RV-Archive.digest.vol-ay
January 09, 1996 - January 18, 1996
Chromate--I have been doing this for years and have never had rust or
corrosion problems
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | WStucklen(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Experimental IFR Operations |
FAR 91.319-C referrs to "special operating limitations" authorizing the use
of experimental aircraft over densely populated area or in conjested airways
and implies that special operating limitations for particular aircraft can be
issued to permit takeoffs and landings over denslely populated areas or
operations in congested airways. My question is WHAT IS THE SPECIFIC WORDING
OF THESE AUTHORIZATIONS ON MY EXPERIMENTAL AIRCARFT LIMITATIONS CERTIFICATE
THAT IS PART OF MY AIRWORTHYNESS CERTIFICATE? I'll get mine out of my
aircarft tonight and see just what has been written. DOES ANYBODY ELSE WHO
OPERATES IFR HAVE ANY INFORMATION CONCERNING THE SPECIFIC STATEMENTS THAT
HAVE TO BE IN THE LIMITATIONS? This information could clear up a lot of
questions concerning the proper procedures in properly allowing IFR
operations.......
Fred Stucklen N925RV RV-6A (IFR)
wstucklen(at)aol.com
In a resent posting Randall Henderson writes:
<<
I'm somewhat confused about how this really limits us. How does one
typically get/apply for these "special operating limitations" to fly
near urban areas or in "congested" airways (which must include every
victor airway in the Boston-Washington Corridor)? It seems to me that
the absence of such a permit would pretty much preclude *any* IFR
operations.
> 91.319 EXPERIMENTAL Certificates: Operating Limitations...
> C. The administrator authorizes special operating limitations...
> (d)(2) Must operate under DAY VFR unless....
> (e). The Admin. "may" prescribe additional limitations...
But seriously folks.... I believe that it's standard operating
procedure for the inspector to write the "special operating
limitations" allowing you to take off and land over densely populated
areas or in congetsted airspace when they sign off your project, at
least for proven designs like the RV series. But you may need to ask
for it. I'm sure people who have been through the process can answer
this better than me though. And in fact I wouldn't mind hearing from
experienced folk about just what other sorts of signoffs you can ask
for and/or expect. The ones I know about are IFR/VFR, Day/Night. What
else?
Randall Henderson
RV-6
<<
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael.R.Grubb(at)sam.usace.army.mil |
Subject: | Re: Canadian IFR |
Tedd:
> All this talk about IFR in homebuilts has me thinking. My
> understanding is that IFR is not allowed in amateur-built aircraft
> in Canada, but that Transport Canada was considering allowing it.
> Can anyone tell me what the progress of that has been and, most
> especially, if IFR might be legal in Canada in a few years when I
> finish building?
Just got my copy of Sport Aviation last night. There was an article
discussing that specific subject. I didn't get a chance to read it
yet, so I can't elaborate further.
Back to lurking and absorbing all this information.
Mike Grubb
michael.r.grubb(at)sam.usace.army.mil
Mobile, Alabama
......which plane to build, which plane to build???
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dralle (Matt G. Dralle 510-606-1001) |
Subject: | Email To Matronics Down! |
RV-Listers...
Email to the RV-List is having problems. You may or maynot be able to send
mail to the Matronics domain right now depending on when your nameservers
update. Please refrain from using the RV-List and Matronics.com until
I can resolve the problems. Sorry for the inconvenience. I will send email to
everyone again when everything is stable.
Matt Dralle
Matronics
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Dave Mumert" <Dave.Mumert(at)cadvision.com> |
> All this talk about IFR in homebuilts has me thinking. My
> understanding is that IFR is not allowed in amateur-built aircraft
> in Canada, but that Transport Canada was considering allowing it.
> Can anyone tell me what the progress of that has been and, most
> especially, if IFR might be legal in Canada in a few years when I
> finish building?
>
> Tedd McHenry
> tedd(at)idacom.hp.com
> Edmonton, Canada
>
IFR is now allowed in Canada with homebuilt (aka recreational )
aircraft. The plane is subject to the same requirements as a
factory built. This means an inspection (and possibly installation)
by an approved facility.
Aerobatics are now also allowed. An entry in the logbook is required
for each type of manouver showing the plane has been tested and
approved by a competent test pilot familiar with aerobatics.
I do not have TC's (Transport Canada'a) instrument requirements, but
assume they are the same as the FAA requirements.
Dave Mumert
mumertd(at)cadvision.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | ecole(at)ix.netcom.com (EDWARD COLE ) |
You wrote:
>
>Hi! I've just spent the evening trying to read through the archive.
>Only got to May '91, but can't wait to ask this:
>
>1) Is the $575 tool kit from US Tools&Supply the best deal or would it
>be smarter to buy individual pieces? I don't think I need the air
>drill, and can get a used rivet gun for $105 (US Industial Tool, pg
163
>Trade-a-plane Jan '96).
>
>2) I'm considering buying a half-built (or so) RV-3. WIngs are
>complerte, fuselage in boat stage. The question here is how do I
>document the parts already built - and will I still be under the 51%
>rule -- guy selling it (brought it from someone else as is now) says
no
>problem. But reading the earlier postings here leaves me wondering.
>
>Any input on these points would be greatly appreciated!
>
>Finn - Wants to build an RV
>
Buy your tools from Avery's in Texas, you won't regret it. There
service and quality are top notch.
Ed Cole RV6A #24430 Empennage
ecole(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
Subject: | Re: Newcomer -51% rule |
>
>2) I'm considering buying a half-built (or so) RV-3. WIngs are
>complerte, fuselage in boat stage. The question here is how do I
>document the parts already built - and will I still be under the 51%
>rule -- guy selling it (brought it from someone else as is now) says
no
>problem. But reading the earlier postings here leaves me wondering.
>
>Any input on these points would be greatly appreciated!
>
>Finn - Wants to build an RV
>
On the 51% rule, my understanding is that as long as the various
people that worked on it built it for their 'educational purpose',
and the sum total is at least 51%, then it is OK for multiple
people to have worked on it.
For example, builder A completed 10% of the project and sold it
to builder B who completed 20% and sold it to builder C.
Builder finished the plane and did the remaining 21% (lets assume
this is a kit plane that just meets the 51% rule).
So, the FAA would be happy as it meets the 51% rule and it was
all built for education. The only limitation would be that
Builder C would not be able to get the repairman's license for
this aircraft has he did not build a majority of the aircraft.
The only drawback would be needing an AP to signoff the periodic
inspection and any major repairs.
I would get some photos and builders logs or signed affidavids (?sp)
stating what work they did and that it was for their education
(ie not a professional builder for hire) so you have it if needed.
In the real world, if you have some photo's of the project,
I doubt if anyone is going to press you on it. They will be more
concerned that the aircraft is airworthy and ready to fly and
all the paper work is correct and the issue of how much you built
will probably never come up.
I could probably find the reference for this if needed but at this
point the above is from what I recall on researching this several yrs
ago.
FYI, on the tools, only buy from Avery or Cleveland tools and
blow off ATS and US tool. Avery and Cleveland are RV builders and
know what you need and sell QUALITY tools as the history on this
net has documented over and over.
Herman
--------------------------------------------------------
*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: | bobh(at)synopsys.com (Bob Haan) |
Subject: | Dimensions from Webs or flanges - inside or outside? |
Often it is not clear in the plans whether a dimension is from the inside
or the outside of a web or flange. Is there a standard that applies to
Van's drawings?
I realize this is splitting hairs but it just may be the split of a hair
that determines if the holes in the prepunched skins line up.
My current concern is the dimensions for locating the wing ribs on the main
spar. In sketch 32A (RV6) the dimension is from the reference hole at 23.5
inches from the root end of the spar to the web but the drawing is to small
to see if the dimension goes to the web surface on the inside of the rib or
the outside web surface of the rib. The difference would be only the
thickness of the rib aluminum but this might make the difference if some
small errors stacked up unfavorably.
I have assumed it is the shortest dimension. I hate to assume.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bob Haan Office 503-531-2366
Pacific Northwest Mobile 503-720-1132
Account Manager FAX 503-690-6906
Synopsys Modeling Group E-mail bobh(at)synopsys.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dralle (Matt G. Dralle 510-606-1001) |
Subject: | Matronics.Com Back Online! |
Most mailer should once again be able to reach the matronics.com domain.
The problems have been resolved namesevers and most systems should be updated
with the new addresses late Tuesday (1/9) night.
I'm sorry for the basically unannounced outage. My service provided "promised"
that nothing would go wrong but...
Anyway, let's get those RV discussions going again!!!
Matt Dralle
Matronics
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | bill garrett <bgarrett(at)fast.net> |
Subject: | Corrosion proofing steel] |
boundary="---------------------------41742478231391"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
-----------------------------41742478231391
>Randall Henderson wrote-
> My questions are: is a little surface rust OK to prime over? Is there
> any other method that will stabilize rust better before priming? Also,
> what about inside the tubes where you can't get at it with scotch-
> brite? How paranoid about getting every speck of rust off the steel
> before priming do I have to be?
>
> Randall Henderson
> RV-6
Randall-
I don't know if this might help but I found a product called "Corroless"
in my Eastwood Company (a car restoration tool and supply company) that
is supposed to be used to prime offshore oil rigs. According to the
literature,"Corroless first displaces any moisture remaining on the
surface, then chemically converts existing rust to a more stable form.
The surface is completely sealed by a unique interlocking glass leaf
system." The catalog description implies that this is the stuff to use
on heavily rusted parts that you are trying to restore and says "minimal
surface preparation is required." It is supposed to be compatible with
"most car finishes."
I found this after I already built my empennage and primed my elevator
horns but am wondering if it might be good to use on the rest of my steel
parts.
Corroless comes (from this company) in 19.2 oz. aerosol cans for $19.95,
pint cans for $15.95, and quart cans for $24.95 and can be thinned up to
15% with lacquer thinner. Not cheap!
Eastwood's toll free number is 1-800-345-1178. They are a local store
for me here in eastern Pennsylvania where we're still digging out from a
30" snow (thats A LOT OF SNOW for us!).
I'd be interested in the opinions of others as to whether this is
overkill or not. I haven't yet decided whether I'm going to use it or
not but I'm leaning in that direction because I am actually more
concerned about corrosion of the steel parts than the aluminum ones. I
guess I've just seen a lot more steel (even primed and painted) corrode
that aluminum.
Bill Garrett
RV-6A
In case anyone noticed, I've bit the bullet and subscribed to an internet
provider and have a new e-mail address. I got tired of trying to fit it
in at work and the toll calls from home were murder.
-----------------------------41742478231391
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 13:41:00 -0800
From: edt.com!randall(at)matronics.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: RV-List: Corrosion proofing steel
I have a question about sealing/primering steel against corrosion.
I've been using PPG Metal Cleaner, then Metal Conditioner (I don't
remember the numbers), before priming my steel parts. I've found that
using this treatment, unless I dry the parts QUICKLY after rinsing, I
will get some areas of light rust right away. Also, even though the
label on the metal cleaner says it's supposed to lift out rust, it
doesn't seem to do that very well and I have to scotch-brite any rust
off completely off before using it.
My questions are: is a little surface rust OK to prime over? Is there
any other method that will stabilize rust better before priming? Also,
what about inside the tubes where you can't get at it with scotch-
brite? How paranoid about getting every speck of rust off the steel
before priming do I have to be?
After trying this method with several steel parts I'm starting to think
it's better to just sandblast the parts and wipe down with lacquer
thinner, and priming directly over that instead of trying to use some
fancy metal conditioning treatment that seems to result in MORE rust.
I might mention here that I'm not really interested in doing any fancy
powder-coating or chroming of the rudder pedals, control sticks, engine
mount, etc. I just want to prime and paint with good quality primer and
paint.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
-----------------------------41742478231391--
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | bill garrett <bgarrett(at)fast.net> |
Subject: | Reply:Corrosion proofing steel |
>Randall Henderson wrote-
> My questions are: is a little surface rust OK to prime over? Is there
> any other method that will stabilize rust better before priming? Also,
> what about inside the tubes where you can't get at it with scotch-
> brite? How paranoid about getting every speck of rust off the steel
> before priming do I have to be?
>
> Randall Henderson
> RV-6
Randall-
I don't know if this might help but I found a product called "Corroless"
in my Eastwood Company (a car restoration tool and supply company) that
is supposed to be used to prime offshore oil rigs. According to the
literature,"Corroless first displaces any moisture remaining on the
surface, then chemically converts existing rust to a more stable form.
The surface is completely sealed by a unique interlocking glass leaf
system." The catalog description implies that this is the stuff to use
on heavily rusted parts that you are trying to restore and says "minimal
surface preparation is required." It is supposed to be compatible with
"most car finishes."
I found this after I already built my empennage and primed my elevator
horns but am wondering if it might be good to use on the rest of my steel
parts.
Corroless comes (from this company) in 19.2 oz. aerosol cans for $19.95,
pint cans for $15.95, and quart cans for $24.95 and can be thinned up to
15% with lacquer thinner. Not cheap!
Eastwood's toll free number is 1-800-345-1178. They are a local store
for me here in eastern Pennsylvania where we're still digging out from a
30" snow (thats A LOT OF SNOW for us!).
I'd be interested in the opinions of others as to whether this is
overkill or not. I haven't yet decided whether I'm going to use it or
not but I'm leaning in that direction because I am actually more
concerned about corrosion of the steel parts than the aluminum ones. I
guess I've just seen a lot more steel (even primed and painted) corrode
that aluminum.
Bill Garrett
RV-6A
In case anyone noticed, I've bit the bullet and subscribed to an internet
provider and have a new e-mail address. I got tired of trying to fit it
in at work and the toll calls from home were murder.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)MBnet.MB.CA> |
Subject: | Re: Canadian IFR |
On Mon, 8 Jan 1996, Tedd McHenry wrote:
> All this talk about IFR in homebuilts has me thinking. My understanding is
> that IFR is not allowed in amateur-built aircraft in Canada, but that
> Transport Canada was considering allowing it. Can anyone tell me what the
> progress of that has been and, most especially, if IFR might be legal in
> Canada in a few years when I finish building?
Homebuilt IFR is now allowed in Canada. It might not be official yet, but
it's just a matter of finishing the paperwork at Transport Canada. Last I
heard about it was at Oshkosh last summer where the Transport Canada rep
spoke about it and he basically said it was a done deal. All IFR
instrumentation will have to be TSO'd and the installation signed off by
an AME. Pitot-static tests will also have to be routinely done. In other
words, the requirements will be the same as specified for certified aircraft.
I am also thinking about equipping my RV-in-progress for IFR, but I'm
concerned about the "no flight into known icing" limitation, since
Canadian wx forecasts nearly always include the "icing in cloud above the
freezing level" and the freezing level is 0 feet AGL for half the year.
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: 16 years of the RV-ator |
From: | Bill Downey <billd(at)ibmoto.com> |
Andy,
We are just starting up an RV-Builders group in Austin, Tx. The idea
for the group came from Seth Hancock however we really don't have
anyone officially in charge yet. We've been meeting for a few months
right before the local EAA chapters meetings. If there is any
information you would like to send to the group or get from us, I will
be happy to handle the correspondence. Presently we have somewhere
between 20 to 30 members in our builders group.
Bill Downey
13268 Darwin Lane
Austin, Tx 78729
P.S. I am also the secretary for EAA Chapter 187, Austin Tx. if I can
do anything for you there.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Michael Draper" <Michael_Draper_at_corpsoftnorwood4(at)stream.com> |
Subject: | The RV6 & Sportsman Level Competition |
I am considering taking on a partner to help complete my RV. The individual is
interested in competing in IAC competitions (Sportsmans level). I understand
that the RVs are capable of performing all aerobatic maneuvers that one would
encounter at the Sportsmans level. However, I am not sure if there are any
issues related to the performance profile and staying within the aerobatic box.
Does anyone know if the RV performance profile is suited for competing in
Aerobatics at the Sportsman level? Better yet, does anyone know of any RV6s
competing at the Sportsman level?
Would appreciate any references I could contact.
Tks,
Mike Draper
"Still working on the empanage"
RV6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net> |
Maybe some of you "prop gurus" can help me with some prop questions. I have
a 150 hp RV-6 with an empty weight of 1080. I've got a Props, Inc 68 x 66
prop (a beautiful prop, BTW). I'm trying out a Felix Prop (for a spare) now
(prop used on 150 Glasair on which it went 2,850 rpm's). I've done a lot of
flight testing on the Props, Inc. It has been re-pitched twice. Initially,
it would only turn up to 2,500 rpm's at full throttle, leaned for best
power. Here's some data. All data is full throttle and this is calibrated
airspeed:
Indicated True
calibrated
Prop Temp(F) Alt. RPM M.P. % PWR Airspeed
Airspeed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Props Inc 40 7500 2520 22.75 75 % 162
170.8 Props Inc 86 7500 2600 22.5 78.3 % 160
177
Props Inc 43 7500 2600 22.75 78.3 % 174 177.6
Felix 55 7500 2720 22.25 78 % 160 170.8
Props Inc 36 8500 2505 21.75 71.7 160 168.9
Felix 40 8500 2712 22 78 % 160 170.1
The Felix prop gives much better take off and climb performance. I know my
RV is a little heavy, not too much I can do about that now. High density
altitude (5,000-10,000 feet) performance is poor with the Props, Inc. prop.
I thought that if I could re-pitch so the Props, Inc. would turn up to
2,700, that maybe I could increase cruise and climb performance because the
reduced pitch would increase rpm's and H.P. The Felix soes turn up OK, but
hurts cruise. Of course, different airfoil shapes between the 2 props could
have something to do with the difference. If I re-pitch the Props, Inc.
prop to turn up to 2,700, would the airspeed go down and take-off and climb
go up or is it possible that I could gain both take-off and cruise performance.
The 6-A I'm building now will have a 180 and probably a constant
speed. Sensenich told me at OSH that they were working on a fixed pitch
metal for the 180. If they design it so there is no RPM limit, I might
consider that prop for the 6-A. I thought about the Sen. FP for my 150, but
the 2,600 rpm redline bothered me a bit (for resale-acrobatics) I could fit
a constant speed, but with the fixed pitch cowl, I would have to go to the
Hartzell with the extension (3.8 G limit) and I don't know if I made the cut
out low enough on the FW for the governor. Anyone have experience with the
Sensenich metal? Well, this ought to keep you "rv-listers" busy for awhile.
Thanks, Bob Skinner
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rcrothers(at)rcrothers.seanet.com (Randy Crothers) |
Subject: | Re: Suburu Power, Slow RPM Drill Press |
I have been tracking an RV-6 project for awhile now in which the owner is
going to utilize a 160 HP Suburu firewall forward package from NSI in
Arlington WA. I visited NSI recently and was impressed by Lance Wheelers
(owner presedent CEO or whatever) commitment to quality. The facilities were
mostly state of the art and all the parts I examined looked first rate. In
my first few weeks as an RV-lister I havn't noticed any mail on the subject.
I would appreciate hearing about any others out there that are considering
an NSI package. I lean towards Vans attitude toward auto engines but I
suspect that the auto engine movement is rapidly maturing towards a reliable
and less expensive alternive to the "old technology". Especially enticing is
the 200 HP turbo version.
New subject: I am in the process of "getting ready" to build. I can see that
a slow RPM drill press is just about mandatory. All of the popular brands
that I have looked at so far have a min. RPM of about 650. Does anybody know
of a reasonably priced drill press ($300.00 range) that turns at a slower RPM?
How do those of you that are in the process of building find time to read
all this mail!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
Subject: | The RV6 & Sportsman Level Competition (fwd) |
There is someone in Oregon that flew a RV4 in IAC competition and
actually flew in the Advnaced category. He wrote an article on the
mods he did to the plane and what airspeeds etc. he used and this
was published in IAC Sport Aerobatics (I think) and also in the RVator
about 2 yrs ago. I can go thru the back issues and find the reference
if you want it.
In a nutshell, he recommended flying the aircraft at slow speeds to
not over G the aircraft and to help keep it in the box.
I think he used speeds like 130 to 140 mph range.
On his plane, for Advanced category, he removed the fiberglass wingtips,
increased the aileron length (reduced the size of flaps), used a climb
prop, and a few other mods.
For sportsman, you would not need to do those things.
However, you do need an inverted fuel system and something to replace
the float carb (either Fuel Injection or an Ellison throttle body injector
for example).
You need this because the engine will quit on a hammer head with the slighest
negative G. When you pull up to vertical, you have to push the stick forward
a little at vertical to set the line and the engine will stop cold at that
point. I know, I tried this in my RV4 last week on its second test flight
and the engine died in the hammer.
I did loops, rolls, and cuban 8's OK with a float carb. However, you can't
hold the 45 down line very long in a cuban as that would also cause the
engine to quit. Dido for Reverse cubans.
You should also have inverted oil system if you plan to hold inverted for
more than a few seconds. You could probably do sportsman without it
but any more and you need the inverted oil system.
To stay in the aerobatic box, you may have to work more on speed control.
A lot depends on what the sequence of figures is published for that year.
Some sequences are harder to keep in the box, for example a center box
roll followed by a end box spin means you have to loose a lot of speed
in 1/2 the box to do the spin and if you can't slow down then you go out
of the box. For sportsman, the 'out' penality is only 5 points so not
a big deal.
> From root Wed Jan 10 10:32:16 1996
> Errors-To: bounces(at)matronics.com
> Date: Wed, 10 Jan 96 09:50:37 EST
> From: "Michael Draper" <stream.com!Michael_Draper_at_corpsoftnorwood4(at)matronics.com>
> Message-Id: <9600108212.AA821296560(at)smtpmail.stream.com>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: The RV6 & Sportsman Level Competition
> Sender: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Precedence: junk
> Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> I am considering taking on a partner to help complete my RV. The individual
is
> interested in competing in IAC competitions (Sportsmans level). I understand
> that the RVs are capable of performing all aerobatic maneuvers that one would
> encounter at the Sportsmans level. However, I am not sure if there are any
> issues related to the performance profile and staying within the aerobatic box.
> Does anyone know if the RV performance profile is suited for competing in
> Aerobatics at the Sportsman level? Better yet, does anyone know of any RV6s
> competing at the Sportsman level?
>
> Would appreciate any references I could contact.
>
>
>
> Tks,
>
> Mike Draper
> "Still working on the empanage"
> RV6
>
>
--
--------------------------------------------------------
*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
AIX Network Performance Measurement/Analysis
phone: TL 678-2831 outside: (512) 838-2831
MS: 9530 fax: 512-838-1801
mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)idacom.hp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Canadian IFR |
> On Mon, 8 Jan 1996, Tedd McHenry wrote:
>
> > All this talk about IFR in homebuilts has me thinking. My understanding is
> > that IFR is not allowed in amateur-built aircraft in Canada, but that
> > Transport Canada was considering allowing it. Can anyone tell me what the
> > progress of that has been and, most especially, if IFR might be legal in
> > Canada in a few years when I finish building?
>
> Homebuilt IFR is now allowed in Canada. It might not be official yet, but
> it's just a matter of finishing the paperwork at Transport Canada. Last I
> heard about it was at Oshkosh last summer where the Transport Canada rep
> spoke about it and he basically said it was a done deal. All IFR
> instrumentation will have to be TSO'd and the installation signed off by
> an AME. Pitot-static tests will also have to be routinely done. In other
> words, the requirements will be the same as specified for certified aircraft.
>
> I am also thinking about equipping my RV-in-progress for IFR, but I'm
> concerned about the "no flight into known icing" limitation, since
> Canadian wx forecasts nearly always include the "icing in cloud above the
> freezing level" and the freezing level is 0 feet AGL for half the year.
>
> Curt Reimer
Curt:
I flew Tutors for four years under the same "no flight into known icing"
limitation. Remember that the forcast does not constitute "known" icing--
only the possibility of icing. You're wise to be concerned about icing in
a plane like the RV, but a forecast that states "icing in cloud above the
freezing level" doesn't mean you can't take off and climb through cloud
when the freezing level is at the surface. Your judgement is still worth
something.
On a related note, does anyone have any real-world data about the
performance of RVs in icing? I suspect that the fat wing helps.
Tedd McHenry
tedd(at)idacom.hp.com
Edmonton, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | EagleData(at)aol.com |
info: eagledata(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Re: The RV6 & Sportsman Level Competition (fwd) |
> There is someone in Oregon that flew a RV4 in IAC competition and
> actually flew in the Advnaced category. He wrote an article on the
> mods he did to the plane and what airspeeds etc. he used and this
> was published in IAC Sport Aerobatics (I think) and also in the RVator
> about 2 yrs ago. I can go thru the back issues and find the reference
> if you want it.
>From the nifty-difty RVator Index I spent days working up a couple of
years ago (and haven't used since):
Apr 93, 7, Aerobatic Competition Ban on RV-3
Sep 91, 6, Preparing an RV-4 for Aerobatic Competition
Mar 91, 5, The RV-4 in Competitive Aerobatics
Ralph Ridell wrote the RV-4 articles, and he and his son Scott built
the plane and did the mods for competition.
Side-note: My first RV ride was in this plane. It was before I knew
much of anything about them and I was out at the airport one day and
here comes this little red RV up to the gas pump, and I wandered over
and asked for a ride. Afterwards I stumbled out of the plane and as I
tried to maintain my balance I thought "Man these RVs are really neat!"
I didn't know it was specially modified, but who cares -- it got me on
the road to RV-dom!
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ross Mickey <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
Subject: | Re: Torque Wrenches |
A member of our builders group is a retired instructor at the local
community college where he taught aircraft maintainence. At the college
facility they had a tourqe wrench callabrator which I was able to use.
Ross Mickey
>> > > 3) I've looked high and low for a torque wrench in the
>> > > 0-50 inch pound range to torgue the AN3 and AN4 bolts.
>> > > The only one I have found was >$100! Did you actually
>> > > use a torque wrench on these bolts or just tighten
>> > > them nice and snug and called it good?
>> > >
>> > > Thanks for the help!
>> > >
>> > > Doug Medema dougm@physio-control.com
>> > >
>> > Doug
>> > Sears has one that starts at 25" pounds. It was reasonably
>> > priced around $20-30 as I recall.
>> >
>> > Bob Busick
>> > RV-6
>
>I have a break-away torque wrench that I would like to have calibrated
>before I start using it on an airplane. Does anyone know a good way to
>do that, or a place to get it done?
>
>Tedd McHenry
>tedd(at)idacom.hp.com
>Edmonton, Canada
>
>
Ross Mickey Phone: 541-342-1892
2300 Oakmont Way #205 Fax: 541-342-5492
Eugene, Oregon 97401 email: rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Re: Canadian IFR |
> Homebuilt IFR is now allowed in Canada. It might not be official yet, but
> it's just a matter of finishing the paperwork at Transport Canada.
I wonder if experimentals certified in the US for IFR will be able to
fly IFR in Canada as well? Since we need special permission to fly
up there anyhow, I suppose it wouldn't be automatic. Any ideas on
this?
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
Subject: | RV6 tip-up canopy specific Q. |
RV-listers - Specifically -- those that have completed the RV6 tip-up canopy.
Where is the trim line for the C-602 (front canopy skin) where it
meets the side rails?
The side rails have a 'joggle' in them for the plexiglas to sit in,
but the front canopy skin follows the top fuselage contour. Something must
be cut/trimmed so that the plexiglas canopy bubble edges do not have a
bulge (in an outwards direction) where it makes the transition from sitting
in the side rails joggle to going over the front canopy skin.
The photos in the manual don't help, and this skin is not really
shown on the plans. Note: I am _not_ talking about the "instrument panel
overhang" trim line, but about the portion where the C-602 meets the side
rails.
Unfortunately, the local -6s I can visit are sliders, and the Vans
help line guy I spoke to had obviously never built a -6 canopy ..... :^(
... In his defense, this construction detail is hidden by the fibreglas
trim strip when the canopy is completed, so looking at a finished canopy
probably would not help.
Can anyone out there who has completed this stage enlighten me??
What gets cut/trimmed to prevent a bulge at this transition area??
.. thanks ..... Gil Alexander
gil(at)rassp.hac.com ... don't want to waste the 75+ F weather forecast for
this weekend, since I have no heaters in my workshop
to get the plexiglas warm enough to work on. Keeping
the plexiglas warm is one common hint I have got from
everyone!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | TommyLewis(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Heated Pitot (was "No Subject:) |
I bought the heated pitot kit from Warren Gretz and as very happy with it,
the info sheet he distibutes accurately describes the product, I picked the
sheet up at Copper State, called Warren one evening with questions, then
ordered and got the kit about the time Warren posted a note on the RV List,
it took about an evening to add it to a wing that was not yet closed up, I
am just starting to rivet on the bottom skin on the left wing so it soon will
be - Tom
TommyLewis(at)AOL.COM
RV6a project, N967RV reserved
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Sliding canopy questions |
Question for those who have finished their sliding canopies:
I have heard about some local builders (including Art Chard) who formed
the longeron with slightly less of a curve in the canopy area (1/8" or
more) to provide for better fit of the sliding canopy. Is there anyone
out there who has done this, and if so, what were your results?
I was thinking of an alternative. The issue is the potential for canopy
to drag when opening and closing if it is fitted tightly in the closed
position. Has anyone thought about installing the canopy rails with a
shim underneath the front ends, and some sort of detent that the
rollers drop down into at the very front. This way the sides would
clear during opening and closing but would snug down tight at the end.
Perhaps the real question is: what suggestions would people have for
making sure the canopy slides and fits well?
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)MBnet.MB.CA> |
Subject: | Re: Canadian IFR |
On Wed, 10 Jan 1996, Tedd McHenry wrote:
> I flew Tutors for four years under the same "no flight into known icing"
> limitation. Remember that the forcast does not constitute "known" icing--
> only the possibility of icing. You're wise to be concerned about icing in
> a plane like the RV, but a forecast that states "icing in cloud above the
> freezing level" doesn't mean you can't take off and climb through cloud
> when the freezing level is at the surface. Your judgement is still worth
> something.
Okay, great,that's really what I was interested in; the interpretation of
the rule in the real world. I didn't want to go to all the trouble of being
IFR rated if I wasn't legal to do winter IMC in a non-icing equipped
airplane.
> On a related note, does anyone have any real-world data about the
> performance of RVs in icing? I suspect that the fat wing helps.
