following requirements:
a. All holes shall be drilled normal (at 90 degrees) to the working
surface.
b. Extreme pressure shall not be applied and holes shall not be
punched through with the drill.
c. When drilling through more than one sheet, hold the sheets
securely together so there is no misalignment of holes due to shifting or
spearation (sic) of the sheets.
...
...
3.3 Installation
3.3.1 Clean mating surfaces.
Before parts are riveted together, all chips, burrs and
foreign material shall be removed from the mating surfaces. Burrs may be
removed from rivet holes by chamfering to a depth not to exceed 10% of the
stock thickness, or 0.032 inch, whichever is less. Disassembly after
drilling and before riveting, in order to deburr faying surfaces, shall not
be required.
**** end of spec portion ****
Note that sharp edges are apparently OK, and a rep. from Allfast
Fasteners, maker of Cherry-type structural rivets, actually complained that
homebuilders use a chamfering tool. Apparently, in a production stting,
with the precise tool settings needed to set some of these pull-type rivets
to get a perfectly flush surface, any hole chamfers make the inner stem not
sit flush with the surface of the rest of the rivet.
The key here is probably to deburr, but not with the adjective
"aggresively".
SPECIAL OFFER (Blue Light Special):--- If you send me a large Self
Adressed Envelope, I will send you a copy of this MIL Spec. It's 8
double-sided pages, and well worth the reading.
Gil Alexander
4434 Stewart Av.
Los Angeles, CA 90066
... there's 13,000 of them, let's get them right ... Gil
>I wondered about that 10% chamfer rule myself. Certainly I have exceeded
>it in the past, although I certainly have been a LOT more careful lately.
>But think about a flush rivet between two dimpled skins: even without
>deburring, the sides of the rivet hole are anything _but_ square. In
>fact, the "example of good riveting" drawings I have seen show the 90
>degree sharp edges of the skin directly against the rivet, yet the rivet
>seems to "flow" into the gaps just fine when it is set. Wouldn't it do
>the same thing with a deburred/chamfered hole?
>
>Also, a guy at my builders club recently visited the Zenair factory. He
>said the guys there deburr holes by rubbing the sheet metal with some kind
>of scouring stone! This is apparently the standard technique for
>production aircraft. Is this so? It sure would be quick, but obviously
>would leave sharp corners on the holes, which is bad, isn't it?
>
>Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark60195(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: I'm gonna fly |
John Henderson writes:
>> fell in with the local soaring club Saturday and discovered
>> that it was actually affordable to me!
Chris responded:
>Sounds like you fell for the old "gliders are cheep to fly" lie.
>If they told you what it was going to cost, your head would spin >around
several times and you would never start training.
I don't think I'd ever discourage anyone from any kind of flying
but I have to agree with Chris. Soaring is great but not inexpensive
by any means. I started a glider "add-on" and found myself paying
over $100/hr for an ASK-21, instructor and a couple tows per hour!
Note that's not logged hours, depending where your located, you
will be lucky to log 30-40 minutes of flight time per hour. Your initial
flights usually won't last more than 15 minutes each and
thats gonna take a lot of flights before you get to solo and longer
before your flights get significantly longer. More power to you if
you decide to fly gliders but if economy is a factor I think some time
in a C-152 is a much better bargin.
- Mark Lakomski
Hoffman Estates, IL
( starting a Sonerai,
with
a RV-6 following )
So how long till Van's develops a glider to help get rid of some
of the horribly overpriced plastic dominating the soaring market?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | auer(at)teleport.com (Dell Auer) |
GREETINGS, I have just joined the rv list and would like to introduce myself
to you. My name is Dell Auer and I live in Portland, OR. Im retired
Military after 23 years. I have been flying since 1964, never in my own
plane. Saw a rv6 being built in Veneta OR. and fell in love. Im 46 years
old and love to fly and use my hands, why not combine the two. Have not
purchased any thing as of yet, but in time. I would love to hear from any
and all of you out there on the net.
THANKS, D Auer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Fried" <t42444(at)theo.dehavilland.ca> |
The name game as I know it goes something like this;
RV-6 Tailwheel
RV-6a Nosewheel
RV-6b Van's yellow technology demonsrator
RV-6f Floats (not from Van)
RV-6t Van's red demonstrator
RV-6_ Do you know of any others?
I dropped a note on the list the other week related to my favourite variety
of cooked elephant. It was signed with my name and type of RV-6 that I
was building. I used RV-6t to identify it as having a tapered wing.
Since writing this I remembered Van's red demonstrator and have to
come up with something new.
In dealing with Transport Canada I am calling it an original design.
This will allow me to set the gross weight and other limitations.
David Fried
DF-6 C-____
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
************************************************************************
* Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my own and are independent *
* of my employer. *
************************************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dx406(at)cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Lou Haas) |
| Subject: | Re: I'm gonna fly |
Looking for a ride from LA area airports TOA or HHR to Sun 'nFun.
If you or someone you know needs a paying passenger that can help
with the flying chores, give me a holler. Thanks.
Lou Haas, AOPA 215394
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Remi <Remikhu(at)cris.com> |
| Subject: | RV-4 Wing: Rear Spar Construction |
Hello forum audience,
This is my initial posting since signing on, and I may be
repeating a previously discussed item. An apology is extended beforehand
if applicable.
Starting construction of the left wing's rear spar, I have found
F. Justice's manual more comprehensive than Van's Aircraft.
Understandably, it is oriented for the RV-6 builder.
In the rear spar section of his manual, Mr. Justice mentioned the
need for a "notch" on the root doubler plate of the rear spar with the
citing of Van's plan revision number. Since neither I or Steve (another
active RV-4 builder) have seen any revision for the -4. It has been
foremost in my mind; therefore, I am putting this onto the floor for
comments. Will this doubler plate require a notch for the fuselage skin
fitting? (RV-4)
SIDE BAR:
========
I reside in Long Beach and the project is hangared at Comptom
Airport (CPM). Thus far in my building adventure, I have met only a
handful of local builders. 2 others at CPM, of which 1 has completed his
projected. Does anyone know of a 'Builder Group' in the Greater Los
Angeles area? I don't mean an EAA chapter...
Thanks in advance for any information to clarify the rear spar
conceern and for the local builder group contact.
Regards,
Remi
-= RV-4 S/N:3751 =-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | auer(at)teleport.com (Dell Auer) |
GREETINGS, Let me introduce myself; I found out about this group from the
www, and was interested in what you all talk about. Extremely informative
group. My name is Dell Auer, I live in Portland OR. Im 46 and retired from
the navy(black shoe). I learned to fly in North Bend Or. (OTH) in 1964,
washed and gassed Planes inorder to pay for flight time. Joined the Navy in
1966 and stopped flying til 1974 when I returned from Viet Nam and sea duty.
Then got married bought house had kids and flying went out the window. I
have always dreamed about owning my own plane, but the cost was out of
reach. I have looked at home built aircraft before, but did not think I had
the experence or the knowledge to put one together. I look at one in a
garage in Venetia Or. a couple of months ago and was hooked. I went out to
North Plaines and went through Vans' plant, I was impressed. Im planning on
building the 6 or 6a in the near furture. I want to thank you all for
getting off of my --- and getting with the program.
thanks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-4 Wing: Rear Spar Construction |
Text item:
> In the rear spar section of his manual, Mr. Justice mentioned the
>need for a "notch" on the root doubler plate of the rear spar with the
>citing of Van's plan revision number. Since neither I or Steve (another
>active RV-4 builder) have seen any revision for the -4. It has been
>foremost in my mind; therefore, I am putting this onto the floor for
>comments. Will this doubler plate require a notch for the fuselage skin
>fitting? (RV-4)
The aforementioned notch is only applicable to the RV-6, and even then is not
always necessary; just depends on whether or not small errors accumulated in a
particular direction. The fuselage shape in this area in the RV-4 is somewhat
different from what it is in the -6. None of the -4 builders I asked around here
had any trouble getting their wings on in this area.
FKJ
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: RV-4 Wing: Rear Spar Construction
From: Remi <cris.com!Remikhu(at)matronics.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 1995 04:04:40 -0500 (EST)
4.1)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: RV-4 Wing: Rear Spar Construction |
Remi wrote:
> In the rear spar section of his manual, Mr. Justice mentioned the
> need for a "notch" on the root doubler plate of the rear spar with the
> citing of Van's plan revision number. Since neither I or Steve (another
> active RV-4 builder) have seen any revision for the -4. It has been
> foremost in my mind; therefore, I am putting this onto the floor for
> comments. Will this doubler plate require a notch for the fuselage skin
> fitting? (RV-4)
I'm building a -6 and haven't gotten to the fuselage fitting yet, but
as I remember, the notch in the rear wing spar root is "only as necessary"
for clearance with fuselage parts when fitting. Accordingly I've marked
for the notch but don't plan to cut it until/unless it's needed. I
would guess that the rev doesn't apply to the -4, but if it is you
don't have to do it yet anyhow.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Busick <rbusick(at)nmsu.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Spar Rivets Not Seated? |
What is the standard for rivets with smileys, can you live with them of do
they need to be replaced.
Bob Busick
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rbibb(at)fore.com (Richard Bibb) |
| Subject: | Re: RV-4 Wing: Rear Spar Construction |
>>
>>> In the rear spar section of his manual, Mr. Justice mentioned the
>>>need for a "notch" on the root doubler plate of the rear spar with the
>>>citing of Van's plan revision number. Since neither I or Steve (another
>>>active RV-4 builder) have seen any revision for the -4. It has been
>>>foremost in my mind; therefore, I am putting this onto the floor for
>>>comments. Will this doubler plate require a notch for the fuselage skin
>>>fitting? (RV-4)
>>
>
>
>I found that the intersection of my wings and fuselage (RV-4) had an
>interference problem despite the fact both were built according to the
>plans (at least the plans for S/N 1187 bought in mid-1985).
>
>The interference was from the top of the flap actuator horn and the side
>skin/seat rib of the fuselage. Basically the angle of the angle the flap
>actuator horn is mounted to the flap root end was not sufficient to
>accomodate the dihedral angel of the wings. I had to modify (read remove
>some material from) the horn to eliminate the interference. Critical to
>this fit are: Wing dihedral angle, wing for-aft sweep (should be none),
>and angle of the root rib on the flap that it attaches to the flap spar.
>
>My plans said to cut 1/4" off the top of the spar to creat the correct rib
>attach angle if memory serves correctly. On my plane it could have been
>closer to 1/2" such that the actuator horn traveled in parallel to the
>fuselage skin throughout the flap actuation. I checked everything and
>there were no obvious goofs in any of the components construction.
>
>My advise is to somehow check this area before you complete construction
>of the root end of the flap.
>
>This is off the track from the original post but concerns similar issues.
>
>Richard Bibb
>RV-4 N144KT (fly this summer!!??)
>
Richard E. Bibb TEL: (301) 564-4404
Federal Program Manager PAGE:(800) 719-1246
Navy and Civilian Programs FAX: (301) 564-4408
FORE Systems
6500 Rock Spring Drive, Suite 444 rbibb(at)fore.com
Bethesda, MD 20817
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Fried" <t42444(at)alvin.dehavilland.ca> |
Thank you for your interest Curt. I hope that the following helps.
>Dave, perhaps you could clarify this issue. The TC documents gave me the
>impression that any builder could set the gross weight. Is there any
>reason NOT to declare the airplane an original design? I would certainly
>like to bump the GVW up to 1700 lbs or so. Van's have offered to provide
>a letter to the effect that 1700 lbs is acceptable (as I believe they did
>with the float conversion).
The paperwork required to licence an amature-built in Canada starts
with a letter to Transport Canada stating your intention to build. The
details reqiured in this letter are fairly general. It serves to initiate
the process and arrange a schedule for the required inspections. The
gross weight of the aircraft is established during one of these and is
based on the designer's recommendation and the requirements of AMA 549.
If you have a letter from the designer and 549 is met, then it may
be accepted in place of previous weight limitations.
Al Ludford was with the Air Beetle project in Nigeria for a while.
He tells me that they are operating at 1800 pounds on a wing that is
little different from the standard RV-6. Local builder Dan Burns is
trying to help Gord Baxter increase the gross weight on his -6 which
has been flying for some time now. If you already have the letter from
Van increasing gross weight, may I have a copy for them?
>Incidentally, what load factor limit have you designed into your wing? I
>imagine the added span will result in either added structural weight, or
>a reduced strength.
When I was designing my wing I started with the standard -6 wing and
worked backward to check the stress levels that the designer used. I
then resized as required to accomodate the taper and a gross weight of
1800 pounds at aerobatic load factors. Despite the span increase, the
aerodynamic centre is within three inches of that of the standard wing.
Bending moments at the root are not significantly different.
Tapering the wing offers structural efficiency. Considering that the
area has been reduced as well, I expect a slight weight reduction. At
least on paper. I don't expect to operate at the weights that the wing
has been designed for. Whatever the empty weight comes out to be, plus
600 pounds will be gross weight. I hope that this will be closer to
1700 than 1800 pounds. Take off three hundred pounds and that will be
the target weight for aerobatics.
>One final question: concerning aerobatic qualification of the RV-6, to my
>knowledge, the required engineering analysis has never been done for this
>aircraft. Van's have indicated to me that THEY aren't going to do it. The
>reason I ask is that I would consider doing it myself, if I could. I am
>an Electrical P.Eng but aircraft structures have become kind if a secondary
>interest of mine. I think I could handle any required math, but would I
>be way over my head in trying to learn and do this myself?
>
>Regards,
>Curt Reimer
If you wanted to learn how to do a stress analysis of the RV-6, math is
not your biggest challenge. The design cases and aerodynamic loads need
to be carefully considered. Amongst the members of our little group there
are a number of engineers, some with aerospace backgrounds. Maybe we could
get together and produce a design analysis.
Dan Burns is a new member lurking on this list. He has some information
on RV-6 aerobatic certification in Canada. I will see if I can get him to
post it.
David Fried
RV-6T C-____
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
************************************************************************
* Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my own and are independent *
* of my employer. *
************************************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
| Subject: | more on plastic vs metal: Shocking |
Just got my latest AOPA Pilot mag. and it has an article on the
Glasair III LP. LP is for Lightning Protection!
It turns out you have to pay an additional $11,500.00 for the LP
add on kit. This adds all the metal mesh in the skins, etc. to
solve the lightning problems that plastic airplanes have.
This also adds 60 to 70 pounds of extra weight.
In addition, the speed is down several knots (they did not measure it)
due to the fact that with LP you have to mount the antenna's on
the outside of the plane. Gee, there goes another advantage down the drain.
So, add this to your list of advantages for an all metal RV!
Maybe Van can offer a LP add on kit for the RV's and charge $0.00 for it
and claim no weight gain and no speed loss.
Several other 'features' of glass planes are:
-Don't have to worry about what color to paint it; white, white, or white.
-You get to put a placard on the panel that says do not fly aerobatics
if the spar temp is over 115 degrees (or some number close to this).
The Extra 300's have such a placard as the glass spar looses strength
as the temp goes up and so you may not be able to do aerobatics if you
leave the plane on the ramp on a hot summer day.
--------------------------------------------------------
*NOTICE for internet mail*: Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my
own and are independent of my employer.
Herman Dierks, Dept. E54S, AWSD Austin, Texas
mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Reversed fuel gauge |
OK, well I got this nice dual fuel gauge that I want to put in my panel.
Trouble is it reads backwards. It must be one of those that responds to
high resistance when empty (or is it the other way around)
Anyway, apart from tearing my senders out and inverting them (if this is
at all possible) I thought I'd try and hack together a small circuit to
invert the signal. If it was a voltage signal this would be easy, but the
gauges work by putting the sender in series to ground, not an easy thing to
fiddle with.
Does anyone have any suggestions
Ken RV-6A (with Air Beetle gearlegs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Re: more on plastic vs metal: Shocking |
> -You get to put a placard on the panel that says do not fly aerobatics
> if the spar temp is over 115 degrees
Gee that would rule out acro out here in Arizona about half the year.
The annual sidewalk eggfry contest in Oatman didn't go very well
last year. The temperature only hit 116 that day.
Regards,
Dave Barnhart
Thank God for the summer heat, or the
snowbirds would be here all year.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JIM SCHMIDT <JIM.SCHMIDT(at)mail.mei.com> |
| Subject: | Re: more on plastic vs metal: Shocking -Reply |
Regards,
Dave Barnhart
Thank God for the summer heat, or the
snowbirds would be here all year.
Boy, I'll second that. I'm up to my
eyeballs in snowbirds here in Florida. Of
course it will be 78 dergrees today. Just
right for working on RV6 wings.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | PTidball(at)aol.com |
Remi asked....
> Does anyone know of a 'Builder Group' in the Greater Los
> Angeles area? I don't mean an EAA chapter...
There may be an RV group closer, and I know you aren't looking for an EAA
Chapter, but you would be hard pressed to find more active RV projects in the
area than with EAA Chapter 448 based at Cable Airport... We have 11 members
with RV projects either flying or on the way....
If this sounds like shameless self promotion, it is! (I got volunteered to be
president this year.) We meet 2nd Fridays at Brackett airport Pilot's Lounge
at 8PM.
Paul Tidball
Luscombe 8A driver
RV4 wanna-be
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: more on plastic vs metal: Shocking |
> This adds all the metal mesh in the skins, etc. to
> solve the lightning problems that plastic airplanes have.
> This also adds 60 to 70 pounds of extra weight.
I got the feeling when reading the article that this is the
first step in converting the Glassair series into an all metal
airframe. I would guess the next step will be adding an Alclad
layer on the outside to reduce the effects of UV. Followed by
the removal of the plastic to save weight and reduce alergic
reactions during the building process.
> In addition, the speed is down several knots (they did not measure it)
> due to the fact that with LP you have to mount the antenna's on
> the outside of the plane. Gee, there goes another advantage down the drain.
Antenna's? It couldn't have anything to do with the extra 60-70 Lbs on
an already over-weight plane...could it?
>
> So, add this to your list of advantages for an all metal RV!
> Maybe Van can offer a LP add on kit for the RV's and charge $0.00 for it
> and claim no weight gain and no speed loss.
>
I thought that's what the "lightning holes" in the wing ribs were
for!!!????
Chris
RV-6-LP (Less Pounds)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Reversed fuel gauge |
>
> OK, well I got this nice dual fuel gauge that I want to put in my panel.
> Trouble is it reads backwards. It must be one of those that responds to
> high resistance when empty (or is it the other way around)
>
Can you just swap the leads on the back of the gauge? All the gauges
I have worked with have been simple magnet/coil/shunt type things.
Perhaps I,m missing something here?
>
> Anyway, apart from tearing my senders out and inverting them (if this is
> at all possible) I thought I'd try and hack together a small circuit to
> invert the signal. If it was a voltage signal this would be easy, but the
> gauges work by putting the sender in series to ground, not an easy thing to
> fiddle with.
>
Start your flights with the tanks empty and fly to fill them. This has
several advantages that I can think of....and, of course one disadvantage.
No, no, no...forget all of that... the answer is to fly inverted when you
want an accurate reading. Or tell your passengers that the gauges indicate
"fuel used".
What ever you find out, be sure to tell us what the answer was.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Reversed fuel gauge |
You bought the wrong part number guage is all. I bought the Westach dual
fuel and incorrectly measured my senders the first time. They had no
problem exchanging for the correct unit (you ARE talking about the
Westach unit, I hope).
Just carefully ohm-out the senders (full and empty), write down the
values, and call Westberg mfg. They can tell you which model you need,
no need to waste time/effort building an 'adapter'.
I seem to recall that empty is 2xx ohms, full is 'about' 30 ohms? They
have a unit that works.
dw N790DW RV-6 (check it out on the cover of the latest Optional parts
catalog! Van's just got em yesterday).
OK, well I got this nice dual fuel gauge that I want to put in my panel.
Trouble is it reads backwards. It must be one of those that responds to
high resistance when empty (or is it the other way around)
Anyway, apart from tearing my senders out and inverting them (if this is
at all possible) I thought I'd try and hack together a small circuit to
invert the signal. If it was a voltage signal this would be easy, but the
gauges work by putting the sender in series to ground, not an easy thing to
fiddle with.