I believe its the same airfoil section as the DC-3, an aircraft renowned
for its ice-carrying abilities. It's a turbulent airfoil, and should adapt
to a layer of ice much better than a more "modern" laminar flow type.
That, combined with low wing loading and power loading, ought to make an
RV a reasonable ice-carrier (in theory).
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | ROBERT BUSICK <rbusick(at)nmsu.edu> |
Subject: | Re: Suburu Power, Slow RPM Drill Press |
>
> New subject: I am in the process of "getting ready" to build. I can see that
> a slow RPM drill press is just about mandatory. All of the popular brands
> that I have looked at so far have a min. RPM of about 650. Does anybody know
> of a reasonably priced drill press ($300.00 range) that turns at a slower RPM?
>
> How do those of you that are in the process of building find time to read
> all this mail!
I use a drill press with 650 RPM and do not have any problems
with cutting circles. I've also cut cirlces at 900+ RPM, a little scary,
but it can be done. Go with the 650 RPM and good drill press. Make sure
you clamp everything down and use safety goggles and golves etc. You
don't have much anymore that needs to be cut out with a circle cutter,
Vans does most of it for you.
Bob Busick
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)MBnet.MB.CA> |
Subject: | Re: Suburu Power |
On Wed, 10 Jan 1996, Randy Crothers wrote:
> I have been tracking an RV-6 project for awhile now in which the owner is
> going to utilize a 160 HP Suburu firewall forward package from NSI in
> Arlington WA. I visited NSI recently and was impressed by Lance Wheelers
> (owner presedent CEO or whatever) commitment to quality. The facilities were
> mostly state of the art and all the parts I examined looked first rate. In
> my first few weeks as an RV-lister I havn't noticed any mail on the subject.
> I would appreciate hearing about any others out there that are considering
> an NSI package. I lean towards Vans attitude toward auto engines but I
> suspect that the auto engine movement is rapidly maturing towards a reliable
> and less expensive alternive to the "old technology". Especially enticing is
> the 200 HP turbo version.
I wasn't a big fan of auto engines in airplanes, but I was starting to
come around recently, and I was actually considering one of the NSI engines.
Then I found out what the price was.
$16,000 USD for the 160 hp engine, plus $3500 for the firewall forward
kit, including prop. Well, auto conversions may or may not have advantages
over Lycontinentals, but price sure as heck ain't one of 'em.
I also don't believe the claims that such an engine is dirt cheap to
overhaul. If a zero time engine costs $16K, then a zero time overhaul is
going to be expensive - either that or the factory engines are overpriced.
Not that I consider $16K to be overpriced necessarily - you get what you pay
for. And, obviously, building a proper airplane engine ends up costing
a lot of money, regardless of what engine block you start with. But $16K
for a non-certified engine?
I'm sure NSI engines are among the finest auto-conversions in the
industry, but for that kind of money, I'll take the Lycoming.
> How do those of you that are in the process of building find time to read
> all this mail!
Simple, we read it at work! (on our lunch hour of course ;)
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)MBnet.MB.CA> |
Subject: | Re: Canadian IFR |
On Wed, 10 Jan 1996, Randall Henderson wrote:
> I wonder if experimentals certified in the US for IFR will be able to
> fly IFR in Canada as well? Since we need special permission to fly
> up there anyhow, I suppose it wouldn't be automatic. Any ideas on
> this?
Once you had your border crossing permission, IFR would probably be
allowed provided that your instrumentation met the Canadian requirements.
I don't think there are too many differences, but there may be a few. Our
aviation regulators seem to like to do things just a little bit
differently from the FAA, in spite of the similarity between the two
countries and the fact that the FAA has 10 times the manpower. I suspect
they want to justify their jobs, and I suppose I can't blame them for that.
A recent case involved a GPS receiver which was certified for overlay
approaches in the U.S. but denied certification in Canada. Transport Canada
seems to be dragging its feet a bit on the whole GPS issue, which is
frustrating since we have far fewer navaids up here and GPS IFR would
really be an improvement. I flew a VFR cross country from Winnipeg to
Calgary (~650 nm) a couple of years ago, along THE major trans-Canada
airway and due to a single VOR being out of service, did NOT have
continuous navaid reception enroute.
On the border crossing issue, I cornered the Transport Canada rep at OSH
last summer about this, and the explaination he gave was that there is no
ICAO agreement on experimental aircraft. So, each country has different
regulations, which requires extra paperwork to cross borders. Thats all
very logical, but for Pete's sake, can't we draw up a permanent agreement
between Canada and the U.S which eliminates having to ask for special
permission on a case-by-case basis?
On a more positive note, Canada Customs now allows border crossing pilots
to file their custom declarations on the honor system. You apply for
permission and then get to fly directly to your home airport when
returning from the U.S., with no customs inspection, except for occaisional
spot checks. I presume there is a reciprocal arrangement in the U.S.?
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Steve Day" <sday(at)pharmcomp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Suburu Power |
>$16,000 USD for the 160 hp engine, plus $3500 for the firewall forward
>kit, including prop. Well, auto conversions may or may not have advantages
>over Lycontinentals, but price sure as heck ain't one of 'em.
I had no idea they were this expensive. If this is accurate information, I
will buy the Lycoming. I was starting to consider the Subaru package, until
now. That is quit a price to pay. If in the future the engine proves to be
more reliable, then the price is justified. (but I'm not willing to be a
$16k test subject)
>Simple, we read it at work! (on our lunch hour of course ;)
hehe
-Steve Day
sday(at)pharmcomp.com
(CK ID - RV6a RV for short)
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Slow RPM Drill Press |
>> New subject: I am in the process of "getting ready" to build. I can see
>that
>> a slow RPM drill press is just about mandatory. All of the popular brands
>> that I have looked at so far have a min. RPM of about 650. Does anybody
>know
>> of a reasonably priced drill press ($300.00 range) that turns at a slower
>RPM?
>>
>> How do those of you that are in the process of building find time to read
>> all this mail!
>
> I use a drill press with 650 RPM and do not have any problems
>with cutting circles. I've also cut cirlces at 900+ RPM, a little scary,
>but it can be done. Go with the 650 RPM and good drill press. Make sure
>you clamp everything down and use safety goggles and golves etc. You
>don't have much anymore that needs to be cut out with a circle cutter,
>Vans does most of it for you.
>
>
I agree with the above - I used a Shopsmith for all my "drillpressing" (it
has a minimum speed of 700 rpm) & it worked fine. I've been eyeing regular
drill presses lately also, & I believe you could change pulleys on most any
of them to alter the speeds if you really needed to.
Dana Breda
N138DB in NC
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Canadian Customs |
From: | "Earl Brabandt" <cwbraban(at)ichips.intel.com> |
> to file their custom declarations on the honor system. You apply for
> permission and then get to fly directly to your home airport when
> returning from the U.S., with no customs inspection, except for occaisional
> spot checks. I presume there is a reciprocal arrangement in the U.S.?
We wish! Through the efforts of the AOPA and other aviation groups,
we almost got it during the Bush administration. When Clinton was
elected, they had to start all over with the new administration. It
looked like it was finally in the bag just a few months ago but the
Customs Officer labor union was instrumental in blocking it in congress.
It seems they wish to protect their totally unproductive, worthless,
no-value-added jobs. (You got it--I consider such jobs to be mostly
a social welfare program.) Anyway, it's on indefinite hold and
comments (more diplomatic than mine above of course) should be
mailed to your state representative protesting the delay and
questioning the validity of the labor union concern with "security."
Cal
________________________________________________________________________________
>Maybe some of you "prop gurus" can help me with some prop questions. I have
>a 150 hp RV-6 with an empty weight of 1080. I've got a Props, Inc 68 x 66
>prop (a beautiful prop, BTW). I'm trying out a Felix Prop (for a spare) now
>(prop used on 150 Glasair on which it went 2,850 rpm's). I've done a lot of
>flight testing on the Props, Inc. It has been re-pitched twice. Initially,
>it would only turn up to 2,500 rpm's at full throttle, leaned for best
>power. Here's some data. All data is full throttle and this is calibrated
>airspeed:
>
> Indicated True
>calibrated
>Prop Temp(F) Alt. RPM M.P. % PWR Airspeed
>Airspeed
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
>Props Inc 40 7500 2520 22.75 75 % 162
>170.8 Props Inc 86 7500 2600 22.5 78.3 % 160
>177
>Props Inc 43 7500 2600 22.75 78.3 % 174
177.6
>
>Felix 55 7500 2720 22.25 78 % 160
170.8
>
>Props Inc 36 8500 2505 21.75 71.7 160
168.9
>
>Felix 40 8500 2712 22 78 % 160
170.1
>
>The Felix prop gives much better take off and climb performance. I know my
>RV is a little heavy, not too much I can do about that now. High density
>altitude (5,000-10,000 feet) performance is poor with the Props, Inc. prop.
>I thought that if I could re-pitch so the Props, Inc. would turn up to
>2,700, that maybe I could increase cruise and climb performance because the
>reduced pitch would increase rpm's and H.P. The Felix soes turn up OK, but
>hurts cruise. Of course, different airfoil shapes between the 2 props could
>have something to do with the difference. If I re-pitch the Props, Inc.
>prop to turn up to 2,700, would the airspeed go down and take-off and climb
>go up or is it possible that I could gain both take-off and cruise
>performance.
> The 6-A I'm building now will have a 180 and probably a constant
>speed. Sensenich told me at OSH that they were working on a fixed pitch
>metal for the 180. If they design it so there is no RPM limit, I might
>consider that prop for the 6-A. I thought about the Sen. FP for my 150, but
>the 2,600 rpm redline bothered me a bit (for resale-acrobatics) I could fit
>a constant speed, but with the fixed pitch cowl, I would have to go to the
>Hartzell with the extension (3.8 G limit) and I don't know if I made the cut
>out low enough on the FW for the governor. Anyone have experience with the
>Sensenich metal? Well, this ought to keep you "rv-listers" busy for awhile.
>Thanks, Bob Skinner
Bob:
I'm no prop guru, but I do have the Sensenich metal prop on my -6 (160 HP).
I got one out of the first batch they shipped after they became certified.
Mine is a 70 X 79. It gives a solo ROC around 1500 most days here in NC & I
get 200 - 202 mph consistently down low at 2600 rpm per GPS. It trues
190-195 at 2600 at 9,500 - 10,000 (lower than that it'll go over redline at
WOT). Just cruising along, it will creep over redline if you're asleep and
trying to go fast, but I rarely ride around with the rpm over about 2400
anyhow (too noisy). 2400 gives 170 - 175 mph. I do only mild aerobatics,
but have never oversped the prop - you just gotta watch it. In my
experience, the 2600 rpm limit is not a factor to worry about. The torque
doesn't change, it doesn't need revarnishing, etc. For me, it's great. Hope
this helps somebody...
Dana Breda
N138DB
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | joehine(at)mi.net (joehine) |
Subject: | Re: Canadian IFR |
>> Homebuilt IFR is now allowed in Canada. It might not be official yet, but
>> it's just a matter of finishing the paperwork at Transport Canada.
>
>I wonder if experimentals certified in the US for IFR will be able to
>fly IFR in Canada as well? Since we need special permission to fly
>up there anyhow, I suppose it wouldn't be automatic. Any ideas on
>this?
>
>Randall Henderson
>RV-6
>
Randall,
I know of at least one instance where an american flying a homebuild filed
IFR to a canadian airport and the plan was accepted by the system in Canada
and the trip was completed. This was a couple of years ago when IFR in
homebuilts was not allowed. This was probably an oversight. To answer your
question I would think that once permission to bring your homebuilt to
Canada is given, I would say you would be able to use the system here
without any problems. Maybe I should rephrase that and say I hope you would
have no problem. Government departments up here have many of the same
characteristics that yours in the states do. (do I hear Bob Hoover nodding
his head)
To give credit where it is due, Transport Canada has been very responsive to
change in the last few years, begining to allow things that have been
prohibited for years.(IFR and aerobatics in homebuilts, designated
inspectors for homebuilts, new catagories of aircraft and licences.
Hope to see some of you up here in summers hence. Plenty of good flyin
sights in Canada.
Joe Hine RV4 nearing completion
Joe Hine
joehine(at)mi.net
506-452-1072 Home
506-452-3495 Work
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Francis S. Smidler" <102776.1474(at)compuserve.com> |
I just watched a promo video for the Velocity. One of the interesting
construction details I saw was the use of the oil cooler for cabin heat. They
plumbed the oil up into the nose then used a NACA intake to route air through
it. The outlet side air went to a switch box that directed it into the cabin or
out of the aircraft. Does anyone have any experience with this type of
installation? Any opinion on how it may work in an RV? One thing Duane Swing
at Velocity doesn't have to worry too much about in Florida is cold weather.
A few thoughts on the heat from the exhaust muff type heat exchanger. The
amount of air flowing through the system will affect how warm it will get. A
small amount of air flowing through will heat to a higher temperature than a
large amount. Varying the position of the firewall switch box DOES NOT change
the amount of air flowing through the muff, only the amount going into the
cabin. The rest of the unchanged volume, and thus same temperature, is just
being dumped overboard. The not so warm air that comes in will only displace
the not so warm air in the cabin and thus not produce much of a cozy climate.
What should be done is add a butterfly valve to the intake to reduce the amount
of air coming in and thus regulating the temperature of the air. Then use the
firewall valve box to regulate the amount of air coming into the cabin.
So much for theory, has anybody tried this on thier airplane?
Frank Smidler
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | kightdm(at)harvey.carol.net |
I was browsing on Webcrawler the other day and ran a search on MEK. The
first article was a lengthy paper on the dangers of MEK to unborn children
(fetotoxicity). Since I occasionaly use solvents that contain MEK, and my
wife and I recently found out we are expecting, it caught my interest.
Everyone knows that breathing the stuff will cause brain damage, but did you
know that MEK is readily absorbed through the skin? I didn't. Although I
always use a charcoal respirator when using solvents, I don't always use
gloves. I will from now on.
Be safe,
Danny Kight
kightdm(at)carol.net
Finishing up empennage RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | kightdm(at)harvey.carol.net |
Finn,
You recently asked:
>1) Is the $575 tool kit from US Tools&Supply the best deal or would it
>be smarter to buy individual pieces? I don't think I need the air
>drill, and can get a used rivet gun for $105 (US Industial Tool, pg 163
>Trade-a-plane Jan '96).
I am just finishing the empennage on my -6. I bought a 3X gun from ATS for
about $100, but I would not do it again. I borrowed an Avery-supplied 2X
gun from a fellow builder, and it is much more pleasant to use. The trigger
is more controllable, it's lighter, and the air exhaust goes out the handle,
not forward onto the work. With proper oiling, (I screw the oiler right
into the base of the gun) the ATS gun blows a fine mist of oil onto the
piece you are riveting.
A paper towel rubber-banded around the barrel stops the mist, but it is a
pretty mickey-mouse set up. I bought the 3X intending to build the spars,
but then decided to let Phlogiston do the heavy riveting. A 2X gun drives
1/8" rivets just fine.
My ATS bucking bars were the least expensive ones I found and work fine,
however, all other tools I have bought from ATS or US Industrial have been
disappointing.
I have several tools from Avery (deep throat rivet frame, dimple dies, rivet
sets, 12" drill bits, etc.) and have been VERY pleased with them, especially
the swivel mounted flush rivet set with the rubber cup. It's really easy to
use and gives you a flawless surface! Every builder I know highly
recommends this tool.
I bought a 1" deep hand rivet squeezer from US Industrial for $75. The
quality is mediocre and the handles are too short. It does OK on rib
flanges, but I had to borrow a 3" squeezer to get around the rudder and
elevator leading edge flanges. BUY THE 3" SQUEEZER FROM AVERY!!! I wish I
had. Again, much better quality and a real joy to use.
I back rivet on a piece of 1/4" plate steel 14" x 6" (cheap and available
from any local machine shop) and get good results. I have also used an
Avery back rivet plate but don't see much difference.
I bought a used angle drill (the snake-like kind) from the fly market at OSH
a few years ago for $15. Don't know who made it, but it is very handy.
Here's a helpful cleko tip- get a nail apron from the hardware store (about
$1.00 at Home Depot) and put your clekos in it. Tie it around your waist
and you can easily move all around the jig without reaching or walking back
and forth. It also makes a good cleko plier holster.
One more helpful item- After you get the HS out of the jig, nail a 2'x2'
plywood "shelf" to the unoccupied end of the crosspiece. It's amazing how
handy this is.
Good Luck,
Danny Kight kightdm(at)carol.net
RV-6 Finishing up empennage
Hope to start a wing next week!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com (Michael McGee) |
Subject: | Re: Slow RPM Drill Press |
>New subject: I am in the process of "getting ready" to build. I can see that
>a slow RPM drill press is just about mandatory. All of the popular brands
>that I have looked at so far have a min. RPM of about 650. Does anybody know
>of a reasonably priced drill press ($300.00 range) that turns at a slower RPM?
For that price Jet makes a nice 14" floor model that will turn 240. I found
it at Western Tool Supply in Portland,OR, about $289. I went with an
economy model "Formost" brand floor model that will turn about 170, it was
169 on year end sale, reg 199 at Tool Peddler in Portland. Mind you
everyone said that the Formost was hobby grade stuff and wouldn't last in a
production setting. The slow turning ones have three pulleys on top instead
of two.
>
>How do those of you that are in the process of building find time to read
>all this mail!
>
Let's see I have currently about 700 messages in my e-mail box of which 98%
are rv-list and I've read about 20%. About average for the last month.
Clean it out every so often and have faith in the archive!
Mike-still collecting tools-had the plans for 20 months now-McGee
Mike McGee & Jackie Stiles, Vancouver, WA jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com
RV-6 ..sn 23530.. (in the "plans" still) .. shop almost ready ...
SHOP: ++++++++-- (It's almost ready, we have jigs)
TAIL: ----------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DerFlieger(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: RV6 tip-up canopy specific Q. |
(Gil Alexander) writes:
>
>RV-listers - Specifically -- those that have completed the RV6 tip-up
canopy.
>
> Where is the trim line for the C-602 (front canopy skin) where it
>meets the side rails?
>
>
Gil,
The plexi must make a transition as you have noted. What you do is cut a
kind of triangular piece out of the front skin in the area where the skin
covers the weblike piece of the frame (both sides of course). This relief
allows the plexi to lay flat against the web (Wd-616C). The necessary cutout
will seem huge to you, but dont worry, it all gets covered up with
fiberglass.
Use some kind of light weight filler in this area and in front of the plexi
to get a good profile before you glass. Two and three inch strips of glass
tape worked well for me. And be sure you glass back about 20 inches from the
front edge (tapering layers) so you get a SMOOOOTH transition to the metal
side plates of the canopy.
Have fun!
Jim Stugart
DerFlieger(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net> |
Subject: | Format of E-mail |
I sent some prop data to RV-list in column form but it came out scrambled.
Can anyone tell me how I can send column data in Eudora without turning it
to garbage? How do I re-send this E-mail that is now in my "out" box in
proper form? If I can figure out how to do it, I will re-send so the stuff
makes sense. Please contact me direct at: BSkinner@ltec Thanks
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Steve Mayer <72652.670(at)compuserve.com> |
Subject: | Re: Suburu Power, Slow RPM Drill Press |
Randy,
>>
>> New subject: I am in the process of "getting ready" to build. I can see that
>> a slow RPM drill press is just about mandatory. All of the popular brands
>> that I have looked at so far have a min. RPM of about 650. Does anybody know
>> of a reasonably priced drill press ($300.00 range) that turns at a slower
RPM?
>>
>
> I use a drill press with 650 RPM and do not have any problems
>with cutting circles. I've also cut cirlces at 900+ RPM, a little scary,
>but it can be done. Go with the 650 RPM and good drill press. Make sure
>you clamp everything down and use safety goggles and golves etc. You
>don't have much anymore that needs to be cut out with a circle cutter,
>Vans does most of it for you.
I use a Delta 13" bench drill press, and 650 rpm is as low as it goes. I
found it cuts lightening holes in the empennage without any trouble whatsoever.
Just feed the fly cutter very slowly. I'll echo Bob's comment about clamps and
safety gear. I've got some Vise-grip clamps that screw into the machined slots
in the work surface, and these do a good job of clamping material to the
surface.
I wonder if one could use the belt drive as a pseudo-clutch by letting it slip
a bit. That would potentially give you a lower speed, but you wouldn't be able
to tell just what that speed is.
>> How do those of you that are in the process of building find time to read
>> all this mail!
I have a program on CIS that allows me to download mail at night. It's waiting
on my PC for me to read as I have my morning coffee. Others get the rv-list
mailed to their work account and read it in a spare moment.
Enjoy!
Steve Mayer
RV-4 empennage
first rivets 1/10/96
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | david_fried(at)smtpgwy.dehavilland.ca |
Last time I saw one, the DC-3 had inflatable leading edge boots on the
wing and tail. This aircraft is certificated for flight into icing,
the RVs are not.
There are numerous places on an airframe for ice to collect:
Structure in general - Adds weight and drag.
Wings - Reduces stall angle and control effectiveness with
possible asymmetric effects. There was a fatal
icing related accident not long ago near Chicago.
Lateral control was lost and 40+ good people are no
longer with us.
Canopy - Reduces visibility.
Air intake - Reduces inflow for cooling and engine power.
Empennage - Reduces control effectiveness in pitch or yaw.
Loss of control in a slip or with flaps down is
possible.
Icing is a nasty bit of business. Speculating about how good an
ice-carrier the RV is, may influence someone to try it. Please let's
not try this for real.
IMHO
David Fried
DF-6 C-____
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: RV-List: Canadian IFR
Date: 10/01/96 18:49
I believe its the same airfoil section as the DC-3, an aircraft renowned
for its ice-carrying abilities. It's a turbulent airfoil, and should adapt
to a layer of ice much better than a more "modern" laminar flow type.
That, combined with low wing loading and power loading, ought to make an
RV a reasonable ice-carrier (in theory).
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | OrndorffG(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: RV projects in Hawaii |
Don ,
We have builders in our erea that have builded RV4's in a one car garage,
found it close but had enough room . As for can you build it anyone with
basic skill and the well ro learn can build an RV4/6/6A, all you need is the
want and be able to ask for help and willing to take advice for other
builder. You will find that most RV builder are every willing to help any
other builder out that needs help. Becki and I have a series of videos
starting with basic tools and skills up to complete construction of RV and
would be willing to talk to you about what ever you need. Write or call
(301)293-1505 ..george & Becki Orndorff
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | OrndorffG(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Slow RPM Drill Press |
tye Sears,you need a speed 500rpm or less for your fly cutters,Sears have a
couple of good presses for under $300 ...George & Becki Orndorff
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | twg(at)blink.ho.att.com (Tom Goeddel(x5278)) |
Subject: | Re: Slow RPM Drill Press |
>> New subject: I am in the process of "getting ready" to build. I can see that
>> a slow RPM drill press is just about mandatory. All of the popular brands
>> that I have looked at so far have a min. RPM of about 650. Does anybody know
>> of a reasonably priced drill press ($300.00 range) that turns at a slower RPM?
I recently bought a 14" Delta floor model drill press from Home Depot that
gets down to something like 250 rpm (I don't recall the exact number).
I've been very happy with the quality of the thing. The cat liked it, too -
she relieved herself on it as soon as it was set up in the basement.
Cost was about $290.
Tom Goeddel
RV-6a
t.goeddel(at)att.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | jpl(at)showpg.mn.org (Joe Larson) |
Subject: | Re: IFR requirments... |
> I think you'd want to have a T&S on your "perfect" panel, so you can do
> UA recoveries (unless you were taught to do IFR UA recoveries on the AI--
> yikes!)
Hmm. *I* was taught to do UA recoveries on the AI during primary training.
I'm not far enough into my IFR training to have gotten this far yet.
Actually, it was AI, airspeed and VSI.
So, what's so bad about UA recovery using these instruments?
-J
--
Joe Larson jpl(at)showpg.mn.org 612-595-9690(w)
Showpage Software, Inc.
435 Ford Rd, Suite 315
St. Louis Park, Mn 55426 Future RV-6A pilot.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Gene Gottschalk (286-0708)" <geneg(at)rattler.gsfc.nasa.gov> |
>Here's a helpful cleko tip- get a nail apron from the hardware store (about
>$1.00 at Home Depot) and put your clekos in it. Tie it around your waist
>and you can easily move all around the jig without reaching or walking back
>and forth. It also makes a good cleko plier holster.
The nail apron works well for me too. My brother-in-law mailed a "bar cart"
to me for xmas one year that was delivered broken. The quick fix doesn't
look real good, but makes it functional as an easily rolled about celco
cart. It keeps the extra clecos close at hand without the weight of too
many celcos on the apron. I set a hardware store three bin plastic nail
tray on the cart and fulled the bins with 3/32", 1/8" and side grip celcos
in the bins. The lower shelf holds misc tools, drill motor etc. Much
better use than a bar cart!
-Gene (starting the firewall!)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | donk(at)aloha.net (Don Kyle) |
Subject: | Re: RV projects in Hawaii |
George,
Thanks for the advice. I know, and meet on fella here who has completed a
RV-4 project. When I talked with him he did not seem that willing to talk
about it. I hoped that there were in progress projects I could visit. I
was considering taking a few classes in aircraft maintenace, or work on a
A&P, what do you think? In any case I have no room here that is out of the
elements. My have to consider leasing a garage or hanger.
Thanks for the advice again
>Don ,
>We have builders in our erea that have builded RV4's in a one car garage,
>found it close but had enough room . As for can you build it anyone with
>basic skill and the well ro learn can build an RV4/6/6A, all you need is the
>want and be able to ask for help and willing to take advice for other
>builder. You will find that most RV builder are every willing to help any
>other builder out that needs help. Becki and I have a series of videos
>starting with basic tools and skills up to complete construction of RV and
>would be willing to talk to you about what ever you need. Write or call
>(301)293-1505 ..george & Becki Orndorff
>
>
Aloha and Blue Skies
Don Kyle
D-8853
Email: donk(at)aloha.net
Phone# 808-247-2879
Snail mail: 45-631 Kulukeoe Pl.
Kaneohe, Hi 96744
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | MGGX07C(at)prodigy.com ( SCOTT GESELE) |
Subject: | RV6 tip-up canopy specific Q. |
Gil;
After the C-602 was rivetted on, I used a clamp to bend the C-602
skin into the joggle on the side rails. Once it was bent, I put a
single 3/32 rivet to hold it into the joggle. This allowed a smooth
transition for the plexiglass to go from the front skin to the side
rails. Of course, filler and fiberglass will be needed to cover
this transition. The above resulted in a smooth transition with no
bulges
Hope this helps;
-Scott
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | MGGX07C(at)prodigy.com ( SCOTT GESELE) |
Subject: | Re: Slow RPM Drill Press |
I have been using a Sears 1HP, 15" drill press to build a -6A. It
goes down to 250 RPM and cost around $300. It was bought three years
ago, so I don't remember the exact cost. The tool looks exactly like
the Delta drill press of the same size and HP. They are probably
made at the same factory, with different data plate affixed. As far
as changing belts to change speed, mine has two belts and I can
change the speed in under ten seconds. It really is easy.
BTW, I really like the floor standing model and would not want to
build an RV with one of those Mickey Mouse table versions.
-Scott (on finishing kit)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | B F Gibbons <bfgibbons(at)intellinet.com> |
Subject: | RV-List Archive - finding that e-mail |
Finn Lassen writes:
Hi! I've just spent the evening trying to read through the archive. =20
Only got to May '91, but can't wait to ask this:, etc....
I've had the same problem trying to review the archive file, so I wrote =
a program specifically to search it. I can enter several text strings =
to qualify my search. For example, if I'm interested in what's been =
written about landing light installations, I can search for "wing, =
landing light, kit" to find all postings containing the words "wing", =
"landing light", and "kit" (up to seven search strings). I can date =
range the search (before or after a certain date) and it's pretty fast - =
about 15 seconds to search through 6,738 e-mails on a P75. It is a =
Windows application and works well for me but would need some cleaning =
up before I'd let anyone else see it. If there is enough interest I'll =
fix it up and make it available via FTP.
If you'd be interested in the program let me know via =
bfgibbons(at)intellinet.com. Please don't clutter the list.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | EBundy2620(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Suburu Power, Slow RPM Drill Press |
>I would appreciate hearing about any others out there that are considering
>an NSI package. I lean towards Vans attitude toward auto engines but I
>suspect that the auto engine movement is rapidly maturing towards a reliable
>and less expensive alternive to the "old technology". Especially enticing is
>the 200 HP turbo version.
I was origianlly considering NSI, and another similar company that I can't
remember the name of right now. My main concern is that they've all been
"real close to introducing it"
for almost 2 years now. I don't want to drag my feet for what could be
another 2 or more (possibly MUCH more to get all the bugs out) years when I
could be flying. With 6A finish kits at a 14 week lead time, I ordered mine
a couple weeks ago with a standard Lycoming mount.
I'll finish this one, and when (not if) I build my second one, perhaps there
will be sufficient field test data to convince me to buy one. I feel that
auto technology will be the future of light aircraft, I just don't think
it'll be here for awhile, not in the 160+ hp range anyway. Plus, at over
$16,000, I don't see much benefit over a brand new Lycoming.
Besides, nobody loses money on a Lyc these days...
>New subject: I am in the process of "getting ready" to build. I can see that
>a slow RPM drill press is just about mandatory. All of the popular brands
>that I have looked at so far have a min. RPM of about 650. Does anybody know
>of a reasonably priced drill press ($300.00 range) that turns at a slower
>RPM?
I just have a cheapie ($100 or so) drill press with a min 650rpm. I haven't
had any concerns. The only times I even slow it down that much is when I use
a flycutter.
-- Ed Bundy
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | WStucklen(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Experimental Limitations |
The following is a copy of my Airworiness certificate limitation. These
limitations MUST be caried in the aircraft at all times with the pink
airworiness certificate ond other documents (ARROW). Please note that item #4
allows for IFR operations. Item #2 does limit operations in "Congested
Airways" and over "Densely populated areas". Densely populated areas are
well defined in the FAR's, but I'm not sure about the definition of
"Congested Airways" or if ATC actually adherrs to that rule.
Also note that the engine has been classified experimental. this is done
by removing the original data tag and replacing it with you own with your
name (or any other name) as the engine type.
Any comments concerning this or any other "Limitation" that we all should
be asking the FAA about for Airworthiness certificates, would be appreciated.
EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT OPERATING LIMITATIONS
(To be carried in the aircraft during all flights)
MAKE: F. W. Stucklen MODEL: RV-6A SERIAL NO:
21508
REGISTRATION NO: N925RV
ENGINE MAKE: F. W. Stucklen MODEL: 0320-D1A SERIAL NO:
L-13570-36A
PROPELLER MAKE: Sensinich SERIAL
NO: xxxxxxxxxx
This aircraft certification in the experimental classification is for the
purpose of operating amateur built aircraft. Operation is subject to the
following limitations.
1. No person may operate this aircraft for other than the purpose of which
the Special Airworthiness Certificate was issued and the aircarft shall be
operated in accordance with the applicable FAA Air Traffic and General
Operating Rules of FAR 91.319 and all additional limitations herin.
2. No operations except take-offs and landings shall be conducted over
densely populated areas or in congested airways.
3. The operator of this aircraft shall notify the control tower of the
experimental nature of the aircraft when operating the aircraft into or out
of airports with operating control towers.
4. Day/Night VFR and IFR operation is authorized.
5. This aircraft shall contain the placecards, markings, etc., required by
FAR91.9 (A) as indicated in the pilots manual dated and amended
.
6. The connizant FAA Flight Standards Office must be notified and their
responce received in writing, prior to flying this aircraft after
incorporating a major change as defined by FAR 21.93.
7. This aircraft shall not be operated for glider towing or parachute jumping
operations.
8. All flight maneuvers will be limited to the maneuvers performed during the
flight test period. These maneuvers are recorded in the airplane records.
9. All Flights will be in accordance with the pilots manual dates and
amended .
10. The pilot in command is resonsible for advising each person carried of
the experimental nature of the aircraft.
11. This aircraft does not meet the requirements for the applicable
comprehensive and detailed airworthiness code as provided by Annex 8 to the
convention on International Civil Aviation. this aircraft may not be operated
over any foreign country without the special permission of that country.
12. No person shall operate this aircraft inless within the preceeding 12
calendar months it has had a conditional inspection performed in accordance
with Appendix D of Part 43 and found to be in a condition for safe operation.
Additionally, this inspection shall be recorded in accordance with limitation
(13) listed below.
13. Condition inspections shall be recorded in the aircraft maintenance
records showing the following or similarly worded statement: I CERTIFY THAT
THIS AIRCRAFT HAS BEEN INSPECTED ON IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SCOPE AND
DETAIL OF APPENDIX D OF PART 43 AND FOUND TO BE IN A CONDITION FOR SAFE
OPERATION. The entry will include the aircraft total time in sevice, the
name, signature and certification type and number of the person performing
the inspection.
14. This experimental aircraft builder when certified as a repairman, , FAA certified mechanics holding airframe and power plant rating and
appropreately rates repair stations, may perform condition inspections in
accordance with Appendix D of Part 43.
15. Approved grade fuel must be used for the engine.
16. The word "EXPERIMENTAL" must be displayed in accordance with Part 45.23.
17. Airworthiness Directives must be complied with when applicable.
18. The pilot-in-command of this aircraft must, as applicable, hold an
appropriate category/class rating, have an aircraft type rating, have a
flight instructor's log book endorsement or possess a "Letter of
Autorization" issed by an FAA General Aviation or Air Carrier Operations
Inspector.
19. The following pacard shall be displayed in the cockpit in full view of
all occupants: PASSENGER WARNING - THIS AIRCRAFT IS AMEUR-BUILT AND DOES NOT
COMPLY WITH FEDERAL SAFETY REGULATIONS FOR STANDARD AIRCRAFT.
Signed by FAA Inspector or DAR
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Canadian Customs |
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Canadian Customs
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 17:21:31 -0800 (PST)
> From: "Earl Brabandt" <ichips.intel.com!cwbraban(at)matronics.com>
> Sender: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Anyway, it's on indefinite hold and
> comments (more diplomatic than mine above of course) should be
> mailed to your state representative protesting the delay and
> questioning the validity of the labor union concern with "security."
>
> Cal
>
OK, did you?
Randall
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
Subject: | Decoder ring for Hartzel prob hub numbers |
I've always wondered what all those numbers meant in the Hartzell
propeller numbers, so I called up Harzell today, and this is what I found.
1. The portion before the '/' is the Hub model number, the portion
after the '/' is the blade model.
2. The breakdown of the hub model number appears below. This information
is copied from a datasheet that Hartzell faxed to me.
3. There is no similar grand scheme for the blade model number. The
first two digits are the diameter, and the remainder is the
engineering number.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
rv-6 sn 23744
building the firewall
Hartzell Compact Hub model designation:
B HC - C 2 Y F - 1 BF
- -- - - - - - --
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | ---- Minor Modifications: A - Minor mod not
| | | | | | | (Blank to 4 chars) affecting elgibility
| | | | | | | B - 830-21 Stop Units
| | | | | | | C - 830-30 Stop Units
| | | | | | | Counterweighted propeller
| | | | | | | D - A-2476-3 Spinner
| | | | | | | Mountng Kit
| | | | | | | E - A-2476-4 Spinner
| | | | | | | Mountng Kit
| | | | | | | F - Strengthened pitch
| | | | | | | change knob
| | | | | | | G - Damper installed
| | | | | | | H - A-2476-8 Spinner
| | | | | | | mountng Kit
| | | | | | | L - Left hand rotation
| | | | | | | R - Large cylinder & piston
| | | | | | | U - Feather assist spring
| | | | | | | kit in cylinder
| | | | | | | K - Special air charge
| | | | | | | requirement
| | | | | | | J - Left hand tractor
| | | | | | | T - Spring in hub extension
| | | | | | | S - Spring in hub extension
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | --- Special Design: 1 - Constant Speed, no counterweight
| | | | | | Features oil pressure to high pitch
| | | | | | centrifugal force to low
| | | | | | 2 - Feathering, constand speed oil
| | | | | | pressure to low pitch, air charge
| | | | | | and spring force to high pitch
| | | | | | and feather (some exceptions)
| | | | | | 3 - Reversing, constant speed (beta
| | | | | | ring)
| | | | | | 4 - Oil pressure to low pitch,
| | | | | | counterweights to high pitch
| | | | | | 5 - Constant speed, reversing,
| | | | | | feathering
| | | | | | oil pressure to low pitch
| | | | | | counterweights feathering spring
| | | | | | air charge (except soloy prop,
| | | | | | same as -2 except turbine oil ring
| | | | | | 6 - Automatic constant speed
| | | | | | 7 - Constant speed reversing (pressure
| | | | | | control)
| | | | | | 8 - Constant speed, oil to decrease,
| | | | | | air charge
| | | | | |
| | | | | --- Hub Mounting Flange:
| | | | Bolt Dowels Dia No of Engine
| | | | Circle (nmbr) bolts
| | | | (inches) or studs
| | | | F 4.00 2 1/2 6 (1/2") Continental
| | | | K 4.75 2 3/4 6 (1/2") Lycoming
| | | | L 4.75 2 5/8 6 (7/16") Lycoming
| | | | O290, O320
| | | | N 4.25 2 1/2 8 (9/16") GTSIO520
| | | | R 4.75 2 3/4 6 (1/2") Lycoming
| | | |
| | | |--- Blade shank type: Y - shank, aluminum blade,
| | | or integral pitch change arm
| | | blade retension B - Blade retention system, composite
| | | system (composite blade, integral pitch change arm
| | | blades)
| | |
| | --- Basic Design Characteristic:
| |
| | Flange Distance from hub
| | designation parting line to
| | flange face
| | C - Compact Standard Hub F 3.250
| | K,R,L 4.187
| | N 3.375
| | E - 5" extended hub F 7.250
| | K,R,L 9.187
| | N 8.375
| | F - 3" extended hub R,L 7.187
| | G - 1" extended hub F 4.250
| | H - 4.25" extended hub F,N 7.500
| | I - 2" extended hub R 6.187
| | F 5.250
| | J - 3.25" extended hub F 6.500
| | L - 0.5" extended hub F 3.750
| | M - 2.50" extended hub R,L 6.750
| |
| --- HC = Hartzell Controllable
|
|
--- Dowel Location: Blank - 90 & 270 deg. clockwise - Continental
B - 0 & 180 deg. clockwise - Lycoming
C - 150 & 330 deg. clockwise - Lycoming
D - 60 & 240 deg. clockwise - Continental
E - 0 & 180 deg. and propeller GTC marks
aligned - Continental
P - 0 & 180 deg. and propeller DTC marks
alingned - Continental
From: rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 11:22:13 -0800
Subject: Re: RV-List: Experimental Limitations
>8. All flight maneuvers will be limited to the maneuvers performed during the
>flight test period. These maneuvers are recorded in the airplane records.
Does this mean that we have to have someone perform all aerobatic manuvers
that we mibght want to do during the test flight period? In my case, this
would mean finding or hiring someone to do this as i am not qualified YET.
Ross Mickey Phone: 541-342-1892
2300 Oakmont Way #205 Fax: 541-342-5492
Eugene, Oregon 97401 email: rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)idacom.hp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Canadian IFR |
Joe Hine wrote:
> I know of at least one instance where an american flying a homebuild filed
> IFR to a canadian airport and the plan was accepted by the system in Canada
> and the trip was completed. This was a couple of years ago when IFR in
> homebuilts was not allowed. This was probably an oversight.
I have heard similar stories, and have also been told by a controller
that it would be unlikely that a controller would notice that a particular
aircraft were a homebuilt (experimental), and even less likely that he'd
care. In other words, even though it might not be strictly legal, you
could probably get away with it indefinitely as long as you didn't violate
something else.
Incidentally, the same controller said a Canadian-registered homebuild
could probably get away with it too (this was before it became legal),
but I certainly wouldn't have tried it!
> Hope to see some of you up here in summers hence. Plenty of good flyin
> sights in Canada.
>
I second that! I'd love to see more American pilots coming up here and
enjoying the great flying in Canada (and spending their 1.37x dollars).
In the west, particularly, there's lots of uncontrolled airspace over
beautiful scenery, and plenty of RV-able strips. We also have an excellent
SAR system (speaking as a highly-biased, ex-SAR pilot)--but make sure
you've got a good ELT!
The first American RV pilot on this list to visit Edmonton will get a
free pancake breakfast, with real maple syrop .
Tedd McHenry
Edmonton, AB, Canada
(about to order RV-6 plans)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)idacom.hp.com> |
>
> Icing is a nasty bit of business. Speculating about how good an
> ice-carrier the RV is, may influence someone to try it. Please let's
> not try this for real.
>
> IMHO
>
> David Fried
> DF-6 C-____
> dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
>
David:
You're right: icing is potentially lethal. I didn't mean to incite
anyone to conduct their own airborne icing test. However, if you fly in
IMC in Canada in the winter, you _will_ get icing. Therefore, since it is
certain that some of us will do that, it would be nice to hear about the
real-world experience of people on the list who have already picked up ice
on an RV.
The Canadair Tutor is also not certified for flight into known icing
conditions, but knowing the airplane's capabilities (climb and descent
rates, altitude performance, ability to carry ice, and so on) allows its
pilots to exercise their judgement and decide what kind of conditions are
safe to fly in and what aren't. RV pilots need the same information to
safely fly IFR.
Tedd McHenry
Edmonton, Canada
(about to order RV-6 plans)
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Canadian Customs |
From: | "Earl Brabandt" <cwbraban(at)ichips.intel.com> |
> OK, did you?
Naw. I'm so honest and undiplomatic I'd set our cause back for
good! :-)
Maybe you can teach me some tact tonight.
I'm picking up your skin tomorrow. I'll try to paint it this
weekend if it's not to foggy and cold at night. (Can't attract
attention by painting during daylight hours.)
Cal
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: RV-List Archive - finding that e-mail |
Sorry to add to the traffic, but where is the RV Archive?
Could someone post the host and path name for anonymous ftp?
Thanks,
Mickey Baker mbaker(at)gate.net
(Just ordered the empennage kit - plans 23400)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)idacom.hp.com> |
Subject: | Re: IFR requirments... |
> > I think you'd want to have a T&S on your "perfect" panel, so you can do
> > UA recoveries (unless you were taught to do IFR UA recoveries on the AI--
> > yikes!)
>
> Hmm. *I* was taught to do UA recoveries on the AI during primary training.
> I'm not far enough into my IFR training to have gotten this far yet.
> Actually, it was AI, airspeed and VSI.
>
> So, what's so bad about UA recovery using these instruments?
>
> -J
>
> --
> Joe Larson jpl(at)showpg.mn.org 612-595-9690(w)
> Showpage Software, Inc.
> 435 Ford Rd, Suite 315
> St. Louis Park, Mn 55426 Future RV-6A pilot.
>
Joe:
The problem with doing UA recoveries on the AI is that there's a finite
probability that it was a failed AI that got you into the UA in the first
place. A much better UA recovery procedure (IMC only, of course) is:
centralize & analyze
nose high - apply power
- maintain rate 3 or less on the T&S (you are rolling your
nose down to the horizon)
- as your altimeter peaks, roll the T&S to center; while you
are doing this, cross check the AI; if the AI agrees with
everything else, transition to the AI
nose low - reduce power
- roll the T&S to center (it will lag, so you have to
practice this to learn how not to overshoot the wings-
level position)
- apply backpressure to begin level out; while you are doing
this, cross check the AI; if the AI agrees with everything
else, transition to the AI
As an aside, I used to conduct semi-annual emergency sessions in the
simulator for Canadair Tutor jet pilots in the Canadian air force (QFIs and
recent wings graduates). I did a little informal study of responses to
failed attitude indicators. Without exception, pilots went into an
"unusual attitude" within ten second of loss of the AI when there was no
indication of failure (no verbal warning or red flag). Frequently it took
less than five seconds (especially if the AI failed when not in straight
and level flight ). There didn't seem to be much correlation between
experience and time-to-UA. On more occasions than I expected, and
especially with less experienced pilots (students or recent wings
graduates), proper UA procedures were not used. Some pilots ended up
ejecting, especially when the failure occured on approach or departure
(due to altitude).
Something to think about when you lay out your panel.
Tedd McHenry
Edmonton, Canada
(about to order -6 plans)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | crazer(at)midwest.net (Chester Razer) |
Subject: | Re: Dimensions from Webs or flanges - inside or outside? |
It really doesn't matter, I just finished left wing and you can move any
rib with a stick or your hand and bring it into spec. Otherwise just
figure the dimension to the center of the piece that way you're only half
wrong. The most important thing you can learn is how to visualize a
finished component and how it attaches to other related components and
here, experience is the best teacher.
Chet Razer
crazer(at)midwest.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
Subject: | Re: Partial-Panel IFR |
The statement made that statistically, if you lose your Attitude
Indicator IFR you die, is pretty accurate, but I think that is so only if
you attempt a partial panel approach. When I was getting my instrument
rating, the thing that was pounded into my head by some very wise old men
was that if the AI dies, you use the backup to get you to VFR weather.
Even though you practive partial-panel non-precision approaches, don't
even think about trying one for real.
Best regards,
Dave Barnhart
rv-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | bonorden(at)lagrange.amd.com (David Bonorden) |
Subject: | Vac Pumps and AIs |
>
>Speaking of recovery from UA, I was reading an article on Avweb about
>vacuum pumps. The article opened with something to the effect that
>statistically if your AI dies in IMC, you die.
>
>JOhn
>
Seems to me that the real problem is not AI failure, but vacuum pump
failure. There was an article about a year ago in Sport Aviation about
an RV-4 that used a manifold vacuum system combined with a small
venturi. The guy said that the drag from the venturi was offset by the
extra power that was no longer required to turn the vacuum pump.
This seems like a great, simple, reliable plan to me. In an RV, if you
DON'T have the throttle pulled back, then you're definitely going fast
enough for a small venturi to generate good vacuum. If you DO have the
throttle pulled back, then you will have plenty of manifold vacuum to run
your gyros. It's lighter, simpler and more reliable that a vacuum
pump. The venturi mounted right between the gear legs was hardly
noticeable on the RV-4.
Dave Bonorden
Lonely RV-4/Harmon Rocket? Project
Austin, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net> |
Subject: | Re: Topcoating for self-etching primers... |
>Hi! I'm a new RV-6/6A builder (haven't decided yet!) and have just
>finished the HS skeleton and am ready to skin.
>
>I have been watching the Primer discussion with much interest and would
>like to ask an additional question about it, since I'm really struggling
>with this whole primer issue.
>
>I used Dupont's VariPrime, since it was suggested to me by Van's.
>However, I noticed the recommendation to top-coat it with a sealer.
>Dupont (technical assistance) also recommended doing this.
>
>My question is: is this really necessary for INTERNAL structures?
>(such as the HS skeleton and inside of the skin?) I'm worried about
>two things. 1) adding a lot of extra weight
> 2) this priming seems to be getting a little out of hand
> (I feel like I'm spending 1/2 my time priming, not building!)
>
>Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! I'm not going to close up
>the HS until I feel that the job has been done right.
>
I would assume that they were talking about exterior. I sure wouldn't
put anything but a light coat of Variprime on your interior skins, maybe
just a little more on the non-alclad parts (angle & flange strips). There
is a happy medium as far as primer goes.
Yes, there is a lot of, what many would say, discussion on primers. It
just shows me that there are a lot of people that want to do the very best
job of building that they can do. That's good. These are the same people
who seek out the advice of other builders and try to learn as much as they
can so they can build an airworthy airplane.
Bob Skinner RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net> |
>
>What should be done is add a butterfly valve to the intake to reduce the amount
>of air coming in and thus regulating the temperature of the air. Then use the
>firewall valve box to regulate the amount of air coming into the cabin.
>
>So much for theory, has anybody tried this on thier airplane?
>
>Frank Smidler
>
>Frank: In my RV, I have a cockpit controlled flap on the oil cooler. In
the winter, the door is closed, hence, no air flowing through for the cabin
heat idea. On my heat muff, there is no provision to dump air. There is
air in and air out. I experimented with closing the 2" air inlet (in the
rear baffle) off in increments and found no difference. I'm using the
Vetterman 4 pipe exhaust with one muff. Larry suggested that I put another
muff on another muff and use this to pre-heat air going into the second
muff. I think I'll give this a try. On my next RV, I'll use the cross-over
and put a muff on each pipe as Larry suggests. This way, you would be
picking up heat from all four cylinders. Bob Skinner
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net> |
Here is a re-formated copy of an earlier post. Hope it comes out un-garbled:
Maybe some of you "prop gurus" can help me with some prop questions. I have
a 150 hp RV-6 with an empty weight of 1080. I've got a Props, Inc 68 x 66
prop (a beautiful prop, BTW). I'm trying out a Felix Prop (for a spare) now
(prop used on 150 Glasair on which it went 2,850 rpm's). I've done a lot of
flight testing on the Props, Inc. It has been re-pitched twice. Initially,
it would only turn up to 2,500 rpm's at full throttle, leaned for best
power. Here's some data. All data is full throttle and this is calibrated
airspeed:
True
Temp % Ind. calibrated
Prop deg F. Alt. RPM M.P. PWR Airspeed Airspeed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Props Inc 40 7500 2520 22.75 75% 162 170.8
Props Inc 86 7500 2600 22.5 78% 160 177
Props Inc 43 7500 2600 22.75 78% 174 177.6
Felix 55 7500 2720 22.25 78% 160 170.8
Props Inc 36 8500 2505 21.75 72% 160 168.9
Felix 40 8500 2712 22 78% 160 170.1
The Felix prop gives much better take off and climb performance. I know my
RV is a little heavy, not too much I can do about that now. High density
altitude (5,000-10,000 feet) performance is poor with the Props, Inc. prop.
I thought that if I could re-pitch so the Props, Inc. would turn up to
2,700, that maybe I could increase cruise and climb performance because the
reduced pitch would increase rpm's and H.P. The Felix soes turn up OK, but
hurts cruise. Of course, different airfoil shapes between the 2 props could
have something to do with the difference. If I re-pitch the Props, Inc.
prop to turn up to 2,700, would the airspeed go down and take-off and climb
go up or is it possible that I could gain both take-off and cruise performance.
The 6-A I'm building now will have a 180 and probably a constant
speed. Sensenich told me at OSH that they were working on a fixed pitch
metal for the 180. If they design it so there is no RPM limit, I might
consider that prop for the 6-A. I thought about the Sen. FP for my 150, but
the 2,600 rpm redline bothered me a bit (for resale-acrobatics) I could fit
a constant speed, but with the fixed pitch cowl, I would have to go to the
Hartzell with the extension (3.8 G limit) and I don't know if I made the cut
out low enough on the FW for the governor. Anyone have experience with the
Sensenich metal? Well, this ought to keep you "rv-listers" busy for awhile.
Thanks, Bob Skinner
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | crazer(at)midwest.net (Chester Razer) |
Subject: | Re: Slow RPM Drill Press |
I purchased an inexpensive table top drill press with a slow speed of about
550 rpm. I works fine and Van's now does most of the hole cutting for you.
Don't spend a lot of $ on a drill press unless you have other uses for it.
Chet Razer
crazer(at)midwest.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
Subject: | Re: Vac Pumps and AIs |
> This seems like a great, simple, reliable plan to me. In an RV, if you
> DON'T have the throttle pulled back, then you're definitely going fast
> enough for a small venturi to generate good vacuum. If you DO have the
> throttle pulled back, then you will have plenty of manifold vacuum to run
> your gyros. It's lighter, simpler and more reliable that a vacuum
> pump. The venturi mounted right between the gear legs was hardly
> noticeable on the RV-4.
JUst make sure it is a HEATED venturi.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
rv-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
Subject: | Re: IFR requirments |
On Thu, 11 Jan 1996, Randall Henderson wrote:
> I've always thought one deficency in most IFR training is that there is
> no way for the instructor to simulate actual vacum system failure,
Most good simulators can simulate a vacuum failure quite well. I did
some IFR refresher work a while back, spending about 10 hours letting an
instructor beat me up with an AST 300 simulator. He would always choose
the times of the highest workload to fail the gyros. I found that once
I had gained some IFR profficiency, I could detect the failure before
things got too far out of hand.
HOWEVER: this was AST 300 was set up to simulate a twin-engined
airplane, and I have never flown a twin in my life. The sadistic
son-of-a-gun kept failing engines on me. And everytime he did, I died.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
rv-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
Just got back to Texas after some 9 days on the road - through LA and Portland
Oregon...
I have to write this for a couple of reasons, firstly to thank Gill Alexander,
Frank
Justice, Randall Henderson and several others for their hospitality and friendship
during my trip.. I'ts great to be able to talk and meet others with similar interests,
especially when out of town on business... sure beats hanging around in hotels
!
Second.. To heartily endorse the training being given by Mike Seager at the factory.
I
got some 3 hours in the blue 6A this week and I found Mike to be by far the most
Helpful, PATIENT!!, and knowledgable flight instructor that it has ever been my
pleasure
to fly with. I still can't fly worth a damn - I'm low time and I know it ! - but
I'm a
bunch better than I was a week ago...and wow... did I make the right decision on
what
plane to build! -- Yup, I'm smarter than I thought.
Seriously though..There is still no way I'm going to do my first flight in my 6A,
but
I'm much happier now about flying the plane after the initial testing is done.
50 hours
in a 150 don't cut it I guess!!!
Lastly, I want to say that I have rediscovered the best part of building this airplane..
Its not the satisfaction of handcrafting an enormously capable airplane, or the
sheer
fun of learning how to work with different materials... Its the people that you
meet
during the process. Thanks again.
Rob Lee
Wheel pants, Gear fairings and paint to go.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DerFlieger(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: IFR requirments |
edt-eng.netcom.com!randall(at)matronics.com (Randall Henderson) writes:
>But I guess since I'm building the plane I
>could install a co-pilot accessable vacum shut-off valve, couldn't I? I
>just might do that.
>
>
At the risk of re-starting the question of whether the spun down gyros are
protected from acro, I will mention that I installed a vacuum bypass
constructed from a garden hose ball valve and a filter. Works good. Don't
know how my gyros like it, I've only done a few rolls, but they seem to work
OK.
Jim Stugart
DerFlieger(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Graham Taylor <gmt(at)perth.DIALix.oz.au> |
Subject: | Re: Icing caution |
>
> Icing is a nasty bit of business. Speculating about how good an
> ice-carrier the RV is, may influence someone to try it. Please let's
> not try this for real.
>
> David Fried
> DF-6 C-____
> dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
>
ABSOLUTELY. Remember the RV is a SPORT AIRCRAFT, not an ice hauler.
Just THINK about it, please.
Graham Taylor
RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | csanchez(at)BayNetworks.com (Cheryl Sanchez) |
All this talk about losing gyros and/or the vacuum pump
in IMC got me thinking. Everyone is always quick to complain about
how much the electric gyros cost. But if you are stuck in the soup
and have a vacuum failure, would you pay the cost then? I think it
is a safe bet that we all would.
Stuff does happen in IMC. After I got my instrument rating,
I lost my alternator the first time I flew in actual IMC without
an instructor. Losing the electrical system is also very bad. ATC
was not able to pick up my transponder signal with it running on
a quickly dying battery. Fortunately for my, I was flying out of
IMC into hazy VFR and was able to land my 172 just fine. There was
not enough battery left to put down my flaps even though I had
shut down just about everything.
Before that, when I was working on my instrument rating,
one of my instructors kept urging me to buy one of the handheld
comm/nav radios. I scoffed at the cost and did not get one.
Needless to say, after my electrical system failure, I bought
one IMMEDIATELY!! After that, whenever flyinc IFR or going on
a long cross country I would not only carry my handheld, but
also an extra battery pack for it.
Since I am interested in having the capability of
flying IFR, I will seriously consider my backups. An alternate
vacuum source, an electric AI? I'm not sure, but something.
Vacuum pumps are known to not be the most reliable components.
Oh, yes. When taking off on my instrument checkride
my alitimeter gave up the ghost....
Cheryl Sanchez
csanchez(at)baynetworks.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: RV-List Archive - finding that e-mail |
On Thu, 11 Jan 1996, B F Gibbons wrote:
>Finn Lassen writes:
> Hi! I've just spent the evening trying to read through the archive.
> Only got to May '91, but can't wait to ask this:, etc....
>
>I've had the same problem trying to review the archive file, so I wrote a
program specifically to search it. I can enter several text strings to qualify
my search. For example, if I'm interested in what's been written about landing
light installations, I can search for "wing, landing light, kit" to find all
postings containing the words "wing", "landing light", and "kit" (up to seven
search strings). I can date range the search (before or after a certain date)
and it's pretty fast - about 15 seconds to search through 6,738 e-mails on a
P75. It is a Windows application and works well for me but would need some
cleaning up before I'd let anyone else see it. If there is enough interest I'll
fix it up and make it available via FTP.
>
>If you'd be interested in the program let me know via bfgibbons(at)intellinet.com.
Please don't clutter the list.
>
>
I would be interested in a search engine for the archives. Would be willing to
pay nominal amount.
GDPratt(at)dmi.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | WStucklen(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Icing caution |
>You're right: icing is potentially lethal. I didn't mean to incite
>anyone to conduct their own airborne icing test. However, if you fly in
>IMC in Canada in the winter, you _will_ get icing. Therefore, since it is
>certain that some of us will do that, it would be nice to hear about the
>real-world experience of people on the list who have already picked up ice
>on an RV.
>
>The Canadair Tutor is also not certified for flight into known icing
>conditions, but knowing the airplane's capabilities (climb and descent
>rates, altitude performance, ability to carry ice, and so on) allows its
>pilots to exercise their judgement and decide what kind of conditions are
>safe to fly in and what aren't. RV pilots need the same information to
>safely fly IFR.
>
>Tedd McHenry
>Edmonton, Canada
>(about to order RV-6 plans)
>
>
>----------------------- Headers ----------------
Glad to see that somebody else looks at the reality of their environment! But
still, be carefull out there.......
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | WStucklen(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Experimental Limitations |
>F. W. Stucklen excerpted the following from his operating limitations:
>
> > 2. No operations except take-offs and landings shall be conducted over
> > densely populated areas or in congested airways.
> > *snip*
> > 4. Day/Night VFR and IFR operation is authorized.
>
>
>Three issues:
>
>A) Does limitation 4 somewhat contradict 2? If an IFR flight is being
>performed using victor airways, do we have to worry about which ones
>may be 'congested', or is it safe to assume that ATC is providing
>separation, and by definition, is limiting the congestion of the
>airway?
In my limited experience, that has not been a problem. ATC has re-routed me
at times when traffic got to much out of hand, but, as PIC, I have no idea
when an airway is "congested" or not. Only the guy looking at the "Big
Picture" (ie , radar screen) can decide that.
>B) Let's say one departs Hyannis, on Cape Cod, for a VFR flight North
>to Lawrence, Massachusetts. Sounds to me like you would NOT be able
>to call Boston Approach and ask them for a clearance through Bravo,
>since it would take you over Boston. Do you have to circumnavigate
>the city? Or could you fly direct, and construe as part of your
>"landing" those portions of your flight over densely populated areas?
Again, in my experience, I would request that route. If ATC didn't want me
over the "congested" area, they will re-route me. This happens to me almost
all the time coming up V1 south of NYC. NY Center doesn't want to handle me
over the city.
>C) You're on an IFR flight between Podunk and Peoria. ATC calls you
>with an amended clearance that will take you over some urban area. Of
>course, you are in the soup, so you won't SEE the urban area from the
>air. You might have the foresight to pull out your sectional and
>check the route, but single pilot IFR is tough enough without adding
>to the workload, so you blow it off. Any chance of getting violated,
>even while following an ATC clearance?
Good question. I have to ASSUME (oand of coarse, that makes an ASS out of U
and ME) that under those conditions , ATC, representing the FAA, is
authorizing you to fly over the congested area.
>Has anyone gotten the 'congested/populated' operating limitation
>removed?
I've got a call into my DAR asking that exact question. I'll let you know.
Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
wstucklen(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rust47rg(at)one.net |
Subject: | Re: IFR requirments |
>edt-eng.netcom.com!randall(at)matronics.com (Randall Henderson) writes:
>
>>But I guess since I'm building the plane I
>>could install a co-pilot accessable vacum shut-off valve, couldn't I? I
>>just might do that.
>>
>>
>At the risk of re-starting the question of whether the spun down gyros are
>protected from acro, I will mention that I installed a vacuum bypass
>constructed from a garden hose ball valve and a filter. Works good. Don't
>know how my gyros like it, I've only done a few rolls, but they seem to work
>OK.
>
>Jim Stugart
>DerFlieger(at)aol.com
>
I asked the engineers at SIGMA-TEK and they said you are still banging up
your gyros.
By the way I have a slightly used D.G. that I would be glad to let go at a
very reasonable price......The only problem is that I think it's had one too
many
split S's. I hate it when this happens.
Ive also survived a vacuum failure. Not in the RV,but still it was interesting.
I didn't have any problem identifying the failure. The vacuum guage was in
my scan and it was obvious. The other trick is you can get gyros with
vacuum flags
if you want.
Regards
Rusty Gossard
N47RG RV-4 Flying (IFR equiped and flown)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rcrothers(at)rcrothers.seanet.com (Randy Crothers) |
Subject: | Re: Slow RPM Drill Press |
>tye Sears,you need a speed 500rpm or less for your fly cutters,Sears have a
>couple of good presses for under $300 ...George & Becki Orndorff
George and Becky,
I was just watching your empanage video yesterday. It has been
helpfull to show me a little more about what I'm getting myself into. I was
very interested in the little metal break that was shown in the video. I
played it back alot of times but could not quite tell where the pivot point
of the angle iron was located. Does anyone know where I can get a few
details on this little break, or one like it? It looks like it would be very
easy to build but a drawing or some info would make it even easier.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rcrothers(at)rcrothers.seanet.com (Randy Crothers) |
Subject: | Re: Suburu Power |
>>$16,000 USD for the 160 hp engine, plus $3500 for the firewall forward
>>kit, including prop. Well, auto conversions may or may not have advantages
>>over Lycontinentals, but price sure as heck ain't one of 'em.
>
>I had no idea they were this expensive. If this is accurate information, I
>will buy the Lycoming. I was starting to consider the Subaru package, until
>now. That is quit a price to pay. If in the future the engine proves to be
>more reliable, then the price is justified. (but I'm not willing to be a
>$16k test subject)
>
>The price that I was quoted recently at NSI was close to 20K but that was
for a firewall forward package, including an extensive engine
instrumentation package, engine mount, radiator, cockpit adjustable
propellor and more. It still is expensive and I would have to see a good
track record before hanging out on that limb. Stratus seems to be geared up
more toward the do it your self type. They will offer a 160HP Suburu with NW
Aero Reduction Drive and prop extension for around 10K. That is more to my
liking but I have a very long way to go before I will need one, getting
ready to start.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Re: Topcoating for self-etching primers... |
>
> I have been watching the Primer discussion with much interest and would
> like to ask an additional question about it, since I'm really struggling
> with this whole primer issue.
Join the club
> I used Dupont's VariPrime, since it was suggested to me by Van's.
> However, I noticed the recommendation to top-coat it with a sealer.
> Dupont (technical assistance) also recommended doing this.
> My question is: is this really necessary for INTERNAL structures?
Lots of RV builders use Variprime, and I've never heard of anyone
going over it with a topcoat on internal structures.
> 2) this priming seems to be getting a little out of hand
Yes, it's easy to get carried away (I should know!). Just find a simple
method that works, and go with it.
> I'm not going to close up
> the HS until I feel that the job has been done right.
Close it up now, before you change your mind! :-)
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Vac Pumps and AIs |
From: | "Earl Brabandt" <cwbraban(at)ichips.intel.com> |
> >Speaking of recovery from UA, I was reading an article on Avweb about
> >vacuum pumps. The article opened with something to the effect that
> >statistically if your AI dies in IMC, you die.
> >
> >JOhn
Yeah, this opinion comes around in the press every now and then. Then
you read other opinions that such alarmist attitudes are counter productive.
My position is: don't freak out if (when) it happens--fly the airplane
just like you practiced!
I don't think that there are any useful "statistics" available. Most
flights that land safely following an admittedly all too common vacuum
pump failure simply never get reported to anyone who's keeping track.
I didn't tell anyone about it when it happened to me once in IMC and
I didn't tell anyone about it when it happend two or three time in
VMC.
I didn't have a vacuum backup in any of the above cases but I'll probably
install a homebrew manifold pressure backup in my RV-6.
Cal (actual partial panel--and LIVED!)
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Partial-Panel IFR |
From: | "Earl Brabandt" <cwbraban(at)ichips.intel.com> |
> The statement made that statistically, if you lose your Attitude
> Indicator IFR you die, is pretty accurate, but I think that is so only if
> you attempt a partial panel approach. When I was getting my instrument
> rating, the thing that was pounded into my head by some very wise old men
> was that if the AI dies, you use the backup to get you to VFR weather.
> Even though you practive partial-panel non-precision approaches, don't
> even think about trying one for real.
I disagree that a P-P approach is the most dangerous phase of a P-P
emergency (and P-P should be treated as an emergency). However, if
VMC conditions are safely attainable, (considering fuel, range, flight
time and fatigue, and the probability of icing or other weather
related hazards along the route) then certainly go for VMC!
The reason that I don't beleive that the approach represents the
high risk phase of the emergency is that the failure was already
discovered, the "lying" instrument detected, and the aircraft attitude
stabilized. That's the tricky part! It's also the part that we
instructors can't generally simulate in actual flight because the
student always identifies the lying instrument correctly--it's
the one that the instructor covered-up!.
If you must fly a P-P approach, declare and emergency, get a no-gyro
approach from a radar facility if possible. It may also be helpful
to pick a final approach course oriented in a southerly direction.
That way, the wet compass will quickly exaggerate an inadvertent turn
and it will indicate in the proper sense. If you fly a northerly
final approach course, expect the wet compass to initially indicate
a turn opposite to the actual direction of the turn until the "lag
catches up." Don't let all the naysayers and doomspeakers cause
you to enter the psychological "resignation stage" because you think
you're toast. Confidence in your ability is critical and lots of
practice builds confidence.
There are lots of tricks that will improve your odds of making it.
Many GPS receivers or ADFs can be used in place of a wet compass for
heading control. Learn as many tricks as you can and above all,
practice them often before the real thing happens to you.
Cal (partial-panel and lived)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com |
Subject: | Re: Topcoating for self-etching primers... |
For internal, I am just using VariPrime. As has been mentioned, the aging
commercial fleet uses little if any priming of internal area's. Some RV
builders are priming only where two pieces of metal touch and rely only on
the alum. coating.
Ross Mickey
>Hi! I'm a new RV-6/6A builder (haven't decided yet!) and have just
>finished the HS skeleton and am ready to skin.
>
>I have been watching the Primer discussion with much interest and would
>like to ask an additional question about it, since I'm really struggling
>with this whole primer issue.
>
>I used Dupont's VariPrime, since it was suggested to me by Van's.
>However, I noticed the recommendation to top-coat it with a sealer.
>Dupont (technical assistance) also recommended doing this.
>
>My question is: is this really necessary for INTERNAL structures?
>(such as the HS skeleton and inside of the skin?) I'm worried about
>two things. 1) adding a lot of extra weight
> 2) this priming seems to be getting a little out of hand
> (I feel like I'm spending 1/2 my time priming, not building!)
>
>Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! I'm not going to close up
>the HS until I feel that the job has been done right.
>
>
>
>
>
Ross Mickey Phone: 541-342-1892
2300 Oakmont Way #205 Fax: 541-342-5492
Eugene, Oregon 97401 email: rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Johnson, Steve" <spjohnson(at)msmail.mmmg.com> |
>I asked the engineers at SIGMA-TEK and they said you are still banging up
>your gyros.
>By the way I have a slightly used D.G. that I would be glad to let go at a
>very reasonable price......The only problem is that I think it's had one too
>many
>split S's. I hate it when this happens.
>Ive also survived a vacuum failure. Not in the RV,but still it was
interesting.
>I didn't have any problem identifying the failure. The vacuum guage was in
>my scan and it was obvious. The other trick is you can get gyros with
>vacuum flags
>if you want.
>Regards
>Rusty Gossard
>N47RG RV-4 Flying (IFR equiped and flown)
It seems reasonable to bring up removable sub-panels for AI and DG again. I
wonder if anyone knows of a suitable quick disconnect for vacuum lines similar
to the quick disconnect couplings on the high pressure air lines for riveting
etc.
Steve Johnson
Waiting on the RV-8
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Steve Day" <sday(at)pharmcomp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Suburu/Rotary Power |
>>The price that I was quoted recently at NSI was close to 20K but that was
>for a firewall forward package, including an extensive engine
>instrumentation package, engine mount, radiator, cockpit adjustable
>propellor and more. It still is expensive and I would have to see a good
>track record before hanging out on that limb. Stratus seems to be geared up
>more toward the do it your self type. They will offer a 160HP Suburu with NW
>Aero Reduction Drive and prop extension for around 10K. That is more to my
>liking but I have a very long way to go before I will need one, getting
>ready to start.
$10k is much more reasonable.
I've been doing some reading about the Rotary engine design. Why is the
rotary engine not gaining more support. It seems to me that the design is
far superior to the piston engine.
Does anyone have information on companies who supply aircraft ready Rotary
engines?
If only the Rotary enjoyed the mass amounts of money put into development as
the piston engine has, I bet we'd have an incredibly reliable alternative.
-Steve Day
sday(at)pharmcomp.com
(CK ID - RV6a RV for short)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | chinkley(at)ix.netcom.com (Curtis R. Hinkley ) |
Subject: | Re: Topcoating for self-etching primers... |
You wrote:
>
>Hi! I'm a new RV-6/6A builder (haven't decided yet!) and have just
>finished the HS skeleton and am ready to skin.
>
>I have been watching the Primer discussion with much interest and
would like to ask an additional question about it, since I'm really
struggling with this whole primer issue.
>
>I used Dupont's VariPrime, since it was suggested to me by Van's.
>However, I noticed the recommendation to top-coat it with a sealer.
>Dupont (technical assistance) also recommended doing this.
>
>My question is: is this really necessary for INTERNAL structures?
>(such as the HS skeleton and inside of the skin?) I'm worried about
>two things. 1) adding a lot of extra weight
> 2) this priming seems to be getting a little out of hand
> (I feel like I'm spending 1/2 my time priming, not
building!)
>
>Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! I'm not going to close
up the HS until I feel that the job has been done right.
>
The question you need to ask yourself is why am I painting anything on
my RV.
Am I painting to protect the aircraft from corrosion or am I painting
to provide protection from dissimilar metal. I don't think RV builders
need to worry about dissimilar metal since it's all aluminum, and I
believe most of the aluminum is alclad which provides more corrosion
protection than non-alclad aluminum.
So I believe the answer to these questions is that we are painting the
internal parts of our RV's to provide an extra measure of protection
from corrosion. Since we are painting to protect against corrosion
which is caused by the presence of water, then the next logical
question is why would I prime something and not top coat it. This is
why Dupont's VariPrime should be top coated. If VariPrime it's not top
coated then what protection is it providing? Please don't take this as
a dig or cut against VariPrime, I believe it is arguably the best self
etching primer on the market. However it's a primer which provides a
surface that the top coat will stick to. Another thing to keep in mind
is that VariPrime is a non-sanding primer if top-coated within 24
hours, if you do not top coat your VariPrime within 24 hours then it
needs to be wet-sanded with 400grit before you top-coat it.
Since you've been following the priming discussion then you know I
prefer PPG's alodine treatment and DP-Epoxy Primer which does not need
a top coat because the epoxy is water proof.
My best advice is for you to pick a paint system that is easy for you
to use and stick with it.
I hope this is helpful to you.
Curtis,
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
Subject: | Quick release fittings (was IFR requirments) |
>
>
>It seems reasonable to bring up removable sub-panels for AI and DG again. I
>wonder if anyone knows of a suitable quick disconnect for vacuum lines similar
>to the quick disconnect couplings on the high pressure air lines for riveting
>etc.
The race care folks use these for quick engine changes. They work
with Aeroquip hoses and come in several sizes.
Try an Earl's Plumbing (race car plumbing!) catalog, or a Summit
Racing catalog (I did see them in the latest Summit catalog, but they are
probably made by Earls).
Phone #s should be in any good hot rod magazine.
For smaller 3/16 ID flex hoses, Winter makes a nice 4-way
(simultaneous connections for 4 seperate hoses) quick release connector for
easy removal of sailplane instrument panels. E-mail me if you need a
contact for a supplier.
Gil Alexander
gil(at)rassp.hac.com
RV6A, #20701, N64GA (rsvd) ... cutting plexiglas (carefully!)
>
>Steve Johnson
>Waiting on the RV-8
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com (Doug Weiler) |
Subject: | Shoulder Harnesses |
RV Listers:
Although this is not directly RV related, I'm hoping someone in our group
may help me. I am in the process of installing shoulder harnesses in my
C-180 and can't seem to find what I am looking for from the usual aircraft
vendors (Wag-Aero, Airtex, A/C Spruce, etc). I've concluded I may have to
have someone sew up what I want.
Seems I recall a vendor at OSH by the name of Hooker Harness which may be
able to do customer work. But I can't find their number in any of my past
Sport Aviation magazines. Does anyone have their phone number or could
recommend a custom seatbelt/harness maker?
Many thanks as always.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
= Doug Weiler, pres. MN Wing Van's AirForce, RV-4 wings in progress
= 347 Krattley Lane
= Hudson, WI 54016
= 715-386-1239
= email: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | RV6junkie(at)aol.com |
Just some thoughts...
>From the limited data that you sent it is hard to make a proper evaluation of
your prop. The information that I don't have is 1) what is your static rpm,
2) full throtle rpm @ SL, 3) rpm in climb.
>From the data that you sent, the Props, Inc. (PI) prop doesn't allow the
engine to make as much HP as you have listed. Example: at 8500' it turned up
to 2505 RPM. This is 200 rpm below the RPM where max power, at any altitude,
is achived. In this example, your engine was making about 68% power out of a
possible 74.85%. However, you seem to get the most performance from the PI
prop. The PI prop seems to be more efficent than the Felix prop. BTW, based
on your information, the effective (average) pitch of the PI prop is 71.35",
not 66". The different pitch numbers that prop makers use are only valid
when comparing different props from the same manufacturer.
I would try to remove two more inches of pitch from the PI prop. With this
new pitch, assuming your engine has the power to turn to 2700 RPM at 8500'
(which it should), you should be able to make 179 mph, a 10.1 mph
improvement. You will also gain about 75 FMP in climb.
Props are the transmission of our aircraft so there is no free lunch when you
reduce pitch to pick-up rpm. It has the same effect of shifting from 5th
gear to 4th gear in a car that has an overdrive 5th gear. You will go faster
and climb hills better, but, you will burn more fuel and make more noise.
Some will argue that you'll put more ware & tare on the engine but these
engines were built to run at 2700 rpm all day long.
The other thing to think about is that if you normally cruise at lets say
2400 rpm, after re-pitching your prop, your RV will be slower at the same rpm
setting! Why is this? Because you will make less HP at the same RPM. So if
you like to cruise at a fixed rpm (like 2400), regardless of altitude (not a
good way to fly IMHO) at all times, you are better off with an over-pitched
prop. This will hurt your climb performance however.
I like props that are pitched to achive 2700-2750 rpm at 7500'. This allows
you max cruise and good climb performance.
My hangar-mate has a Sensenich metal prop. His RV (Valerie's Nightmare) is
as fast as any with a fixed pitch prop. With 160 HP he'll cruise at 188-191
mph at 2600 rpm. However, you will notice that his max speed at SL also
happens to be his max cruise speed due to the rpm restriction. He never stops
talking about installing a CS prop. He doesn't like the rpm restriction and
he would like the extra 200-400 fpm climb.
But the added weight and complexity..........
Gary Corde
RV-6 N211GC
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com |
Subject: | Fwd: FS: Engines |
This is a bit old but thought someone might be interested
>From: Hank Blackstock <wa5jrh(at)ionet.net>
>Subject: FS: Engines
>Date: 5 Jan 1996 14:41:56 GMT
>
>2 O-320 B1B w/Turbo 1100Hr $6,000 each
>1 O-360 A1A 1100Hr 7,500
>2 IO-470D 400Hr 5,000 each
>1 E-185-11 (205hp) 200Hr 4,500
>
>
>Please email your phone number if interested for details
>
>Thanks, Hank Blackstock wa5jrh(at)ionet.net
>
>---- End Forwarded Message
>
>
>
Ross Mickey Phone: 541-342-1892
2300 Oakmont Way #205 Fax: 541-342-5492
Eugene, Oregon 97401 email: rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
Subject: | Shoulder Harnesses (fwd) |
I had a Hooker Harness business card in my wallet from 2 yrs ago
at Oshkosh. Their number is 815-233-5478.
At that time, they got $175 for their SH/SB kit for Cessna 170
per seat. You have to drill quite a hole horizontal thru the
rear spar carrythrough. They then install a bushing in this hole
so you can put a bolt all the way thru the spar and into the SH
attach plate.
I think the best unit is from BAS in Washington state. Theirs
comes with an initeral reel on the SH. I realy think you need this
in a Cessna as I lean forward a lot to look past the wing LE.
I want to buy the BAS unit when I have the extra cash.
I don't recall the cost but it is more like 400 per seat.
I can get the number/address from home if you need it.
They advertise in the Cessna Pilots Assn news letter and I think
in AOPA and elsewhere.
The Wag Aero is about the least expensive but you have to drill
a holl in the roof skin above the rear spar to slip in a doubler
(or if the wing is off you can slide it in without drilling the hole).
I don't like the idea of a hole in the top skin.
Also, this unit (like Hookers) does not have an Initeral Reel on it.
Herman
> X-Sender: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com
> X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.5
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> From: mail.pressenter.com!dougweil(at)matronics.com (Doug Weiler)
> Subject: RV-List: Shoulder Harnesses
>
> RV Listers:
>
> Although this is not directly RV related, I'm hoping someone in our group
> may help me. I am in the process of installing shoulder harnesses in my
> C-180 and can't seem to find what I am looking for from the usual aircraft
> vendors (Wag-Aero, Airtex, A/C Spruce, etc). I've concluded I may have to
> have someone sew up what I want.
>
> Seems I recall a vendor at OSH by the name of Hooker Harness which may be
> able to do customer work. But I can't find their number in any of my past
> Sport Aviation magazines. Does anyone have their phone number or could
> recommend a custom seatbelt/harness maker?
>
> Many thanks as always.
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> = Doug Weiler, pres. MN Wing Van's AirForce, RV-4 wings in progress
> = 347 Krattley Lane
> = Hudson, WI 54016
> = 715-386-1239
> = email: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------
*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
AIX Network Performance Measurement/Analysis
phone: TL 678-2831 outside: (512) 838-2831
MS: 9530 fax: 512-838-1801
mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)MBnet.MB.CA> |
Subject: | Re: Suburu Power |
On Wed, 10 Jan 1996, Steve Day wrote:
> >$16,000 USD for the 160 hp engine, plus $3500 for the firewall forward
>
> I had no idea they were this expensive. If this is accurate information, I
> will buy the Lycoming. I was starting to consider the Subaru package, until
> now. That is quit a price to pay. If in the future the engine proves to be
> more reliable, then the price is justified. (but I'm not willing to be a
> $16k test subject)
I was surprised myself. The price information comes from a member of our
builder's group who recently visited the NSI factory. I hope it's correct.
I agree completely with your comments. The NSI/Subaru may eventually prove
to be the greatest aviation engine ever built, but it is definitely NOT
proven technology yet.
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com |
I just ran into a web site from Empire Development Avionics
(http://user.aol.com/chanik/ed) who sell a three axis autopilot for $699.
They also sell an eclectronic ignition for $385 as well as some other
products. Has anyone heard of these? Any experience?
Their home page has very detailed information, diagrams etc and also links
to Franklin Engines and U.S. Aviator .
Ross Mickey Phone: 541-342-1892
2300 Oakmont Way #205 Fax: 541-342-5492
Eugene, Oregon 97401 email: rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rust47rg(at)one.net |
Subject: | Re: Shoulder Harnesses |
>RV Listers:
>
>Although this is not directly RV related, I'm hoping someone in our group
>may help me. I am in the process of installing shoulder harnesses in my
>C-180 and can't seem to find what I am looking for from the usual aircraft
>vendors (Wag-Aero, Airtex, A/C Spruce, etc). I've concluded I may have to
>have someone sew up what I want.
>
>Seems I recall a vendor at OSH by the name of Hooker Harness which may be
>able to do customer work. But I can't find their number in any of my past
>Sport Aviation magazines. Does anyone have their phone number or could
>recommend a custom seatbelt/harness maker?
>
>Many thanks as always.
>
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>= Doug Weiler, pres. MN Wing Van's AirForce, RV-4 wings in progress
>= 347 Krattley Lane
>= Hudson, WI 54016
>= 715-386-1239
>= email: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>
Hooker Custom Harness, Jack Hooker, 30 E. Jefferson St., Freeport,Il 61032
(815) 233-5478
Got Them in my 4, Jack does great work but be prepared to wait.
Regards:
Rusty Gossard
N47RG RV-4 flying
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)MBnet.MB.CA> |
Subject: | Re: Icing caution |
On Thu, 11 Jan 1996 david_fried(at)smtpgwy.dehavilland.ca wrote:
> Last time I saw one, the DC-3 had inflatable leading edge boots on the
> wing and tail. This aircraft is certificated for flight into icing,
> the RVs are not.
Point taken. I hope no one would voluntarily test pilot an RV into
known icing conditions. But since people *do* fly RVs in clouds, and
unforecast icing may be encountered, discussing the potential effect
of ice on the flying characteristics of an RV *is* relevant, IMHO.
Question: Do certified aircraft manufaturers test the effects of icing on
non-known-icing aircraft?
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | chinkley(at)ix.netcom.com (Curtis R. Hinkley ) |
Subject: | Re: Shoulder Harnesses |
You wrote:
>
>RV Listers:
>
>Although this is not directly RV related, I'm hoping someone in our
group may help me. I am in the process of installing shoulder
harnesses in my C-180 and can't seem to find what I am looking for from
the usual aircraft vendors (Wag-Aero, Airtex, A/C Spruce, etc). I've
concluded I may have to have someone sew up what I want.
>
>Seems I recall a vendor at OSH by the name of Hooker Harness which may
be able to do customer work. But I can't find their number in any of
my past Sport Aviation magazines. Does anyone have their phone number
or could recommend a custom seatbelt/harness maker?
>
>Many thanks as always.
>
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=
>= Doug Weiler, pres. MN Wing Van's AirForce, RV-4 wings in progress
>= 347 Krattley Lane
>= Hudson, WI 54016
>= 715-386-1239
>= email: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=
>
Doug,
You may want to take a look at a Speedway Motors catalog, they carry a
complete line of Simpson harnesses with Cam-Lock or Latch & Link Buckle
assemblies. Their phone number is 800-736-3733.
Curtis,
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rcrothers(at)rcrothers.seanet.com (Randy Crothers) |
Subject: | Re: Suburu/Rotary Power |
>>>The price that I was quoted recently at NSI was close to 20K but that was
>>for a firewall forward package, including an extensive engine
>>instrumentation package, engine mount, radiator, cockpit adjustable
>>propellor and more. It still is expensive and I would have to see a good
>>track record before hanging out on that limb. Stratus seems to be geared up
>>more toward the do it your self type. They will offer a 160HP Suburu with NW
>>Aero Reduction Drive and prop extension for around 10K. That is more to my
>>liking but I have a very long way to go before I will need one, getting
>>ready to start.
>
>$10k is much more reasonable.
>
>I've been doing some reading about the Rotary engine design. Why is the
>rotary engine not gaining more support. It seems to me that the design is
>far superior to the piston engine.
>
>Does anyone have information on companies who supply aircraft ready Rotary
>engines?
>
>If only the Rotary enjoyed the mass amounts of money put into development as
>the piston engine has, I bet we'd have an incredibly reliable alternative.
>
>-Steve Day
>sday(at)pharmcomp.com
>(CK ID - RV6a RV for short)
NEW
I didn't mention rotarys in my previous mail but I am fortunate to live near
a rotary developer as well as Stratus and NSI. The rotary man I refer to is
Dave Atkins who has a shop at Pierce Co. airport in Puyallup WA. Dave showed
an RV-6 with a rotary mounted but not flying at the Arlington EAA flyin and
then managed to fly the RV-6 to Oshkosh. He had some mysterious (SP)
difficulty on the way to Copperstate and had to put it down rather than
atempt to climb over some wires and went through a fence in the process. I
don't claim to know what happened. His -6 is nearly completly repaired and
should be airborne again soon. Dave started out with a turbo-charged fuel
injected version that proved troulbesome and produced way too much HP
anyway,(325!). He went back to a carburated version and as far as I know it
has been running well. Some of Daves engines have been racking up some
reliable hrs in a Gyrocopter instruction operation. I have been keeping
track of Daves progress as well as the Suburu -6 that is nearly complete.
You may be interested in Contact! magazine. It has many articles on auto
engine conversions. It costs $18.00 for 6 months. Address is 2900 East
Weymouth, Tucson, AZ. 85716. I don't have the phone number but I got it from
information ok, he does visa. If your interested I can dig up Dave Atkins
address, business name, phone etc..
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
Subject: | Re: Shoulder Harnesses (fwd) |
Please note that he is asking for SH for a Cessna 180.
This MUST BE A TSO'd shoulder harnes system for use in a certified AC.
So don't send him to race car catalogs.
The possible vendors of TSO'd SH sets I know of are:
Cessna, Wag Aero, Hooker (maybe, had C170 approval), and BAS.
IMHO, it would be better to have a SH from any source as it is much
better than none but the FAA would frown on it. Who ever has to
sign off your Annual inspection would also likely not sign it off with
non-TSO mods (but some close their eyes to such things).
Herman
> From root Fri Jan 12 19:20:41 1996
> Errors-To: bounces(at)matronics.com
> Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 16:06:16 -0800
> Message-Id: <199601130006.QAA02632(at)ix4.ix.netcom.com>
> From: ix.netcom.com!chinkley(at)matronics.com (Curtis R. Hinkley )
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Shoulder Harnesses
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Sender: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Precedence: junk
> Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>
> You wrote:
> >
> >RV Listers:
> >
> >Although this is not directly RV related, I'm hoping someone in our
> group may help me. I am in the process of installing shoulder
> harnesses in my C-180 and can't seem to find what I am looking for from
> the usual aircraft vendors (Wag-Aero, Airtex, A/C Spruce, etc). I've
> concluded I may have to have someone sew up what I want.
> >
> >Seems I recall a vendor at OSH by the name of Hooker Harness which may
> be able to do customer work. But I can't find their number in any of
> my past Sport Aviation magazines. Does anyone have their phone number
> or could recommend a custom seatbelt/harness maker?
> >
> >Many thanks as always.
> >
> >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> =-=-=-=
> >= Doug Weiler, pres. MN Wing Van's AirForce, RV-4 wings in progress
> >= 347 Krattley Lane
> >= Hudson, WI 54016
> >= 715-386-1239
> >= email: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com
> >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> =-=-=-=
> >
> Doug,
>
> You may want to take a look at a Speedway Motors catalog, they carry a
> complete line of Simpson harnesses with Cam-Lock or Latch & Link Buckle
> assemblies. Their phone number is 800-736-3733.
>
> Curtis,
>
--
--------------------------------------------------------
*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
AIX Network Performance Measurement/Analysis
phone: TL 678-2831 outside: (512) 838-2831
MS: 9530 fax: 512-838-1801
mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)idacom.hp.com> |
Subject: | Re: IFR requirments |
> I've always thought one deficency in most IFR training is that there is
> no way for the instructor to simulate actual vacum system failure,
> since most IFR trainers don't have anything like a vacum system
> "circuit breaker". Seems to me this would be the only way to train for
> a REAL vacum system failure. But I guess since I'm building the plane I
> could install a co-pilot accessable vacum shut-off valve, couldn't I? I
> just might do that.
>
> Randall Henderson
> RV-6
>
Here's what we used to do in the air force. Cover up the AI. Have the
student close his or her eyes, then ask the student to perform some simple
manoeuvres, such as a turn one way followed by a turn the other way. It
generally doesn't take long to be in an unusual attitude. Have the
student open his or her eyes and recover.
This doesn't actually similate an AI (or vacuum system) failure, but it
puts the student in more-or-less the same predicament. The main limitation
is that the "failed" AI is covered. If you've done failed a AI in a sym
(or had a real one), you know that it's a lot harder to do the partial
panel work with a cockeyed AI staring you in the face.
Tedd McHenry
tedd(at)idacom.hp.com
Edmonton, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)idacom.hp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Partial-Panel IFR |
> I disagree that a P-P approach is the most dangerous phase of a P-P
> emergency (and P-P should be treated as an emergency). However, if
> VMC conditions are safely attainable, (considering fuel, range, flight
> time and fatigue, and the probability of icing or other weather
> related hazards along the route) then certainly go for VMC!
>
[snip]
>
> There are lots of tricks that will improve your odds of making it.
> Many GPS receivers or ADFs can be used in place of a wet compass for
> heading control. Learn as many tricks as you can and above all,
> practice them often before the real thing happens to you.
>
> Cal (partial-panel and lived)
>
>
Right on both counts, Cal. Only do a PP approach if there isn't any
other option. But if you've practiced it, it's not that bad. We used
to do them almost daily in the air force--you'd do one on most QFI mutual
trips, and almost always on a proficiency check. We just considered them
a normal IFR exercise; tricky, but doable.
Tedd McHenry
tedd(at)idacom.hp.com
Edmonton, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)idacom.hp.com> |
Subject: | Quick release fittings (was IFR requirments) |
> >It seems reasonable to bring up removable sub-panels for AI and DG again. I
> >wonder if anyone knows of a suitable quick disconnect for vacuum lines similar
> >to the quick disconnect couplings on the high pressure air lines for riveting
> >etc.
>
>
> The race care folks use these for quick engine changes. They work
> with Aeroquip hoses and come in several sizes.
>
I don't think I'd like one of those on a critical instrument. Granted
they are reliable, but why introduce a potential failure mode if you don't
have to?
Tedd McHenry
tedd(at)idacom.hp.com
Edmonton, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)idacom.hp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Icing caution |
Okay, perhaps no-one wants to fess up. But surely someone out there has
picked up ice on an RV. Heck, you can do it VFR if the conditions are
right. How 'bout snow? I'd like to hear any experience anyone has had
with, shall we say "airframe contamination" in an RV. Heavy rain?