Does anyone have any suggestions
Ken RV-6A (with Air Beetle gearlegs)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Fried" <t42444(at)theo.dehavilland.ca> |
| Subject: | Aerobatic approval |
Good news for Canadians interested in Aerobatics.
> Curt Reimer
>> Dan Burns is a new member lurking on this list. He has some information
>> on RV-6 aerobatic certification in Canada. I will see if I can get him to
>> post it.
Dan is going to lurk for a while longer so I will pass on what he dug up.
Transport Canada is planning to amend its rules regarding aerobatic
certification of homebuilt designs. If the design is approved for aerobatics
in the U.S. and the applicant's aircraft is built to plan, then a Canadian
approval will be granted. Apparently the paperwork has been completed on this
change and the regulations are due to be released this summer. Watch for it
in your A.I.P.
> Note that I don't intend to operate regularly at a high GW, I just want
> the ability to carry big people in the plane for an occaisional ride.
One of the problems that comes with increasing the gross weight is ground
loads.
The aircraft may have the performance to deal with the weight once airborne,
but not be able to land at the take off weight. The RV-6 is a capable
performer, but I have been hearing about loose rivets at the firewall and
elongating bolt holes at the gear legs. I think that it would be wise to
be conservative about how much extra you want to carry.
> Well done. But is the aerodynamic centre of the (deflected) aileron further
> outboard with the tapered wing, thus increasing bending moment with
> control deflection? Or does one need to reduce control throw to limit the
> maximum applied forces?
The longer moment arm was good for roll power but bad for bending moments.
Fortunately the aileron area is reduced which offsets this. Long wings
are bad for roll power but this is offset by taper ratio which is good.
There are a bunch of other factors to consider regarding torsion and control
deflection, each with trade offs. As near as I can figure, the roll
performance
of the new wing should be similar to the original. I appreciate your interest,
the issue of lateral control is one of the most interesting challenges I had
to face.
David Fried
DF-6 C-____
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
************************************************************************
* Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my own and are independent *
* of my employer. *
************************************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: more on plastic vs metal: Shocking |
Yes, it IS fun to poke at the 'plastic' airframe types. But aside from all the
real or imagined differences between ALL types of construction, the one thing I
have to say is that, I don't care WHAT it's made out of, there isn't anything
else out there (that I know of anyway) that has the flight characteristics of my
RV-6. PERIOD.
THAT is why the -6 is my first choice (of course the -4 is as good or slightly
better, but that is basically the same design). The others just have too many
limitations.
dw
> This adds all the metal mesh in the skins, etc. to
> solve the lightning problems that plastic airplanes have.
> This also adds 60 to 70 pounds of extra weight.
I got the feeling when reading the article that this is the
first step in converting the Glassair series into an all metal
airframe. I would guess the next step will be adding an Alclad
layer on the outside to reduce the effects of UV. Followed by
the removal of the plastic to save weight and reduce alergic
reactions during the building process.
> In addition, the speed is down several knots (they did not measure it)
> due to the fact that with LP you have to mount the antenna's on
> the outside of the plane. Gee, there goes another advantage down the drain.
Antenna's? It couldn't have anything to do with the extra 60-70 Lbs on
an already over-weight plane...could it?
>
> So, add this to your list of advantages for an all metal RV!
> Maybe Van can offer a LP add on kit for the RV's and charge $0.00 for it
> and claim no weight gain and no speed loss.
>
I thought that's what the "lightning holes" in the wing ribs were
for!!!????
Chris
RV-6-LP (Less Pounds)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Chandler <mauser(at)claris.com> |
| Subject: | Re: more on plastic vs metal: Shocking |
Chris Ruble says:
> I got the feeling when reading the article that this is the
> first step in converting the Glassair series into an all metal
> airframe. I would guess the next step will be adding an Alclad
> layer on the outside to reduce the effects of UV. Followed by
> the removal of the plastic to save weight and reduce alergic
> reactions during the building process.
Hmmm, this turns last month's question around. Instead of asking what would
happen if you built an RV out of plastic, what would you get if you built a
Lancair or Glassair out of Aluminum?
--
"Wait a minute, you expect us innocent children to climb up dangerous
scaffolding and paint naked people all over a church? We'll do it!!"
-- Yakko Warner, Animaniacs
"Yeah, I've got ADD, you wanna make something of.... oooh, cool. Look!"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | re:reversed fuel gauge |
> Start your flights with the tanks empty and fly to fill them. This has
> several advantages that I can think of....and, of course one
disadvantage.
> No, no, no...forget all of that... the answer is to fly inverted when you
> want an accurate reading. Or tell your passengers that the gauges
indicate
>"fuel used".
Good ideas, but
a: I don't have an inverted oil system so I'd only get about 30 seconds to
read it
b: I already have a fuel used indicator in my fuel computer.
I could always install the gauge upside down!! naw
>You bought the wrong part number guage is all. I bought the Westach dual
>fuel and incorrectly measured my senders the first time. They had no
>problem exchanging for the correct unit (you ARE talking about the
>Westach unit, I hope).
Actually I didnt buy it, its out of a Nigerian Air Force Bulldog and
measures in U.K. galls.
I tried to buy a dual Westberg gauge from Spruce, but the one they sent me
was a capacitance type...no damn good on a resistive sender. I didn't know
they had a variety..I'll give them a call.
BTW, my senders measure 0 ohms empty and 250 ohms full.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
| Subject: | Re: re:reversed fuel gauge |
>
>
>>You bought the wrong part number guage is all. I bought the Westach dual
>>fuel and incorrectly measured my senders the first time. They had no
>>problem exchanging for the correct unit (you ARE talking about the
>>Westach unit, I hope).
>
>Actually I didnt buy it, its out of a Nigerian Air Force Bulldog and
>measures in U.K. galls.
>
>I tried to buy a dual Westberg gauge from Spruce, but the one they sent me
>was a capacitance type...no damn good on a resistive sender. I didn't know
>they had a variety..I'll give them a call.
>
>BTW, my senders measure 0 ohms empty and 250 ohms full.
>
>Ken
Ken ... see this old post from me ... and comments after ...
***** start old post - from May 1994 *********************
I took my sender from Van's, and measured it's resistance
vs. angle after adjusting the end stops to 33 and 240 ohms.
I found it to be non-linear, with a greater resistance change vs.
angle at high resistance (Full). This gives it a greater sensitivity near
Empty which is good. Approximate readings are as follows (angle was a bit
hard to measure accurately .. is probably +/- 1.5 degrees).
Ohms Angle
33 0
63 8
87 18
106 28
132 38
161 48
208 58
243 67
I then took a WESTACH Dual Fuel Gauge #2DA4 ($62 from Aircraft
Spruce) and wired it to two variable resistors, and simulated the fuel
sender from the above resistance curve. I also translated the readings to
sender float angle.
Ohms Reading Angle (degrees)
241 EMPTY 0
164 1/4 19
106 1/2 39
67 3/4 57
33 FULL 67
This was done at 12.3 VDC supply (the battery from my Terra
handheld), and to check supply sensitivity, I added 3 volts to make 15.3
VDC, and could see NO change in the meter reading anywhere in the range.
This is better than most direct reading guages (the Westach has internal
electronic circuitry, unlike Vans single tank guages).
Conclusions,
The Westach #2DA4 dual gauge will work with Van's senders, in
spite of the catalog warnings to only use the same brand sender.
The gauge looks like an Aircraft 2 1/4 inch instrument instead of
an automobile type, and should save space on the panel by showing both tank
fuel levels in one instrument.
The gauge reads the same over a wide range of supply voltages.
The gauge and Van's sender combination has more sensitivity in the
lower half of sender travel ... which is good for our application.
Full and Empty are indicated correctly if the sender is adjusted to
32-34 ohms and 235-245 ohms at the float arm limits.
Cost is not exorbitant.
Internal lighting is available cheaply.
Sometimes you get lucky!! My original intention was to build some
electronics to make this guage and Van's senders compatible.. none is
needed!
This is the way I am going to do my fuel indicator, with the gauge
mounted just above the fuel selector on a sub-panel (in place of the large
manual trim knob - I am going electric for elevator trim). I am also
thinking of low fuel warning lights next to the gauge driven by float
switches in the fuel tank access panel.
happy gauging ..... Gil Alexander #20701 RV6A
***** end old post *******************************************
Ken,
The Westach unit you need is the "2DA4", and the correct values for
resistance are 33 ohms (full) and 240 ohms (empty).
It sounds like your sender may be mis-adjusted at it's stops, and
also installed upside down, or it's of a standard not usually seen in the
US. Was this sender bought in the US, or did it come from Nigeria??
One option you could try is to use an automotive type sender
designed for a GM vehicle which uses 0 ohms (empty) and 90 ohms (full). A
140 ohm resistor (try 150 ohms first, since 150 is a standard value) across
the sender should make the end points correct. The only problem remaining
will be how linear the guage reads. You could run some tests like I did
above. I suggest just hooking up a GM-compatible fuel guage and trying it,
if the indications are OK then the problem is solved. Can you easily
change the sender???
The FAA only requires fuel indicating systems to be accurate at
empty - strange but true!
hope this helps ..... Gil Alexander, RV6A, #20701
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
Guys and gals,
..... just got back from the SSA (Soaring Society of America)
Convention in Reno, and Van was also an attendee.
Didn't get to talk to him, but do you think we can persuade his
next project to be a sailplane???
BTW .... there were more representatives of homebuilding in the SSA than I
have seen since the mid 70's. I guess the $70,000+ German sailplanes have
finally sparked a market for US kits.
... thermals can be better than HP for fun .... Gil Alexander, RV6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Chandler <mauser(at)claris.com> |
| Subject: | Re: re:reversed fuel gauge |
> The FAA only requires fuel indicating systems to be accurate at
> empty - strange but true!
"But Mr. Inspector, my fuel system DOES accurately indicate empty. When the
tanks are dry, the engine sputters out!"
:-)
P.S. When's the next Portland area RVators meeting? I haven't been to one
since that visit to Van's factory that impressed me so much.
--
"Wait a minute, you expect us innocent children to climb up dangerous
scaffolding and paint naked people all over a church? We'll do it!!"
-- Yakko Warner, Animaniacs
"Yeah, I've got ADD, you wanna make something of.... oooh, cool. Look!"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
| Subject: | Re: re:reversed fuel gauge (typo corrected) |
**** see typo below ***** Sorry -- Gil A. *****
**** old posting cut out *****
>
>Ken,
> The Westach unit you need is the "2DA4", and the correct values for
>resistance are 33 ohms (full) and 240 ohms (empty).
>
> It sounds like your sender may be mis-adjusted at it's stops, and
>also installed upside down, or it's of a standard not usually seen in the
>US. Was this sender bought in the US, or did it come from Nigeria??
>
> One option you could try is to use an automotive type sender
^^^^^^
******** SORRY --- I actually meant GUAGE ******
>designed for a GM vehicle which uses 0 ohms (empty) and 90 ohms (full). A
>140 ohm resistor (try 150 ohms first, since 150 is a standard value) across
>the sender should make the end points correct. The only problem remaining
>will be how linear the guage reads. You could run some tests like I did
>above. I suggest just hooking up a GM-compatible fuel guage and trying it,
>if the indications are OK then the problem is solved. Can you easily
>change the sender???
>
> The FAA only requires fuel indicating systems to be accurate at
>empty - strange but true!
>
>
> hope this helps ..... Gil Alexander, RV6A, #20701
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | re: reversed gauge |
Gil Alexander wrote
>Ken ... see this old post from me ... and comments after ...etc
Gil, thanks for the info. I had boo booed in my note. My senders actually
reads 43ohms full and 248 empty, so they are correctly orientated for North
American gauges. They're actually Isspros, bought from Van's...don't like
em much because I had to mod them to make them fit.
Anyway, I had bought the 2DA4 from Spruce, took it out of the box and
noticed it said capacitance senders, so sent it back!!!
I'm a bit reluctant to go and order it again, although your experience
sounds convincing. Trouble is now to land it in Canada costs another bundle
in tax and handling etc...oh well.
Just out of curiosity, does anyone else sell dual gauges? Does Westach have
one for resistance senders?
Ken
RV6-A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)NtwkServ.MTS.MB.CA> |
| Subject: | Rivet Relief Holes |
I have run into a couple of places on the wing where there doesn't seem
to be enough room for the specified 4-3 pop rivets. Specifically, on the
93.5 and 103.5 rib to spar flange joint. There isn't enough clearance
between the spar web and the reinforcement angle to allow the pop rivet
to seat properly. In the manual there is a photograph showing 1/4" or so
relief holes drilled in the angle. I have done this, but before I rivet
it all together, is there any other way? Also, the inboard rivet
attaching the flap brace to the rear spar has a similar clearance
problem. Do I drill a hole there as well?
It's strange that (other than the photo) no one mentions this - I checked
the manual text, the plans, the 14 years of RVator, FKJ's instructions
and the Orendorf video. Did I miss it?
But hey, installing the wing ribs is great fun - one night a pile of
parts, a couple of nights later it looks like a real wing!
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: reversed gauge |
As I said in my earlier posting, Westach makes one for the type(s) of senders
Van's uses. They make several models to handle different types of senders,
different resistance values. Call them and tell them those resistance values
and they will tell you which model you need. (2DA4 sounds awful familiar).
dw
Gil Alexander wrote
>Ken ... see this old post from me ... and comments after ...etc
Gil, thanks for the info. I had boo booed in my note. My senders actually
reads 43ohms full and 248 empty, so they are correctly orientated for North
American gauges. They're actually Isspros, bought from Van's...don't like
em much because I had to mod them to make them fit.
Anyway, I had bought the 2DA4 from Spruce, took it out of the box and
noticed it said capacitance senders, so sent it back!!!
I'm a bit reluctant to go and order it again, although your experience
sounds convincing. Trouble is now to land it in Canada costs another bundle
in tax and handling etc...oh well.
Just out of curiosity, does anyone else sell dual gauges? Does Westach have
one for resistance senders?
Ken
RV6-A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rivet Relief Holes |
Text item:
>I have run into a couple of places on the wing where there doesn't seem
>to be enough room for the specified 4-3 pop rivets. Specifically, on the
>93.5 and 103.5 rib to spar flange joint. There isn't enough clearance
>between the spar web and the reinforcement angle to allow the pop rivet
>to seat properly. In the manual there is a photograph showing 1/4" or so
>relief holes drilled in the angle. I have done this, but before I rivet
>it all together, is there any other way? Also, the inboard rivet
>attaching the flap brace to the rear spar has a similar clearance
>problem. Do I drill a hole there as well?
>
>It's strange that (other than the photo) no one mentions this - I checked
>the manual text, the plans, the 14 years of RVator, FKJ's instructions
>and the Orendorf video. Did I miss it?
In my instructions the 1/4" holes at the two ribs are covered early, during the
creation of the reinforcing angles. I don't remember for sure what I did at the
flap brace; I'll look tonight. I probably drilled the hole for the rivet first
and then drilled the 1/4" relief hole from the inside (the ribs are not there
until the final skin riveting in my sequence)
FKJ
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: Rivet Relief Holes
From: Curt Reimer <NtwkServ.MTS.MB.CA!Curt_Reimer(at)matronics.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 09:17:47 -0600 (CST)
1)
)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Fried" <t42444(at)alvin.dehavilland.ca> |
>Curt Reimer
>Regarding torsion, I am curious about the rear spar/fuselage attachment
>in the RV series. The single bolt in the fitting doesn't restrict
>movement of the rear spar about the longitudinal axis. In the case of
>wing flexing due to torsion (as created by aileron deflection) wouldn't a
>multi-bolt fitting at the rear spar root add some stiffness to the wing,
>as well as giving a bit of redundancy at this critical joint?
Wing loads at the root may be broken down into three components.
Lift creates a bending moment about the longitudinal axis of the
aircraft and shear vertically. These loads are reacted to primarily
by the main spar.
Torsion is a result of the lift centre of pressure being located
on the wing chord somewhere other than the main spar. Depending on
airfoil section this is usually aft of quarter chord. Additional
increments to torsion loads come from flap and aileron loads.
These are reacted to by a vertical load at the rear spar attach.
Drag loads create moments about the vertical axis and shear
horizontally. Shear is reacted to by the main spar. The moment is
reacted to by a horizontal load at the rear spar attach.
The main spar on this aircraft is a massive beam well suited to the loads
applied to it. A cantilever rear spar would not improve resistance
to torsion or drag loads. To strengthen it to the point where it
could react to a significant portion of wing bending loads would add a great
deal of weight.
The single bolt that holds the rear spar to the carry through structure
is not failsafe. I would expect that there is a healthy margin of safety
included in it's design. All you need to worry about is the nut coming
off.
I finally managed to wade through 2500+ postings in the archive file. Some
time ago somebody suggested that reflexing the flaps a few degrees trailing
edge up would reduce drag. This would work by reducing the pitching moment
generated by the wing and it's related trim drag. The airfoils used on the
Lancair and high performance gliders have the centre of pressure well back on
the chord producing high pitching moments. The RV's use a NACA 23013.5
section which is front loaded (near .25 chord). Reflexing the flap on this
aircraft probably won't do anything to drag. The lift would be reduced
requiring a higher angle of attack a cruise. Stall may also be different
if the stall angle of the reflexed section is much different from the regular
section out by the ailerons.
On the same subject, the Lancair has a lovely wing-fuselage fairing that
fairs the fuselage to the wing with the flap at zero degrees. If the flaps
were
reflexed at cruise, it would have made more sense to fair the fuselage to the
reflexed flap position. Considering the adjective that I used to describe
the fairing on the Lancair, you can figure that I want one on my aircraft.
Has anybody tried it?
David Fried
DF-6 C-____
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
************************************************************************
* Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my own and are independent *
* of my employer. *
************************************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RGS4%PClOs%PS(at)bangate.pge.com |
| Subject: | Gear Loads on RV-6. |
Dave Fried,
Just read your "Rear Spar Loads" E-mail, interesting info about the effect of
negative flaps. I've flown high performance sailplanes, but were not aware of
the theory involved.
What do you think of the design of the landing gear of the RV-6? Would it be
able to pass FAR 23 testing? I was looking over the plans and it seemed a bit
weak to the un-trained eye.
Thanks,
Dick Slavens
________________________________________________________________________________
I've been busy and haven't had time to do much else but save the rv-list
postings to a file, but I did catch one note discussing "non-corrosive" RTV.
Permatex makes one that can be found in almost any auto parts store. It's
called "Ultra Blue". I've seen it in both a 6oz. size and a regular caulking
tube.
The 6oz. is nice since we don't really use that much and it only costs 3 or
4 bucks. If you buy too much, it's been my experience that it doesn't last
more that 6 to 8 months after being opened. I used to buy a caulking tube in
the spring to do one small job or another on my boat, only to find is hard
and lumpy by fall.
Bob Neuner
bobn(at)ims.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
| Subject: | Re[3]: reversed gauge |
Don W.
I believe that Westach just made their capacitance sender look like
a Stewart Warner type resistive sender. That's what the potted electronics
on top of the sender probe do.
The 2DA4 is definitely the part I tested, in spite of the warning
in the Aircraft Spruce catalog that various senders are not
interchangeable. As I said earlier, there only seem to be three different
standards (at least in the US).
Ken,
Since the sender is actually installed the right way up, it is only
the end point that need adjusting (approx. 3 degrees more swing full, and
empty is probably OK) if you want to use a Stewart Warner compatible guage.
Do you want a loan of my guage for test purposes??? I probably won't
really need it for a year or two ......
I personally haven't seen any other manufacturers of dual guages.
.... keep measuring .... Gil Alexander
>As I said in my earlier posting, Westach makes one for the type(s) of senders
>Van's uses. They make several models to handle different types of senders,
>different resistance values. Call them and tell them those resistance values
>and they will tell you which model you need. (2DA4 sounds awful familiar).
>dw
>
>
>Gil Alexander wrote
>>Ken ... see this old post from me ... and comments after ...etc
>
>Gil, thanks for the info. I had boo booed in my note. My senders actually
>reads 43ohms full and 248 empty, so they are correctly orientated for North
>American gauges. They're actually Isspros, bought from Van's...don't like
>em much because I had to mod them to make them fit.