Tedd McHenry
tedd(at)idacom.hp.com
Edmonton, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Scott Johnson <rvgasj(at)popmail.mcs.net> |
Subject: | Need Advice For Drilling Wing Ribs For Wires |
Where is the best place to drill the wing ribs for the one half inch holes
that will carry the electrical wires to the wing tips and how close can I
get to the big 4 and 5 inch cut out holes or rib ends? Scott Johnson
rvgasj(at)mcs.com
P.S. It sure is neat to finally be building a big piece on the airplane,
just looking at all those wing ribs on the spar sure looks substantial
compared to the tail kit !
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net> |
>From the data that you sent, the Props, Inc. (PI) prop doesn't allow the
>engine to make as much HP as you have listed. Example: at 8500' it turned up
>to 2505 RPM. This is 200 rpm below the RPM where max power, at any altitude,
>is achived. In this example, your engine was making about 68% power out of a
>possible 74.85%. However, you seem to get the most performance from the PI
>prop. The PI prop seems to be more efficent than the Felix prop. BTW, based
>on your information, the effective (average) pitch of the PI prop is 71.35",
>not 66". The different pitch numbers that prop makers use are only valid
>when comparing different props from the same manufacturer.
>
>I would try to remove two more inches of pitch from the PI prop. With this
>new pitch, assuming your engine has the power to turn to 2700 RPM at 8500'
>(which it should), you should be able to make 179 mph, a 10.1 mph
>improvement. You will also gain about 75 FMP in climb.
>
>Props are the transmission of our aircraft so there is no free lunch when you
>reduce pitch to pick-up rpm. It has the same effect of shifting from 5th
>gear to 4th gear in a car that has an overdrive 5th gear. You will go faster
>and climb hills better, but, you will burn more fuel and make more noise.
> Some will argue that you'll put more ware & tare on the engine but these
>engines were built to run at 2700 rpm all day long.
>
>The other thing to think about is that if you normally cruise at lets say
>2400 rpm, after re-pitching your prop, your RV will be slower at the same rpm
>setting! Why is this? Because you will make less HP at the same RPM. So if
>you like to cruise at a fixed rpm (like 2400), regardless of altitude (not a
>good way to fly IMHO) at all times, you are better off with an over-pitched
>prop. This will hurt your climb performance however.
>
>I like props that are pitched to achive 2700-2750 rpm at 7500'. This allows
>you max cruise and good climb performance.
>
>My hangar-mate has a Sensenich metal prop. His RV (Valerie's Nightmare) is
>as fast as any with a fixed pitch prop. With 160 HP he'll cruise at 188-191
>mph at 2600 rpm. However, you will notice that his max speed at SL also
>happens to be his max cruise speed due to the rpm restriction. He never stops
>talking about installing a CS prop. He doesn't like the rpm restriction and
>he would like the extra 200-400 fpm climb.
>
>But the added weight and complexity..........
>
>Gary Corde
>RV-6 N211GC
>
Gary, Thanks for the input. I do have more data, but left it out for space
considerations. Static RPM's: Props, Inc.=2230. Didn't do a static on the
Felix. Field elevation here is 2,400', so no sea level performance figures.
RPM's when A/C leaves ground. PI=2230, Felix=2280. Climb is much better
with the Felix. I agreee with your assesment on reducing pitch on the PI,
in fact, I've sent the prop back twice to be re-pitched. I agree that the
PI is a more efficent prop design than the Felix. I only intend to use the
Felix as a back-up or as a high density altitude prop for summers. Like the
PI best. Very nicely made and finished with many laminates (looks like a
Warnke, with a "normal" prop shape.) Jeff, at Props, Inc., is very good to
work with and I sure hope I can get the prop pitched right cause it's the
one I'd like to keep on my airplane. It is really a work of art. I agree
that a RPM of 2700-2750 at 7,500' would be ideal.
The redline restriction of 2600 is the one thing that kept me from
purchasing the Sensenich. I'd like to have the ability to use all of the
engine and I also thought that it might hurt re-sale value because I
wouldn't think that anyone doing acrobatics would want this restriction.
In my conversations with some prop builders, they seem to agree that
you could make 3 props identical to one another and have different
performance characteristics. So, the comparison of prop pitches between
manufacturers is almost pointless and is something of a "shot in the dark"
with different props from the same manufacturer.
Which RV does your hanger-mate have and what is it's empty weight?
I'd be really interested to hear from RVer's that have started with wood
props and have switched to the Sensenich. I see in Van's catalog that they
suggest the 77 pitch for the 150 hp RV-6 and the 76 pitch for the RV-6A. I
wonder, since I have a heavy (1080 empty) RV if I should use the 76" pitch
if I decide to go to the Sensenich? Thanks again for your ideas. Bob Skinner
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | kightdm(at)harvey.carol.net |
Subject: | Re: Experimental Limitations |
Ross,
You recently asked:
>
>Does this mean that we have to have someone perform all aerobatic manuvers
>that we mibght want to do during the test flight period? In my case, this
>would mean finding or hiring someone to do this as i am not qualified YET.
I asked the same question of the FAA inspector who signed off my Sonerai two
years ago. He said that you don't have to do everything during the required
40 hour (in my case) test period. After you are experienced in the aircraft
(and have taken some dual aerobatic instruction!) and you want to perform
aerobatics, make a note in the logbook that you are placing the aircraft
back under the original flight restrictions. Go back within the original
test area and perform the new maneuvers. Note the newly approved maneuvers
in the logbook, and place the aircraft back in the post-flight-test
operating limitations category.
You can do this as often as you like, but it must always be done in the
original flight test area.
Hope this helps,
Danny Kight kightdm(at)carol.net
230 happy hours on my Sonerai (and climbing)
Finishing up empennage on my RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Scott Johnson <rvgasj(at)popmail.mcs.net> |
Subject: | Confused About Primers Now ... |
I primed my tail kit with zinc chromate in spray cans. Easy to do but the
adhesion and evenness of the coating was not to good. Was told that moisture
on this primer produces chromate ions which protects from corrosion.
However, over time the chromate ions can be exhausted from the moisture and
not prevent corrosion, is this true ?
So I decided to try variprime for the wing. Much better adhesion and
spraying with a zip gun have given good results. But what is all this
business about top coating ? No RV builders in my area that I am aware of
are doing this. Have we all made a mistake ? I like Variprime because it is
self etching and therefore does not require an etching step... thereby
making the priming operation faster. However, if it needs a topcoat to
prevent corrosion from moisture, I am going to switch to another primer.
Confused .... can anybody clarify this issue ?
Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | bakerv4(at)cdsnet.net (James Baker) |
Subject: | Re: RV projects in Hawaii |
>George,
>
>Thanks for the advice. I know, and meet on fella here who has completed a
>RV-4 project. When I talked with him he did not seem that willing to talk
>about it. I hoped that there were in progress projects I could visit. I
>was considering taking a few classes in aircraft maintenace, or work on a
>A&P, what do you think? In any case I have no room here that is out of the
>elements. My have to consider leasing a garage or hanger.
>
>Thanks for the advice again
>
>>Don ,
>>We have builders in our erea that have builded RV4's in a one car garage,
>>found it close but had enough room . As for can you build it anyone with
>>basic skill and the well ro learn can build an RV4/6/6A, all you need is the
>>want and be able to ask for help and willing to take advice for other
>>builder. You will find that most RV builder are every willing to help any
>>other builder out that needs help. Becki and I have a series of videos
>>starting with basic tools and skills up to complete construction of RV and
>>would be willing to talk to you about what ever you need. Write or call
>>(301)293-1505 ..george & Becki Orndorff
>>
>>
>Aloha and Blue Skies
>Don Kyle
>D-8853
>Email: donk(at)aloha.net
>Phone# 808-247-2879
>Snail mail: 45-631 Kulukeoe Pl.
> Kaneohe, Hi 96744
>
>
Don,
I built my empenage and most of my wing here in Oregon under a patio
cover.
You don't have to have an enclosed shop to do the work, just some place to
keep the rain and snow off. (Snow?). There in Hawaii I would think just a
roof to keep the rain off would work for most of the protection. To rent a
garage would soon cost as much as the materials to build a shelter.
Besides if your project is close by you can do many little projects without
leaving to go to build.
I would recommend George and Becki's tapes.
Blue skies and and tailwinds,
Jim Baker
#1616 RV-4
bakerv4(at)cdsnet.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)MBnet.MB.CA> |
On 12 Jan 1996, Johnson, Steve wrote:
> It seems reasonable to bring up removable sub-panels for AI and DG again. I
> wonder if anyone knows of a suitable quick disconnect for vacuum lines similar
> to the quick disconnect couplings on the high pressure air lines for riveting
> etc.
I was thinking about this too. I have seen simple quick-disconnect vacuum
lines on automobile engines. They were just a simple friction fit with a
plastic male half pushing into a rubber female half. Lo-tech but it
works. The beauty of vacuum fittings is that the vacuum tends to pull the
parts together, unlike pressure fittings. If we go more high-tech, any
kind of quick disconnect made for air or fluid (with an o-ring seal)
ought to work.
I was thinking in terms of a socket in the instrument panel, into which
you slide the gyro, with all the vacuum & electrical connections mounted
rigidly at the back of the socket. Build a suitable bracket attached to
the rear of the gyro holding the male vacuum/electrical fittings. So, I
would just slide the gyro in, all the fittings would mate (like an
electronic plug module you see on oscilloscopes and other equipment) and
secure the instrument to the panel with thumbscrews, wingnuts or some
other quick-disconnect fastener - maybe camlocks?
Anyway, I think the key would be to design a system that's simple to use.
If I have to start fumbling under the panel or taking out Phillips screws
to remove a gyro, I'm probably not going to do it when I should.
Curt Reimer
skinning 2nd wing (still)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "R. Werner" <russ(at)maui.net> |
Subject: | Re: RV projects in HAWAII |
Don,
I too have met the guy on Oahu and he wasn't all that interested in talking
to me either! Anyway, I am working on the tail of an RV4 on Maui. If you
can get over here, you are welcome to check it out. There are a couple of
other guys here on Maui thinking of starting others too. There is also a
complete RV4 in Hilo that a guy bought in Minnesota and shipped over. That
is the nicest one I've ever seen.
Aloha,
Russ
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | chinkley(at)ix.netcom.com (Curtis R. Hinkley ) |
Subject: | Re: Confused About Primers Now ... |
You wrote:
>
>I primed my tail kit with zinc chromate in spray cans. Easy to do but
the adhesion and evenness of the coating was not to good. Was told that
moisture >on this primer produces chromate ions which protects from
corrosion.
>However, over time the chromate ions can be exhausted from the
moisture and not prevent corrosion, is this true ?
>
>So I decided to try variprime for the wing. Much better adhesion and
>spraying with a zip gun have given good results. But what is all this
>business about top coating ? No RV builders in my area that I am aware
of are doing this. Have we all made a mistake ? I like Variprime
because it is self etching and therefore does not require an etching
step... thereby making the priming operation faster. However, if it
needs a topcoat to prevent corrosion from moisture, I am going to
switch to another primer.
>Confused .... can anybody clarify this issue ?
>
>
>Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.com
>
Scott,
Please dont take this the wrong way (that goes for the rest of you on
the list to) but let me think out loud for a moment and maybe we can
figure out why the painting issue is so confusing.
We have all probably been painting things since we were little kids, so
since Ive been painting with spray cans all my life I know all I need
to know about painting. If I see some one else using a product
(VariPrime) on their RV then Im sure its good enough for me. Since I
already know everything there is to know about painting why should I
bother to follow DuPonts instructions for using the product.
Does the above sound familiar, havent we all been guilty of believing
one thing until we find out different from the proper source. When you
have a question on building your RV and you write this RV-List for help
you receive several good but different ways other builders have
accomplish the task thats got you bewildered at that moment. After
you evaluate all of the good responses from the RV-List and you find
that you are still perplexed, you pick up the phone an call Vans. You
call Vans because they are the manufacture of your RV and they know
how and why they designed it the way they did..
Just because youve seen other RV builders not top-coating VariPrime
does not mean it should not be top-coated. Did all of these builders
make a mistake, according to the application instructions provided by
DuPont they should top-coat it. Did it cause any harm, NO WAY. Did it
make them feel better because they used VariPrime, sure it did.
All Im saying is that since you have seen all the notes on painting
and you are still confused, then the proper source for you to relieve
your painting doubts is the manufacture of your painting system, i.e.
DuPont.
Curtis
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Cliff Carpenter <70633.355(at)compuserve.com> |
Subject: | Re: Icing caution |
Tedd, ok you asked!
In heavy rain my RV-4 worked like a champ,of course the wood prop got ground
down a bit,and luckily one of those poles that stick up high didn't get me! I
don't do rain anymore!
Got stuck in some inclement weather just recently mainly snow and fog, temps
around 30oF.Got myself boxed into a corner with no way out,the field showed up
in the nick of time. The picture in my mind during this tight situation was of
a
Beechcraft I had seen coming out of a 600ft overcast all iced up with 2
gentlemen about to meet their maker. They had much better weather(field report)
than I was presently in!If I had picked up any ice (any ice!!) the RV was going
to blend into traffic on the Interstate. I don't do snow and fog anymore,or ice
anytime!
BTW
Made a stop in Edmonton both ways on my trip to Alaska 3 years ago in 141CC.Lots
of help at the downtown airport changing a mag.Guys in Whitecourt were a great
help also with a starter problem. You Canadians are alright in my book!!
Regards,
Cliff
N141CC,RV-4
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net> |
Subject: | Re: Confused About Primers Now ... |
>I primed my tail kit with zinc chromate in spray cans. Easy to do but the
>adhesion and evenness of the coating was not to good. Was told that moisture
>on this primer produces chromate ions which protects from corrosion.
>However, over time the chromate ions can be exhausted from the moisture and
>not prevent corrosion, is this true ?
>
>So I decided to try variprime for the wing. Much better adhesion and
>spraying with a zip gun have given good results. But what is all this
>business about top coating ? No RV builders in my area that I am aware of
>are doing this. Have we all made a mistake ? I like Variprime because it is
>self etching and therefore does not require an etching step... thereby
>making the priming operation faster. However, if it needs a topcoat to
>prevent corrosion from moisture, I am going to switch to another primer.
>Confused .... can anybody clarify this issue ?
>
>
>Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.com
>
> When in doubt, call the paint manufacturer. My guess is that they would
recommend an epoxy primer over a properly cleaned and converted surface for
maximum protection. (sea planes on salt water, for instance.) The
Variprime is a better choice that the spray can zinc chromate, IMO. I used
Variprime on my first RV and on the one I'm building now, Sherwin Williams
Industrial Wash primer (P60G2) with Catalyst Reducer R7K44. This is a "acid
catalyzed vinyl wash primer". I like it better than the Variprime as it
seems to stand up to handling better and it is cheaper. When calling the
manufacturer, make it plain to them the you are talking about interior
corrosion protection and not exterior painting. Bob Skinner
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | A200hpRV6(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Topcoating for self-etching primers... |
Well although priming is a good idea and am using variprime myself, any
additional coating i personally feel are unnecessary. Several manufacturers
built aircraft without any use of primer back in the 40's and they are still
around. Your plane will long outlive you and i am sur e with just variprime
it will last 100 years.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | JamesCone(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Need Advice For Drilling Wing Ribs For Wires |
Don't drill the holes close to the skin or you will have trouble bucking the
rivets. I speak from experience.
Jim Cone
jamescone(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Peter Bennett" <elanora(at)zip.com.au> |
Subject: | Re: Shoulder Harnesses |
> Seems I recall a vendor at OSH by the name of Hooker Harness which may be
> able to do customer work. But I can't find their number in any of my past
> Sport Aviation magazines. Does anyone have their phone number or could
> recommend a custom seatbelt/harness maker?
>
> Many thanks as always.
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> = Doug Weiler, in progress
A Hooker Harness? In an airplane? Doug, the mind boggles!
Peter Bennett
Sydney Australia
RV6 skinning fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Terry Williams <terry(at)ouijibo.netcom.com> |
Subject: | Re: Suburu/Rotary Power |
Speaking of rotaries, is there anymore information about Tracy =
Crooks Mazda 13B/RV-4? Last I heard he had a serious overtemp =
situation, but corrected it with a baffle. How's his engine now?
I am also very interested in Dave Atkins' engines, but I hate his =
muffler/exhaust pipe solution. Tracy's is much more esthetic. =
Though, Tracy's may not be as effective. Any thought?
tw
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 17:47:11 -0800
From: rcrothers.seanet.com!rcrothers(at)matronics.com (Randy =
Crothers)
Subject: Re: RV-List: Suburu/Rotary Power
>>>The price that I was quoted recently at NSI was close to 20K =
but that was
>>for a firewall forward package, including an extensive engine
>>instrumentation package, engine mount, radiator, cockpit =
adjustable
>>propellor and more. It still is expensive and I would have to =
see a good
>>track record before hanging out on that limb. Stratus seems to =
be geared up
>>more toward the do it your self type. They will offer a 160HP =
Suburu with NW
>>Aero Reduction Drive and prop extension for around 10K. That is =
more to my
>>liking but I have a very long way to go before I will need one, =
getting
>>ready to start.
>
>$10k is much more reasonable.=20
>
>I've been doing some reading about the Rotary engine design. Why =
is the
>rotary engine not gaining more support. It seems to me that the =
design is
>far superior to the piston engine. =20
>
>Does anyone have information on companies who supply aircraft =
ready Rotary
>engines?
>
>If only the Rotary enjoyed the mass amounts of money put into =
development as
>the piston engine has, I bet we'd have an incredibly reliable =
alternative.
>
>-Steve Day
>sday(at)pharmcomp.com =20
>(CK ID - RV6a RV for short)
NEW
I didn't mention rotarys in my previous mail but I am fortunate to =
live near
a rotary developer as well as Stratus and NSI. The rotary man I =
refer to is
Dave Atkins who has a shop at Pierce Co. airport in Puyallup WA. =
Dave showed
an RV-6 with a rotary mounted but not flying at the Arlington EAA =
flyin and
then managed to fly the RV-6 to Oshkosh. He had some mysterious =
(SP)
difficulty on the way to Copperstate and had to put it down rather =
than
atempt to climb over some wires and went through a fence in the =
process. I
don't claim to know what happened. His -6 is nearly completly =
repaired and
should be airborne again soon. Dave started out with a =
turbo-charged fuel
injected version that proved troulbesome and produced way too much =
HP
anyway,(325!). He went back to a carburated version and as far as =
I know it
has been running well. Some of Daves engines have been racking up =
some
reliable hrs in a Gyrocopter instruction operation. I have been =
keeping
track of Daves progress as well as the Suburu -6 that is nearly =
complete.
You may be interested in Contact! magazine. It has many articles =
on auto
engine conversions. It costs $18.00 for 6 months. Address is 2900 =
East
Weymouth, Tucson, AZ. 85716. I don't have the phone number but I =
got it from
information ok, he does visa. If your interested I can dig up Dave =
Atkins
address, business name, phone etc..=20
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | bob(at)pop.holli.com |
Subject: | Re: Shoulder Harnesses |
The telephone number for Hooker Harness is: 815-233-5478.
Their address: Hooker custom Harness, 30 East Jefferson Street,
Freeport, Illinois, 61032.
Really nice stuff! $150 for a regular harness, $250 for one with
the cargo ratchet (al la serious aerobatics).
Happy flying!
Bob Japundza
RV-6 Fuselage on gear
Kokomo, Indiana
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | amunro(at)amunro.seanet.com (Alex Munro) |
Subject: | Re: Suburu/Rotary Power |
>>>>The price that I was quoted recently at NSI was close to 20K but that was
>>>for a firewall forward package, including an extensive engine
>>>instrumentation package, engine mount, radiator, cockpit adjustable
>>>propellor and more. It still is expensive and I would have to see a good
>>>track record before hanging out on that limb. Stratus seems to be geared up
>>>more toward the do it your self type. They will offer a 160HP Suburu with NW
>>>Aero Reduction Drive and prop extension for around 10K. That is more to my
>>>liking but I have a very long way to go before I will need one, getting
>>>ready to start.
>>
>>$10k is much more reasonable.
I'd say that 10k is more reasonable too. I've been watching this
auto-engine thing for some time, keeping my mouth shut. I've been hoping
that someone would make a Legacy conversion of the RV6, and was stoked to
see them starting to come out. $20,000 is way too much.
All these people claim that the Lycoming is too expensive, "Hell you can go
out any buy a Mr. Goodwrench V6 for $2500!". Yes, you can. Do you just
bolt it on the plane after that? No. You take your brand new out of the
crate motor to the best automotive speed shop in town and dissasemble it.
You turn the crank, bore it out to maximum oversize (insuring that you can
never overhaul this motor), mill the tops of the block flat, fit aluminum
heads, and magiflux/x-ray the crap out of everything. Sure does show a lot
of confidence in Mr. Goodwrench. You toss the intake manifold and ignition
system for better stuff, pay a very competent mechanic to bolt it together
and viola: You now have a $17,000 motor good enough to bolt on a plane.
Don't forget a light weight alternator and to cross drill your toothbrush,
'cause it's heavy. But wait, there's more. As a bonus you get a hack job
cowling arragement that's tough to fall in love with.
Don't forget that we have an unknown TBO. You also don't have a $350
overhaul, as I've seen implied. You'll probably buy a new motor in the
crate and start over. You'll also always have that knot in your gut when
you fly, just like I have when I set off on a road trip in my 30 year old VW
bus. Only I can find emergency parking a little easier.
For $20,000 I'll stick with a proven dinosaur. For $7500 I might bite.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Munro
amunro(at)amunro.seanet.com
My other Sig is a P220
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jack Gageby <aj752(at)lafn.lafn.org> |
Subject: | RV4B (RV8-like Fuselage for the RV4) |
In the last RVator Van requested inputs on whether any RV4 builder, who
hasn't ordered the fuselage kit, would be interested in an RV8 like fuselage
for their RV4. Seem like an improvement to me, so responded to Van. Anyone
else interested?
________________________________________________________________________________
"who"
"index"
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com (Doug Weiler) |
Subject: | Re: Shoulder Harnesses |
>
>> Seems I recall a vendor at OSH by the name of Hooker Harness which may be
>> able to do customer work. But I can't find their number in any of my past
>> Sport Aviation magazines. Does anyone have their phone number or could
>> recommend a custom seatbelt/harness maker?
>>
>> Many thanks as always.
>>
>>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>> = Doug Weiler, in progress
>
>A Hooker Harness? In an airplane? Doug, the mind boggles!
>
>Peter Bennett
>Sydney Australia
>RV6 skinning fuselage
I knew these Aussies had a strange sense of humor!!!!!!!!
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
= Doug Weiler, pres. MN Wing Van's AirForce, RV-4 wings in progress
= 347 Krattley Lane
= Hudson, WI 54016
= 715-386-1239
= email: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com (Doug Weiler) |
Subject: | Re: RV projects in HAWAII |
>Don,
>
>I too have met the guy on Oahu and he wasn't all that interested in talking
>to me either! Anyway, I am working on the tail of an RV4 on Maui. If you
>can get over here, you are welcome to check it out. There are a couple of
>other guys here on Maui thinking of starting others too. There is also a
>complete RV4 in Hilo that a guy bought in Minnesota and shipped over. That
>is the nicest one I've ever seen.
>
>Aloha,
>
>Russ
Don & Russ:
I may have mentioned this before, but the RV-4 at Hilo is owned by Skip
Pease (808-959-4181). He is a vet and did not build the airplane (was built
by Gary Novotny here in Minnesota). I have flown this RV and watched it
being built. It is masterpiece.
Doug
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
= Doug Weiler, pres. MN Wing Van's AirForce, RV-4 wings in progress
= 347 Krattley Lane
= Hudson, WI 54016
= 715-386-1239
= email: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com (Finn Lassen ) |
Subject: | Re: Suburu/Rotary Power |
You wrote:
>Speaking of rotaries, is there anymore information about Tracy =
>Crooks Mazda 13B/RV-4? Last I heard he had a serious overtemp =
>situation, but corrected it with a baffle. How's his engine now?
I got a ride in Tracy's RV-4 back in December. I did not not see any
serious overtemp situation. He did let it cool down at bit between
rides though, to avoid vapor lock in carbs.
Incedently, he's just finished his manual on teh Mazda 13B conversion.
I'll check with TRacy if he wants his e-mail address posted here so you
can order the manual. Think it's about $35.
Finn
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Espen Dahl <dahl(at)sn.no> |
Subject: | Re: RV4B (RV8-like Fuselage for the RV4) |
>In the last RVator Van requested inputs on whether any RV4 builder, who
>hasn't ordered the fuselage kit, would be interested in an RV8 like fuselage
>for their RV4. Seem like an improvement to me, so responded to Van. Anyone
>else interested?
>
I responded to Vans immediately!. I would certainly like a fuselage with
more room and with better CG location. ( less tendency of aft CG with a
heavy passenger).
I told them I would order the 4B!
Espen Dahl
Building RV4(B?) s/n 2770 in Oslo, Norway
--
- Espen Dahl
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Francis S. Smidler" <102776.1474(at)compuserve.com> |
Subject: | Re: RV projects in Hawaii |
This is to Don Kyle in Kaneohe, HI
I have a friend in Southern Indiana, Mike Wonder, who one day plans to fly to
all 50 states. However he is realistic about the difficulty in flying across
the Pacific to HI and is considering cheating for that one state. He was
thinking of sending some part of his plane, such as his tires, and have someone
fly them on thier plane on the island and then ship them back. He problably
won't be doing it for a couple of years so by then maybe you will have an RV
flying and can help out.
All the encouragement in the world,
Frank Smidler, D-8913 & Freak Bros.
RV-6 fuselage skins going on now.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | EBundy2620(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Need Advice For Drilling Wing Ribs For Wires |
>Where is the best place to drill the wing ribs for the one half inch holes
>that will carry the electrical wires to the wing tips and how close can I
>get to the big 4 and 5 inch cut out holes or rib ends? Scott Johnson
I don't know if it's the *best* place, but I put mine right near the flange
on the top side. I'd stay away from the lightening holes. If you can, avoid
putting it right in line with a rivet hole on the rib - makes that bugger
real hard to buck.
>P.S. It sure is neat to finally be building a big piece on the airplane,
>just looking at all those wing ribs on the spar sure looks substantial
>compared to the tail kit !
True, but the novelty wears off when it comes time to build the second one!
I just finished mating my wings to the fuselage to drill the landing gear
mounts. WOW! I must have used an entire roll of film. I think the little
joys like that are what keep us pounding the endless number of rivets...
-- Ed Bundy
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Robert Acker <75104.3077(at)compuserve.com> |
Well, I bought a house yesterday so now I *finally* have a garage to build in!
I have some questions about compressors and noise, which hopefully some of you
gurus can answer. I am moving into a community of freestanding townhouses.
1) Any ideas on insulating the garage for compressor and riveting noise? Is it
okay to build a box for the compressor, or will heat build-up be a problem?
2) Quietest compressor types (someone here a few months ago mentioned
beltless)?
3) Home Depot had some Cambell-Hausfield (sp?) compressors. One, a 4hp-20 gal.
The other 6hp-60 gal. There is only a $60 difference between the two.
I know the 4hp is more than adequate, but will the 60 gal. tank make a big
difference in the amount of time the compressor runs? If so, that would really
help in regards to noise abatement.
Thanks, Rob (waiting for escrow to close so I can order my tail kit!).
________________________________________________________________________________
HI Guys...
My name is Gary Zilik and I am currently building RV-6A s/n 22993. I finished
the empenage eons ago (5 months) and have been working since then on both
wings. I have the wings jigged back to back about 30 inches apart in a small
(15'x12') shop. It is a little cramped at times but works. The fusalage is
unpacked and stuffed in every available nook and cranny in the house. My wife
is very understanding. Plans for an addition to the house which includes a
24x36 shop space are sitting on my desk. At soon as the ground thaws (I live
in Pine, Colorado @ 8500' msl) the addition will be started and I will have
enough room to build the fusalage.
The first question I have for the group is: When riveting the leading edge
and bottom skins the rivet set scuffs the aluminum. Is this normal? The
rivet set is polished and has no damage. To stop the scuffing I have been
placing masking tape over each rivet before riveting. This works great but
is very slow. Any ideas???
Gary Zilik
zilik(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com (Finn Lassen ) |
You wrote:
>3) Home Depot had some Cambell-Hausfield (sp?) compressors. One, a
4hp-20 gal.
>The other 6hp-60 gal. There is only a $60 difference between the two.
Check out the Sears/Craftman oilfree 3.5HP (8.5 SCFM @ 40PSI, 6.8 SCFM
@ 90PSI). It's $240 in the catlog, $260 in stores (w/shipping). Become
a member of the Craftman Club (free!) and you get 10% off on certain
days in the month. That's what I'm planning on doing.
Finn
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Steve Mayer <72652.670(at)compuserve.com> |
Subject: | RV4B (RV8-like Fuselage for the RV4) |
Jack,
Thanks for the reminder. Having just purchased the Emp kit in
Oct, it'll be awhile before I'm ready for the fuselage. I'd been meaning
to mail VAN's, and you pushed me over the edge, so to speak...
Steve
----- Forwarded Message -----
FROM: Jack Gageby, INTERNET:aj752(at)lafn.lafn.org
DATE: 1/14/96, 5:08 PM
Re: RV-List: RV4B (RV8-like Fuselage for the RV4)
In the last RVator Van requested inputs on whether any RV4 builder, who
hasn't ordered the fuselage kit, would be interested in an RV8 like fuselage
for their RV4. Seem like an improvement to me, so responded to Van. Anyone
else interested?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | klgray(at)bihs.net (Ken Gray) |
Subject: | another plane born |
The FAA showed up on 1/11 and issued my temporary airworthy ticket. They
checked for the proper placards, data plate and the log books. I received a
VFR day only with a 50 mile radius and 25 hour flight time.
My plane is a RV-6 SN: 23069, N69KG, with O320-E2D and a Warnke prop.
The first flight was at 8:18 am on 1/12 and it was great!!
After 2 years, 2 months and 2100 hours this was great!
Insurance was provided by National at a cost of $1027 per year for $40,000 full
coverage. With a 10 hour and 10 landing up front no coverage. I already have
10 hours in the plane the last three days.