>
>Anyway, I had bought the 2DA4 from Spruce, took it out of the box and
>noticed it said capacitance senders, so sent it back!!!
>
>I'm a bit reluctant to go and order it again, although your experience
>sounds convincing. Trouble is now to land it in Canada costs another bundle
>in tax and handling etc...oh well.
>
>Just out of curiosity, does anyone else sell dual gauges? Does Westach have
>one for resistance senders?
>
>Ken
>
>RV6-A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TommyLewis(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | reply - rivet relief holes |
You got it right, you need to drill 1/4" holes in the angles so there is room
for the pop rivet to expand. I have not gotten to the flap brace, but did
you catch that flush rivets are needed in some locations on the rear spar?
Yes, it was great to put the ribs on the spar and have a wing, but the
downside is you have a wing, or in my case, two wings, setup for a long time,
because it takes a LONG time to complete the wings. On well, some day - Tom
---------------------------------------------
I have run into a couple of places on the wing where there doesn't seem
to be enough room for the specified 4-3 pop rivets. Specifically, on the
93.5 and 103.5 rib to spar flange joint. There isn't enough clearance
between the spar web and the reinforcement angle to allow the pop rivet
to seat properly. In the manual there is a photograph showing 1/4" or so
relief holes drilled in the angle. I have done this, but before I rivet
it all together, is there any other way? Also, the inboard rivet
attaching the flap brace to the rear spar has a similar clearance
problem. Do I drill a hole there as well?
It's strange that (other than the photo) no one mentions this - I checked
the manual text, the plans, the 14 years of RVator, FKJ's instructions
and the Orendorf video. Did I miss it?
But hey, installing the wing ribs is great fun - one night a pile of
parts, a couple of nights later it looks like a real wing!
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dralle (Matt G. Dralle 1+ 510-447-9886) |
| Subject: | RV-LIST Question... |
How have the email bounces when posting to the RV-LIST been? Nobody had
complained about it in quite a while. Is it possible that the changes I
made actually fixed the problem?
Thanks for the input,
Matt Dralle
RV-LIST Admin.
Matronics
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | holmes1(at)nwsca.att.com (Judson Holmes +1 708 224 2264) |
Hello,
My name is Jud Holmes and I am a Flyaholic. I began flying in 1981 at the ripe
age of 21. My first plane was an ultralight that I flew for about two years.
My second plane was a 'faster' ultralight (55mph instead of 45mph), which I
flew until last year. I then purchased a RANS (not Vans) S14, which is
classified as Experimental - the RANS will do about 100mph on 55 horsepower,
but will still fly slow enough that I can fly with other members of the flying
club that I'm in (mostly ultralight-type planes). I've been interested in RVs
for a few years, so I'm subscribing to the list. Realistically, I wont be in
the market for awhile (building a house), so I will probably be a silent
observer.
--------------------------
| - - - - | <
[]-| - - - - | > - - -
.====== | - - - ___ | Jud Holmes <
. /| / |~~~~~~~| judson.holmes(at)att.com > - -
. / | / __ | | <
.__________/ |==========| | | >
(_____________//==========-----^ | < - -
/ \ __________________________>
( ) ( )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | terrance.jantzi(at)canrem.com (Terrance Jantzi) |
A fellow RV builder has the following engine for sale.
Lycoming O-320 B2C
102 hours on factory overhaul (Dec 1993)
2102 TTSN (1990)
$US11000 or $CDN15500
This engine is ideally suited for an RV-3,4 or 6. It will not work in
its present form for an RV-6A due to the design of the sump. He will
box it and ship it anywhere. If interested call (519) 648-2044.
Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[4]: reversed gauge |
Gil, I thought we were talking about GUAGES to use with Van's resisitive
SENDERS. How did capacitance senders get involved? At any rate, I use a dual
Westach GUAGE with Van's resistance type Stewart Warner SENDERs, that have ABOUT
the same resistance measurements as Ken mentioned about his (43ohms full and 248
empty). Again, Ken, give Westberg a call and tell them what resistance values
your SENDERs have, and they can tell you what version of their dual guage to
order. (I know this will work, myself and many other RVs use Westach dual fuel
guages with Van's standard S-W/Isspro senders).
PS - Don't order it from them, it is cheaper from the catalog folks.
Don W.
I believe that Westach just made their capacitance sender look like
a Stewart Warner type resistive sender. That's what the potted electronics
on top of the sender probe do.
The 2DA4 is definitely the part I tested, in spite of the warning
in the Aircraft Spruce catalog that various senders are not
interchangeable. As I said earlier, there only seem to be three different
standards (at least in the US).
Ken,
Since the sender is actually installed the right way up, it is only
the end point that need adjusting (approx. 3 degrees more swing full, and
empty is probably OK) if you want to use a Stewart Warner compatible guage.
Do you want a loan of my guage for test purposes??? I probably won't
really need it for a year or two ......
I personally haven't seen any other manufacturers of dual guages.
.... keep measuring .... Gil Alexander
>As I said in my earlier posting, Westach makes one for the type(s) of senders
>Van's uses. They make several models to handle different types of senders,
>different resistance values. Call them and tell them those resistance values
>and they will tell you which model you need. (2DA4 sounds awful familiar).
>dw
>
>
>Gil Alexander wrote
>>Ken ... see this old post from me ... and comments after ...etc
>
>Gil, thanks for the info. I had boo booed in my note. My senders actually
>reads 43ohms full and 248 empty, so they are correctly orientated for North
>American gauges. They're actually Isspros, bought from Van's...don't like
>em much because I had to mod them to make them fit.
>
>Anyway, I had bought the 2DA4 from Spruce, took it out of the box and
>noticed it said capacitance senders, so sent it back!!!
>
>I'm a bit reluctant to go and order it again, although your experience
>sounds convincing. Trouble is now to land it in Canada costs another bundle
>in tax and handling etc...oh well.
>
>Just out of curiosity, does anyone else sell dual gauges? Does Westach have
>one for resistance senders?
>
>Ken
>
>RV6-A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Reichert" <reichera(at)clark.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New subscriber |
On 8 Mar 1995, Judson Holmes +1 708 224 2264 wrote:
> Hello,
>
> My name is Jud Holmes and I am a Flyaholic. I began flying in 1981 at the ripe
> age of 21. My first plane was an ultralight that I flew for about two years.
> My second plane was a 'faster' ultralight (55mph instead of 45mph), which I
> flew until last year. I then purchased a RANS (not Vans) S14, which is
> classified as Experimental - the RANS will do about 100mph on 55 horsepower,
> but will still fly slow enough that I can fly with other members of the flying
> club that I'm in (mostly ultralight-type planes). I've been interested in RVs
> for a few years, so I'm subscribing to the list. Realistically, I wont be in
> the market for awhile (building a house), so I will probably be a silent
> observer.
>
Hi, Jud. Welcome to the list! Even though your not in the market just
yet, I'm sure we can all help you with ideas on how to build the shop in
your house! :-) :-)
Take care!
- Alan
______________________
| Alan Reichert |
| reichera(at)clark.net |
|----------------------|
|The debate continues..|
| -6 or -6A |
|______________________|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Reichert" <reichera(at)clark.net> |
| Subject: | Airspeeds - Results? What Results? |
Hi, all!
Recall that last month I put out a survey on airspeeds of the -6 and -6A.
It failed miserably. I can count on one hand the responses I got, so
that won't tell much.
Thanks to all who did respond, though. I will just keep watching and
learning what I can for now.
Cheers!
- Alan
______________________
| Alan Reichert |
| reichera(at)clark.net |
|----------------------|
|The debate continues..|
| -6 or -6A |
|______________________|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Gear Loads on RV-6. |
Dick Slavens said:
>
> What do you think of the design of the landing gear of the RV-6? Would it be
> able to pass FAR 23 testing? I was looking over the plans and it seemed a bit
> weak to the un-trained eye.
I'll bet the RV-6 landing gear would pass FAR 23, just based on their
good history in the field. In fact, there was an incedent last summer
where a local RV-4 builder/pilot caught some windshear and slammed into
the ground hard enough to bend the motor mount and gear legs far enough
that one wheel pant dented the bottom of the tank. The throttle was
stuck on so he had to go right back into the air again. He flew to a
larger airport and landed there, and the gear had sprung back enough
that he was able to land it without much problem. Says a lot about the
crash integrity of the design, and in fact the FAA inspector who saw
the plane said he didn't think a spam can would have fared nearly as
well.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | REVERSED GAUGE..SOLVED! |
Gil, Don and Tom
Many thanks for all the valuable insight!!
I finally called Westberg, they said.."No problem", just call Spruce with
the resistance values and we'll send them one for you.
Job done, one's on order. Just wish I'd mentioned it here before I
ordered...wow, you're a helpful bunch.
Now the only hole left to cut in my panel is for the GPS 360....or ??????
That's ANOTHER story.
Thanks again guys.
Ken
RV6-A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Fried" <t42444(at)alvin.dehavilland.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Gear Loads on RV-6. |
>Dick Slavens
>What do you think of the design of the landing gear of the RV-6? Would it be
>able to pass FAR 23 testing? I was looking over the plans and it seemed a bit
>weak to the un-trained eye.
The gear on the RV-6 and 6a is a spring that starts at the fuselage side and
extends out, aft and down, all at the same time. To make things even more
interesting, the rubber meets the runway some distance off of the axis of the
leg. All this adds up to a design that probably does not maintain wheel
camber and toe-in as the gear flexes under load. I am concerned about tire
wear patterns and possible elongation of the bolt hole at the gear leg attach.
Does anybody have experience with these issues?
Randall Henderson's posting yesterday sure says a lot about the strength of
the landing gear on this design.
David Fried
DF-6 C-____
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
************************************************************************
* Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my own and are independent *
* of my employer. *
************************************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | terrance.jantzi(at)canrem.com (Terrance Jantzi) |
A question for those of you who are flying RV-6's. Have you found any
need for an adjustable rudder trim? I have built one similar to the
bias spring thing that Van's sells for the ailerons. Now I am having
second thoughts about installing it, especially if its not really
needed.
Terry Jantzi
RV-6 in progress
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: Gear Loads on RV-6. |
In my experience, the leg fits very snugly in the socket. Any load at all
during installation caused binding which prevented the leg from sliding far
enough in the socket to get the bolt in. This tells me that any load during use
will also cause binding which will prevent wear on the bolts. This same design
has been in use on the -3 and -4 for up to 20 years now (sure, they are slightly
different) and Van has not seen anything that is calling for a change to that
design, to my knowledge.
Another 'incident' occured where an RV-6 was purchased, the new owner immediatly
lost control on takeoff and ended-up sliding to a stop in the grass off the
runway, more or less sideways with minimal damage to a wing tip. The gear leg
on one side bent in the accident. A shop on the field helped remove the leg,
straightened it enough for the owner to re-install it and fly the thing home.
Not bad, I would say.
As for tire wear, I have 133hrs on my -6, almost all on pavement, and I expect
to make at least 200hrs before I need to consider turning my tires around. They
are wearing equally, at about 1/3 in from the outside, so I can just turn them
around and have new surface to run on.
don wentz, RV-6 N790dw
>Dick Slavens
>What do you think of the design of the landing gear of the RV-6? Would it be
>able to pass FAR 23 testing? I was looking over the plans and it seemed a bit
>weak to the un-trained eye.
The gear on the RV-6 and 6a is a spring that starts at the fuselage side and
extends out, aft and down, all at the same time. To make things even more
interesting, the rubber meets the runway some distance off of the axis of the
leg. All this adds up to a design that probably does not maintain wheel
camber and toe-in as the gear flexes under load. I am concerned about tire
wear patterns and possible elongation of the bolt hole at the gear leg attach.
Does anybody have experience with these issues?
Randall Henderson's posting yesterday sure says a lot about the strength of
the landing gear on this design.
David Fried
DF-6 C-____
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
************************************************************************
* Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my own and are independent *
* of my employer. *
************************************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rassp.hac.com!gil(at)matronics.com (Gil Alexander) (by way of gil(at)rassp.hac.com |
(Gil Alexander))
| Subject: | Special Offer - any takers?? |
OK guys,
I've only sent out two so far.
I've still got more copies at home and don't want to throw them
out, so print out this message, take it home (for those of you at work),
and send me a SASE for this informative specification.
See how the pros judge good and bad rivets, and only rework those
rivets that actually need it!
**** from Feb 27, 1995 - Referencing the MIL Spec for bucked rivets ****
SPECIAL OFFER (Blue Light Special):--- If you send me a large Stamped Self
Addressed Envelope, I will send you a copy of this MIL Spec. It's 8
double-sided pages, and well worth the reading.
Gil Alexander
4434 Stewart Av.
Los Angeles, CA 90066
... there's 13,000 of them, let's get them right ... Gil
For Non-USA countries:
I'll pay the postage to the first person that e-mails me a request,
as long as you promise to send copies to anyone else in your country who
requests one.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Reichert" <reichera(at)clark.net> |
Hey, all!
Looking through the latest Sport Aviation, I notice Van's ad now offers
"preview plans". Does this mean he no longer offers the full set by itself?
- Alan
______________________
| Alan Reichert |
| reichera(at)clark.net |
|----------------------|
|The debate continues..|
| -6 or -6A |
|______________________|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ault(at)netcom.netcom.com (Tami & Stan Ault) |
| Subject: | Re: New subscriber |
>> My name is Jud Holmes......(snip)... Realistically, I wont be in
>> the market for awhile (building a house), so I will probably be a silent
>> observer.
>>
>Hi, Jud. Welcome to the list! Even though your not in the market just
>yet, I'm sure we can all help you with ideas on how to build the shop in
>your house! :-) :-)
Hey Jud,
This is your big chance to be the first one on the RVList to have a house
with custom BUILT IN jigs and winghanger fixtures for an RV!!!
-- Stan
Tami & Stan Ault (ault(at)netcom.com)
Brentwood CA (Not the infamous one. The other one.)
________________________________________________________________________________
A. Reichert writes:
> Looking through the latest Sport Aviation, I notice Van's ad now offers
> "preview plans". Does this mean he no longer offers the full set by itself?
My understanding is that the "preview plans" are a complete set, but reduced
to a smaller size and possibly missing some of the latest corrections.
Currently Van's ships the full-size, up-to-date, plans in sections with
each kit (emp, wing, fuse, finish). The cost of the plans is included in
the kit price. That way you should always receive plans that match the parts
in your kit. I don't know if you can order full size plans without ordering
a kit, but I think Van's is trying to discourage that.
BTW, Bill Benedict (of Van's) was at the PDX builders group meeting last
evening. He revealed that all new RV-6 wing kits now include pre-punched
skins as a standard component. He also said that pre-punched skins for
the RV-4 wing would be available "soon".
- Dan Benua
RV-6A (wings in progress)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
| Subject: | Van's Plans (fwd) |
This was discribed in the last issue of the RVator.
The full plans will be sent out with each of the 4 sub kits.
You get the tail plans with the tail kit, wing plans with wing kit, etc.
You can still buy the full set if you want.
The 'preview' set is a smaller page drawing (19x24 or some such size)
that give you all the drawings but in a smaller form factor so you
can buy these if you want before you make the big purchase decision.
They are also handy for any builder and the full sheet plans are
kind of difficult to handle (IMHO).
Herman
> From: "A. Reichert" <clark.net!reichera(at)matronics.com>
> To: RV List
> Subject: Van's Plans
>
> Hey, all!
>
> Looking through the latest Sport Aviation, I notice Van's ad now offers
> "preview plans". Does this mean he no longer offers the full set by itself?
>
>
> - Alan
--
--------------------------------------------------------
*NOTICE for internet mail*: Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my
own and are independent of my employer.
Herman Dierks, Dept. E54S, AWSD Austin, Texas
mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com VM: DIERKS at AUSVM6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | holmes1(at)nwscc.att.com (Judson Holmes +1 708 224 2264) |
>>> My name is Jud Holmes......(snip)... Realistically, I wont be in
>>> the market for awhile (building a house), so I will probably be a silent
>>> observer.
>>>
>>Hi, Jud. Welcome to the list! Even though your not in the market just
>>yet, I'm sure we can all help you with ideas on how to build the shop in
>>your house! :-) :-)
>
>Hey Jud,
>
>This is your big chance to be the first one on the RVList to have a house
>with custom BUILT IN jigs and winghanger fixtures for an RV!!!
Actually, after reading some material on how many hours it takes to build a
plane like an RV, I'm still in awe that anyone could tackle a project like
that. The planes that I've owned thus far have had 40 and 500 hour build times
- and I bought both of them already built. However, after looking at the
price tags for completed RVs in the Trade-A-Plane, I think that would be
motivation enough for me!
--------------------------
| - - - - | <
[]-| - - - - | > - - -
.====== | - - - ___ | Jud Holmes <
. /| / |~~~~~~~| judson.holmes(at)att.com > - -
. / | / __ | | <
.__________/ |==========| | | >
(_____________//==========-----^ | < - -
/ \ __________________________>
( ) ( )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Seibert" <Bob_Seibert(at)oakqm3.sps.mot.com> |
Reply to: RE>rudder trim
Of all the RV's flying around central Texas, only one has adjustable rudder
trim. It is a Mac servo and its owner says he wishes he hadn't bothered to
install it. Everybody else has small fixed tabs or none at all. I do not have
any rudder trim on my -6 and it flies just fine most of the time. On the few
occasions when the ball won't stay centered, just resting part of the weight
of my foot on the rudder pedal fixes it. I recommend flying it first, then
adding trim if needed.
PS. The article on aileron trim in the Rvator should be paid attention to! It
works better than trim tabs.
Bob Seibert RV-6 N691RV
--------------------------------------
Date: 3/9/95 4:40 PM
From: Terrance Jantzi
A question for those of you who are flying RV-6's. Have you found any
need for an adjustable rudder trim? I have built one similar to the
bias spring thing that Van's sells for the ailerons. Now I am having
second thoughts about installing it, especially if its not really
needed.
Terry Jantzi
RV-6 in progress
------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 95 15:26:04 MST
From: canrem.com!terrance.jantzi(at)matronics.com (Terrance Jantzi)
Subject: rudder trim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
I called Apollo tech support today to find out the actual size of the 360 so
I could prep my panel for it and had an interesting conversation with the
guy.
He basically told me that unless you can mount the thing almost directly in
front of you, you'll be very dissapointed with the visibility of the
display. It seems that to pass certain FARs it has to have an anti glare
cover on it which severley restricts the viewing angle.
He said that anything more than about 40 degrees from line of sight and it
washes out.
I was pretty gung ho on this unit until now, now I'm not so sure.
Maybe I'll go for the 920 with a gooseneck.
Ken RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: rudder trim |
Bob, I also built a very nice looking rudder trim using a MAC servo. I
agree 100% with your buddy - it wasn't worth the effort (or $$).
I have 3 axis electric trim, hardly ever use the rudder, use the
aileron/elevator on a coolie hat in the stick all the time. BUT, they
are expensive, and I think IF I had it to do again, I would do elec
elev, manual aileron trim and no or manual rudder trim.
Bill Benedict at Van's gets gobs of hours in several different RVs and
lots of xcountry, and he said the 2 that have the manual aileron 'spring
bias' trim work great, electric isn't required.
don w N790DW RV-6
_______________________________
Reply to: RE>rudder trim
Of all the RV's flying around central Texas, only one has adjustable rudder
trim. It is a Mac servo and its owner says he wishes he hadn't bothered to
install it. Everybody else has small fixed tabs or none at all. I do not have
any rudder trim on my -6 and it flies just fine most of the time. On the few
occasions when the ball won't stay centered, just resting part of the weight
of my foot on the rudder pedal fixes it. I recommend flying it first, then
adding trim if needed.
PS. The article on aileron trim in the Rvator should be paid attention to! It
works better than trim tabs.
Bob Seibert RV-6 N691RV
--------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Les Honke <lhonke(at)wnet.gov.edmonton.ab.ca> |
I'm not currently building but an RV6 (taildragger) with amphib floats (summer)
and
skis (winter) is my dream plane. I currently fly a Davis DA2A.
A couple of questions:
1) I need an aileron trim light simple & cheap for the Davis. Sounds like the RV
spring
trim fills the bill. I have access to a set of -6 plans; can anyone tell me which
sheet(s)
shows the trim?
2) Is anyone operating a -6 on skis or floats? I understand in B.C. (Canada) there
is
now one on straight floats.
Les Honke
Technical Analyst
Strathcona County
lhonke(at)wnet.gov.edmonton.ab.ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | no-hole yoke for rivet squeezer |
For those just lurking or who are about to purchase tools,
I heartily recommend that you buy Avery's rivet squeezer,
and for one reason: It uses the same yokes as the
pneumatic squeezer. I have found the no-hole yoke
to be invaluable for squeezing the last few rivets
near the trailing edge of control surfaces.
Yes, I know that a ground-down set of Vise-Grips
will work, but it's sure nice to have the right tool.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 sn 23744
CLosing the left elevator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: Re[2]: rudder trim |
Hmm, I have a spare servo. So far I've got electric elevator and the spring
type aileron trim. My coolie hat has a spare axis. I wonder if I could use
the servo to bias the springs? It seems like overkill but I DO have the
servo and it would be easier than tearing apart my aileron. It would also
be nice to have both axis on the coolie hat.
W.r.t. the rudder trim, the Air Beetle had full 3 axis electric. The rudder
trim was hardly ever used.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | klgray(at)bihs.net (Ken Gray) |
| Subject: | RV, cowl attachments |
Hi, I am new to the list. The name is Ken Gray RV6 # 23069. I got the tail
section, wings and the fuse. out of jig and right side up. The hinge that
attaches the cowl is not very clear in the plans. I intially installed the
wrong size, but reinstalled the 1/8 in stainless steel on both sides. The
question is, the bottom two pieces, are they suppose to be 1/8 or the smaller
size.
I have looked at many of RV's at Hooks Airport in Houston and forget to look
each time I have been there.
Anyone wants to see my project, come on by. I am at Bryan, Tx. Coulter
airfield (CFD). Started project on November of 93.
Bob Seibert. One of these days I would like to meet you. John Goble and
Lewis Porter speak very highly of you.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[4]: rudder trim |
If you've already spent the $$ on the servo (the most expensive part), it
could be worth pursuing. You'll possibly need a bellcrank to increase the
throw, and you DO know that you need a 'driver' module to interface the
coolie hat to the servos? Matt Dralle sells one that will handle both,
else Van's sells one for each servo.
The coolie hat is nice to use since you always have the stick in hand
anyway. My ailerons were completed (with elec trim) BEFORE the manual trim
was available, so I can't tell for sure which I would have picked, had BOTH
been an option at decision time...
dw
Hmm, I have a spare servo. So far I've got electric elevator and the spring
type aileron trim. My coolie hat has a spare axis. I wonder if I could use
the servo to bias the springs? It seems like overkill but I DO have the
servo and it would be easier than tearing apart my aileron. It would also
be nice to have both axis on the coolie hat.
W.r.t. the rudder trim, the Air Beetle had full 3 axis electric. The rudder
trim was hardly ever used.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Les Honke said:
> 2) Is anyone operating a -6 on skis or floats? I understand in B.C. (Canada)
there is
> now one on straight floats.
>
The person you're thinking of is Eustace Bowhay 604-675-4428.
I don't believe there is anyone else on floats yet, but he's
selling kits for it, and is currently working on an amphibious
version.
There was a photo of an RV-4 on skiis, owned by a couple of guys up
in Norway, in Van's 1993 calendar. I don't remember their names, but
I think it said they were a homemade design.
Randall Henderson
RV-6 (yes I want floats too!)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Have you gotten Van's new catalog yet? You should!
Why? Well for one thing, on the cover is a photo of the beautiful and
bodacious N790DW -- Don "the Duck" Wentz's RV-6 (BTW, first flight was
June 30, NOT April, as the caption says). And inside you'll find the
new "Van's Air Force Collection", sporting the really cool new Van's
Air Force emblem.
A little history about that -- the emblem was first designed for the
Portland RVators' Third Annual Northwest RV Fly-in T-shirts, and later
became the Portland RVators "squadron" emblem. But after Van and Bill
got a look at it, they asked me about doing a "Van's Air Force"
version, and the rest is history. I'm now providing T-shirts, coffee
mugs, hats, and decals to Van's to sell through the catalog.
It's good quality stuff too, mostly made in the USA. The hats are a
"brushed cotton twill" material, charcoal gray, and have a bit of a
military look to them. And the emblem is _embroidered_ (not screened)
onto the front. The stickers are all-weather. The T-shirts are gray
ash, 100% cotton.
One note though -- the emblem shown in the catalog IS NOT THE REAL
EMBLEM -- it was dummied-up from the original for some other purpose
and got stuck in there by accident. The real one is more refined and
has much more detail, particularly on the aft fuselage "blueprint"
area. In fact, the original artwork is partly made up of a scanned in
image of Van's drawing #26 - "RV-4 Fuselage".
Check out John hovan's home page, sub-heading "RV newsletters"
(http://atlantis.austin.apple.com/people.pages/jhovan/newsletter.html)
to see the original Portland RVators version. The only difference is
items that Van's sells have "Van's Air Force" around the circle instead
of "Portland RVators".
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gretzw(at)tcplink.nrel.gov |
| Subject: | Pitot tubes for RV-6 |
Has any one installed a heated pitot tube on their RV, which type and
where did you get it? Where was it installed? What is the amperage of
the heater element?
Warren Gretz
Denver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pitot tubes for RV-6 |
>
> Has any one installed a heated pitot tube on their RV, which type and
> where did you get it? Where was it installed? What is the amperage of
> the heater element?
>
> Warren Gretz
> Denver
>
>
I purchased an AN5812-XX (XX= Volttage 12 or 28) from Cheif Aircraft
($100.00) You can also get the AN5814-XX from Wag Aero for $200.00. The
5814 is longer and would work better on an RV due to the location of the
main spar. I'm not sure if it's worth the extra 100 bucks. The unit I
got for my $100.00 is a work of art and will make the view from under the
wing very impressive.
You will have to make a mount for the unit. The recomended mount is
made from a small section of streamlined tubing. The mount that I made
is cheep and simple to make if you have welding equipment and alot of
patients. It mounts the pitot tube to the bottom skin and puts the
business end of the pitot tube within 1/2" of vans bent tube design. If I
ever get off my butt and send the Dwg. that I made to Hovan he can put it
into his WWW sight. If you want I,ll send you a paper copy via snail mail.
I have thought about selling the mounts to other builders but I,m not
sure what the market is like.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kvap(at)solar.sky.net (Kevin E. Vap) |
| Subject: | Re: floats & skiis |
>Les Honke said:
>
>> 2) Is anyone operating a -6 on skis or floats? I understand in B.C.
(Canada) there is
>> now one on straight floats.
>>
>The person you're thinking of is Eustace Bowhay 604-675-4428.
>I don't believe there is anyone else on floats yet, but he's
>selling kits for it, and is currently working on an amphibious
>version.
>
FYI: An article about Eustace Bowhay and Jim Rowe's installation of Zenair
floats on Eustace's RV-6 was in the July '94 issue of "Kitplanes".
Kevin Vap
(just ordered plans for RV-6, emp kit to follow soon)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: Re[4]: rudder trim |
> If you've already spent the $$ on the servo (the most expensive part),
> it could be worth pursuing. You'll possibly need a bellcrank to
> increase the throw, and you DO know that you need a 'driver' module to
> interface the coolie hat to the servos? Matt Dralle sells one that
> will handle both, else Van's sells one for each servo.
>
> The coolie hat is nice to use since you always have the stick in hand
> anyway. My ailerons were completed (with elec trim) BEFORE the manual
> trim was available, so I can't tell for sure which I would have picked,
> had BOTH been an option at decision time... dw
Don, I like the bellcrank idea. I'd probably need it anyway to change the
direction of the servo.
The driver module is actualy just a pair of double pole relays that are
operated by the switch in the coolie hat. One pair of relays for each
servo. There is another module to slow down the servo but I've not opted
for that.
I have a circuit for the relay module if you need it.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: Re[4]: rudder trim |
> If you've already spent the $$ on the servo (the most expensive part),
> it could be worth pursuing. You'll possibly need a bellcrank to
> increase the throw, and you DO know that you need a 'driver' module to
> interface the coolie hat to the servos? Matt Dralle sells one that
> will handle both, else Van's sells one for each servo.
>
> The coolie hat is nice to use since you always have the stick in hand
> anyway. My ailerons were completed (with elec trim) BEFORE the manual
> trim was available, so I can't tell for sure which I would have picked,
> had BOTH been an option at decision time... dw
Don, I like the bellcrank idea. I'd probably need it anyway to change the
direction of the servo.
The driver module is actualy just a pair of double pole relays that are
operated by the switch in the coolie hat. One pair of relays for each
servo. There is another module to slow down the servo but I've not opted
for that.
I have a circuit for the relay module if you need it.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: Pitot tubes for RV-6 |
> Has any one installed a heated pitot tube on their RV, which type
> and
> where did you get it? Where was it installed? What is the amperage
> of
> the heater element?
The Nigerian Air Beetle had the AN5812 tube from Spruce. It was mounted on
the bellcrank access panel. Can't remember the current rating but I think
it had a 10 amp breaker
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: Pitot tubes for RV-6 |
> Has any one installed a heated pitot tube on their RV, which type
> and
> where did you get it? Where was it installed? What is the amperage
> of
> the heater element?
The Nigerian Air Beetle had the AN5812 tube from Spruce. It was mounted on
the bellcrank access panel. Can't remember the current rating but I think
it had a 10 amp breaker
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | terrance.jantzi(at)canrem.com (Terrance Jantzi) |
> put on a external rudder trim so I would be interested in the system
> you have for rudder trim. I do have one of Van's aileron trim systems
> and it work very
All I did was mount a small bell crank horizontally on one of the
firewall stiffeners. Two light springs run to the bottom of the rudder
pedals (hanging style). The bell crank is connected to a locking
T-handle cable. I set it up so the springs are equally pre-loaded with
the knob fully forward. Any pull on the handle will load the left
rudder pedal. This is mostly in response to the requirement from my
inspector to have return springs on the rudder pedals. I just want to
pass the final inspection. Once I had thee springs placed it was just
an easy step to add a bell crank. The weight increase is negligable but
still measurable. I think after some of the responses, I will shelf it
till after I am flying.
Terry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Help: small oops |
I'm constructing the left elevator. When drilling the holes
for the rivets that attach the skin, elevator rear 'stub'
spar, and the trim tab hinge together, the construction manual
says that the skin should be dimpled and the spar should
be machine countersunk. Yup, you guessed it. In my zeal,
I inadvertently dimpled the rivet holes in the stub spar.
Can I simply dimple the corresponding holes in the hinge also?
If not, got any good suggestions?
Thanks in advance,
Dave Barnhart
rv-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Pitot tubes for RV-6 |
> Has any one installed a heated pitot tube on their RV, which type
> and where did you get it? Where was it installed? What is the amperage
> of the heater element?
I bought an AN5812-12 heated tube from aircraft spruce. The same one is
actually available from Wicks for a lot cheaper than that. Very nice,
chrome finish, but a lot heavier than the aluminum ones. I don't know
the amperage offhand.
I mounted it on a mast that a local custom builder makes. It's just a
piece of streamlined steel tubing, about 3" long, welded to a plate
about 4"x5". It's mounted in the corner of the rib and spar just
outboard of the access hole. I riveted a piece of .040 to the skin in
the corner to serve as a stiffener and also as a spacer. The mast is
installed from the inside, and goes through a hole in the doubler and
the skin. Nutplates riveted to the base of the mast hold it onto the
wing. It's kind of hard to explain in words -- maybe I'll make up a
drawing.
Mine came out pretty well, but I had a look at Dan Benua's installation
the other day which looks even better -- he bent flanges in his doubler
and riveted it to the skin AND to the rib. (Dan you should write up
the way you did that -- include some drawings and I'll put it in the
newsletter :-)
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Help: small oops |
Dave Barnhart said:
> I'm constructing the left elevator. When drilling the holes
> for the rivets that attach the skin, elevator rear 'stub'
> spar, and the trim tab hinge together, the construction manual
> says that the skin should be dimpled and the spar should
> be machine countersunk. Yup, you guessed it. In my zeal,
> I inadvertently dimpled the rivet holes in the stub spar.
>
> Can I simply dimple the corresponding holes in the hinge also?
> If not, got any good suggestions?
Hmmm... I don't even remember that that spar was specified as being
machine c-sunk. I did the same thing you did, and machine c-sunk the
hinge. Seems to me a better part to countersink since it is the thicker
part, but as I remember it was tricky since the hinge eyelets got in
the way of the countersink cage, so I had to do it "freehand" with the
bit chucked directly in the drill. If you do this be careful however,
it's easy to elongate the hole or over-countersink it. You should
clamp a piece of .040 or .063 to the hinge and drill thru all the holes
into it, and keep it clecoed on while countersinking to provide a good
backing for the pilot ad keep the bit from reaming out the hole in the
hinge. Did you know the pilot bits on those actually have a cutting
edge? Makes it almost a given that you will elongate the holes if you
don't have something backing it up.
I wouldn't dimple the hinge -- I think it's a bit thick for that,
although it is pretty soft material. Plus it'd probably get warped.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | hsutphin(at)ix.netcom.com (Harold Sutphin) |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: Re: Sun n Fun |
---- Begin Forwarded Message
+OK 1566 octets
(8.6.9/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
(8.6.9/SMI-4.1)
Sun N Fun is the 9th thru the 15th of April.
>We would like to know the exact dates of Sun n Fun this year, I know it
>is
>around the 8th April, but need to know the other dates. We will be
>coming from
>Hong Kong and enjoyed it so much last year that we don't want to miss
>it.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ray Belbin <Ray.Belbin(at)jcu.edu.au> |
| Subject: | Pitot Tubes and 28V Systems |
Recently I managed to "score" a serviceable 28 Volt Heated Pitot tube
from a King Air 200 operated by a friend of mine. This begs the question,
28V or 12V? I don't know the current rating for this tube.
Ray Belbin
RV6A ('cause they look better!)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)NtwkServ.MTS.MB.CA> |
| Subject: | Re: Help: small oops |
On Tue, 14 Mar 1995, David A. Barnhart wrote:
> Can I simply dimple the corresponding holes in the hinge also?
I dimpled mine. The hinge takes on a decided curve, but once it is
riveted in place it will work fine. If anything, the dimpled holes will
be stronger than countersunk ones.
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: Re: Sun n Fun |
Sun 'n Fun starts April 9th and I beleive it ends April 16th!
>>We would like to know the exact dates of Sun n Fun this year, I know it
>>is
>>around the 8th April, but need to know the other dates. We will be
>>coming from
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RGS4%PClOs%PS(at)bangate.pge.com |
Thanks for all the information on the RV Gear design.
Did anybody make it to the Fly-in Sunday at Nut Tree Airport, CA ??
What's the date/location of the next RV gathering in Northern Calif.?
Dick Slavens
Napa, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Fried" <t42444(at)theo.dehavilland.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Help: small oops |
>I wouldn't dimple the hinge -- I think it's a bit thick for that,
>although it is pretty soft material. Plus it'd probably get warped.
>Randall Henderson
I dimpled my flap hinges using Avery's dimple arbor. The dimples are very nice
but the flap hinge curled somewhat. When I clecoed the hinge to the flap I had
no problems aligning the holes or inserting the pins. Worked for me.
David Fried
DF-6 C-____
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
************************************************************************
* Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my own and are independent *
* of my employer. *
************************************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
| Subject: | Harbor Freight & ScotchBrite |
RV builders,
Harbor Freight now sells ScotchBrite, and at what seems to
be the lowest prices in town. Get their latest catalog, (800) 423-2567. I
don't know about the rest of you, but my ScotchBrite usage seems to be
fairly high, especially as I use them to apply AlumiPrep.
I just bought a bunch, and it's all the genuine 3M stuff
re-packaged in their own plastic bags.
Some examples:
5 pieces 6 in. x 9 in. 7447 pads (red) for $3.49
Something I've never seen advertised before:
1 in. wide by 10 ft. long roll of red Scotchbrite for $3.99
And the essential "half-twist screw-on" 2 inch diam. Scotchbrite disks:
5 pieces for $3.99 - available in coarse (brown), medium (red) and fine (blue).
These are the same ScotchBrite disks I mentioned last summer, but I
had been buying them from good hardware stores at 3 for $5, and never saw
any of the medium ones for sale.
The medium and fine seem to be best for our use on aluminum. Don't
forget you also need a pad and 1/4 in. shank, with a 3M trademark name of
"Roloc".
.... keep on removing scratches .... Gil Alexander, RV6A
PS Usual disclaimer - my only involvement is as a satisfied customer.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RGS4%PClOs%PS(at)bangate.pge.com |
Thanks for all the information on the RV Gear design.
Did anybody make it to the Fly-in Sunday at Nut Tree Airport, CA ??
What's the date/location of the next RV gathering in Northern Calif.?
Dick Slavens
Napa, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Apollo 360 GPS |
>
> I called Apollo tech support today to find out the actual size of the 360 so
> I could prep my panel for it and had an interesting conversation with the
> guy.
>
> He basically told me that unless you can mount the thing almost directly in
> front of you, you'll be very dissapointed with the visibility of the
> display. It seems that to pass certain FARs it has to have an anti glare
> cover on it which severley restricts the viewing angle.
>
> He said that anything more than about 40 degrees from line of sight and it
> washes out.
>
> I was pretty gung ho on this unit until now, now I'm not so sure.
>
> Maybe I'll go for the 920 with a gooseneck.
>
> Ken RV-6A
Have you considered an angled sub-panel? Seems to me you could
make wedge shaped section slightly larger than the instrument to angle
it towards the pilot's position. Either that or a full height
angled section, with fuel gauges or whatever else is in that vertical
section. I've seen some panels done like this that look pretty nice.
BUT.... You might also reconsider whether this really is necessary. I
remember when I was planning to rearrange the panel in my C-175 a few
years back. Sitting at the drawing board sketching things
out, I was all worried about putting some of those instruments WAY OVER
THERE on the other side of the panel where I'd never even SEE them.
But when I got out to the plane and sat in it it all shrunk down to
real size -- and I realized it's all pretty much right there in front
of you. I suppose you are sitting in the plane looking at it as you're
making your plans, but if not, a reality check may be in order.
Also, you could call a local avionics shop and see about getting
a look at one, maybe even in a plane they're installing it in.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Electric Elevator trim |
For those who have not yet installed their electric elevator
trim option, a tip:
The elevator skin in .016 think, while the access hole cover
(EET-602?) is .032, the result is that if you follow Van's
intructions, the cover will not be flush with the skin and will
stick up .016
Here's how to solve it:
When you make the doubler (EET-601), fabricate a second doubler
from .016 material. Make the second doubler the same size as
the EET-601, but make the cutout in it the same size as the SKIN.
Sandwich your .016 doubler between the skin and the EET-601 doubler.
That way the recess for the access cover plate will be .032 and
viola! the cover will fit flush with the skin.
Now for a problem that I have yet to try to solve. MAybe someone
here has done so and can keep me from re-inventing the wheel:
With the servo mounted per Van's instructions on the access cover,
I cannot get full travel from the servo. When the servo arm is run
aft, the arm hits the access cover. My thoughts are:
1. Fabricate new 602A and 602B brackets that will either move
the servo higher or reduce the angle between the servo and the
access cover.
2. MOve the 602A/602B/servo aft a bit and open up the hole
in the skin that the pushrod passes thru (because the
clevis will now also need to pass through that hole when the
servo arm is run full aft.
Any suggestions?