Ken Gray
Bryan, Tx.
N69KG - 10 hours TT
PS: Keep on building, it is worth the time, when you fly it!!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DerFlieger(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Topcoating for self-etching primers... |
writes:
>Several manufacturers
>built aircraft without any use of primer back in the 40's and they are still
>around. Your plane will long outlive you and i am sur e with just variprime
>it will last 100 years.
This posting relates to the ongoing question of interior priming that we all
love so much.
I rode back seat in a '69 172 yesterday which had the headliner removed. I
had a lot of time to inspect the skin, rivets, cables etc. I didn't like the
looks of the obvious corrosion. Granted it will probably last a long time to
come. I wonder what the wing skins look like on the inside. Considering the
wide range of inspector integrity that exists, serious corrosion might or
might not be noted and repaired (if even possible). I primed everything
inside my 6, and now I am sure its a good thing to do.
Jim Stugart
DerFlieger(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | twg(at)blink.ho.att.com (Tom Goeddel(x5278)) |
Subject: | Re: New To List... |
>> The first question I have for the group is: When riveting the leading edge
>> and bottom skins the rivet set scuffs the aluminum. Is this normal? The
>> rivet set is polished and has no damage. To stop the scuffing I have been
>> placing masking tape over each rivet before riveting. This works great but
>> is very slow. Any ideas???
A tip I got at the East Coast RV Builder's get-together in Frederick, MD
was to put masking tape on the rivet set itself. Seems to do the job.
Good luck.
Tom Goeddel
RV-6a (ready to pro-seal the second tank...)
t.goeddel(at)att.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | bakerv4(at)cdsnet.net (James Baker) |
Subject: | Re: New To List... |
>HI Guys...
>My name is Gary Zilik and I am currently building RV-6A s/n 22993. I finished
>the empenage eons ago (5 months) and have been working since then on both
>wings. I have the wings jigged back to back about 30 inches apart in a small
>(15'x12') shop. It is a little cramped at times but works. The fusalage is
>unpacked and stuffed in every available nook and cranny in the house. My wife
>is very understanding. Plans for an addition to the house which includes a
>24x36 shop space are sitting on my desk. At soon as the ground thaws (I live
>in Pine, Colorado @ 8500' msl) the addition will be started and I will have
>enough room to build the fusalage.
>
>The first question I have for the group is: When riveting the leading edge
>and bottom skins the rivet set scuffs the aluminum. Is this normal? The
>rivet set is polished and has no damage. To stop the scuffing I have been
>placing masking tape over each rivet before riveting. This works great but
>is very slow. Any ideas???
>
>Gary Zilik
>zilik(at)aol.com
>
>
Gary,
Try putting the tape on the rivet set. I found the same problem with
the lite scuff marks after driving the rivet. I am sure that the paint will
hide them put it sure looks a lot better to see nice shiney skins with the
rivets set.
Blue skies & Tailwinds,
Jim Baker
bakerv4(at)cdsnet.net
RV-4 ????? B ?????
#1616
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
Subject: | Re: Need Advice For Drilling Wing Ribs For Wires |
On Fri, 12 Jan 1996, Scott Johnson wrote:
> Where is the best place to drill the wing ribs for the one half inch holes
> that will carry the electrical wires to the wing tips and how close can I
> get to the big 4 and 5 inch cut out holes or rib ends? Scott Johnson
It was not until *AFTER* I finished both wings that I finally figiured
out the correct location. It is the upper front corner of the main rib.
Any position in the next several inches aft of that will interfere with
either the access hole or the aileron bellcrank supports.
I assume that you are going to install a length of conduit thru the
holes. If so, my advice is to leave the coduit out until after you've
riveted the top skins on. That way it won't get in the way. Once youve
riveted the top skins on, install the conduit and wiring (put a little
RTV or pro-seal around each rib hole that the coduit passes thru. That
will keep the conduit from chafing.), then finally, rivet on the bottom
skins.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
rv-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walsh(at)cpeedy.ENET.dec.com |
Subject: | USe of Veriprime?? |
Could someone elaborate a little further on the effectiveness of Variprime
without topcoat? Specifically, if I use Variprime internally with no top
coat, does it have ANY usefulness in terms of corrosion protection. Does
it have no effect? Does it make matters worse?
I'm trying to get a feel for this before I decide to switch. If the lack of
a topcoat means "not as much" protection, that's different from "no protection
at all".
thanks
John
________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Well, I bought a house yesterday so now I *finally* have a garage to build in!
> I have some questions about compressors and noise, which hopefully some of you
> gurus can answer. I am moving into a community of freestanding townhouses.
>
> 1) Any ideas on insulating the garage for compressor and riveting noise? Is
it
> okay to build a box for the compressor, or will heat build-up be a problem?
>
You may not need to insulate for compressor noise if you have the
garage door closed. The key is GET AN OIL BATH WITH BELT COMPRESSOR,
not a direct drive oiless type. Home Depot has both oiless and oil.
The campbell hausfeld are good. If you can find a Sam's, you can
save a bunch of money. My Sanborn is as large as us RVers would
ever want and it's $299. It's 220v, 15A and around 30 gallons.
It's quiet. BTW, look at current draw and voltage to compare, not
rated hp.
> 2) Quietest compressor types (someone here a few months ago mentioned
> beltless)?
>
> 3) Home Depot had some Cambell-Hausfield (sp?) compressors. One, a 4hp-20 gal.
> The other 6hp-60 gal. There is only a $60 difference between the two.
>
> I know the 4hp is more than adequate, but will the 60 gal. tank make a big
> difference in the amount of time the compressor runs? If so, that would really
> help in regards to noise abatement.
>
> Thanks, Rob (waiting for escrow to close so I can order my tail kit!).
>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Don Karl karl@dg-rtp.dg.com (919)248-5915
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walsh(at)cpeedy.ENET.dec.com |
Someone was asking about Tracy Cook and his 13B/RV4. I believe his last
note on compuserve indicated he had 168 hours on the plane.
You should realize that the 13b as he has implemented it is an "alternative"
to the Lycoming but not a substitute. He cruises the ariplane around 140mph
which is a "sweet spot" on the power required/drage curves. He uses using
around 50% power in cruise. He doesn't push it up to 75% power all day like
you would with a Lyc and willingly gives up the 40-50mph in cruise speed.
For that he gets a $6k engine with a $500 overhaul and burns car gas at
around 6gph. I would say that this is a very economical setup, if you're
willing to part with some top end speed.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Steve Day" <sday(at)pharmcomp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Rotary Power |
>Incedently, he's just finished his manual on teh Mazda 13B conversion.
>I'll check with TRacy if he wants his e-mail address posted here so you
>can order the manual. Think it's about $35.
I would certainly be interested in learning more about this conversion. Is
there any way you can get Tracy on the list? I'm sure there are a few
questions some of us would like to ask first-hand.
I'm at least another year away from making a decision on what powerplant to
use, but I'm keeping my options open. At least point I'm still leaning
towards a Lycoming.
-Steve Day
sday(at)pharmcomp.com
(CK ID - RV6a RV for short)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | ted_boudreaux(at)om.cv.hp.com |
Subject: | Re: Suburu/Rotary Power |
Item Subject: cc:Mail Text
I have also been seriously considering some type of rotary option. Of
major concern, of course, is keeping the thing cool. How about
running coolant lines just beneath the leading edge skins on the
wings? Not only would cooling be improved, but it seems that the
aircraft would be much less susceptible to icing. Have to modify the
fuel tanks though.
One thing that really caught my eye recently is a Mazda prototype car
that was in the most recent issue of Road & Track. It is powered by a
new type of rotary engine which utilises peripheral ports. It doesn't
weigh any more than a typical non-turbo 13B, and produces somewhere in
the neighborhood of 220bhp. Unfortunately, this power output is at
8000 rpm. The article states that this engine is far less costly to
produce than the current sequentially twin turbocharged plant found in
the RX7. Sounds interesting to me. Incidentally, the car is called
the RX-01.
Ted Boudreaux
ted_boudreaux@hp-pcd.hp.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
Subject: | Re: New To List... |
> The first question I have for the group is: When riveting the leading edge
> and bottom skins the rivet set scuffs the aluminum. Is this normal? The
> rivet set is polished and has no damage. To stop the scuffing I have been
> placing masking tape over each rivet before riveting.
I use a thick (.003") version of a low adheasion clear plastic tape that
I bought locally. It works great and was only about one dollar for a 1"X300'
roll. Try looking in the Denver phone book under industrial tape. You can
also get rivet tape from the aircraft supply stores like US tools/Avery, but
it's expensive. I have used both and they work equally well.
This works great but
> is very slow. Any ideas???
>
> Gary Zilik
> zilik(at)aol.com
>
Do more than one at a time. I do about 4-5 rivets in a row. One strip
of tape can cover alot of rivets. Put a row of rivets in with a space for
a cleco every forth or fith hole, tape over the row and put a cleco throught
he tape. Works fine.
BTW, I use lots of this tape. I used it last night to hang the single
piece top main skin on the wing. Two strips held the 9' section of O32
while I adjusted the skin location. Duct tape would have worked here, but
it tends to stick a little to good.
Chris - Single piece top main skin on one wing...Oooooh Ahhhhhh!
cruble(at)cisco.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
Subject: | Re: USe of Veriprime?? |
A light coat of LPS or even better ACF50 every other year will keep your
airframe corrosion free. A light coat of any primer will work as a substrate
for the LPS. We have used LPS on 85W for 30 years and have had _NO_ corrosion
problems.
Chris
>
> Could someone elaborate a little further on the effectiveness of Variprime
> without topcoat? Specifically, if I use Variprime internally with no top
> coat, does it have ANY usefulness in terms of corrosion protection. Does
> it have no effect? Does it make matters worse?
>
> I'm trying to get a feel for this before I decide to switch. If the lack of
> a topcoat means "not as much" protection, that's different from "no protection
> at all".
>
> thanks
>
> John
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Steve Day" <sday(at)pharmcomp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Turbine Power |
>NEW
[snip]
>engine conversions. It costs $18.00 for 6 months. Address is 2900 East
>Weymouth, Tucson, AZ. 85716. I don't have the phone number but I got it from
>information ok, he does visa. If your interested I can dig up Dave Atkins
>address, business name, phone etc..
Thanks for the info.
Does anyone know if a turbine conversion has been tried yet? I talked with
a guy who is putting together turbine sets for BD-5's in Siletz, Oregon and
I started getting real interested. The only problem is, I don't want to
change a proven design, and with a 150 lb engine up front, the nose would
have to be stretched some 12-16 inches. I'm not an aerodynamic type, but I
know there are some other problems associated with stretching the nose.
What that means is I'd probably put 150lbs of lead up front to simplify the
whole process. :(((( arghh what a waste. Could of course make a baggage
compartment up front, but God help the person who forgets to put enough
weight in the front. (not worth the risk IMHO)
Anyway, he said his turbine with prop would run about 20k for 160hp.
(supposedly putting out 160hp at 8000k altitude) Because of the nature of
turbine engines, the prop is variable pitch (another bonus). I personally
would feel better about a 20k turbine than a 20k auto-conversion. The
biggest downside(and it is big), and in my opinion one of the very few down
sides is the higher fuel consumption. He claims the engine draws around
10-15gph in cruise configuration. And an unspeakable # at max power.
Another bonus is: Virtually no cooling drag. This being one of the larger %
of drag created from an aircraft, that is nice. Also, the exhaust produces
about 40lbs of thrust in the 160hp turbine.
Here is what I consider downsides over other engine options: (in order of
most important)
* Not a tested design in the rv
* High Fuel burn (need bigger tanks)
* Requires either airframe modification for light nose, or putting a wasted
150lbs up front
* Must burn JetA and for some people the fun of rv's is to get into small
fields. If you need fuel, they probably don't have JetA.
* Loud during taxi
Here is my quick list of upsides, although other engine options share some
of the benefits as well: (no order)
* hp doesn't drop as fast as piston from density altitude (please correct
this if I was told wrong)
* Very reliable powerplant (yet to be proven in rv however)
* Virtually no cooling drag
* No shock cooling to worry about
* Very smooth power (and is very quiet while flying)
* Climb forever without worrying about overheating (but watch that fuel gauge)
* Prop is reversable to slow you down in a hurry.
* Very simple engine design and very easy to overhaul.
This is both an upside and a downside:
* If one can make an airframe modification work, the 150lbs savings would be
a large benefit in climb and some benefit in top speed/cruise and stall. Of
course saving 150lbs means about 25 extra gallons of fuel to offset the fuel
burn.
-Steve Day
sday(at)pharmcomp.com
(CK ID - RV6a RV for short)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DerFlieger(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: another plane born |
ken Gray, Congratulatiions!
Do you know if Lewis Porter at College Station has flown?
Jim Stugart,Austin, TX RV6/6A
DerFlieger(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
Subject: | Re: Shoulder Harnesses (fwd) |
Herman,
I'm not sure if this is true, the TSO for belts (C-22a if memory is
correct) only applies to the construction of the lap portion of the belt.
The portion that is certified from the vendors you mention probably
is the _installation_, not the shoulder belts themselves.
A Form 337 and some simple calculations should make installation of
other "shoulder belts" legal.
IMHO ..... Gil Alexander
PS ... found this out when buying replacement belts for my sailplane and
looking into adding an extra "anti-submarine" belt.
> Please note that he is asking for SH for a Cessna 180.
> This MUST BE A TSO'd shoulder harnes system for use in a certified AC.
> So don't send him to race car catalogs.
> The possible vendors of TSO'd SH sets I know of are:
> Cessna, Wag Aero, Hooker (maybe, had C170 approval), and BAS.
>
> IMHO, it would be better to have a SH from any source as it is much
> better than none but the FAA would frown on it. Who ever has to
> sign off your Annual inspection would also likely not sign it off with
> non-TSO mods (but some close their eyes to such things).
> Herman
>
>> You wrote:
>> >
>> >RV Listers:
>> >
>> >Although this is not directly RV related, I'm hoping someone in our
>> group may help me. I am in the process of installing shoulder
>> harnesses in my C-180 and can't seem to find what I am looking for from
>> the usual aircraft vendors (Wag-Aero, Airtex, A/C Spruce, etc). I've
>> concluded I may have to have someone sew up what I want.
>> >
>> >Seems I recall a vendor at OSH by the name of Hooker Harness which may
>> be able to do customer work. But I can't find their number in any of
>> my past Sport Aviation magazines. Does anyone have their phone number
>> or could recommend a custom seatbelt/harness maker?
>> >
>> >Many thanks as always.
>> >
>> >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> =-=-=-=
>> >= Doug Weiler, pres. MN Wing Van's AirForce, RV-4 wings in progress
>> >= 347 Krattley Lane
>> >= Hudson, WI 54016
>> >= 715-386-1239
>> >= email: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com
>> >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> =-=-=-=
>> >
>> Doug,
>>
>> You may want to take a look at a Speedway Motors catalog, they carry a
>> complete line of Simpson harnesses with Cam-Lock or Latch & Link Buckle
>> assemblies. Their phone number is 800-736-3733.
>>
>> Curtis,
>>
>
>
>--
>--------------------------------------------------------
>*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
>AIX Network Performance Measurement/Analysis
>phone: TL 678-2831 outside: (512) 838-2831
>MS: 9530 fax: 512-838-1801
>mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | ecole(at)ix.netcom.com (EDWARD COLE ) |
At an local EAA fly-in in Oct. '95 Steve Barnard
(The gentleman that produces the fast build wing kits) was sporting his
new wing tips and wing root fairings that he was developing. They
looked great and he said that they seemed to aid the stability in rough
air. Has anyone heard of any more progress on this or know of the
availability?
Ed Cole RV6A #24430 Empennage
ecole(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net> |
Subject: | Re: New To List... |
>HI Guys...
>My name is Gary Zilik and I am currently building RV-6A s/n 22993. I finished
>the empenage eons ago (5 months) and have been working since then on both
>wings. I have the wings jigged back to back about 30 inches apart in a small
>(15'x12') shop. It is a little cramped at times but works. The fusalage is
>unpacked and stuffed in every available nook and cranny in the house. My wife
>is very understanding. Plans for an addition to the house which includes a
>24x36 shop space are sitting on my desk. At soon as the ground thaws (I live
>in Pine, Colorado @ 8500' msl) the addition will be started and I will have
>enough room to build the fusalage.
>
>The first question I have for the group is: When riveting the leading edge
>and bottom skins the rivet set scuffs the aluminum. Is this normal? The
>rivet set is polished and has no damage. To stop the scuffing I have been
>placing masking tape over each rivet before riveting. This works great but
>is very slow. Any ideas???
>
>Gary Zilik
>zilik(at)aol.com
Gary, It's normal for the set to "burnish" the surface to a certain extent.
Instead of masking tape, use the "riveting" tape from Avery. I'ts Scotch
tape with a "sticky note" type of adhesive. I usually cleco every other
hole, then tape in rivets, rivet, remove clecos, insert rivets and move tape
from done rivets to newly installed. Don't worry about the "burnished"
surface. You will eleminate that when preping for paint.
You're lucky to be living close to a very active group of RV builders.
They also publish a great news letter. I'm sure one of them that use the
list will be contacting you. If not, let me know and I'll get you some
names and numbers.
Bob Skinner RV-6 flying, building 6-A
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Brian Yablon <brian(at)lanart.com> |
Robert Acker wrote:
> 2) Quietest compressor types (someone here a few months ago mentioned
> beltless)?
>
> 3) Home Depot had some Cambell-Hausfield (sp?) compressors. One, a 4hp-20
gal.
> The other 6hp-60 gal. There is only a $60 difference between the two.
>
Based on many excellent comments and recommendations gleaned here on
the rv-list, I just bought the Campbell Hausfeld 4.5 HP 26 gal Cast
Iron machine. It is a twin-cyl belt-drive compressor, and it is very
quiet (You can carry on a normal conversation while it is running, and
it is barely audible upstairs). It provides plenty of air, and I've
been told that it is way overkill. But after dealing with my father's
pathetic Sears 1.5 HP single-cyl compressor for so long, way overkill
is nice, indeed.
I did wire it for 220V, though. This eliminates the flicker of the
lights in my workshop, and allows the use of an extension cord (12
gauge) without starving the motor.
-Brian
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Yablon Position: Hardware Engineer
LANart Corporation Internet: byablon(at)lanart.com
145 Rosemary Street, Suite D1 Ma-bell: (617) 444-1994 x206
Needham, MA 02194 FAX: (617) 444-3692
LANart: Difference by Design
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Terry Williams <terry(at)is.com> |
Subject: | Re: Mazda 13B/RV4 |
Seems too bad about Tracy Crook's top end speed. Is the reason that
he uses 50% instead of 75% related to his heat problem, or is he
just being cautious, or does just want to stay in the power-v-drag
"sweet spot?"
Another question. Does anyone (who has seen it) believe that there
may be any problems with Tracy's motor mount under Sportsman
category aerobatic loads? Has Tracy or Dave Atkins tried any
aerobatic or air combat types of maneuvers in their Mazda powered
RV's?
I really believe the rotaries solve a raft of problems in regards
to complexity, cost, and performance. Except, of course, for
installation, but it seems that both Tracy Crook and Dave Atkins
have pretty reasonable solutions.
Shoot, if you can get a 150hp engine for $7K (at the high end),
that is just too cool.
tw
Begin forwarded message:
From: cpeedy.ENET.dec.com!walsh(at)matronics.com
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 96 11:12:32 EST
Subject: RV-List: Mazda 13B/RV4
Someone was asking about Tracy Cook and his 13B/RV4. I
believe his last note on compuserve indicated he had 168
hours on the plane.
You should realize that the 13b as he has implemented it is
an "alternative" to the Lycoming but not a substitute. He
cruises the ariplane around 140mph which is a "sweet spot"
on the power required/drage curves. He uses using around
50% power in cruise. He doesn't push it up to 75% power
all day like you would with a Lyc and willingly gives up
the 40-50mph in cruise speed.
For that he gets a $6k engine with a $500 overhaul and burns
car gas at around 6gph. I would say that this is a very
economical setup, if you're willing to part with some top
end speed.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
Subject: | Re: Need Advice For Drilling Wing Ribs For Wires |
>Don't drill the holes close to the skin or you will have trouble bucking the
>rivets. I speak from experience.
>
>Jim Cone
>jamescone(at)aol.com
Close to the skin is OK .... just make sure it's the first skin you
put on the wing and not the "close-out" skin!
Seriously .... just put the cable conduit near the first side of
the wing that you skin. Pre-drill the holes in the ribs before assembly,
skin one side, thread the conduit, then close-out the other side.
Gil Alexander
gil(at)rassp.hac.com
RV6A, #20701 ... re-making fwd. aft turtle deck skin.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
Subject: | Re: New To List... |
>HI Guys...
>My name is Gary Zilik and I am currently building RV-6A s/n 22993. I finished
>the empenage eons ago (5 months) and have been working since then on both
>wings. I have the wings jigged back to back about 30 inches apart in a small
>(15'x12') shop. It is a little cramped at times but works. The fusalage is
>unpacked and stuffed in every available nook and cranny in the house. My wife
>is very understanding. Plans for an addition to the house which includes a
>24x36 shop space are sitting on my desk. At soon as the ground thaws (I live
>in Pine, Colorado @ 8500' msl) the addition will be started and I will have
>enough room to build the fusalage.
>
>The first question I have for the group is: When riveting the leading edge
>and bottom skins the rivet set scuffs the aluminum. Is this normal? The
>rivet set is polished and has no damage. To stop the scuffing I have been
>placing masking tape over each rivet before riveting. This works great but
>is very slow. Any ideas???
Gary,
Use Scotch "Removeable" Magic Tape instead of masking tape (must be
the Removeable kind!). It's much thinner, and doesn't leave any residue
behind.
It's available from any drug store or office supply store.
This tip came from the Bakersfield Bunch of RV'ers.
On flat areas, rivet every 4th or 5th rivet, and then go back and
tape the in between ones all at once. The tape is reuseable several times,
so just peel it up and stick on the next rivet, or set of rivets, and it
will not add any time to the process.
Good luck
Gil Alexander
>
>Gary Zilik
>zilik(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com (John Ammeter) |
Subject: | Re: another plane born |
>The FAA showed up on 1/11 and issued my temporary airworthy ticket. They
>checked for the proper placards, data plate and the log books. I received a
>VFR day only with a 50 mile radius and 25 hour flight time.
>
>My plane is a RV-6 SN: 23069, N69KG, with O320-E2D and a Warnke prop.
>
>The first flight was at 8:18 am on 1/12 and it was great!!
>
>After 2 years, 2 months and 2100 hours this was great!
>
>Insurance was provided by National at a cost of $1027 per year for $40,000
full
>coverage. With a 10 hour and 10 landing up front no coverage. I already have
>10 hours in the plane the last three days.
>
>Ken Gray
>Bryan, Tx.
>N69KG - 10 hours TT
>
>PS: Keep on building, it is worth the time, when you fly it!!
>
Congrats on finishing and flying your RV!! Sounds like you were on the fast
track to be able to finish the aircraft in only 2 years. Do you have a day
job, too?
I'm curious; has the FAA changed policy? I thought that if you had a
non-certified engine prop combination that you had to fly off a 40 hour test
period. You could only get the 25 hour test period if you had a metal CS
prop/engine combination.
When I got my test period and hours I negotiated for 50 miles, also. After
he had written it down I, innocently, said, 'that's Nautical miles, of
course?'. With kind of a wry chuckle he agreed that 50 Nautical would be
ok. You say, what's the difference, well it added one more airport to my
list of possible landing spots.
John Ammeter
ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com
Seattle WA, USA
RV-6 N16JA
Flying 5 years
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
>
> Check out the Sears/Craftman oilfree 3.5HP (8.5 SCFM @ 40PSI, 6.8 SCFM
> @ 90PSI). It's $240 in the catlog, $260 in stores (w/shipping). Become
> a member of the Craftman Club (free!) and you get 10% off on certain
> days in the month. That's what I'm planning on doing.
> Finn
>
I'd wonder about the noise from that one. The oilfree ones are
generally louder.
My oilless DeVilbiss is a good compressor but LOUD. I wouldn't
reccomend it for noise sensetive situations. I think some of the larger
DeVilbiss compressors are belt drive, they may be oil bath compressors
which are queter. Home base here in PDX sells them CHEAP.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
Subject: | Re: another plane born (fwd) |
John Goble told me he has flown it. John was to go over on Sunday
and take some tabs as he needed a tab for the rudder to trim the
rudder. Herman
> From root Mon Jan 15 12:58:34 1996
> Errors-To: bounces(at)matronics.com
> From: aol.com!DerFlieger(at)matronics.com
> Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 12:46:54 -0500
> Message-Id: <960115124653_61866741(at)mail04.mail.aol.com>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: another plane born
> Sender: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Precedence: junk
> Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>
> ken Gray, Congratulatiions!
>
> Do you know if Lewis Porter at College Station has flown?
>
> Jim Stugart,Austin, TX RV6/6A
> DerFlieger(at)aol.com
>
--
--------------------------------------------------------
*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
AIX Network Performance Measurement/Analysis
phone: TL 678-2831 outside: (512) 838-2831
MS: 9530 fax: 512-838-1801
mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Re: New To List... |
Regarding scuffing of the skins with a rivet set:
I've found that keeping the rivet set CLEAN will significantly reduce
scuffing. And as some people have mentioned, you can use rivet tape to
reduce scuffing.
But WHY BOTHER? Unless you're going to polish your plane, it really
isn't going to make any difference in the long run. This sort of
scuffing, while unsightly before painting, isn't nearly as deep as what
400 grit sandpaper or scotch-brite will do. I worried about this at
the beginning of my project as well, but fortunately I got over it.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | RV6junkie(at)aol.com |
Your prop could use a repitch as it should turn up about 2300-2350 rpm
static. I think you'll find that once your prop is pitched correctly, you
will never need to use the Felix prop as a high density altitude again.
Before Don installed the Sensenich prop on his RV-4, he was using my 3 bladed
wood prop. He also had a two blade wood prop that would turn over 3000 rpm so
I don't think I can use that one for comparison. Down low, the 3 blade was
faster, hands down (202 mph @ 2000') than the Sensenich. However, at
altitude (7500') it only alowed 184 mph. This was before it was repitched
for my aircraft.
Don bought his prop directly from Sensenich (had a friend there). He bought
the 79" pitch prop but was unhappy with it because he had to throttle back at
7000' to maintain the rpm restriction. He sent it back to Sensenich and had
it repitched to 81"!!! Now he can fly at full power at 7500'. Don's engine
is unusual, I think it makes more power than most O-320's.
I have flown behind Don's prop and I like it a lot. At low altitude it is a
pain in the @$$ to watch the rpm. The metal prop idles better (lower rpm)
than a wood prop and therefore allows for a slower landing speed.
My 3 blade Performance Prop is much smother than a metal and most two bladed
wood props. It also behaves differently as well. It is a 62 x 74. It will
give 2450 rpm static, however, one it "bits" it lowers to 2350 rpm in climb.
Inital thrust on the runway also suffers while the prop cavatates but once
it hooks-up, it responds real well. Most importantly, it looks and sounds
real cool!
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com |
A fellow builder gave me some tape to put on the face of the rivet set. It
is blue/green translusent tape about 4 times thicker than scotch tape and
1/2" wide. I replace it as it wears down. I'm sorry I don't know what its
called.
>Return-Path:
>Errors-To: bounces(at)matronics.com
>From: aol.com!Zilik(at)matronics.com
>Date: Sun, 14 Jan 1996 21:52:44 -0500
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Cc: Zilik(at)aol.com
>Subject: RV-List: New To List...
>Sender: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>
>HI Guys...
>My name is Gary Zilik and I am currently building RV-6A s/n 22993. I finished
>the empenage eons ago (5 months) and have been working since then on both
>wings. I have the wings jigged back to back about 30 inches apart in a small
>(15'x12') shop. It is a little cramped at times but works. The fusalage is
>unpacked and stuffed in every available nook and cranny in the house. My wife
>is very understanding. Plans for an addition to the house which includes a
>24x36 shop space are sitting on my desk. At soon as the ground thaws (I live
>in Pine, Colorado @ 8500' msl) the addition will be started and I will have
>enough room to build the fusalage.
>
>The first question I have for the group is: When riveting the leading edge
>and bottom skins the rivet set scuffs the aluminum. Is this normal? The
>rivet set is polished and has no damage. To stop the scuffing I have been
>placing masking tape over each rivet before riveting. This works great but
>is very slow. Any ideas???
>
>Gary Zilik
>zilik(at)aol.com
>
>
Ross Mickey Phone: 541-342-1892
2300 Oakmont Way #205 Fax: 541-342-5492
Eugene, Oregon 97401 email: rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rcrothers(at)rcrothers.seanet.com (Randy Crothers) |
Subject: | Re: USe of Veriprime?? |
> A light coat of LPS or even better ACF50 every other year will keep your
>airframe corrosion free. A light coat of any primer will work as a substrate
>for the LPS. We have used LPS on 85W for 30 years and have had _NO_ corrosion
>problems.
NEW:
I had ACF-50 fogged into my wings and rear fuselage etc on my little Gruman
2 seater. I think it is providing good protection but it is still SLOWLY,
like real SLOWLY running out over a year later. If you have a real clean
airplane and want to keep it that way this may be a concern. It wipes off ok
but needs it after nearly every flight.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
Subject: | Rivet tape (was: New To List...) |
>Regarding scuffing of the skins with a rivet set:
>
>I've found that keeping the rivet set CLEAN will significantly reduce
>scuffing. And as some people have mentioned, you can use rivet tape to
>reduce scuffing.
>
>But WHY BOTHER? Unless you're going to polish your plane, it really
>isn't going to make any difference in the long run. This sort of
>scuffing, while unsightly before painting, isn't nearly as deep as what
>400 grit sandpaper or scotch-brite will do. I worried about this at
>the beginning of my project as well, but fortunately I got over it.
Randall,
Yes, I know it makes no difference, but I find the tape useful for
holding the rivets into the holes, and the ability to set up to drive
multiple rivets sequentially makes the tape worthwhile from a time-saving
viewpoint. Taping the rivet set would not get these benefits.
I just got into a habit of doing it every time. The Scotch
Removeable Magic Tape is certainly cheap enough and easy to get!