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bataller(at)tif623.ed.ray.com (Gary Bataller) |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Elevator trim |
>
> Now for a problem that I have yet to try to solve. MAybe someone
> here has done so and can keep me from re-inventing the wheel:
> With the servo mounted per Van's instructions on the access cover,
> I cannot get full travel from the servo. When the servo arm is run
> aft, the arm hits the access cover. My thoughts are:
>
> 1. Fabricate new 602A and 602B brackets that will either move
> the servo higher or reduce the angle between the servo and the
> access cover.
>
> 2. MOve the 602A/602B/servo aft a bit and open up the hole
> in the skin that the pushrod passes thru (because the
> clevis will now also need to pass through that hole when the
> servo arm is run full aft.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Best Regards,
> Dave Barnhart
> RV-6 sn 23744
>
>
I ran into the same problem on my RV6A. I made the passthru hole
longer (aft), and slightly larger to allow the clevis to fit thru
with proper clearance. I used a 'rudder cable fuselage plate' from
Bob Avery to dress it up. Seems to work fine on the ground. I will
be back from Norway next week to resume work on it. Haven't touched
it since November. About 3-4 months from flying it...
Gary Bataller
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: Electric Elevator trim |
> Now for a problem that I have yet to try to solve. MAybe someone here
> has done so and can keep me from re-inventing the wheel: With the servo
> mounted per Van's instructions on the access cover, I cannot get full
> travel from the servo. When the servo arm is run aft, the arm hits the
> access cover. My thoughts are:
I retrofitted my servo to an already complete elevator (quite a task I
might add) but didn't find any difficulty in getting full travel. Mind you,
I did have to elongate and widen the slot a bit to let the clevis arm pass
through.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: Apollo 360 GPS |
> Have you considered an angled sub-panel? Seems to me you could make
> wedge shaped section slightly larger than the instrument to angle it
> towards the pilot's position. Either that or a full height angled
> section, with fuel gauges or whatever else is in that vertical section.
> I've seen some panels done like this that look pretty nice.
Randall, the angled subpanel is a good idea...I already have both sides of
the panel angle, sorta like a wrap around.
Trouble is with this unit, is that its over 8 inches long, so I cant put it
in my sidepanels. Even putting it in the centre would put the rear end of
it quite a way out.
I think the idea to go see one is the best. I've never seen one of the
beasts, so perhaps sun'nfun is the time to do that.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kvap(at)solar.sky.net (Kevin E. Vap) |
I'm trying to locate Avery Enterprises, a tool vendor. I was given an old
catalog of theirs from 1992. It listed Bedford TX as the address. The
phone numbers on this catalog no longer reach them.
I assume they moved some time ago. Can anyone give me their new
numbers/address? Thanks for the help.
Kevin Vap
"ordered plans, emp kit to follow soon"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kvap(at)solar.sky.net (Kevin E. Vap) |
| Subject: | RE: Avery Tools? |
Okay...so I re-read the FAQ and realized I had overlooked their address in
there. Sorry about the dumb mistake.
I now return you to your regularly scheduled messages.
Kevin Vap
(just ordered plans for RV-6, emp kit to follow soon)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | donmack(at)interaccess.com (Don Mack) |
| Subject: | Aileron Counterbalance ? |
We are about to install the counterbalance pipe in the ailerons on the 6-A.
My brother wants to coat the inside of the pipe with linseed oil.
I say that it just a waste of time, not to mention the mess that could
result. I have replaced 60 year old galvanized pipe in our cottage and other
than being dingy looking, it shows not signs of corrosion.
Any thoughts?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fuel tank sealing |
Several weeks back, someone mentioned that a solution to sealing the
fuel tank access covers was to use closed-end nutplates. He mentioned that
they were available from Wicks Aircraft Supply in Illinois. I have called
Wicks and they don't seem to carry 8-32 closed-end nutplates. I would like
to use these on my tanks. Does anyone know where I can acquire them.
Thanks,
Ted
RV-4
Full inverted, 180hp, C/S Prop
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Reichert" <reichera(at)clark.net> |
| Subject: | The next step... |
Hi, all!
Remember this? -
______________________
| Alan Reichert |
| reichera(at)clark.net |
|----------------------|
|The debate continues..|
| -6 or -6A |
|______________________|
Well, put a fork in it. It's done.
The envelope please...
[drum roll]
And the winner is - RV-6!
Now to start collecting tools.
A question now...
Has anybody seen the preview plans Van is now selling? Wondering if I
should get these for study, or the full-size set.
Thanks.
- Alan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Counterbalance ? |
Text item:
>We are about to install the counterbalance pipe in the ailerons on the 6-A.
>My brother wants to coat the inside of the pipe with linseed oil.
This pipe does not trap water in the RV. It will last forever.
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: Aileron Counterbalance ?
From: interaccess.com!donmack(at)matronics.com (Don Mack)
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1995 20:50:21 -0600
-4.1)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Reichert" <reichera(at)clark.net> |
Any builders in the Northern Virginia/DC area want to show off their project?
- Alan
_________________________________________________
| Alan Reichert - reichera(at)clark.net |
|-------------------------------------------------|
| Wannabe RV-6 Builder - Working on the tooling...|
|_________________________________________________|
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Counterbalance ? |
I didn't coat the inside of mine yet for the same reason. I did, however,
notice that there were some "burrs" left over from the holes drilled to
attach the skin. I am assuming they will rust a little and stain the paint
if there is enough water running out of them over time. I might consider
coating them with a little leftover primer at some point.
My neighbor is a retired Boeing employee that did remind me to make sure the
outside of the pipe and the inside of the skins are well primed. It is
appearently a "cardinal rule" at Boeing, never to mate dissimilar matels,
especially zinc and aluminium. The aileron has aluminium, zinc, and cast
iron where the rivet holes have been countersunk.
>I say that it just a waste of time, not to mention the mess that could
>result. I have replaced 60 year old galvanized pipe in our cottage and other
>than being dingy looking, it shows not signs of corrosion.
>
>Any thoughts?
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
| Subject: | The next step... (fwd) |
I would buy the preview plans. They are cheap. I have some this size
for Pitts and I like using them. The full size are a pain in the rear.
You will get the full size plans with each kit you purchase.
>
> A question now...
>
> Has anybody seen the preview plans Van is now selling? Wondering if I
> should get these for study, or the full-size set.
>
> Thanks.
>
> - Alan
>
--------------------------------------------------------
*NOTICE for internet mail*: Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my
own and are independent of my employer.
Herman Dierks, Dept. E54S, AWSD Austin, Texas
mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com VM: DIERKS at AUSVM6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron Counterbalance ? |
** Don Mack said ***
>We are about to install the counterbalance pipe in the ailerons on the 6-A.
>
>My brother wants to coat the inside of the pipe with linseed oil.
>
.....
>
>Any thoughts?
Don
.... the application of linseed oil (or special TubeSeal oil) to
aircraft structures is only used for sealed assemblies. Usually the inside
of a welded tubular fuselage frame or equivalent. Since the RV aileron
pipes are not sealed at the ends, and don't even use sealing (cloded end)
pop rivets, any linseed oil applied will not last for the time spans
needed.
An old RVator mentioned one builder spraying zinc chromate primer
into the ends, and then quickly following it with an short air blast to
spread the spray deep down the tube. Probably the most effective thing you
could do is to dip the pop rivets into zinc chromate primer and install
them wet. This would protect the tubing at the drilled holes where the
galvanizing has been removed, as well as protecting against any long term
dissimilar metals type corrosion. Galvanizing is pretty good over long
time spans. This was one component where I used the MarHyde one-step
aerosol self-etching primer.
... keep building ... Gil Alexander, RV6A, #20706
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave.Bonorden(at)amd.com (Dave Bonorden) |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Elevator trim |
>
>
>I retrofitted my servo to an already complete elevator (quite a task I
>might add) but didn't find any difficulty in getting full travel. Mind you,
>I did have to elongate and widen the slot a bit to let the clevis arm pass
>through.
>
>Ken
My elevator is also complete and I don't really want to tear into it.
Has anyone built an electric elevator trim with the servo mounted in the
rear (or anywhere else) of the fuselage, using the elevator end of the standard
manual trim cable?
Dave Bonorden
RV-4
________________________________________________________________________________
RV List
| From: | rbibb(at)fore.com (Richard Bibb) |
Sure - got my -4 almost ready to paint.... Lot's of miscellaneous crap to
do but would love to show it off. I'm in Reston.
Richard
At 3:08 PM 3/17/95, A. Reichert wrote:
>Any builders in the Northern Virginia/DC area want to show off their project?
>
>- Alan
> _________________________________________________
>| Alan Reichert - reichera(at)clark.net |
>|-------------------------------------------------|
>| Wannabe RV-6 Builder - Working on the tooling...|
>|_________________________________________________|
Richard E. Bibb TEL: (301) 564-4404
Federal Program Manager PAGE:(800) 719-1246
Navy and Civilian Programs FAX: (301) 564-4408
FORE Systems
6500 Rock Spring Drive, Suite 444 rbibb(at)fore.com
Bethesda, MD 20817
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Preview plans vs full set |
On Fri, 17 Mar 1995, A. Reichert wrote:
> Has anybody seen the preview plans Van is now selling? Wondering if I
> should get these for study, or the full-size set.
I'd say get the preview plans. You gotta have SOMETHING, because
while building, questions will inevitably come up. For example, while
building the vertical stab, I wanted to know exactly how the H.S.,
V.S. and Fuselage all bolted together. You'll need a complete set
of plans to answer questions like that. The Preview plans can
answer those kinds of questions just as well as the full sized set.
The preview plans are less expensive, and are MUCH easier to handle.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
| Subject: | Elect. trim kits |
Since everybody is discussing electric trim...
I have the electric trim kits from vans. I have decided to not
use them. I'll sell them on the cheep. Make an offer.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: Electric Elevator trim |
> My elevator is also complete and I don't really want to tear into it.
> Has anyone built an electric elevator trim with the servo mounted in the
> rear (or anywhere else) of the fuselage, using the elevator end of the
> standard manual trim cable?
I tried to figure something out using bourden (sp) cables and those clamp
on cable ends. I thought that it should have been possible and essentially
better than having the servo in the elevator. I finally gave up and cut
open the elevator. It was a lot more difficult than doing it before the
elevator was built, but in the long run, I'm glad I did it. Just getting
rid of that huge trim cable was worth the effort!
Ken
RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brent Baxter <Brent_Baxter(at)ccm.jf.intel.com> |
---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes ---------------------------
From: baxter(at)agora.rdrop.com at SMTPGATE
Date: 3/17/95 3:54PM
Subject: Pro-seal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Text item:
I did some checking on that in-the-tube proseal. It turns out that it
can be had from Flightcraft. It comes in a tube that is similar to
regular calk. In the spout of the tube is a handle that one
pumps back and forth to mix the two compounds. After its been pumped
about fifty times, one may apply it like regular calk. The only
hangup is that the tube is slightly smaller in diameter than regular calk
tubes. The fellow at Flightcraft told me that I would just have to put a
1.5 inch plunger on my calk gun to use it. It costs $28 for a 6 oz tube.
Mike Baxter
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: Pro-seal
From: Michael Baxter <baxter(at)agora.rdrop.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 1995 15:16:19 -0800 (PST)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Electric Elevator trim failure |
Has anyone given any thought to what might happen if the plastic(nylon)
clevis was to break or the servo was to let go of the arm?
While I was working on the Air Beetle, there was much discussion (I believe
some of it initiated from Van's) around the tremendous flutter that would
occur if the trim tab became free, to the point that it would probably tear
the tail off.
Reccomendations included a counterbalance, a friction lock and a bias
spring. I don't know if they still do it, but we built a couple with a
spring that would bias the tab all the way down if it came free. The
argument being that the pilot could hold the stick against a constant
force.
Anyone have any comments?
Ken
RV6-A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob_Seibert-R18643(at)email.sps.mot.com |
| Subject: | Mogas going to Sun&Fun |
Subject: Time:1:59 PM
OFFICE MEMO Mogas going to Sun&Fun Date:3/17/95
I am departing Austin, Tx. on April 7 or 8 in RV-6 N691RV heading for Lakeland.
Does anyone out there have info on Mogas / cheap 100LL? We stopped in DeQuincy,
La. last year and got mogas for about $1.50. I'm interested in anyplace in
southern Lousiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida Panhandle, etc.
BTW - Burnet Texas (T27) has 100LL for $1.65 - Austin Executive (3R3) has self
serve 100LL for $1.65 also.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | raycoxon(at)netinfo.com.au (Ray Coxon) |
| Subject: | New Member Details - Ray Coxon, Canberra Australia |
Dear Matt,
Here are my details as requested in the Welcome message.
Email: raycoxon(at)netinfo.com.au
Ray Coxon
9 Menzie Place
Kambah
ACT 2902
Australia
Home & Work Phone: 61 06 231 6400
Fax: (Ring first to arrange connection)
D.O.B: 10 July 1947
RV4 # 3838 160hp
MailArchive=Yes
I heard about the RV-List from john.morrissey(at)its.csiro.au, another RV4
builder and a friend in this town.
I have just started the RV4. I have set up the workshop (which needs
government approval in this country) and started on the empenage group. I am
not going very quickly at this juncture as I am in the middle of a major
career change. I hope to get back into full production when that stabilizes.
My careers so far have been:
14.5 years as an aircraft electrician in the Air Force
8.5 years as an computer engineer for DEC
4 years as a university student and tutor in computing subjects
5 years as a technical writer and trainer on defence contracts
My next career (starting real soon now as I am between jobs) will be
teaching business and government people to get more out of their lives and jobs.
Regards
Ray Coxon
RV4 #3838
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gregg L. Sloan" <gsloan(at)CapAccess.org> |
Alan, I'm building an RV-6A (wings in jig). I live in Herndon, VA near Dulles.
I would be glad to show off my project. I'm close to Rich Bibb so you
could see both the same day. Also, I'm scheduled to do a builder's report
at the EAA chapter 186 April meeeting.
Gregg Sloan
(703) 476-7183
On Fri, 17 Mar 1995, A. Reichert wrote:
>
> Any builders in the Northern Virginia/DC area want to show off their project?
>
> - Alan
> _________________________________________________
> | Alan Reichert - reichera(at)clark.net |
> |-------------------------------------------------|
> | Wannabe RV-6 Builder - Working on the tooling...|
> |_________________________________________________|
Gregg Sloan_____gsloan(at)capaccess.org_____Herndon, Virginia__USA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Fried" <t42444(at)alvin.dehavilland.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Elevator trim failure |
> Ken Hitchmough
>Has anyone given any thought to what might happen if the plastic(nylon)
>clevis was to break or the servo was to let go of the arm?
>While I was working on the Air Beetle, there was much discussion (I believe
>some of it initiated from Van's) around the tremendous flutter that would
>occur if the trim tab became free, to the point that it would probably tear
>the tail off.
It might not be a bad idea to figure out what load the trim system can sustain
before failure. The following questions come to mind:
What kind of load is required to break the linkage or servo arm?
Is the servo irreversable of will it backdrive?
If it is irreversable, what load will shear the drive shaft or strip
the gears?
It may be that the allowable limits are well in excess of the loads required
for flight. If there is concern about something becoming unfastened, it is
possible to add a tab mass balance. It could be attached to the tab in the
same manner as the control arm. Flutter is a critical problem, check with Van
before trying this.
_________________________________________
/
/
//*
//*
_____________________//
|---------------------/
|| /
|| /
_________||_________________/
>Reccomendations included a counterbalance, a friction lock and a bias
>spring. I don't know if they still do it, but we built a couple with a
>spring that would bias the tab all the way down if it came free. The
>argument being that the pilot could hold the stick against a constant
>force.
I don't know about that spring. If the linkage came apart on approach, the
sudden nose up moment that resulted could cause a stall. Scary business.
David Fried
DF-6 C-____
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
************************************************************************
* Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my own and are independent *
* of my employer. *
************************************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: Electric Elevator trim failure |
>I don't know about that spring. If the linkage came apart on approach, the
>sudden nose up moment that resulted could cause a stall. Scary business.
Yeh, it would be scary. On the other hand so would a wildly oscillating
elevator!
The mass balance idea was tried on the Beetle too. We filled a piece of 1/4
inch tube with lead (after squashing one end down) and riveted it to the
trim tab. It needed an exceptionally long arm to balance it....can't
remember exactly how long, but we gave that one up.
> Flutter is a critical problem, check with Van before trying this.
Dave, as I mentioned in my note, I believe the concern was RAISED by Van's
although I could be mistaken on this.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JerryFlyRV(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Elevator trim fa... |
From: mail.magic.ca!J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)matronics.com
Ken wrote
>Has anyone given any thought to what might happen if the >plastic(nylon)
>clevis was to break or the servo was to let go of the arm?
>While I was working on the Air Beetle, there was much discussion >(I believe
>some of it initiated from Van's) around the tremendous flutter that >would
>occur if the trim tab became free, to the point that it would probably >tear
>the tail off.
>Reccomendations included a counterbalance, a friction lock and a >bias
>spring. I don't know if they still do it, but we built a couple with a
>spring that would bias the tab all the way down if it came free. The
>argument being that the pilot could hold the stick against a >constant
>force.
>Anyone have any comments?
>Ken
>RV6-A
Ken
I can assure you that you can not hold enough stick pressure to fly the
airplane with the trim tab in the full down position, I have a MAC servo on
my -6 and just moving the trim a fraction of the full travel makes tremendous
stick pressure at crusie speed, I think that there would be so much pressure
that there would be damage elsewere. I do not worry about it coming loose or
breaking, but do worry about a electrical problem that might make it runnaway
so I have installed a breaker switch in the trim system so all I have to do
is turn off the breaker.
Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed Weber <ebw(at)hpfiebw.fc.hp.com> |
Hello again,
I will be in the Bay Area (San Jose) on business this Wednesday
through Friday (3/22-24). If anyone would like to show off their 6 or
6A to someone who hasn't seen one in person yet, it would be greatly
appreciated. A ride would be great but all I really want is to sit in
one for a moment. I actually have some free time Wed morning and
Friday afternoon.
In addition to lurking here for about 4 months now, I have been
studying my 6A plans (Van's and Frank's), read all the old RVators,
and only have about 700 notes left to read in the rv-list archive. My
basement is starting to look like real shop. About another $400 to
Avery and I should be able to order the empenage kit in about May.
BTW, Does anyone know what happened to Doug Bloomberg? His e-mail
address must have changed since I can't seem to get through to him
anymore.
RV6A #23945
--
Ed Weber Hewlett-Packard Company
voice: (303) 229-3241 ICBD Product Design
fax: (303) 229-6580 3404 E Harmony Road, MS 72
email: ebw(at)fc.hp.com Fort Collins, Co 80525
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ollerton(at)priacc.com |
I am changing jobs, and mail addresses. Please take
me off the list for awhile. I will rejoin when my feet hit
the ground.
thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: Help: small oops |
Randall, the way I understand it, you machine countersunk the material that gets
the shop head against it? I have to wonder if that is an acceptable practice.
that leaves very little material for the bucked head to press against.
I accidentally did what you did (machine countersunk the hinge) and after
looking at it, I decided to back it up with a piece of .025 to increase the
material that the bucked end is holding.
I think dimpling the hinge would be much more acceptable. That hinge isn't too
thick to dimple and the warpage won't matter, it will disappear when the piece
is riveted in.
This response may be a little late, I was out of town all last week.
good luck, dw
Dave Barnhart said:
> I'm constructing the left elevator. When drilling the holes
> for the rivets that attach the skin, elevator rear 'stub'
> spar, and the trim tab hinge together, the construction manual
> says that the skin should be dimpled and the spar should
> be machine countersunk. Yup, you guessed it. In my zeal,
> I inadvertently dimpled the rivet holes in the stub spar.
>
> Can I simply dimple the corresponding holes in the hinge also?
> If not, got any good suggestions?
Hmmm... I don't even remember that that spar was specified as being
machine c-sunk. I did the same thing you did, and machine c-sunk the
hinge. Seems to me a better part to countersink since it is the thicker
part, but as I remember it was tricky since the hinge eyelets got in
the way of the countersink cage, so I had to do it "freehand" with the
bit chucked directly in the drill. If you do this be careful however,
it's easy to elongate the hole or over-countersink it. You should
clamp a piece of .040 or .063 to the hinge and drill thru all the holes
into it, and keep it clecoed on while countersinking to provide a good
backing for the pilot ad keep the bit from reaming out the hole in the
hinge. Did you know the pilot bits on those actually have a cutting
edge? Makes it almost a given that you will elongate the holes if you
don't have something backing it up.