Gil Alexander
gil(at)rassp.hac.com
>
>Randall Henderson
>RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | sburch(at)Infi.Net (stan burchett) |
Subject: | Virginia Builder Partner(s) Wanted |
In SE VA (Tidewater). Want to build 2 models concurrently in same shop,
sharing tools,jigs,effort,etc. My first. Contact Stan email or 804-867-7244
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Elon Ormsby" <Elon.Ormsby(at)quickmail.llnl.gov> |
REGARDING Auto Engines
Finally, some wisdom is starting to emerge. I would like to add to Alex
Munro's "Mr. Goodwrench Scenario". That NEW GM Goodwrench V-6 he is talking
about is manufactured and assembled in Mexico. You won't even turn the new
crank because it is cast iron (not a forging) so throw it away and buy a
custom forging. The new rods are junk so throw them away and buy a set of
$1200 Carillo's. This block is a "thin wall" design with suspect, Mexican
metallurgy so it is doubtful you would bore it. Most likely sleeve all
cylinders with quality sleeves. That $7,500 motor is now over $11,000 and I
still would not fly it.
What you want to pay or what YOU "THINK" is a reasonable price for an engine
has absolutely nothing to do with it. If you thought that then why pay
$10,000 for all that RV-N aluminum stuff. After all sheet aluminum only costs
about $1.00 a pound +/- some cents. So based on weight you should only be
paying about $1,200 for all of the RV-kit stuff. Obviously, no one would
agree with that figure because you UNDERSTAND the VALUE ADDED by Vans. The
designing, bending, welding, cutting, drilling, punching, tech support, taxes,
employee costs, r&d (i.e. -8), profit, on-and-on, it all costs money. It must
ALL BE PASSED ALONG TO YOU. So you pay $10K for $2k of aluminum sheet metal
and think it is the best deal going! You are right it is a excellent value!
When you balk at a $15K-20K motor you don't understand where the value is.
All of the "cheap" auto engine types prey on this lack of understanding. It is
like the same old stereotype of the Fish carburetor that gets 75 mpg but was
supposedly bought up by the bad Detroit types (or gas companies) to keep from
the consumer. Yeah .. that's why you pay almost $3,000 for electronic fuel
injection to meet gas mileage and emission statutes.
To use another example. It costs a racing team $1 million for a set of 6 Indy
500 engines ($166,000 each). At that price they are a steal. If you don't
know why, then spend some of your VALUABLE time and educate yourself - high
costs sometimes reflect VALUE and are not always a rip-off!
Elon,
ormsby1(at)llnl.gov
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Re: Rivet tape (was: New To List...) |
>
> Yes, I know it makes no difference, but I find the tape useful for
> holding the rivets into the holes, and the ability to set up to drive
> multiple rivets sequentially makes the tape worthwhile from a time-saving
> viewpoint. Taping the rivet set would not get these benefits.
> I just got into a habit of doing it every time. The Scotch
> Removeable Magic Tape is certainly cheap enough and easy to get!
>
> Gil Alexander
> gil(at)rassp.hac.com
Yes absolutely. I didn't mean to discourage the idea of using rivet
tape in general, I too find it handy for holding rivets in -- I do the
same thing you do (every other rivet....) But the original poster was
concerned about scuffing and I mainly wanted to point out that (IMHO)
minor scuffing isn't anything to worry about by itself.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | B F Gibbons <bfgibbons(at)intellinet.com> |
------ =_NextPart_000_01BAE364.5C9037A0
Oil-less????
NO WAY!!!!
I wish I could do it over again. I have the 4hp Sears and it puts out a =
lot of air but, good grief, it is really uncomfortable to work around. =
I hate the thing.
If you'll come get it I'll take $100 for it and go buy myself a quiet =
(relatively) compressor.
BFG
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | B F Gibbons <bfgibbons(at)intellinet.com> |
Subject: | another plane born |
------ =_NextPart_000_01BAE364.57748A00
CONGRATULATIONS KEN!!!!!
(I'm jealous!!!)
BFG
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | ROBERT BUSICK <rbusick(at)nmsu.edu> |
Robert
I have an oil less compressor and it is the noisest contraption I
have ever heard. The belt drive compressors are much quieter. I would
go with the larger tank, not necessary, but you will appreaciate it when
you start using the diegrinder and other such air hogging tools.
Bob Busick
RV-6
On 14 Jan 1996, Robert Acker wrote:
> Well, I bought a house yesterday so now I *finally* have a garage to build in!
> I have some questions about compressors and noise, which hopefully some of you
> gurus can answer. I am moving into a community of freestanding townhouses.
>
> 1) Any ideas on insulating the garage for compressor and riveting noise? Is
it
> okay to build a box for the compressor, or will heat build-up be a problem?
>
> 2) Quietest compressor types (someone here a few months ago mentioned
> beltless)?
>
> 3) Home Depot had some Cambell-Hausfield (sp?) compressors. One, a 4hp-20 gal.
> The other 6hp-60 gal. There is only a $60 difference between the two.
>
> I know the 4hp is more than adequate, but will the 60 gal. tank make a big
> difference in the amount of time the compressor runs? If so, that would really
> help in regards to noise abatement.
>
> Thanks, Rob (waiting for escrow to close so I can order my tail kit!).
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | twg(at)blink.ho.att.com (Tom Goeddel(x5278)) |
Subject: | Re: Need Advice For Drilling Wing Ribs For Wires |
>> Close to the skin is OK .... just make sure it's the first skin you
>> put on the wing and not the "close-out" skin!
>>
>> Seriously .... just put the cable conduit near the first side of
>> the wing that you skin. Pre-drill the holes in the ribs before assembly,
>> skin one side, thread the conduit, then close-out the other side.
That's definitely a good way to do it. I originally was planning on skinning
the bottom first as per the manual, so I put the holes close to the bottom
skin figuring I'd do as Gil suggested. Naturally, I changed my mind and
decided to skin the top first - the conduit would definitly interfere with
riveting. I decided to feed the conduit through one bay at a time as I was
riveting. Great plan except I forgot about it until the wing was half closed.
Even so, I was still able to get it in, working from both the root end and
the inspection opening. Not particularly fun, but doable. The
bay-at-a-time method was simple for the outboard half. A little
planning ahead is always a good idea- some day I'll figure that out...
Tom Goeddel
RV-6a
t.goeddel(at)att.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Steve Day" <sday(at)pharmcomp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Auto Engines |
>Finally, some wisdom is starting to emerge. I would like to add to Alex
>Munro's "Mr. Goodwrench Scenario". That NEW GM Goodwrench V-6 he is talking
>about is manufactured and assembled in Mexico. You won't even turn the new
>crank because it is cast iron (not a forging) so throw it away and buy a
>custom forging. The new rods are junk so throw them away and buy a set of
>$1200 Carillo's. This block is a "thin wall" design with suspect, Mexican
>metallurgy so it is doubtful you would bore it. Most likely sleeve all
>cylinders with quality sleeves. That $7,500 motor is now over $11,000 and I
>still would not fly it.
"Finally, some wisdom is starting to emerge?" Not sure what you mean by this.
Your point is understood. Question: If R&D costs a lot, why hasn't the
price of a lycoming dropped? After all these years you'd think they might
have sold enough engines to pay for something that hasn't changed in eons.
I also wonder why they can't manufacture a second version of the engine that
isn't stamped 'certified', but for all practical purposes is. Isn't that
one of the factors that make the lycoming so expensive?
Also, if I understand it correctly, for the average Joe to go and buy a new
lycoming is more like $30k+ right??? Van's Aircraft makes a deal to buy
them at $18-20k. What is this $10k for??? This must be the shaft the
customer dollar figure. I wonder what the profit margin is. (not trying to
put down Lycoming, just one of those facts of reality that affects me in a
bad way. :)
A factor that hasn't been brought up is:
If Van's Aircraft made a deal to purchase 100 NSI Subaru engines, I bet the
cost would be considerably less than $20k each. (But hey, what do I know :)
-Steve Day
sday(at)pharmcomp.com
(CK ID - RV6a RV for short)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | RV4BILDR(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Shoulder Harnesses |
Jack Hooker PH (815) 233-5478, Fax (815) 233 5479
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | B F Gibbons <bfgibbons(at)intellinet.com> |
Well, instead of drilling holes in my wings this weekend I worked on the =
computer, and I've got the program 'polished' (well... washed at least). =
For you Windows types who mailed me with interest I'll post the =
download instructions.
First, I'd really like for one person to try to download and run the =
program. The program REQUIRES the archive file with page breaks. Matt =
is still working on putting the archives back out on an FTP site so I =
assume they are unavailable right now.
If you currently have an archive file with page breaks inserted and are =
interested in the search program, please send me a phone number where =
you can be reached and I'll get in touch with you to try the download. =
I'd like to get this done ASAP, and if it works make the program =
available to the people who are interested.
Thanks for the help.
BFG
________________________________________________________________________________
>Received: by phzzzt.atww.org (Linux Smail3.1.29.1 #3)
From: | "A. Reichert" <alan(at)mattress.atww.org> |
Subject: | another plane born |
Congrats to you! Better than being snowbound (D.C. area).
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Elon Ormsby" <Elon.Ormsby(at)quickmail.llnl.gov> |
REGARDING Compressors
Everyone interested in a (QUIET) compressors should look into a SCREW
COMPRESSOR. First the good stuff: These are the quietest, smoothest, most
efficient compressors made. They impart less heat to the air and draw less
amps (i.e.. cost less to run) than any equivalent compressor. You won't
believe it until you see one running. Their life expectancy is 10X (yep..10
times!) a piston type compressor. Unfortunately, they cost about 3-5x as
much as a piston type.
If you are a young person that will be doing this stuff the rest of your life
and you want an outstanding quality tool that you will keep forever - then you
owe it to yourself to at least look at one. They are all commercial units so
you will have to look up your industrial supplier in your yellow pages. Even
though the cost is great, the life is much greater. Looking back on what I
know now AND if the screw technology was available when I was younger, I would
have bought one. If you are old (like me) and know someone who can USE and
APPRECIATE a fine tool - you might even consider buying it for yourself now -
and leaving it to them - it will last two (QUIET) lifetimes!
Elon
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)idacom.hp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Turbine Power |
Steve:
You may have solved my dilemma: how to get my RV to the geographic north
pole. Avgas isn't available north of Cambrige Bay, NWT !
Tedd McHenry
tedd(at)idacom.hp.com
Edmonton, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)idacom.hp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Suburu/Rotary Power |
> I have also been seriously considering some type of rotary option. Of
> major concern, of course, is keeping the thing cool. How about
> running coolant lines just beneath the leading edge skins on the
> wings? Not only would cooling be improved, but it seems that the
> aircraft would be much less susceptible to icing. Have to modify the
> fuel tanks though.
I think some biz jets do this (Canadair Challenger?) with bleed air. I
suppose one concern might be that the wing would always be running in
slightly heated, and therefore less dense, air. I know this is a concern
with race car wings; they always try to get the radiator and exhaust heat
away from the rear wing. Any knowledgable aerodynamics types have thoughts
on that?
In the refrigerator business, they use really neat aluminum heat exchangers
that are made by bonding two sheets together with a pattern of unbonded
areas that will form the refrigerant passages. Then they blow gas into
the unbonded space, expanding it into nice, round passages. If you could
find a way to do that with thin enought aluminum, and have it pop out on
one side only, you might have a very tidy heat exchange and leading edge.
Tedd McHenry
tedd(at)idacom.hp.com
Edmonton, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | crazer(at)midwest.net (Chester Razer) |
Subject: | Re: Need Advice For Drilling Wing Ribs For Wires |
I placed my wiring conduit at the UPPER FRONT EDGE of the main ribs. I
placed them here so they would not interfere with the inspection hole area.
As far as bucking the top skin rivets, if you carefully locate and drill
the conduit holes you can push it in from the root rib or the tip rib with
no problems after all the skins are on and the wing is completed. Doing it
this way allows you to replace the conduit from the wing tip if you ever
need to. The only disadvantage is you cannot place a bead of RTV around
each rib hole to protect the couduit. I opted to be able to replace the
conduit or completely remove it if I wanted to.
Chet Razer
crazer(at)midwest.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)idacom.hp.com> |
> Well, instead of drilling holes in my wings this weekend I worked on the =
> computer, and I've got the program 'polished' (well... washed at least). =
> For you Windows types who mailed me with interest I'll post the =
> download instructions.
What's the program written in? I work on a UNIX system; if it's written
in C I might be able to compile it for UNIX from the source files.
Tedd McHenry
tedd(at)idacom.hp.com
Edmonton, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Elon Ormsby" <Elon.Ormsby(at)quickmail.llnl.gov> |
REGARDING Auto Engines
Steve Day writes...
Question: If R&D costs a lot, why hasn't the price of a Lycoming dropped?
After all these years you'd think they might have sold enough engines to pay
for something that hasn't changed in eons.
Eons ago (about 1960) gas was 27cents/gal and an average factory worker
made $100/week. That engine cost about $5k. What has inflation increased in
35 years! What is a weekly wage today? And that was BEFORE product LIABILITY
became a killer in the mid - 70's. And what is wrong with a little profit.
Without it your only engine choice would be Rotax or PZL!
"I also wonder why they can't manufacture a second version of the engine that
isn't stamped 'certified', but for all practical purposes is."
Product liability insurance for a certified motor is obscene - what do
you think it would be for a un-certified motor? Try "unavailable"!
"Also, if I understand it correctly, for the average Joe to go and buy a new
Lycoming is more like $30k+ right??? Van's Aircraft makes a deal to buy
them at $18-20k. What is this $10k for??? "
At OSH 94, Lycomming offered me a factor new 360 for $18,500 (retail),
before a end-of-year price increase. That sure ain't $30k. Sounds like Van's
price is right on!
"A factor that hasn't been brought up is:
If Van's Aircraft made a deal to purchase 100 NSI Subaru engines, I bet the
cost would be considerably less than $20k each. (But hey, what do I know :)"
Who is he going to buy them from? The only Japanese mfgr considering an
aero engine is Toyota. They have one flying in a Rutan development project.
Subaru would not knowingly sell an engine headed for an aircraft environment.
Sure you can buy one or two from a dealer or junk yard - they don't know what
you are going to do with it. Van would have to buy used/junk motors and you
know he wouldn't even think of it!
The reason you see these 1 or 2 engine deals is because they are
"judgment proof". They stay small, they manufacture in a "rented" building,
use "leased" equipment, run on "borrowed" capitol and are insurance bare. "So
sue me - what are your going to get!!! The company (not the individual) goes
bankrupt and its just another new day for the boss/owner to start over (no
personnel liability). So lets get real...any legitimate engine company will
have horrendous start-up costs, development costs and terrible liability
exposure all of that cost has to be passed along on each engine. If you think
you can do all of the above on $1 million then 100 engines will cost you
$10,000 per engine (not even counting the engine itself)!!. BTW you couldn't
even begin to do a creditable job on $1M.
Elon
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | JerryFlyRV(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Auto Engines |
Steve and anyone else that is thinking auto engine
I think it is great that a few builders are trying auto engines and maybe
some day there will be one that works and will go all the way to TBO without
any problems but to date there is not such a engine. I think those that are
putting auto engines in their airplanes know and are willing to take the
risks.
Myself I am not willing to fly my family and friends in a airplane that I
have to worry about the engine quitting, Lycoming may be old tech. but they
are reliable more so than anything else, I built my RV for fun and it is not
fun to fly if you are always concerned about a engine failure.
I think that the biggest share of you who are thinking auto engine are
kidding yourselves if you think you are going to get something better
cheaper, yes new engines are expensive but there are still some deals out
there in the used market.
My opinions only
Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS over 700hrs. and no engine problems on a used
O-360
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Ross Rebgetz <Ross.Rebgetz(at)tvl.tcp.csiro.au> |
Subject: | Elevator skin damage |
I have damaged my right elevator skin as describrd below and am seeking
additional advice to that which Tom has given. (also below). I can't think
how to describe the damage any better than I have.
Thanks in advance
Ross
>Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 15:29:24
>To: Vans
>From: Ross Rebgetz <Ross.Rebgetz(at)tvl.tcp.csiro.au>
>Subject: Elevator skin damage
>
>I have put two bumps on my right elevator skin and am seeking your advice
about whether to replace it or repair it.
>
>While back riveting 2 rivets on the trailing edge have been raised above
the skin surface. This occurred because I had routed the backing plate into
a sheet of chipboard and it had warped since I had last used it. All the
other rivets are fine because they are away from the folded edge and so the
skin flexed down while holding and riveting or were riveted on a part of the
backing plate that allowed the skin to be in contact.
>
>The area of the bump is a bit less than the size of the back riveting tool
(purchased from Avery's) and one is 20 thousands of an inch high and the
other 10 thou.
>
>I assume that if I squeeze this bump down it will not stay put and flex up
and down in use. Do you have any suggestions about fixing them or do you
recommend that the skin be replaced.
>
>Regards
>
>Ross
>Customer number 24001
>
Date: 15 Jan 96 11:46:44 EST
From: "VAN's AIRCRAFT" <76455.1602(at)compuserve.com>
Subject: Elevator skin damage
Actually without weeing the problem it is difficult to say about
replacement... my initial response is to just move ahead with the
project knowing that the problem exists and figuring to fix it after
flying if it gives a problem... it is easy to build a surface once you
have the experience behind you of building the whole acft.... tom
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tel: +61 077 538 570
Fax: +61 077 538 600
CSIRO Mail: CSIRO
Division of Tropical Crops & Pastures Davies Laboratory
Davies Laboratory Private Mail Bag
University Road Aitkenvale Qld 4814
Townsville Australia
AUSTRALIA
Email: Ross.Rebgetz(at)tvl.tcp.csiro.au
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | HowardRV(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: another plane born |
Congratulations way down here in Austin!! Looking forward to seeing your
"bird" at some fly in's. If your an Argriculture and Mechanical type (Aggie)
then it was an accomplishment! Just joking. Great news.
Howard Kidwell, tail and one wing about done plus made two new golf clubs
today. Still lousy shots!
Howardrv(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | EBundy2620(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: another plane born |
>Insurance was provided by National at a cost of $1027 per year for $40,000
>full
>coverage. With a 10 hour and 10 landing up front no coverage. I already
>have
>10 hours in the plane the last three days.
Congratulations! Do I understand correctly that your insurance policy did
not cover your first 10 takeoffs and landings? I'd be a little concerned
about that. I know Avemco covers 1st and subsequent flights.
Only 10 hours in 3 days?... (grin)
-- Ed Bundy
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jeremy <jbenedic(at)uofport.edu> |
Subject: | Re: Vans WWW opinion |
Just a note:
The Van's WWW page will remain up until Feb. 1, 1996. [Responding to
several posts...] After that things are up in the air.
> > Something I wish could be added I saw on another users group list. Their
> > web page has a link to the email that has been exchanged by subject, so the
> > rv web page would have links something like:
Unfortunately, Van's could not put the list materials on their page,
because it would be essentially endorsing the content. Without reviewing
every post for the past five years, this won't become a reality.
However, maybe someone like me (independent of Van's) is HTMLizing the
archive... :-)
E-mail policy: Sorry to those who posted questions regarding my original
statment. My policy is to keep posts to a minimum for a variety of
reasons. About a year ago, I made some comments/questions without fully
explaining what I meant, they were part of a month long thread that
upset more than one person...
So I now use extreme caution, and try to answer personally when I can...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| name://Jeremy Benedict | PP-ASEL (1994) [R/E: TD] |
| email://jbenedic(at)uofport.edu | Logged:C-150,RV-4,-6,-6A,-6B,-6T|
| http://www.uofport.edu/~jbenedic | TT: 163.2 hrs TT-RV: 70.2 hrs |
| voice://503.240.1528 | |
|postal://Villa 114/5000 N. Willamette Blvd./Portland OR 97203-5754 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Van's "WebManager" -- http://www.earthlink.net/~rkhu/vans/
Disclaimer: I am not an employee of Van's Aircraft, Inc. Therefore,
please regard my comments on e-mail as those of myself, and not
necessarily of Van's Aircraft (unless stated otherwise). Any (late)
responses are my responsibility, and do not reflect the timeliness of
Van's Aircraft, Inc. Finally, the web site I have put together
is the offical Van's Aircraft, Inc. web site, and contains only official
approved information.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | EBundy2620(at)aol.com |
>I wish I could do it over again. I have the 4hp Sears and it puts out a lot
>of air but, good grief, it is really uncomfortable to work around. I hate
>the thing.
>
>
I keep my oil-less compressor in my house (plugged into a 20a washing machine
circuit) and run 100' of air hose out to my shop (about 50' away from the
house). Makes it much more pleasant. I can't imagine being in the same room
with it... When I'm in my shop with hearing protectors on I can *still* hear
when the compressor kicks on.
-- Ed Bundy
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | EBundy2620(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Need Advice For Drilling Wing Ribs For Wires |
>Gil Alexander
>gil(at)rassp.hac.com
>RV6A, #20701 ... re-making fwd. aft turtle deck skin.
What happened to your turtle deck skin? Care to save us from the same
mistake? (grin)
-- Ed Bundy
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | DerFlieger(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: another plane born) |
writes:
>Congratulations! Do I understand correctly that your insurance policy did
>not cover your first 10 takeoffs and landings? I'd be a little concerned
>about that. I know Avemco covers 1st and subsequent flights.
>
>
Hey Ya'll! Doesn't every one know that if you have an EAA tech counselor
visit your project and you participate in the EAA Flight Advisor program,
Avemco covers you on the first 10 hours!
Jim Stugart
DerFlieger(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | JamesCone(at)aol.com |
Does anyone know about a crash of a one of a kind homebuilt that was being
flown by a retired TWA Captain? From the little information I have heard, it
sounds like this could have been Stan Burak.
Jim Cone
jamescone(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Thanks for Rivet help and Compressors |
Thanks for all of the replies recieved about the scuffing problem while
riveting. I will try all suggestions and try not to worry so much about that
nice shiny skin..
About compressors....
My compressor (6hp 60 gal twin cyl belt drive) is located in my garage which
is about 20 feet from my house and shop. The garage is insulated (but not
heated). I ran 1" pvc cold water pipe from the compressor to the house and
buried it 12 inches deep. Once the line enters the house it goes into a
manifold with three outlets. Each outlet has its own regulator so that the
presure may be different for each hose. Total cost of the setup (minus
compressor) was about 20 bucks for the pvc pipe and fittings. The regulators
were given to me by a friend. Pvc works well for this and will hold the
100psi from the compressor with no problem. With the compressor in the garage
I can never hear it running unless I am outside, and then it is just a
muffled low rumble. I wish I could get my rivet gun and die grinder this
quiet.
Gary Zilik
RV-6A s/n 22993
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gerald forrest <forrest1(at)haven.iso.com> |
Subject: | riveting hs411 bracket & bearing |
I just started building the rv6 epennage kit. When I got to the hs411
bracket and bearing, the plans call for 6 470 ad 4-5 rivets. I cannot
get a proper shophead without going to a longer rivet. Has anyone else
run into this problem or did I do something wrong. thanks in advance.
Jerry Forrest
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | OrndorffG(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: another plane born |
good going , good luck , and happy skies .....George & Becki Orndirff
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | klgray(at)bihs.net (Ken Gray) |
Subject: | Re: another plane born |
>ken Gray, Congratulatiions!
>
>Do you know if Lewis Porter at College Station has flown?
>
>Jim Stugart,Austin, TX RV6/6A
>DerFlieger(at)aol.com
>
>
Lewis has flown his rv-6 the same day I did. I have not had the chance to
talk to him yet.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Becki Orndorff <rso(at)css.ncifcrf.gov> |
Subject: | Re: Sheet Metal Brake |
You wrote:
>George and Becky,
> I was just watching your empanage video yesterday. It has been
>helpfull to show me a little more about what I'm getting myself into. I was
>very interested in the little metal break that was shown in the video. I
>played it back alot of times but could not quite tell where the pivot point
>of the angle iron was located. Does anyone know where I can get a few
>details on this little break, or one like it? It looks like it would be very
>easy to build but a drawing or some info would make it even easier.
>
Plans for the sheet metal brake shown in the empennage video are
available from us for $3 and a self-addressed stamped envelope. Please call
if you have questions.
George and Becki Orndorff
2347 Michael Road
Myersville, MD 21773
(301) 293-1505
Becki Orndorff
NCI-FCRDC, Computer & Statistical Services
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Dan Boudro <dboudro(at)nmia.com> |
Subject: | Re: Elevator skin damage |
Ross,
IMHO Tom's advice was excellent although I'm not the kind of person who can
walk away from a problem and go on although I think I should since these
kind of "catastrophies" seem to melt away with time. I would either decide
to leave it alone (always a very good choice!) or patch it with a piece of
.016 from the inside if possible, from the outside if necessary. I have
a similar spot on an elevator (rivet gun slipped), I patched it and now
don't even remember where it is or which elevator.
Dan Boudro
RV-4 N9167Z
Albuquerque, NM
On Tue, 16 Jan 1996, Ross Rebgetz wrote:
> I have damaged my right elevator skin as describrd below and am seeking
> additional advice to that which Tom has given. (also below). I can't think
> how to describe the damage any better than I have.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Ross
>
> >Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 15:29:24
> >To: Vans
> >From: Ross Rebgetz <Ross.Rebgetz(at)tvl.tcp.csiro.au>
> >Subject: Elevator skin damage
> >
> >I have put two bumps on my right elevator skin and am seeking your advice
> about whether to replace it or repair it.
> >
> >While back riveting 2 rivets on the trailing edge have been raised above
> the skin surface. This occurred because I had routed the backing plate into
> a sheet of chipboard and it had warped since I had last used it. All the
> other rivets are fine because they are away from the folded edge and so the
> skin flexed down while holding and riveting or were riveted on a part of the
> backing plate that allowed the skin to be in contact.
> >
> >The area of the bump is a bit less than the size of the back riveting tool
> (purchased from Avery's) and one is 20 thousands of an inch high and the
> other 10 thou.
> >
> >I assume that if I squeeze this bump down it will not stay put and flex up
> and down in use. Do you have any suggestions about fixing them or do you
> recommend that the skin be replaced.
> >
> >Regards
> >
> >Ross
> >Customer number 24001
> >
> Date: 15 Jan 96 11:46:44 EST
> From: "VAN's AIRCRAFT" <76455.1602(at)compuserve.com>
> To: Ross Rebgetz
> Subject: Elevator skin damage
>
> Actually without weeing the problem it is difficult to say about
> replacement... my initial response is to just move ahead with the
> project knowing that the problem exists and figuring to fix it after
> flying if it gives a problem... it is easy to build a surface once you
> have the experience behind you of building the whole acft.... tom
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tel: +61 077 538 570
> Fax: +61 077 538 600
>
> CSIRO Mail: CSIRO
> Division of Tropical Crops & Pastures Davies Laboratory
> Davies Laboratory Private Mail Bag
> University Road Aitkenvale Qld 4814
> Townsville Australia
> AUSTRALIA
> Email: Ross.Rebgetz(at)tvl.tcp.csiro.au
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Jack Gageby <aj752(at)lafn.lafn.org> |
Subject: | Problems - Duckworks Landing Light Installation |
I bought the landing light kit that Van offers (Duckworks Landing Light) and
I'm having some frustation with the installation because of the poor
instructions/engineering of the kit. This message is to warn you, of the
rv-list, of the deficiencies of this landing light kit.
1. The light assembly brackets mount between the outer two wing ribs close
to the nose of those ribs. The design and instructions assume that the rib
web in the mounting position is flat, which is not the case with my RV4
ribs, having been formed with stiffening rings and a vertical aligned
stiffening indentation near the nose of the ribs. When using the provided
template for drilling the mounting holes in the ribs, one of the holes was
in a crease of this stiffening indentation. This was my first
disappointment with this kit. The work-around (achieving a flat surface to
mount to) consumed a lot of time.
2. The next problem I ran into was with the lense mounting. There are these
little bone shaped pieces of that you cutout of AL, using a supplied
template, which go on the top and bottom of the plexiglass lense.
Nut-plates are to be installed on these bone shaped pieces. After drilling
the screw holes per the supplied template, I discovered bone shaped pieces
are too short to install the nutplates.
3. Finally, my last complaint, is that with this kit there is no weather
seal to prevent rain from entering between the plexiglass lense and the wing
skin. So, I guess I should some put drain holes somewhere in the bottom of
the wing to get rid of any water that might collect. This in not covered in
the kit instructions.
Anyone else have any experience with the Duckworks Landing Light Kit?
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: riveting hs411 bracket & bearing |
From: | Scott Hatcock <scotth(at)rv6.fc.hp.com> |
I had the same problem and used 4-6s. In addition the holes in the
bearing were slightly undersize. I opened them with a #40 turned by hand.
> I just started building the rv6 epennage kit. When I got to the hs411
> bracket and bearing, the plans call for 6 470 ad 4-5 rivets. I cannot
> get a proper shophead without going to a longer rivet. Has anyone else
> run into this problem or did I do something wrong. thanks in advance.
> Jerry Forrest
>
-----------------
Scott Hathcock Integrated Circuit Business Division
Hewlett-Packard MS 72 Product Design Lab
3404 E. Harmony Rd. scotth(at)fc.hp.com
Fort Collins, CO 80525-9599
(303) 229-3488 FAX (303) 229-3971
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
Subject: | Re: USe of Veriprime?? |
Well...OK, I will admit that we have that problem as well, but it,s a small
price to pay for the protection.
Chris
cruble(at)cisco.com
>
> NEW:
> I had ACF-50 fogged into my wings and rear fuselage etc on my little Gruman
> 2 seater. I think it is providing good protection but it is still SLOWLY,
> like real SLOWLY running out over a year later. If you have a real clean
> airplane and want to keep it that way this may be a concern. It wipes off ok
> but needs it after nearly every flight.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
Subject: | Re: riveting hs411 bracket & bearing |
> From owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com Tue Jan 16 01:21:05 1996
> X-Deleted-Errors-To: bounces(at)matronics.com
>
> I just started building the rv6 epennage kit. When I got to the hs411
> bracket and bearing, the plans call for 6 470 ad 4-5 rivets. I cannot
> get a proper shophead without going to a longer rivet. Has anyone else
> run into this problem or did I do something wrong. thanks in advance.