I wouldn't dimple the hinge -- I think it's a bit thick for that,
although it is pretty soft material. Plus it'd probably get warped.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
| Subject: | Spring for invert tank |
Does anybody have any words of wisdom concerning the spring for the
inverted tank check valve flapper door thing-a-ma-what's-it that goes
in the next to last rib? I have everything completed except for the
spring. I thought I would just wind a spring out of music wire and be
done with it but the springs that I have tried don't seem to work. The
music wire doesn't hold it's shape. I,m starting to think that a VCR
door spring might work. Any ideas?
Thanks --Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: Apollo 360 GPS |
Randall had a good point - the RV-6 panel is not that wide. I mounted
my radios just right of center, dictated by the 3" instruments I
installed. This puts them no more than 15-20 degrees off my 'nose',
very easy to reach and view.
I was initially concerned about the width, but after plotting my panel
on paper and mounting it on a cardboard piece, I was able to sit in
the pilot seat and see just how close everything was. I spent a lot
of time 'pretending' like that and it really paid-off - I wouldn't
move anything in my panel.
dw RV-6 N790DW
> Have you considered an angled sub-panel? Seems to me you could make
> wedge shaped section slightly larger than the instrument to angle it
> towards the pilot's position. Either that or a full height angled
> section, with fuel gauges or whatever else is in that vertical section.
> I've seen some panels done like this that look pretty nice.
Randall, the angled subpanel is a good idea...I already have both sides of
the panel angle, sorta like a wrap around.
Trouble is with this unit, is that its over 8 inches long, so I cant put it
in my sidepanels. Even putting it in the centre would put the rear end of
it quite a way out.
I think the idea to go see one is the best. I've never seen one of the
beasts, so perhaps sun'nfun is the time to do that.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: Electric Elevator trim |
Is it possible that you mounted the servo too far 'down the slope' on the
brackets? I didn't have a problem with the clevis hitting the skin as you
mention...
dw RV-6 N790DW
>
> Now for a problem that I have yet to try to solve. MAybe someone
> here has done so and can keep me from re-inventing the wheel:
> With the servo mounted per Van's instructions on the access cover,
> I cannot get full travel from the servo. When the servo arm is run
> aft, the arm hits the access cover. My thoughts are:
>
> 1. Fabricate new 602A and 602B brackets that will either move
> the servo higher or reduce the angle between the servo and the
> access cover.
>
> 2. MOve the 602A/602B/servo aft a bit and open up the hole
> in the skin that the pushrod passes thru (because the
> clevis will now also need to pass through that hole when the
> servo arm is run full aft.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Best Regards,
> Dave Barnhart
> RV-6 sn 23744
>
>
I ran into the same problem on my RV6A. I made the passthru hole
longer (aft), and slightly larger to allow the clevis to fit thru
with proper clearance. I used a 'rudder cable fuselage plate' from
Bob Avery to dress it up. Seems to work fine on the ground. I will
be back from Norway next week to resume work on it. Haven't touched
it since November. About 3-4 months from flying it...
Gary Bataller
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Rsolution: small oops |
First, I want to thank everyone who offered their suggestions
for dealing with my 'small oops' (accidentally dimpling the
rivet holes in the HS trim tab stub spar instead of
countersinking them.)
What I ended up doing was dimpling the hinge. The hinge is
soft aluminum, and so dimpling it was no problem.
I must tell you that I felt quite a sense of accomplishment
this past weekend when it occured to me that there were NO
MORE ALUMINUM PARTS ON THE SHELF! The empennage is about
done (it took five months -- boy did that time go quickly),
and except for some detail work (why can't Van's fiberglass
parts be as well-formed as his aluminum ones?) the only
thing I have to do is to sit around and wait for the wing
kit to get here. Fortunately, that should occur any day
now.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Re[2]: Help: small oops |
Don Wentz said (in regards to the "trim tab hinge oops question):
> Randall, the way I understand it, you machine countersunk the material that gets
> the shop head against it? I have to wonder if that is an acceptable practice.
> that leaves very little material for the bucked head to press against.
>
> I think dimpling the hinge would be much more acceptable. That hinge isn't too
> thick to dimple and the warpage won't matter, it will disappear when the piece
> is riveted in.
> This response may be a little late, I was out of town all last week.
> good luck, dw
Yeah you're probably right -- I'm going from memory but at the time it
seemed to me the hinge was thick enough to machine countersink, but I
hadn't thought about the possibility of "acceptable practice" in
regards to having the shop head against a machine countersunk part. I
wonder if there is a rule for that? Maybe it's in that mil-spec that
what's his name is sending to me....
I do remember I had a tough time getting a good c-sink in there,
especially since I didn't back it up with anything when I did it.
Bottom line is, several people say they dimpled theirs and it worked
fine, so if that works I'd think it's the better way.
I'll have to go back and look at mine but I don't know what that'll tell
me now that it's all riveted together. Now if I can just remember where
I stored the damn thing.....
Randall
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Spring for invert tank |
No spring is required.
dw
Does anybody have any words of wisdom concerning the spring for the
inverted tank check valve flapper door thing-a-ma-what's-it that goes
in the next to last rib? I have everything completed except for the
spring. I thought I would just wind a spring out of music wire and be
done with it but the springs that I have tried don't seem to work. The
music wire doesn't hold it's shape. I,m starting to think that a VCR
door spring might work. Any ideas?
Thanks --Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: Electric Elevator trim fa... |
> I can assure you that you can not hold enough stick pressure to fly the
> airplane with the trim tab in the full down position, I have a MAC servo
> on my -6 and just moving the trim a fraction of the full travel makes
> tremendous stick pressure at crusie speed, I think that there would be
> so much pressure that there would be damage elsewere. I do not worry
> about it coming loose or breaking, but do worry about a electrical
> problem that might make it runnaway so I have installed a breaker switch
> in the trim system so all I have to do is turn off the breaker.
Good point Jerry, I too have installed a separate trim breaker., however,
is this also the case with the mechanical trim, that it is impossible to
hold aginst full down trim? There are two different servos I believe with
different travels. Is it possible that you have the long travel one?
Ken
6-A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: Re[6]: rudder trim |
>I'm already up and flying with my setup, but I would like to see that
>relay circuit, just so I could see what's going on there.
>dw
Don, do you have a fax#? The drawing is in Macintosh format, so if you have
a Mac I could email it to you.
My email address is J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)magic.ca
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kvap(at)solar.sky.net (Kevin E. Vap) |
| Subject: | Re: The next step... |
>The envelope please...
>
>[drum roll]
>
>And the winner is - RV-6!
>
>Now to start collecting tools.
>
>A question now...
>
>Has anybody seen the preview plans Van is now selling? Wondering if I
>should get these for study, or the full-size set.
>
> Alan Reichert
>
Alan, I just decided to start my RV-6 project last week after seeing another
builder's RV-6 project (Doug McMullin in Wellsville KS, fellow member of EAA
Chapter 868, Olathe KS).
I ordered the preview plans last week. Since Van's are now encouraging to
purchase the preview and then receive full size plans with the kit, I
elected to follow their latest directions. I'll be happy to answer any
questions you have when I get them, as I'm not sure who else on the list has
them yet.
And...ditto on starting to collect tools.
Kevin Vap
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JerryFlyRV(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Elevator trim fa... |
>Good point Jerry, I too have installed a separate trim breaker., >however,
>is this also the case with the mechanical trim, that it is impossible >to
>hold aginst full down trim? There are two different servos I believe >with
>different travels. Is it possible that you have the long travel one?
>Ken
>6-A
Ken
I do have the long travel servo, but it takes such a small amount of trim
tab movement to trim the airplane that I don't think it would matter if it
was a shorter travel servo. I just don't think you could hold the airplane
with a full deflection of the trim tab.(although this is just my opinion
based on experience of flying my RV-6 for 700 hrs) I also don't think that in
flight machanical failure is a big worry because at normal speed the trim tab
should be pretty well centered therefore very small forces working on it.
Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: Electric Elevator trim fa... |
When I bought my elevator trim, the servo wasn't included in the kit, so I
bought the shortest throw servo (less $$), even tho the kit called for the
longer one (I reckoned that since early users were complaining about touchy
elec trim, the shorter one would be sufficient). I certainly have NEVER
come even close to needing full travel.
Also, I ruined my servo mounts and had to make my own replacements. I
believe mine mount the servo higher than the stock ones (by accident), and
that may be why I didn't have the skin interference that some folks have
mentioned.
dw
>Good point Jerry, I too have installed a separate trim breaker., >however,
>is this also the case with the mechanical trim, that it is impossible >to
>hold aginst full down trim? There are two different servos I believe >with
>different travels. Is it possible that you have the long travel one?
>Ken
>6-A
Ken
I do have the long travel servo, but it takes such a small amount of trim
tab movement to trim the airplane that I don't think it would matter if it
was a shorter travel servo. I just don't think you could hold the airplane
with a full deflection of the trim tab.(although this is just my opinion
based on experience of flying my RV-6 for 700 hrs) I also don't think that in
flight machanical failure is a big worry because at normal speed the trim tab
should be pretty well centered therefore very small forces working on it.
Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Re[2]: Fwd: Re: Sun n Fun |
Don:
There were a lot of "IF's" in being able to get to SnF, but the big one "if
I can get off of work" turned out to be negative. I won't be able to go
after all. I was sending my other Scheduler, here at work, to a training
class at the end of March. The training was rescheduled for the same week as
SnF. This would leave no one "minding the store" in our department so my
boss won't let me go.
I'm really disapointed now! It would have been a lot of fun. I was really
looking forward to a 6A weenie roast.
Make Randall put you up. He's been braging about going for a month now.
Sorry!
>Bob, Im trying to arrange a customer visit in that area during SnF. If I make
>it and can extend so I can go to SnF for a while, can I slide-in at your folks
>place?
>dw
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)NtwkServ.MTS.MB.CA> |
| Subject: | Re: Spring for invert tank |
Chris, I haven't got to this point yet, but I'll be there in a week or
so. Is a spring required? I thought perhaps the weight of the fuel would
be sufficient to close the trap door (like a check valve).
If a spring is required, here is a trick from my model airplane days: try
a torsion spring:
Take a four inch piece of music wire and put a 90 degree bend 1 inch from
the end. Insert the long end into a small (1/8 or less) diameter, 2
inch long aluminum tube. Put a 90 degree bend on the other end, so the
music wire now has a "Z" shape with the tube trapped in the middle. Use a
small clamp and rivet (like the pitot tube clamps) to attach the tube
just above the hinge line. One "arm" of the spring should rest against
the door, and the other end against the rib. You may have to put a little
pre-load in the spring to get the desired tension. Small diameter
aluminum tube and music wire is available at hobby shops. I would use
small music wire and keep the tension fairly low.
tube | music wire
|-O========)-|
hinge HHHHHHHHH|HHHHHHH
| | |
| trap door |
_____|_______________|_________________
Cheers,
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kvap(at)solar.sky.net (Kevin E. Vap) |
Hey everyone...
I just received my preview plans for the RV-6. In browsing them, I noticed
in the Weight & Balance Section that it was figuring the gross weight for
the RV-6A as 1650, whereas the RV-6 as 1600. In all the literature I could
get my hands on before had set them both at 1600.
Since I am "gravitationally enhanced" (read: much heavier than the average
170 lb pilot), useful load played a large part in my RV-6 vs RV-6A decision.
Since the nosewheel adds 30-35lbs, I thought an RV-6 would give me that
advantage. However, these new figures show that an RV-6A would give me
nearly 20 lbs more load. This is enough to go from wood prop to metal prop,
or from fixed to CS prop, or ??? (insert other weight related decisions I
could make).
So...before I call Van's, maybe somebody could shed some light on this
confusion. I would really like to build an RV-6, but a significant useful
load advantage could sway me back towards the RV-6A.
Sorry if I get everyone started on extolling the virtures of each design again.
- Kevin
http://www.sky.net/~kvap/kvap.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Busick <rbusick(at)nmsu.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6 vs RV-6a |
1600 gross weight for the RV-6 and 1650 for the RV-6A doesn't make any
sense to me. Can aynone out there explain this?
Bob Busick
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6 vs RV-6a |
It is my understanding that the gross weights set by Van's are
"recommended" values based on their prototypes and that in the US
anyway the aircraft builder can set it at whatever he/she wants
really. One reason for this is that with homebuilts, each plane is
unique and may have different characteristics at or near gross weight,
so the gross weight figures can't really be all that precise. Gross
weights in both production and homebuilts are usually pretty
conservative, I suppose they figured adding 50 lbs to make up for the
heavier nosewheel would still leave it well within the margin for
safety. I'd guess that they just added the 50 lbs to the -6A because 1)
It's easier to handle on the ground and so would be more forgiving of
sloppy landing techniques at or near gross, 2) Testing of their
prototype revealed that a higher gross weight was acceptable, and 3) 50
lbs is a good round number.
Please post what you find out from Van's, I'd be interested in knowing
what they say about it.
>
> I just received my preview plans for the RV-6. In browsing them, I noticed
> in the Weight & Balance Section that it was figuring the gross weight for
> the RV-6A as 1650, whereas the RV-6 as 1600. In all the literature I could
> get my hands on before had set them both at 1600.
>
> Since I am "gravitationally enhanced" (read: much heavier than the average
> 170 lb pilot), useful load played a large part in my RV-6 vs RV-6A decision.
> Since the nosewheel adds 30-35lbs, I thought an RV-6 would give me that
> advantage. However, these new figures show that an RV-6A would give me
> nearly 20 lbs more load. This is enough to go from wood prop to metal prop,
> or from fixed to CS prop, or ??? (insert other weight related decisions I
> could make).
>
> So...before I call Van's, maybe somebody could shed some light on this
> confusion. I would really like to build an RV-6, but a significant useful
> load advantage could sway me back towards the RV-6A.
>
> Sorry if I get everyone started on extolling the virtures of each design again.
>
> - Kevin
>
> http://www.sky.net/~kvap/kvap.html
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James Mike Wilson <James_Mike_Wilson(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: Spring for invert tank |
Text item:
I only used a stop to prevent door from opening more than 90deg.
If fuel try's to get out, door closes. Prefect seal is not necessary.
jmw
No spring is required.
dw
Does anybody have any words of wisdom concerning the spring for the
inverted tank check valve flapper door thing-a-ma-what's-it that goes
in the next to last rib? I have everything completed except for the
spring. I thought I would just wind a spring out of music wire and be
done with it but the springs that I have tried don't seem to work. The
music wire doesn't hold it's shape. I,m starting to think that a VCR
door spring might work. Any ideas?
Thanks --Chris
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: Re: Spring for invert tank
From: Don Wentz <ccm2.hf.intel.com!Don_Wentz(at)matronics.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 95 16:04:01 PST
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | To Don Wentz Re: Re[8]: rudder trim |
>No Mac here! (Intel :-) You could FAX it if you don't mind,
>503-681-8711.
>thx, dw
Don, did you get the fax. If it needs explanation, drop me a note.
Sorry about the Intel. ;-)
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: RV-6 vs RV-6a |
Just for interest's sake, the AirBeetle was grossed at 1850 lbs, mind you,
it was coming in empty at about 1250!!
It also had a modified gear which I'm sure has something to do with it.
Ken
RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | pressure transducers |
I have a 100 psi oil pressure sender and a 50 psi fuel sender. They are both
the same type of device, 4 terminal with a 1/8 npt thread (the expensive
type)
Has anyone interfaced this type of transducer to custom electronics? I've
done my oil temp, fuel flow, RPM, amps, volts, cht and egt, but these two
are driving me nuts now. Anyone?
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
What routes have builders taken to get cables from the front to the rear of
the main spar?
Depending on how many options you build in, there are plenty of wires that
have to wind their way to under the seat panels.
For those of you using electric elevator trim, the hole for the trim cable
is a good route. You have to change the hole in the spar to be a slot so
it will slide over the wires, but the hole in the bulkhead doesn't need
changing and accepts a 5/8 grommet. Plenty of room for most needs.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
On my RV4, I drilled two holes in the center of the spar (half way between
the top plates and the bottom plates) thru the spar web. One hole is in the
left wing spar and the other is in the right wing spar web so I could route
wires under the floor on either the right or left side. The left side was
used for strobe and wing light. The right hole was for tail light.
You have to locate the holes span wise so that you don't hit any internal
structure as there are some virtical square pieces in there.
Also have to locate so it works for whatever else is under the floor fwd and
aft of the spar.
I think you are OK drilling holes in this manner as you have to cut out about
6 inches of this center web anyway for the torque tube (controls).
The critical part is to not drill into any of the plates or doublers.
Stay on the centerline between the spar plates and avoid any internal components.
Check Spar plans before drilling.
I think I drilled a 1/2 inch or so hole and push polyethelene (sp?) tubing
thru it to protect the wires. This gives a large enough hole to route several
wires thru it.
> From root Sat Mar 25 20:37:53 1995
> From: mail.magic.ca!J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)matronics.com
>
> What routes have builders taken to get cables from the front to the rear of
> the main spar?
>
> Depending on how many options you build in, there are plenty of wires that
> have to wind their way to under the seat panels.
>
> For those of you using electric elevator trim, the hole for the trim cable
> is a good route. You have to change the hole in the spar to be a slot so
> it will slide over the wires, but the hole in the bulkhead doesn't need
> changing and accepts a 5/8 grommet. Plenty of room for most needs.
> Ken
>
--------------------------------------------------------
*NOTICE for internet mail*: Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my
own and are independent of my employer.
Herman Dierks, Dept. E54S, AWSD Austin, Texas
mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com VM: DIERKS at AUSVM6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John.Morrissey(at)its.csiro.au (John Morrissey) |
| Subject: | Birth Announcement - VH-SIX - RV6 |
Hi All,
Wow what a weekend!!
During high speed taxy tests on Saturday 25th March at 3.35pm Eastern
Australian Time - Vans RV6 - VH-SIX left the ground. The only thing to
do was to take it for a quick circuit :-)
Both Builder and RV6 are doing well.
Basic stats
Builder :- Andre Viljoen
Aircraft :- RV6 with 180HP, Fixed pitch prop.
Test pilots:- Simon Pike - Builder of first RV6 in OZ
Me! :-) :-)
Ahh that RV Grin :-)
John Morrissey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
| Subject: | RV wiring (update) |
Let me clarify something on my note below.
I am at work and the plans and RV4 are at the hangar.
Therefore, I am not 100% sure the hole should be in the center of the web as
there may also be some structure inside at that point.
As my note said however, look at the spar plans and at the spar and ensure
you will not drill into any part of the web that has some structural member
behind it and keep the hole close to the center of the spar as possible.
> On my RV4, I drilled two holes in the center of the spar (half way between
> the top plates and the bottom plates) thru the spar web. One hole is in the
> left wing spar and the other is in the right wing spar web so I could route
> wires under the floor on either the right or left side. The left side was
> used for strobe and wing light. The right hole was for tail light.
> You have to locate the holes span wise so that you don't hit any internal
> structure as there are some virtical square pieces in there.
> Also have to locate so it works for whatever else is under the floor fwd and
> aft of the spar.
>
> I think you are OK drilling holes in this manner as you have to cut out about
> 6 inches of this center web anyway for the torque tube (controls).
> The critical part is to not drill into any of the plates or doublers.
> Stay on the centerline between the spar plates and avoid any internal components.
> Check Spar plans before drilling.
>
> I think I drilled a 1/2 inch or so hole and push polyethelene (sp?) tubing
> thru it to protect the wires. This gives a large enough hole to route several
> wires thru it.
>
> > From root Sat Mar 25 20:37:53 1995
> > From: mail.magic.ca!J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)matronics.com
> >
> > What routes have builders taken to get cables from the front to the rear of
> > the main spar?
> >
> > Depending on how many options you build in, there are plenty of wires that
> > have to wind their way to under the seat panels.
> >
> > For those of you using electric elevator trim, the hole for the trim cable
> > is a good route. You have to change the hole in the spar to be a slot so
> > it will slide over the wires, but the hole in the bulkhead doesn't need
> > changing and accepts a 5/8 grommet. Plenty of room for most needs.
> > Ken
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------
> *NOTICE for internet mail*: Any ideas or thoughts expressed here are my
> own and are independent of my employer.
>
> Herman Dierks, Dept. E54S, AWSD Austin, Texas
> mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com VM: DIERKS at AUSVM6
>
>
Herman Dierks, Dept. E54S, AWSD Austin, Texas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dralle (Matt G. Dralle 1+ 510-447-9886) |
| Subject: | Re: pressure transducers |
>--------------
>I have a 100 psi oil pressure sender and a 50 psi fuel sender. They are both
>the same type of device, 4 terminal with a 1/8 npt thread (the expensive
>type)
>
>Has anyone interfaced this type of transducer to custom electronics? I've
>done my oil temp, fuel flow, RPM, amps, volts, cht and egt, but these two
>are driving me nuts now. Anyone?
>
>Ken
>
>
>--------------
The four leads are as follows: +volts, -volts, +signal, and -signal.
You can use +volts and ground, but for the best readings you should use a
split supply. Also, you should use a deferential amp to amplify the signal.
You can use +12 volts ( +volts ), chassis ground ( -volts ), and reference
a floating ground. You have to be very careful when connecting to other
external devices when using a floating ground setup, however, especially
if the devices are designed for 5 volts. Depending on the transducer,
you will need moderate to high gain to drive an A/D converter. Again,
your best bet is to go deferential on the A/D converter for the best
accuracy.
If your going to connect directly to a meter, um, well, you're on your own...
:-)
Good Luck
Matt Dralle
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Wing Tanks - grrrr! |
---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes ---------------------------
From: owner-grumman-gang(at)xmission.com at SMTPGATE
Date: 3/27/95 7:07AM
*To: grumman-gang(at)xmission.com at SMTPGATE
*To: markm(at)xmission.com at SMTPGATE
Subject: Wing Tanks - grrrr!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Text item:
Thought the RV builders would be interested in this from the Grumman (Tiger,
Cheetah, Traveler, Lynx, etc) chat line. It refers to the fact that the fuel
tanks in these aircraft are not nearly as well closed up as in the RV; big gaps
remain which must be filled with ProSeal and it must be replaced about every 10
years. Grumman owners get a lot of experience with fuel tanks. The referenced
access plates are on the bottom side of the tank.
Frank J.
>It appears as if I'm going to have to make a decision soon on resealing my
>fuel tanks. Seeking references for places which have good success at this
>sort of thing.
never had absolute success, but reasonably good - ie lasts several years -
doing it myself. It is a total PITA though.
I have one piece of advice which I *STRONGLY* recommend. DO NOT seal the
fuel tank inspection plates back on. They are a *BITCH* to get off again
and as you seem to realize there is a high probability that you will
need to get them off w/in a couple of years.
Instead of sealing them, run down to the local auto parts store and buy
four of sheets of 1/16" neoprene-cork gasket material. Place one of
the inspection plates (are yours all the same size, or are they different
inboard and outboard ?) on the sheet and draw it's outline, also mark the
center of each screw hole. Now free hand atother outline about 3/4"
inside the one you just drew. Cut out this "hoop" of gasket, then use
a single-hole hand punch to punch out where you just marked the screw
holes - making sure you get them centered up correctly. This makes an
excellent gasoline proof gasket for a couple of bucks and 20 mins
work, and enables you to install/remove the inspection plates without
all that nasty goo setting up in the screw holes and without destroying
the plate when you remove it.
I've had excellent experience (NOT LUCK) doing this and will
*NEVER EVER* use tank sealant on an inspection plate again !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin C. Walker martinw(at)eapi.com
Project Lead Voice (513) 629-2517
Eagle-Picher Industries (513) 721-7010
580 Walnut St, Cinti, OH 45202 Fax (513) 629-2449
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 9:46:13 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Wing Tanks - grrrr!
From: "Martin C. Walker,EP,x2517" <martinw(at)eapi.com>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JerryFlyRV(at)aol.com |
>What routes have builders taken to get cables from the front to the >rear of
>main spar?
>Depending on how many options you build in, there are plenty of >wires that
>have to wind their way to under the seat panels.
>For those of you using electric elevator trim, the hole for the trim >cable
>is a good route. You have to change the hole in the spar to be a >slot so
>it will slide over the wires, but the hole in the bulkhead doesn't need
>changing and accepts a 5/8 grommet. Plenty of room for most >needs.
>Ken
Regarding getting wiring to the front or back of the spar.
The web where the spars butt together can have a fairly big hole cut in it
if you are building a -6, each spar end can have say a 1"radius cut in it. As
those that are building -4 know there is already a hole cut in the spar web
where the control tube goes through the spar.
Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
You're welcome. Yes I have the sets, and made an improvement to the
"collared" set with a pin through it just like the Avery short set.
I don't have Cortauld's new address handy, but I'll look for it tonight.
>Thanks Bob! I'll be taking it over to Rion's so it'll be there if
>anyone else needs it. Bob -- you have the sets, right?
>
>Bob: do you have Courtauld's new phone#/address?
>
>Randall
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
| Subject: | Re[2]: pressure transducers |
Ken,
If it's a Westach transducer (or equivalent), there was an article
in Kitplanes about 4 years ago that gave the electrical output vs. sensor
input equations for all of their sensors. The article was about a guy
building a HUD (Heads Up Display) for a homebuilt. The display wasn't very
useful (it used a half sivered mirror in front of one eye) in my opinion,
but his sensor data was.
I meant to keep this article, but it seemed to go the way of most
old magazines! Perhaps someone at your local EAA chapter has a complete
set, or you could possibly call Kitplanes to see if they have any back
issues.
If you can find this data, post it for the rest of us.
... happy hunting ... Gil Alexander, RV6A, #20701
>I have a 100 psi oil pressure sender and a 50 psi fuel sender. They are both
>the same type of device, 4 terminal with a 1/8 npt thread (the expensive
>type)
>
>Has anyone interfaced this type of transducer to custom electronics? I've
>done my oil temp, fuel flow, RPM, amps, volts, cht and egt, but these two
>are driving me nuts now. Anyone?
>
>Ken
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Sorry to send this to the whole list, but:
Mike Wilson! If you're still on the list, would
you please send me mail so I can get your new
e-mail address?
Randall
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | StuFraley(at)aol.com |
To Whom It May Concern:
I've just seen mention of you in the latest RVator.
Please add me to the list.
Stuart Fraley (RV-6 under construction)
stu fraley(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "A. Reichert" <reichera(at)clark.net> |
| Subject: | TEST - Ignore this. |
Test 2.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: pressure transducers |
> >-------------- >I have a 100 psi oil pressure sender and a 50 psi fuel
> sender. They are both >the same type of device, 4 terminal with a 1/8
> npt thread (the expensive >type) > >Has anyone interfaced this type of
> transducer to custom electronics? I've >done my oil temp, fuel flow,
> RPM, amps, volts, cht and egt, but these two >are driving me nuts now.
> Anyone? > >Ken > > >--------------
>
>
> The four leads are as follows: +volts, -volts, +signal, and -signal.
>
> You can use +volts and ground, but for the best readings you should use
> a split supply. Also, you should use a deferential amp to amplify the
> signal. You can use +12 volts ( +volts ), chassis ground ( -volts ), and
> reference a floating ground. You have to be very careful when
> connecting to other external devices when using a floating ground setup,
> however, especially if the devices are designed for 5 volts. Depending
> on the transducer, you will need moderate to high gain to drive an A/D
> converter. Again, your best bet is to go deferential on the A/D
> converter for the best accuracy.
>
> If your going to connect directly to a meter, um, well, you're on your
> own... :-)
The senders are actually going to a 68HC11 microcontroller thats driving an
LCD display. My problem with these senders is that its difficult to know
just how much gain and offset to use because I need to ensure they measure
accurately and the output is dependent on supply voltage.
I will be using a differential amp and +10 to gnd. I'll probably have to
connect the system up to an airline to calibrate because I don't want to be
debugging the oil pressure reading on a new engine :-(
What threw me is that I have a 3 lead 15 psi sender that gives me about 0-5
volts out, whereas the 4 lead devices only give something like 2
millivolt/psi
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dralle (Matt G. Dralle 1+ 510-447-9886) |
| Subject: | Re: pressure transducers |
>--------------
>> >-------------- >I have a 100 psi oil pressure sender and a 50 psi fuel
>> sender. They are both >the same type of device, 4 terminal with a 1/8
>> npt thread (the expensive >type) > >Has anyone interfaced this type of
>> transducer to custom electronics? I've >done my oil temp, fuel flow,
>> RPM, amps, volts, cht and egt, but these two >are driving me nuts now.
>> Anyone? > >Ken > > >--------------
>>
>>
>> The four leads are as follows: +volts, -volts, +signal, and -signal.
>>
>> You can use +volts and ground, but for the best readings you should use
>> a split supply. Also, you should use a deferential amp to amplify the
>> signal. You can use +12 volts ( +volts ), chassis ground ( -volts ), and
>> reference a floating ground. You have to be very careful when
>> connecting to other external devices when using a floating ground setup,
>> however, especially if the devices are designed for 5 volts. Depending
>> on the transducer, you will need moderate to high gain to drive an A/D
>> converter. Again, your best bet is to go deferential on the A/D
>> converter for the best accuracy.
>>
>> If your going to connect directly to a meter, um, well, you're on your
>> own... :-)
>
>The senders are actually going to a 68HC11 microcontroller thats driving an
>LCD display. My problem with these senders is that its difficult to know
>just how much gain and offset to use because I need to ensure they measure
>accurately and the output is dependent on supply voltage.
>
>I will be using a differential amp and +10 to gnd. I'll probably have to
>connect the system up to an airline to calibrate because I don't want to be
>debugging the oil pressure reading on a new engine :-(
>
>What threw me is that I have a 3 lead 15 psi sender that gives me about 0-5
>volts out, whereas the 4 lead devices only give something like 2
>millivolt/psi
>
>Ken
>
>--------------
Depending on how much you want to pay to the transducers, you can get stainless
steel pressure transducers with an output ranges from millivolts to volts
(0-5). Check out a mag called 'Sensors'. It has a lot of interesting things
in it. If you find a 0-30 psi (and 0-150) fuel pressure sender with
0-5 volts output for ~$15 in 100ea quanity, let me know. That's what I'm
in the market for. Actually, a highly accurate *resistive* sender would
work out good for my needs as well.
Matt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Congratulations John Morrissey |
Congratulations.
I could almost see the smile on your face!!
Ken
RV-6A(soon)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
> I think you are OK drilling holes in this manner as you have to cut out
> about
> 6 inches of this center web anyway for the torque tube (controls).
> The critical part is to not drill into any of the plates or doublers.
> Stay on the centerline between the spar plates and avoid any internal
> components.
> Check Spar plans before drilling.
6 inches....for controls!!! What???
Aha, I just realized you're building a '4.
Still, as Jerry indicated, you can cut quite a bit through the spar web. I
think the trick is to make it low enough so that it doesn't interfere with
control assembly and secure the cables well enough to avoid ANY possibility
of fouling here.
It's always a bit scary cutting material away from something as precious as
a wing spar!!
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kvap(at)solar.sky.net (Kevin E. Vap) |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6 vs RV-6a |
>I just received my preview plans for the RV-6. In browsing them, I noticed
in >the Weight & Balance Section that it was figuring the gross weight for
the >RV-6A as 1650, whereas the RV-6 as 1600. In all the literature I could
get my >hands on before had set them both at 1600.
>...
Well, I talked to Van's today (Tom, I think it was). He said that all the
magazines and their info pack (I have last years) was probably wrong in
listing the RV-6A gross weight as 1600.
As was said here last week (I forget who), he said they probably set it at
1650 so the 6 & 6A would have similar useful loads. He also reiterated that
the builder can certify to a different gross (he has a 6 at 1650).
I guess its probably a minor issue and will go ahead with the RV-6 (the one
I want) instead of a 6A to get that extra useful load. I'm curious...if
anyone has the newest info pack (after last August), could you look it up on
there and tell me if it is any different?
- Kevin
"RV-6 #24163" http://www.sky.net/~kvap/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Pro-Seal really is as bad as they say |
Well, here I am, a RV-4 builder in the '90's. All this experience to draw
from both written and verbal. One thing's for sure, everyone I've talked to
and everything I've read says that pro-sealing is the worst, most horrible
thing they've ever done.
Armed with this knowledge I planned ahead. I dry fit everything, practiced
my riveting sequence, mixed up some pro-seal to observe what the pot life
was. I had everything ready to go: MEK, laquer thinner, paper towels and
rags coming out the ying-yang, I wore old, dirty clothes, had a box full of
rubber gloves, rivets, squeezer and gun close at hand. Hey, I was ready!
Well, even with all this preparation, it STILL was a nightmare. I got
pro-seal on places I know I didn't get within 100 feet of! And on parts of
my body I'm ashamed to identify.
I've got the tank all together now, but I've got to tell you, I'm considering
building the first RV-4 with only one wing tank!
Any helpful hints would be GREATLY appreciated.
Thanks, Ted
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | trim tab servo placement: solution |
I want to thank everyone who offered their help with my trim tab servo
placement problem (when mounted according to the plans, the servo arm hit
the access cover at full aft travel).
Last weekend, I drew a profile (side) view of that area of the elevator/
trim tab on a piece of left-over poster board. I found that all I
needed to do was to:
1. Put a 1/8-inch shim between the servo mounting brackets and the
access plate.
2. slightly legnthen and widen the slot the pushrod goes through.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Tip: working with fiberglass |
I stole this technique from another local builder. I needed to move
the 'shoulder' on the VS fiberglass tip up a bit (so the tip would
rest a little lower in the VS)
Mark a line on the tip with a Saarpie where you want the new shoulder.
Clamp a flexible steel rule on that line so the edge of the steel
rule is exactly aligned with the line. Use a hacksaw blade and
drag it over the fiberglass along the edge of the steel rule. It
will cut a nice straight groove in the fiberglass exactly where
you want the new shoulder. Finally, use a dremel tool and a small
cutter (I used a little cylindrical-shaped steel cutter about 1/4-inch in
diameter and about 3/8 inch long.) to remove the excess material
between the original shoulder and the new one.
Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Miner" <dougm(at)qm.WV.TEK.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Pro-Seal really is as ba |
RE>Pro-Seal really is as bad as they say 3/28/95 9:54 AM
Oh you guys are cracking me up!~
Now don't any of you take this wrong... ok?!
Proseal is not the pain that you are making it out to be. It really isn't.
I have built at least a dozen tanks now, and here is ~T H E~ seceret.
Use a small flexable metal spatula. and wind the stuff on it like cheese from
a pizza. use MEK to clean the spatula. use MEK to wipe the squeezed out sealant
around the rivit head.
This idea came to me about the second tank I was assembling at Phologistion...
I was having pizza for dinner and started winding the cheese around my fork...
the next day and from then on out... tank sealing was a snap. (sure you're bound
to get it on stuff... but don't stress on it... it is reminance of building
an airplane! Your friends (if they don't already know) will ask euwwwww what
is that stuff! and you can then go into a long disertation on the process
of building an RV!~
in 5 years when you go to use those needle nose plyers and see a lil sealant, you
will smile and remember how much fun building your airplane was...Then go flying!
Doug~
Randall & Rion,
I died laughing at your "take us to your leader" photo in the last newsletter!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kvap(at)solar.sky.net (Kevin E. Vap) |
| Subject: | Re[2]: RV-6 vs RV-6a |
Thanks to Don Wentz and Randall Henderson for all those things to think
about. I'm aware of the aft CG considerations and the gross weight, I just
keep forgetting to think about both of those things at the same time.
Currently I'm planning on an RV-6 with fixed metal prop, O-320, medium
panel. Of course I've got 2000+ hours of building to do to change my mind
about the engine/prop/avionics.
- Kevin
http://www.sky.net/~kvap/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | StuFraley(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Compliant Newbie |
RV-List:
As requested in the RV-List Message Policy, my autobiography follows:
My address:
e-mail: Stu Fraley(at)aol.com
snail mail:
Stuart Fraley
7800 Washington Ave.
Evansville, IN 47715
Ph: (812)471-5745 day and night
I am building RV-6(A?) #23899. I've finished the HS and VS, ready to start
riveting the rudder tomorrow afternoon.
If you've had a discussion about the merits of the Barnard wing kits, I'd
appreciate it if somebody would send me a copy. If not, I'll lurk around
until someone posts a question about them (but soon, please; I'm about to
order the wing kit).
Otherwise, MailArchive=no
Stuart Fraley
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | leo(at)icn.su.OZ.AU (Leo Davies) |
| Subject: | Australian RV builders |
I understand that you have an interest group for RV builder/flyers/owners. I
would be interested in being on the receiving end of such information
(building and RV6A). I am a newcomer to the net having so far only used it
to send EMail to single recipients. How do I get access to your bulletin board?
Thanks,
Leo Davies, Sydney Australia
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Standley <Gary_Standley(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: Pro-Seal really is as ba |
Text item:
Ya' know Doug, I really don't know how these guys get anything done with
all the whining about getting their hands dirty. Hey guys (gals), when
it's done and you break the surly bonds of earth for the first time,
pro-seal will have no meaning at all, unless your tanks start leaking of
course.
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Pro-Seal really is as ba
Date: 3/28/95 5:54 PM
RE>Pro-Seal really is as bad as they say 3/28/95
9:54 AM
Oh you guys are cracking me up!~
Now don't any of you take this wrong... ok?!
Proseal is not the pain that you are making it out to be. It really isn't.
I have built at least a dozen tanks now, and here is ~T H E~ seceret.
Use a small flexable metal spatula. and wind the stuff on it like
cheese from a pizza. use MEK to clean the spatula. use MEK to wipe
the squeezed out sealant around the rivit head.
This idea came to me about the second tank I was assembling at Phologistion...
I was having pizza for dinner and started winding the cheese around
my fork... the next day and from then on out... tank sealing was a
snap. (sure you're bound to get it on stuff... but don't stress on
it... it is reminance of building an airplane! Your friends (if they
don't already know) will ask euwwwww what is that stuff! and you can
then go into a long disertation on the process of building an RV!~
in 5 years when you go to use those needle nose plyers and see a lil
sealant, you will smile and remember how much fun building your airplane
was...Then go flying!
Doug~
Randall & Rion,
I died laughing at your "take us to your leader" photo in the last newsletter!
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: Re: Pro-Seal really is as ba
From: "Doug Miner" <qm.WV.TEK.COM!dougm(at)matronics.com>
Date: 28 Mar 1995 16:39:15 -0800
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Compliant Newbie |
RV-List:
As requested in the RV-List Message Policy, my autobiography follows:
My address:
e-mail: Stu Fraley(at)aol.com
snail mail:
>If you've had a discussion about the merits of the Barnard wing kits, I'd
>appreciate it if somebody would send me a copy. If not, I'll lurk around
>until someone posts a question about them (but soon, please; I'm about to
>order the wing kit).
The Barnard kit will save you about 150 to 200 hours and some worry. If you have
lots of money and little time, buy it. If you don't mind or actually prefer to
do things yourself, do without it. If you are still worrying constantly about
drilling holes in the wrong place, you should buy it; however, the wing is far
easier to understand than the tail.
Just for comparison, the prepunched wing skins option that Van offered for a
while at $150 was a fantastic bargain, saving about 25 to 30 hours of
not-very-rewarding drudgery. This is now standard for the RV-6.
FKJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re[2]: Pro-Seal really is as ba |
Text item:
> RE>Pro-Seal really is as bad as they say 3/28/95 9:54 AM
>
>
>Oh you guys are cracking me up!~
>
>Now don't any of you take this wrong... ok?!
>
>Proseal is not the pain that you are making it out to be. It really isn't.
>
>I have built at least a dozen tanks now, and here is ~T H E~ seceret.
>
>Use a small flexable metal spatula. and wind the stuff on it like
>cheese from a pizza. use MEK to clean the spatula. use MEK to wipe
>the squeezed out sealant around the rivit head.
I know it sounds too good to be true, but he's right. Make yourself several
metal spatulas, 1/4" to 1/2" wide, out of various thicknesses of aluminum scrap.
(or buy artist's pallette knives) One will be just right at whipping out a gob
of goo and laying it on the tank in one easy stroke. Popscicle sticks, tongue
depressors, and other stiff implements just don't do right.
FKJ
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: Re: Pro-Seal really is as ba
From: "Doug Miner" <qm.WV.TEK.COM!dougm(at)matronics.com>
Date: 28 Mar 1995 16:39:15 -0800
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Re[2]: Pro-Seal really is as ba |
>
>Oh you guys are cracking me up!~
>
>Now don't any of you take this wrong... ok?!
>
>Proseal is not the pain that you are making it out to be. It really isn't.
>
Geez, you want to take all the fun out of it, don't you Doug. Don't you
realize the only fun thing about Proseal is being able to whine about
it? Not to mention making sure everyone who hasn't done it yet is
completely terrified at the prospect.
:-) :-) :-)
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James Mike Wilson <James_Mike_Wilson(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Communting in an RV6 |
Text item:
I hitched a ride to work this morning with Don Wentz (RV6). Yup, Don is in the
air again. This is my opportunity to rub in how great it is to fly to work.
What a treat, commuting in an RV. The only problem was, flight time was less
than 10 minutes. Sure puts you in a good mood though, but not for work.
Especially looking forward to getting off work tonight.
MikeW RV4 (starting to jig the fuse)
Text item: External Message Header
The following mail header is for administrative use
and may be ignored unless there are problems.
***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***.
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Pro-Seal really is as ba
From: edt.com!randall(at)matronics.com (Randall Henderson)
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 10:32:19 -0800
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Pro-Seal & N790DW airborne again! |
Now I know why I was wondering what all the whining was about - I don't recall
the proseal being such a big deal, probably because Doug helped my do my tanks!
Really, if you think ProSeal was tough, you're gonna die when you get to the
fiberglass parts!
Which brings me to this: After 5 months on the ground, N790DW is once again
chasing the clouds! I 'finished' my winter rebuild and boy is it great to be
back in the air.
The rebuild consisted of:
Repair and repaint the gear legs (I molded them myself out of glass over foam
and didn't make them strong enough the first time - they split).
Repair/paint the lower cowl (I used epoxy resin to bond the intake scoop to the
cowl and it delaminated. Probably the heat helped. Use Polyester as that is
what the RV fiberglass parts are made from!)
Rebuild/paint the vert/horiz stab intersection fairing (this part I just didn't
do well enough the first time, I wanted it to look better. Now it does!)
Note - all of these glass part problems were pretty much my fault, but of all
the things I did, they took 10 times as long as anything else.
Drill-out/replace rivets on the firewall to floor, spar carry thru, floor
stiffeners. We've had many discussions about this item, just remember: don't
machine countersink any thing you don't HAVE to, and use larger rivets when the
materials get thicker than .032 and you shouldn't have the loosening rivets.
Replace binding 'heim' bearing on elevator. I had damaged this installing it
and it eventually bound up tight, restricting free elevator movement.
Replace Art horizon and VSI. These were the victims of aerobatics. The
bearings blew-out of my rebuilt AIM gyro, and the 'zero' on my VSI would change
after every Split-S. I installed a shut-off valve to my gyros (I'll have to let
you know how that works over the long term), and replaced a 2K/min VSI with a
4K. (got good service and prices from Midwest Aircraft Instruments in Minnesota
- 612-492-6088).
Improved my forward canopy seal.
Re-painted: the red portion of my wing leading edges, extended the stripes
across the wing-root fairing, cowl bottom, gear legs, floor pan, ailerons/flaps
(original paint too thin), and vertical stab (ruined the paint while fixing the
fairing).
Had 1" taken out of the pitch of my prop. Initial testing shows about a 100rpm
gain at all settings: static run-up, climb-out, and top end.
It sure feels great to fly it after 5 MONTHS being a builder again. It's so
great that instead of it being my turn to drive today (I carpool with Mike
Wilson - RV-4 builder), we flew (there Randall, I said it)! (is it time to get
off work yet?????)
Don 'The Duck' Wentz, RV-6 #20369, N790DW, 180HP warnke prop.
>
>Oh you guys are cracking me up!~
>
>Now don't any of you take this wrong... ok?!
>
>Proseal is not the pain that you are making it out to be. It really isn't.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JERRYWALKER(at)delphi.com |
| Subject: | Electric Elevator trim Tab Horn |
What should te moment arm for this horn be? I have the MAC
unit with 1.2 inches of travel. Also, should the motor be
biased for either up or down tab during final adjustments of
the connecting threaded rod.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JERRYWALKER(at)delphi.com |
| Subject: | Electric Elevator trim Tab Horn |
What should te moment arm for this horn be? I have the MAC
unit with 1.2 inches of travel. Also, should the motor be
biased for either up or down tab during final adjustments of
the connecting threaded rod.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John E. Brick" <p01315(at)psilink.com> |
How do I access the RV bulletin board / news group or whatever it is?
Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric Elevator trim Tab Horn |
On Wed, 29 Mar 1995 JERRYWALKER(at)delphi.com wrote:
> What should te moment arm for this horn be?
Having just been through this, I'll tell you what I know.
Van's drawing of the electric trim stuff is not very precise.
(The drawing, by the way, was both in the standard RV-6 plans
and included in the optional electric trim stuff. Look for
a D-sized sheet with the elevator trim drawing on one half
and the aileron trim drawing on the other half.)
I don't have the drawing in front of me, but as I recall,
it showed the hole in the trim tab control arm to be
about a quarter of an inch aft of the hinge line. I'll
measure mine tonight when I get home, but the exact location
doesn't seem to matter a whole lot.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Melting lead for counterweights |
I just finished pouring the lead counterweight in my
right elevator, and it went so well, I thought I
would pass along a couple of things:
1. I used an RCBS Lead Melting Pot. They are
available at Gun shops that sell reloading
supplies and they cost about $11. It is a
nice heavy cast iron, so it will remain hot
long after you remove the heat source.
2. Lead shot melts real easy. I could not
find any lead ingots, but the guy at the
gun shop said the lead shot would melt
just as easily, and he was right.
3. Use a Coleman white gass stove. The guy
at the gun shop asked what I was doing, and
I told him. When I told him I was going to
melt the lead with a propane torch (like
Orndorff does in his video), he said that
I should use a Coleman stove. He was right
again.
In Orndorff's video, it appears that he has
a tough time keeping the lead hot enough to
pour before it solidifies. The Coleman stove
melted the lead to a nice runny liquid,
and I had no problem with it solidifying before
I could get it poured.
Now to do the left one.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Busick <rbusick(at)nmsu.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Melting lead for counterweight |
I have had good results with melting lead bars by using long
handled pliers to hold the lead and using a propane torch to melt the
lead and let it drip right into the cavity that I was trying to fill. Be
carefull and don't burn yourself. This method eliminates the need for a
melting cast iron pot and pouring the hot liquid. Also do this in a well
ventilate area, the lead fumes are considered highly toxic and will
contribute to lead poisoning if inhaled! Lead poisoning is cumulative
over your life time, everyone has already received some small does of
lead, try not to increase it more than you have to.
Bob
On Thu, 30 Mar 1995, David A. Barnhart wrote:
>
> I just finished pouring the lead counterweight in my
> right elevator, and it went so well, I thought I
> would pass along a couple of things:
>
> 1. I used an RCBS Lead Melting Pot. They are
> available at Gun shops that sell reloading
> supplies and they cost about $11. It is a
> nice heavy cast iron, so it will remain hot
> long after you remove the heat source.
>
> 2. Lead shot melts real easy. I could not
> find any lead ingots, but the guy at the
> gun shop said the lead shot would melt
> just as easily, and he was right.
>
> 3. Use a Coleman white gass stove. The guy
> at the gun shop asked what I was doing, and
> I told him. When I told him I was going to
> melt the lead with a propane torch (like
> Orndorff does in his video), he said that
> I should use a Coleman stove. He was right
> again.
>
> In Orndorff's video, it appears that he has
> a tough time keeping the lead hot enough to
> pour before it solidifies. The Coleman stove
> melted the lead to a nice runny liquid,
> and I had no problem with it solidifying before
> I could get it poured.
>
> Now to do the left one.
>
> Best Regards,
> Dave Barnhart
> RV-6 sn 23744
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John.Morrissey(at)its.csiro.au (John Morrissey) |
| Subject: | Re: Australian RV builders |
Gidday Leo,
Yes there are a few of us Aussie's on this list. What's your Email
Address???
Mine is John.Morrissey(at)its.csiro.au
Drop me a line
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Australian RV builders
Date: 29/3/95 3:18 PM
I understand that you have an interest group for RV builder/flyers/owners. I
would be interested in being on the receiving end of such information
(building and RV6A). I am a newcomer to the net having so far only used it
to send EMail to single recipients. How do I get access to your bulletin board?
Thanks,
Leo Davies, Sydney Australia
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ad160(at)freenet.unbc.edu (E French) |
Name: Ted French
City: Prince George
British Columbia
I am presently building an RV-6A. Have been working on it for 4 1/2
years.
I keep hearing bad stories about the cowl pins coming out and going
into the prop.
Seems to me that it would not be too difficult to arrange things
so the pins were inserted from the cockpit. Has anyone any experience
with this.
If so I would appreciate any info.
thanks
Ted.
--
Ted French
Prince George BC
An RV-6A builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | meehan(at)coopext.cahe.wsu.edu (Don Meehan) |
| Subject: | Re: Melting lead for counterweights |
Here is how I did it.
Used old lead weights I got for free from a tire shop.
Used a coffee can and made a pour spot on it before starting.
Used a Coleman stove and tinfoil lid on the can.
Poured off the lead to separate the ferrous metal and crud.
Reheated the clean stuff and poured into tinfoil pie tins to create thin
1/4" thick pieces.
Then cut the pieces up with a chisel and placed them on the elevator to
determine how much to melt, similar to Ormsdorf.
Heated each side separately and poured in. Made sure I poured in more than
needed so I would have some material to offset trimming later on.
Good luck with yours.
>
Don Meehan - meehan(at)coopext.cahe.wsu.edu
Whidbey RV-ators
721 N. Palisades
Coupeville, WA 98239
(Working on Fuselage - RV6A)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | miles(at)hk.net (Miles Ashton) |
unsubscribe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Remi <Remikhu(at)cris.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Melting lead for counterweights |
Since I have a nice supply of SCUBA equipments, the lead belts proved
adequate as counterweight for the flippers.
Just thought I'd chime in with another idea for lead. My $0.02's worth.
Remi Khu
RV-4 #3751
Left Wing
(pre-fuel tank)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Melting lead for counterweights |
On Thu, 30 Mar 1995, Don Meehan wrote:
> Then cut the pieces up with a chisel and placed them on the elevator to
> determine how much to melt, similar to Ormsdorf.
One of the nice things about using lead shot is that it
is easy to determine exactly how much lead you need. I simply
put a paper cup on the counterweight and poured in the shot
until it balanced.
Lead shot is cheap, by the way. I think I paid $4 for a 5-pound bag.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
rv-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Melting lead for counterweights |
With all the talk about melting lead. Hot lead will get a grey scum
on the surface when melted. A good trick to keep the lead clean is to
put a little candle wax in the melting pot just before you pour the lead.
The wax works like a flux and absorbs any oxidation. Another good safty
tip is to keep a can of water near your work area. Melted lead on skin
is painfull (personal experience). Make sure you don't get any water in
the melting pot.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gretzw(at)tcplink.nrel.gov |
When melting your lead in either a pot, or a strong tin can, after the
lead is melted, one should flux the metal. This will help in re-mixing
the alloy of the metal or metals in the lead, and help in the
separation of the dirt and krud that will be in your lead. Wheel
weights are composed of lead and tin. Printers lineotype metal, if
available, is lead, tin and antimony. Lead shot from a gun shop, is
pure lead with graphite coating. Spent bullets from a shooting range
is a combination of all of the above. All sources listed above are
good and useable. The use of the flux and stirring the liquid metal
will insure that the metals are re-mixed and that the lighter alloy
metals will not be on the top surface. The dirt and krud will be on
top and can and should be skimmed off and disposed of. This will
include the wheel weight attach clips, graphite, sand or grit. Skim
with a piece of steel strap bent into an "L" shape. The flux to use
could be a pea size of bees wax, or candle wax. It makes a lot of
smoke and be aware of possible flame for a short time, but not
explosive. Pure lead is denser than any alloy of lead, and pure lead
will be noticeably softer that an alloy containing tin. So,for the
most weight in a volume, use pure lead.
If one chooses to use and old tin can, be alert that the can seam is
soldered together, and when heated to melt the contents, it also will
melt out and cause a slow drip of molten lead. Not fast enough to
cause a problem, but a aggravation.
A last word of extreme caution! If even a drop of water gets into your
container of molten lead it will cause a explosive reaction as it
turns to steam! It will shower the area with very hot molten lead! Be
very careful for personal protection around molten lead!
Last, have fun.
Warren Gretz
RV-6
Denver
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shobensh(at)cln.etc.bc.ca (Shirley Hobenshield) |
how can I subscribe to this list?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Shirley Hobenshield shobensh(at)cln.etc.bc.ca
Kitwanga Elem. Jr. Sec. 604-849-5484
Box 88
Kitwanga, BC, Canada
V0J 2A0
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca |
by mail.magic.ca (PostalUnion/SMTP 1.1.4)
| Subject: | Re: Re[2]: pressure transducers |
> Ken,
> If it's a Westach transducer (or equivalent), there was an
> article in Kitplanes about 4 years ago that gave the electrical output
> vs. sensor input equations for all of their sensors. The article was
> about a guy building a HUD (Heads Up Display) for a homebuilt. The
> display wasn't very useful (it used a half sivered mirror in front of
> one eye) in my opinion, but his sensor data was.
>
> I meant to keep this article, but it seemed to go the way of
> most old magazines! Perhaps someone at your local EAA chapter has a
> complete set, or you could possibly call Kitplanes to see if they have
> any back issues.
Thanks for the pointer Gil.
Actually, its not a Westach. They tend to be the cheaper type. The pressure
transducers I have are the same type used in the VM1000, EXPENSIVE!!
I'll try and search the article out anyway...probably some good info in it.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | StuFraley(at)aol.com |
unsubscribe.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dx406(at)cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Lou Haas) |
UNSUBSCRIBE
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | GGCC44A(at)prodigy.com (MR MALCOLM L HARPER) |
Can someone help me with the trimming of the inboard end of
the RV-6 flaps? I have a fax 404-4126655. Thanks
ggcc44a(at)prodigy.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | doug.weiler(at)swamp.mn.org |
| Subject: | Intro to RV-List (#1) |
Greetings:
I am brand new to the RV-List and would like to introduce myself. My name is
Doug Weiler, president of the Minnesota Wing of Van's AirForce. We have a very
active builder's group in the Minneapolis area with just under 200 members
(about 100 RVs under construction with 28 flying). We publish a quarterly
newsletter (which we exchange with most of the other builder's groups) and try
to meet every other month or so. Each September we have a fly-in/pig roast
south of Minneapolis at a local residential airpark.
Personally, I am building an RV-4 (#2649) and have the tail complete and the
wings probably around 50%. I've restored a Cessna 140A, Aeronca Champ, and a
1959 Cessna 180 which we still have. Been dabbling in sport aviation since 1968
or so, worked as a corporate pilot in Dayton, Ohio for quite a while,and now fly
for Northwest Airlines on the 727.
I am really looking forward to participating in your group. I hope to get some
good info that you will allow me to use in my newsletter and I will be happy to
pass alone tips and pitfalls we have learned here in the MN Wing. This sounds
like a great resource and it should be great fun cruising the "info highway"
checking out RVs!
I look forward to hearing from you soon!!
Doug Weiler, Hudson, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | meehan(at)coopext.cahe.wsu.edu (Don Meehan) |
| Subject: | Re: Melting lead for counterweights |
Here is how I did it.
Used old lead weights I got for free from a tire shop.
Used a coffee can and made a pour spot on it before starting.
Used a Coleman stove and tinfoil lid on the can.
Poured off the lead to separate the ferrous metal and crud.
Reheated the clean stuff and poured into tinfoil pie tins to create thin
1/4" thick pieces.
Then cut the pieces up with a chisel and placed them on the elevator to
determine how much to melt, similar to Ormsdorf.
Heated each side separately and poured in. Made sure I poured in more than
needed so I would have some material to offset trimming later on. filled
the inside half fullest. Did an initial trimming pior to final mount of tip.
I actually placed a piece of the lead in the tip piece to get the weith as
far forward as possible. Tip end was made of laminated fiberglass and lead
piece was fiberglassed in.
Good luck with yours.
>
Don Meehan - meehan(at)coopext.cahe.wsu.edu
Whidbey RV-ators
721 N. Palisades
Coupeville, WA 98239
(Working on Fuselage - RV6A)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Intro to RV-List (#1) |
Welcome Doug! As a past editor of the Portland RVators Newsletter, I have had
the opportunity to enjoy your quality publication. I will have to agree with
the active level of your group. We here are also very fortunate to have your
ex-member Jerry VanGrunsven and his wife Judy as members. They are great folks
and I have learned many things from Jerry already (notice he is doing the flying
in the photo of my -6 on the latest optional parts catalog).
Great to have you on this list...
Don Wentz, Duckworks, N790DW
>Greetings:
>Doug Weiler, Hudson, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Well I'm off to Sun-N-Fun Tomorrow AM (Wednesday) with Bill Benedict in
the factory RV-6T. We're going to stop off in Kansas and Georgia for
builder's group meetings that Bill has set up. Anyone going to
Sun-N-Fun be sure to stop by the booth and look me up, I'll be peddling
the "Van's Air Force" stuff, pushing RVs, and in general acting like I'm
somebody important. Have to earn my keep, y'know :-) :-) :-)
Andy Hanna should be there too, as well as Mike Seager, who does flight
instruction, or "crew training" for RV pilots as allowed under the new
rules. Van may show up, I don't know for sure.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
P.S. The picture of the "Van's Air Force" emblem in the latest RVator
is STILL the wrong one, even though Ken described it as the "corrected"
version. $&#*%@ #@&*#&^$#! Take my word for it, it looks better than
that.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Chandler <mauser(at)Claris.COM> |
> Andy Hanna should be there too, as well as Mike Seager, who does flight
> instruction, or "crew training" for RV pilots as allowed under the new
> rules.
Oooh! Where can I sign up for this?!
--
"Wait a minute, you expect us innocent children to climb up dangerous
scaffolding and paint naked people all over a church? We'll do it!!"
-- Yakko Warner, Animaniacs
"Yeah, I've got ADD, you wanna make something of.... oooh, cool. Look!"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ReileyRV6(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Would like to know more |
Just received your address and I am very new to this internet. If you receive
this mail I would like to know more about what you have in store. I'm
building an RV6 and need to find people with good info. Hope to here from you
soon. reiley rv6(at)aol.com I think will get back to me. I hope. Thanks, DR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shobensh(at)cln.etc.bc.ca (Shirley Hobenshield) |
My name is Ed Hobenshield. My partner, Ray Haeussler and I started our
RV-6 a year ago. We are getting close to finishing the fuselage.
We have a 320-160 hp and are now shopping for instruments etc. Any deals or
advice would be appreciated.
Ray is retired and works on the plane regulary (1200hrs so far).
I'm 45 and build roads for the loggers. I am not a high time pilot but have
flown 150s,185,Piper Tommahawk and a few hundred on a
little Champ I recently sold.
The RV-6 I got to fly at Vans really hooked me! What an aircraft!!
We read about the RV-LIST on this system in THE RVator.
Time to go up to the shop and fit the last sheet to the fuselage.
shobensh(at)cln.etc.bc.ca
February 07, 1995 - April 04, 1995
RV-Archive.digest.vol-aj