> Jerry Forrest
>
Double check that you have the parts assembled correctly. If all looks
well, use the longer rivets. As you progress with the project you will find
that an RV is not a step by step airplane. It will requier that you make
lots of decisions like the above. They will get much more involved as you
start on the wings. When I started I was very concerned about doing
everything by the book/plans. You will find later that sometimes the book/
plans simply don't say how to do one thing or another. The general concensus
is that Van is a great designer, but a bad writer. Some of his instructions
read like "...build the part..." . This is fine if you have built one before
(happens to me all the time) but makes the first time sort of tricky. I
think I remember a section in the manual that said something like "...you'r
going to have to do some thinking here...". The manual is correct. That's
what makes building fun for me. Solving the problems of how to do the next
step is 50% of the fun. Keep working, and when you finish that first part
you will feel like a million bucks!
Chris
cruble(at)cisco.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
Subject: | Re: USe of Veriprime?? |
On Mon, 15 Jan 1996 walsh(at)cpeedy.enet.dec.com wrote:
>
> Could someone elaborate a little further on the effectiveness of Variprime
> without topcoat?
My experience is that Veriprime absorbs grease and oil. It has no sealer in
it. Therefore it is not very durable if it is handled a lot or exposed to
grease or oil. I would expect that the bare veriptime would be just fine
on the interiors of wings, tails, fuselages, etc.
The BEST way to get an answer to your question, however, is to obtain
DuPont's product support number and call it.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
rv-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Steve Day" <sday(at)pharmcomp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Turbine Power |
>You may have solved my dilemma: how to get my RV to the geographic north
>pole. Avgas isn't available north of Cambrige Bay, NWT !
hehe. Are you serious? Please educate me as to why Avgas is not avail. Is
there a problem at extreme low temps? Or is it one of those "Next Rest Stop
2000 miles" :-) Meaning no pumps at all.
-Steve Day
sday(at)pharmcomp.com
(CK ID - RV6a RV for short)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
Subject: | Re: Problems - Duckworks Landing Light Installation |
On Tue, 16 Jan 1996, Jack Gageby wrote:
> I bought the landing light kit that Van offers (Duckworks Landing Light) and
> I'm having some frustation with the installation because of the poor
> instructions/engineering of the kit. This message is to warn you, of the
> rv-list, of the deficiencies of this landing light kit.
I've installed a DUckworks Landing Light kit in each wing of my RV-6 with
no problems. I'm VERY happy with the results.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
rv-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com (Doug Weiler) |
Subject: | Re: Problems - Duckworks Landing Light Installation |
>I bought the landing light kit that Van offers (Duckworks Landing Light) and
>I'm having some frustation with the installation because of the poor
>instructions/engineering of the kit. This message is to warn you, of the
>rv-list, of the deficiencies of this landing light kit.
>
>1. The light assembly brackets mount between the outer two wing ribs close
>to the nose of those ribs. The design and instructions assume that the rib
>web in the mounting position is flat, which is not the case with my RV4
>ribs, having been formed with stiffening rings and a vertical aligned
>stiffening indentation near the nose of the ribs. When using the provided
>template for drilling the mounting holes in the ribs, one of the holes was
>in a crease of this stiffening indentation. This was my first
>disappointment with this kit. The work-around (achieving a flat surface to
>mount to) consumed a lot of time.
>
>2. The next problem I ran into was with the lense mounting. There are these
>little bone shaped pieces of that you cutout of AL, using a supplied
>template, which go on the top and bottom of the plexiglass lense.
>Nut-plates are to be installed on these bone shaped pieces. After drilling
>the screw holes per the supplied template, I discovered bone shaped pieces
>are too short to install the nutplates.
>
>3. Finally, my last complaint, is that with this kit there is no weather
>seal to prevent rain from entering between the plexiglass lense and the wing
>skin. So, I guess I should some put drain holes somewhere in the bottom of
>the wing to get rid of any water that might collect. This in not covered in
>the kit instructions.
>
>Anyone else have any experience with the Duckworks Landing Light Kit?
My personal experience with the Duckworth light was very positive. First,
I would give Don Wentz (of Duckworth fame) a call and discuss your problems
(his number is 503-543-2298). I don't recall have problems with my mounting
plate. I did have problems inserting the lens in the opening until Don told
me to cut the lens as small as possible and then I figured out the
combination to insert it. Again, I don't recall a problem with the
"bone-shaped" pieces.
There was a little roll of sealing foam tape included in my kit with is used
to seal the lense to the opening and prevent leakage.
Give Don a call and see what he says.
Doug
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
= Doug Weiler, pres. MN Wing Van's AirForce, RV-4 wings in progress
= 347 Krattley Lane
= Hudson, WI 54016
= 715-386-1239
= email: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walsh(at)cpeedy.ENET.dec.com |
Thanks Dave,
I don't really make any distinction between exterior and interior priming.
In fact, I would argue that interior is a more demanding application since
water will tend to collect in places inside the plane.
It's too late for most of my empennage but , starting with the wings, I will
probably switch over. To what, I don't know yet.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Auto engines & their lawyers |
(Steve Day) writes:
> Question: If R&D costs a lot, why hasn't the
>price of a lycoming dropped? After all these years you'd think they might
>have sold enough engines to pay for something that hasn't changed in eons.
>
>I also wonder why they can't manufacture a second version of the engine that
>isn't stamped 'certified', but for all practical purposes is. Isn't that
>one of the factors that make the lycoming so expensive?
It's that "L" word again. Yep, it's those crying widows, their lawyers, and
those Roseanne watching juries that send Lycoming costs well into the
$20,000+ range. And don't think that stamped in word "certified" has much to
do with it. It's still the same equipment, represented to fulfill the same
purpose, with the same inherent guarantees, and offered by the same faceless
"deep pocket" American corporation.
And, regarding Subaru engines mass marketed through Vans. I doubt that is
very likely. Subaru stands little risk if a few of their engines are aquired
under the table and privately modified and installed in aircraft. But for
Subaru to publically acknowledge the application and then actually endorse it
by openly selling to the market for (god forbid) money?
Perhaps Subaru could perform the testing and buy the insurance they need to
enter the market. But with the limited market (what 1,000 engines per year,
maybe 2,000), where do you think their prices would be? Yep, just like
Lycoming; perhaps even higher since all the testing they could do could not
ever compare with those eons of experience gained by Lycoming.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Steve Day" <sday(at)pharmcomp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Auto Engines |
> Eons ago (about 1960) gas was 27cents/gal and an average factory worker
>made $100/week. That engine cost about $5k. What has inflation increased in
>35 years! What is a weekly wage today? And that was BEFORE product LIABILITY
>became a killer in the mid - 70's. And what is wrong with a little profit.
>Without it your only engine choice would be Rotax or PZL!
But don't they use robotic technology to build some of these labor intensive
parts these days? I would be willing to bet that if you put the numbers on
a graph, the cost to build the engine would not even come close to matching
the retail price of the engine. My guess is the cost of liability would be
the substantial factor.
> Product liability insurance for a certified motor is obscene - what do
>you think it would be for a un-certified motor? Try "unavailable"!
Do you mean lycoming's liability for selling the engine? If so, I wish this
was a perfect world, hehe, and we could just trust a company to put out the
best work they can and not worry about lawyers etc. etc.. Why can't an
engine be produced, not stamped as an 'aircraft' engine, but rather just an
engine to be used for whatever purpose a builder decides. If someone
decides to put it on an aircraft, does that mean Lycoming is still liable???
Why is this, I don't understand why the system works like this.
> At OSH 94, Lycomming offered me a factor new 360 for $18,500 (retail),
>before a end-of-year price increase. That sure ain't $30k. Sounds like Van's
>price is right on!
Oh, well, shows you what I know. I had been told by many people that Van's
aircraft gets an extremely good deal on Lycoming engines and the (retail)
price is right around $30k.
> Who is he going to buy them from? The only Japanese mfgr considering an
>aero engine is Toyota. They have one flying in a Rutan development project.
>Subaru would not knowingly sell an engine headed for an aircraft environment.
>Sure you can buy one or two from a dealer or junk yard - they don't know what
>you are going to do with it. Van would have to buy used/junk motors and you
>know he wouldn't even think of it!
You must have missed some previous messages about the Subaru engine package
put out by a company called 'NSI'. (I think that is what they are called)
I wasn't trying to say Van would purchase the engines, I was speaking
hypothetically. If 'someone' were to buy 100 engines put together by
company 'X', they would probably get a much better deal that if they bought
1 engine from company 'X'.
>personnel liability). So lets get real...any legitimate engine company will
>have horrendous start-up costs, development costs and terrible liability
>exposure all of that cost has to be passed along on each engine. If you think
>you can do all of the above on $1 million then 100 engines will cost you
>$10,000 per engine (not even counting the engine itself)!!. BTW you couldn't
>even begin to do a creditable job on $1M.
My comment had nothing to do with starting a company from scratch, but
rather to buy 100 engines from an existing company who has already been in
production.
-Steve Day
sday(at)pharmcomp.com
(CK ID - RV6a RV for short)
________________________________________________________________________________
rv-list-request(at)matronics.comrvmailinglistsetup,
majordomo(at)matronics.com
Subject: | Re: Archive Search |
Just a quick thought;
Would you like to see the RV archives in print as sought of a "best of the
internet" book.
I really have not put much thought into the details of such a project, but if
their was interest, it might be worth considering.
Andy Gold
Easy Publishing
(I do the 14 Years of the RV-Ator Book)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Steve Day" <sday(at)pharmcomp.com> |
Subject: | Re: Auto Engines |
>Myself I am not willing to fly my family and friends in a airplane that I
>have to worry about the engine quitting, Lycoming may be old tech. but they
>are reliable more so than anything else, I built my RV for fun and it is not
>fun to fly if you are always concerned about a engine failure.
I hear that.
>I think that the biggest share of you who are thinking auto engine are
>kidding yourselves if you think you are going to get something better
>cheaper, yes new engines are expensive but there are still some deals out
>there in the used market.
If what you are saying is a rebuilt lycoming is more reliable than a new
auto engine, I don't think I could give you much of an argument on that one.
Just because I'm showing so much interest in an auto-conversion doesn't mean
I'm really going to do it. I'm asking questions more for education and to
keep up with the market. There is no doubt in my mind that we are real
close to seeing some very good alternative engine choices that will be as
reliable as a Lycoming, and probably with time even more reliable. (But
probably not much cheaper)
Actually, the only reason I am even considering an alternative engine is
because of the rv's short field capability. If I were building a Lancair IV
or something that comes in real fast, I wouldn't even consider a
non-certified engine unless the aircraft had multiple engines.
When I finally get to the point of a decision, the odds are probably 100:1
that I'll be putting a used or new Lycoming up front..... then continue to
ask more silly questions about auto-conversions.
-Steve Day
sday(at)pharmcomp.com
(CK ID - RV6a RV for short)
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Problems - Duckworks Landing Light Installation |
From: | "Earl Brabandt" <cwbraban(at)ichips.intel.com> |
Jack Gageby reports:
> I bought the landing light kit that Van offers (Duckworks Landing Light) and
> I'm having some frustation with the installation because of the poor
> instructions/engineering of the kit.
> The design and instructions assume that the rib
> web in the mounting position is flat, which is not the case with my RV4
> ribs, having been formed with stiffening rings and a vertical aligned
> stiffening indentation near the nose of the ribs.
Between which ribs are you mounting the light, Jack? I mounted mine
between the outermost ribs in my -6 and didn't have this problem. I
think (but it's difficult to recall), that because the outer rib faces
flange in (backwards from the rest) the stiffening rings and indentation
were pointed away from the brackets on both ribs. At any rate, I didn't
have any interference. I don't know--are any of your ribs mounted
backwards with the flange pointed the wrong direction, ie., did you use
the rib from the opposite wing?
> 2. The next problem I ran into was with the lense mounting. There are these
> little bone shaped pieces of that you cutout of AL, using a supplied
> template, which go on the top and bottom of the plexiglass lense.
> Nut-plates are to be installed on these bone shaped pieces. After drilling
> the screw holes per the supplied template, I discovered bone shaped pieces
> are too short to install the nutplates.
What do you mean my too short? Granted, it was difficult to reach
the threads on the nutpalates with the screws supplied until the
lens was installed because it wasn't yet "sucked-up" tight. I
just used a longer screw temporarily to bring the lens up tight,
then replaced it with the shorter, more appropriate length screws
supplied.
> 3. Finally, my last complaint, is that with this kit there is no weather
> seal to prevent rain from entering between the plexiglass lense and the wing
> skin. So, I guess I should some put drain holes somewhere in the bottom of
> the wing to get rid of any water that might collect. This in not covered in
> the kit instructions.
Mine came with weatherstrip. I'm sure that if you write to Duckworks, Don
will send you the weatherstrip. I'm pretty sure that it was in the
parts list and instructions too.
Cal
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Re: USe of Veriprime?? |
> Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 11:50:20 -0800
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com, rv-list(at)matronics.com
> From: rcrothers.seanet.com!rcrothers(at)matronics.com (Randy Crothers)
> Subject: Re: RV-List: USe of Veriprime??
> I had ACF-50 fogged into my wings and rear fuselage etc on my little Gruman
> 2 seater. I think it is providing good protection but it is still SLOWLY,
> like real SLOWLY running out over a year later. If you have a real clean
> airplane and want to keep it that way this may be a concern. It wipes off ok
> but needs it after nearly every flight.
Yes that has been my experience with ACF-50 as well. I wouldn't plan on
depending on it for corrosion protection INSTEAD of priming. I might
use it if I put floats on and/or move to the coast however. But in the
meantime I'm doing as good a job of priming as I can, since I figure I
may do one or both of those some day.
Randall
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com |
Subject: | Re: Need Advice For Drilling Wing Ribs For Wires |
>
>I placed my wiring conduit at the UPPER FRONT EDGE of the main ribs. I
>placed them here so they would not interfere with the inspection hole area.
>As far as bucking the top skin rivets, if you carefully locate and drill
>the conduit holes you can push it in from the root rib or the tip rib with
>no problems after all the skins are on and the wing is completed. Doing it
>this way allows you to replace the conduit from the wing tip if you ever
>need to. The only disadvantage is you cannot place a bead of RTV around
>each rib hole to protect the couduit. I opted to be able to replace the
>conduit or completely remove it if I wanted to.
>
>Chet Razer
>crazer(at)midwest.net
>
What is the RTV for? I placed plastic grommets in each hole to protect the
conduit. Since we are on the subject, I purchased the light weight nylon
wiring conduit from Vans (Part DUCT NT5/8-50) but didn't use it because of
installation problems. I thought the ridges in the tubing would hold it in
place but if you drill the holes undersize (the size of the "valley") you
can not thread the tubing through it. The only way to install it is to
drill holes to the outer dimension and then secure the tubing with???(RTV,
String) I ended up using a smooth plastic tubing used for plumbing which
streaches so I could thread it through plastc grommets and when it regains
its unstreached shape holds firm in the hole. The penalty is that it weighs
a bit more.
It should be noted that using conduit allows for easier threading of
electric wires but at the cost of reduced heat disipation. I have been told
that we don't have to worry about heat buildup inside the conduit because of
the limited number of wires we run through it. I don't Know anything (YET)
about electricity so I am just going on what others have told me. I do know
that one builder here, who is an aircraft maintainece instructor at a local
college, did NOT use conduit because of the heat buildup issue.
Any comments?
>
>
Ross Mickey Phone: 541-342-1892
2300 Oakmont Way #205 Fax: 541-342-5492
Eugene, Oregon 97401 email: rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
Subject: | Re: USe of Veriprime?? |
>On Mon, 15 Jan 1996 walsh(at)cpeedy.enet.dec.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Could someone elaborate a little further on the effectiveness of Variprime
>> without topcoat?
>
>My experience is that Veriprime absorbs grease and oil. It has no sealer in
>it. Therefore it is not very durable if it is handled a lot or exposed to
>grease or oil. I would expect that the bare veriptime would be just fine
>on the interiors of wings, tails, fuselages, etc.
Also remember it is _not_ a catalyzed epoxy, so be careful selecting the
solvent used to clean grease off ... you might find it acts like a paint
stripper!!
Gil Alexander
>
>The BEST way to get an answer to your question, however, is to obtain
>DuPont's product support number and call it.
>
>Best Regards,
>Dave Barnhart
>rv-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Re: riveting hs411 bracket & bearing |
> I just started building the rv6 epennage kit. When I got to the hs411
> bracket and bearing, the plans call for 6 470 ad 4-5 rivets. I cannot
> get a proper shophead without going to a longer rivet. Has anyone else
> run into this problem or did I do something wrong. thanks in advance.
> Jerry Forrest
You should take all rivet lengths called out in the plans with a grain
of salt. Use the shop head gages (available from Avery -- you DO have a
set, don't you?) and eventually you'll get an eye for how much shaft
should be showing to yield a good shop head, and you can make up your
own mind what lengths to use. Also get a rivet cutter and/or get some
half length length rivets (available from Aircraft Spruce) -- they will
make life easier.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
Subject: | Re: riveting hs411 bracket & bearing |
On Tue, 16 Jan 1996, Chris Ruble wrote:
> I
> think I remember a section in the manual that said something like "...you'r
> going to have to do some thinking here...". The manual is correct. That's
> what makes building fun for me. Solving the problems of how to do the next
> step is 50% of the fun.
Amen! At least for me, if this were a 'Tab-A-into-Slot-B' process, I'd
be bored to death.
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
rv-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com> |
John:
Of course, you have to understand that I have a really warped view of the
amount of priming necessary: I live in Arizona! :-)
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
rv-6 sn 23744
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Re: Archive Search |
> Would you like to see the RV archives in print as sought of a "best of the
> internet" book.
Andy:
I have thought of this. It would be a lot of work, especially to separate
out the good stuff from the looks-like-good-stuff and the idle chatter.
I'd like to see it combined with the 16 years of the RVator. If you did
this I'd sure buy it! Of course I'll buy "16 Years" anyway....
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Arrowbat(at)aol.com |
Ditto about the Devilbiss....my 3.5 HP 30 gal. is EXTREMELY loud (regardless
of garage door position) & so annoying that I don't use it unless absolutely
necessary. Thank goodness for hand squeezers & electric grinders!
Mike Calhoon
Delta A&P - Orlando, FL
RV6 s/n 22991
Skinning left wing.
Variprime inside - no topcoat (and quite satisfied!)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Rich Klee <Rich_Klee(at)ccm.fm.intel.com> |
Ed Cole wrote:
At an local EAA fly-in in Oct. '95 Steve Barnard
(The gentleman that produces the fast build wing kits) was sporting his
new wing tips and wing root fairings that he was developing. They looked
great and he said that they seemed to aid the stability in rough air.
Has anyone heard of any more progress on this or know of the
availability?
Talked to Steve Barnard recently who is done with the modifications, but is
awaiting good weather and finishing up the engine swap in his a/c to do some
systematic testing of his tips and fairings. Steve is definitely the
figure-oriented engineer who wants to get hard data with and w/o the mods.
I am sure he will have more info after he is finished with his tests.
rich
=======================================================================
Rich Klee 4564 Chicago Ave.
rich_klee(at)ccm.fm.intel.com Fair Oaks, CA 95628
(916) 863-1927 (will accept faxes)
=======================================================================
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Michael A. Hartmann" <hartmann(at)sound.net> |
Subject: | Re: Problems - Duckworks Landing Light Installation |
>I bought the landing light kit that Van offers (Duckworks Landing Light) and
>I'm having some frustation with the installation ...
I installed one of the Duckworks lights in each of my wings (RV6A) without any
problems. Point by point:
1. I don't think it is particularly crucial that the mounting surface of the
wing ribs be perfectly flat. I suppose you could shim to avoid the rib's
stiffening ring, but I didn't, and everything fit fine. The mounting plates
deform slightly at the tabs which probably helps lock the plate in place to
maintain it's adjustment. I was careful not to drill a hole in the crease of
the stiffening ring indentation.
2. I had no difficulty with the size of the "bone-shaped" pieces, they fit
my cutouts and lenses perfectly with plenty of room for the nutplates.
3. My kit came with some foam-like gasket material to seal the lenses, but I
didn't use it so as to get a better fit of the lens to skin. You could seal
the installation with RTV using wax on the lens until the RTV cured to make it
easily removable if you wanted. My wings are well enough ventilated that I'm
not too concerned about getting a little water in them.
In short, my experience with the Duckworks lights has been that they are
consistent with my impression of the rest of the RV. Excellent value for the
money spent, perform their function without unwanted frills or weight, and come
with instructions that are complete enough to get the job done, but without so
much detail that building gets boring. I'm very happy with both the lights
and the RV kit so far.
Mike Hartmann
hartmann(at)sound.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Re: Problems - Duckworks Landing Light Installation |
As I recall the landing light bracket rides on the bump on at least one
rib. Which works fine, only problem is if the nutplate ends up on or
too close to this bump. I checked this before installing it -- I think
I had to relocate one nut-plate a little bit. But if the nutplate is on
the male side of the bump you could just rivet on a plate that
would span the bump...
Personally I feel that Don's instructions are very good. There are some
things that I would do differently (actually I did "customize" my
installation a bit), but I think his kit is simple and inexpensive and
didn't take much time to install.
Randall
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com |
Subject: | Re: Archive Search |
>Just a quick thought;
>
>Would you like to see the RV archives in print as sought of a "best of the
>internet" book.
>
>I really have not put much thought into the details of such a project, but if
>their was interest, it might be worth considering.
>
>Andy Gold
>Easy Publishing
>
>(I do the 14 Years of the RV-Ator Book)
>
I would much rather have a searchable electronic copy.
Ross Mickey Phone: 541-342-1892
2300 Oakmont Way #205 Fax: 541-342-5492
Eugene, Oregon 97401 email: rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
>
>>Gil Alexander
>>gil(at)rassp.hac.com
>>RV6A, #20701 ... re-making fwd. aft turtle deck skin.
>
>What happened to your turtle deck skin? Care to save us from the same
>mistake? (grin)
>-- Ed Bundy
OK .... I'll admit to my screw-ups. I was %^$@#*& with myself! .... :^(
I had one major (but fixable) screw-up, by overcutting the
plexiglas at the rear for the curve of the "window" over baggage
compartment. I eyeballed the intial trim cut, and ended up "cutting off
the corner" from my roughly trimmed fwd. aft decking skin!! To fix it, I'm
going to make a new aft decking skin, using the old one as a template
(luckily it wasn't dimpled yet), but I will put a little more gentle curve
into it! (I was only off 1/2 inch!)
Moral is: measure twice (or more), cut once!
In retrospect, I was too eager to get the initial trimming out of
the way to get down to the serious final trimming ....
The good news is that the aft turtledeck skin fits very well
against the canopy when the forward sides are pulled in. I now just have
final trimming needed on the forward curves of the plexiglas so less
pressure will be needed to pull in the sides, and the replacement
turtledeck skin can now have it's final curve defined and finished.
Gil A. ..... picking up replacement skin on Thur. night (48 x 72 x 0.025)
- cheaper than a new canopy!
PS ... Is anyone allowing for any sort of sealing/weatherstripping at the
edges where the plexiglas is pop riveted to the skins/roll over structure??
(RTV?, foam tape? ....)
PPS ... I'm still %^$@#*& with myself!!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | RUSS_NICHOLS(at)fire.ca.gov (RUSS NICHOLS) |
Subject: | Re: riveting hs411 bracket & bearing |
This is a Mime message, which your current mail reader
may not understand. Parts of the message will appear as
text. To process the rest, you will have to use a Mime
compatible mail reader. Contact your vendor for details.
--IMA.Boundary.821829243
Jerry,
I went to a slightly longer rivet as well. I've had to alter the rivet
length in a number of places. If you're sure you have the correct parts,
correct position, etc., I wouldn't worry about using a slightly different
rivet length. A big difference, however, probably indicates some sort of
problem.
Good luck!
Russ Nichols
russ_nichols(at)fire.ca.gov
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: RV-List: riveting hs411 bracket & bearing
Date: 1/16/96 3:31 AM
I just started building the rv6 epennage kit. When I got to the hs411
bracket and bearing, the plans call for 6 470 ad 4-5 rivets. I cannot
get a proper shophead without going to a longer rivet. Has anyone else
run into this problem or did I do something wrong. thanks in advance.
Jerry Forrest
--IMA.Boundary.821829243--
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Auto engines & their lawyers |
From: | "Earl Brabandt" <cwbraban(at)ichips.intel.com> |
> But with the limited market (what 1,000 engines per year,
> maybe 2,000), where do you think their prices would be? Yep, just like
> Lycoming; perhaps even higher since all the testing they could do could not
> ever compare with those eons of experience gained by Lycoming.
Well we may find out--at least if Toyota ever markets the aircraft
engine that they're rumored to be testing!
Cal
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | walsh(at)cpeedy.ENET.dec.com |
Subject: | Lycoming engine costs |
Avweb has an interview with the President of Lycoming. In it, he candidly
discusses the number of lawsuits ongoing at any time and the $$ cost /lawsuit.
I remember estimating that the approximate legal cost/engine was something
like $5k, assuming they don't lose and have to pay a big judgement. I don't
think Lycoming has insurance againt lawsuits, just the results. In other
words, if they lose and get wacked for $1,000,000,000, they may have insurance
to cover the loss. However, they still have to pay to defend it themselves.
I doubt they lose very often but at $300k/suit, you don't need to lose very
often to have a big problem.
He also indicated that Lycoming is profitable and that the parent company
is quite happy as long as they stay that way. Layoffs continue as Lycoming
essentially outsources anything they can. There will be virtually no
investment in the foreseeable future.
Also, the 18 year liability limit is great for airframe manufacturers but
marginally useless to the engine companies, since most all engines have been
built or rebuilt within the last 18 years.
It is a very interesting interview and there is also an interview with the
president of TCM. If you have access to the www, you should "sign up" for
Avweb. http://www.avweb.com/ it's free and I have no relation other than
a reader.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | crazer(at)midwest.net (Chester Razer) |
Recently had trouble locating #4-40 Stainless, phillips head, countersunk
screws for attaching wing tips. Dick Slavens who follows the list provided
me with the following:
On the "stainless screws" for your wing tips, have you looked in the D&D
Aircraft Supply Catalog. I picked up a current D&D
catalog at Oshkosh, if you send me the details I'll look it up for you. or
give them a call at 800-468-8000. Examples: Machine Screw, Phillips, 100
degree F. H., MS24693-C, Stainless (old AN507C), 4-40 X (1/4 or 3/8 or 1/2 or
5/8 or 3/4), $2.00 for 25, $3.35 for 50, or $6.40 for 100, etc.
This company specializes in Stainless fasteners, thought you guys on the
net might be interested in the address, I had trouble finding stainless
screws that small. I like stainless hardware and I want my wing tips
removable.
Chet Razer
crazer(at)midwest.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Landing lights - long posting |
(Note: you may have to be familiar with the Duckwork's landing light kit
for all of my comments to make sense.)
>From previous posts:
> > I bought the landing light kit that Van offers (Duckworks Landing Light) and
> > I'm having some frustation with the installation because of the poor
> > instructions/engineering of the kit.
>
> > The design and instructions assume that the rib
> > web in the mounting position is flat, which is not the case with my RV4
> > ribs, having been formed with stiffening rings and a vertical aligned
> > stiffening indentation near the nose of the ribs.
>
> Between which ribs are you mounting the light, Jack? I mounted mine
> between the outermost ribs in my -6 and didn't have this problem. I
> think (but it's difficult to recall), that because the outer rib faces
> flange in (backwards from the rest) the stiffening rings and indentation
> were pointed away from the brackets on both ribs. At any rate, I didn't
> have any interference. I don't know--are any of your ribs mounted
> backwards with the flange pointed the wrong direction, ie., did you use
> the rib from the opposite wing?
>
I looked at the Duckwork's landing light kit that another builder had
purchased when I was trying to decide what to do. I noticed the same
problem the first poster ran into -- the stiffening rings get in the
way of tightening down the light. I believe I have my ribs in correctly,
the stiffening rings always go "into" the rib and the outer rib has the
flanges pointed towards the root of the wing while the inboard ribs (except
the inmost 4 or 5) all point toward the wingtip. This would mean that
the stiffening rings get in the way.
>
> > 2. The next problem I ran into was with the lense mounting. There are these
> > little bone shaped pieces of that you cutout of AL, using a supplied
> > template, which go on the top and bottom of the plexiglass lense.
> > Nut-plates are to be installed on these bone shaped pieces. After drilling
> > the screw holes per the supplied template, I discovered bone shaped pieces
> > are too short to install the nutplates.
>
> What do you mean my too short? Granted, it was difficult to reach
> the threads on the nutpalates with the screws supplied until the
> lens was installed because it wasn't yet "sucked-up" tight. I
> just used a longer screw temporarily to bring the lens up tight,
> then replaced it with the shorter, more appropriate length screws
> supplied.
>
Again, I believe the first poster is correct. I believe he is referring to
riveting the platenut to the "bone shaped" piece. The outermost rivet will
be very close to or perhaps even off the bone shaped piece. The easy fix
to this is just to lengthen the bone shaped piece. This is a pretty minor
issue and easy to fix.
(Deleted third point and response.)
AFter reading some messages about people making their own lenses and looking
at Don's kit, I decided to make my own. I purchased a pair of driving
lights from a local auto supply place (Schuck's). They are exactly the same
ones that Don uses and cost $20 for the pair. I bought a hunk of .100
acrylic from EAGLE hardware for $5 which is enough for 3 lenses. I had extra
platenuts and aluminum already so these items were not a problem. I then
got a book from the library and found out that heating the acrylic to
around 300-325 degrees makes it pliable but too much so. I heated the
acryllic in our oven and then quickly wrapped it over the leading edge of
my fuel tank. The side edges curl up when you do this so you have to file
or sand them down to get a good fit. I may still try to make some more
lense covers using something for a female part of the mold while continuing
to use my fuel tank for the male part. Or I may see if Don is willing to
sell just his lense covers.
I designed mine somewhat differently to alleviate the problem of the rib
stiffeners getting in the way. I decided to forgo any left/right adjust-
ment and just keep the up and down adjustment. This allowed me to use
a hole just big enough for the screw in the bottom and a slot in the
top which allows for the adjustment. I then used some of my taperings
from 1/8 inch main spar stiffeners to make some offset blocks that go
between the light and the rib. I used the longest AN426 rivets I had
to connect both the offset block and the platenut to the rib. Since I
used a slot in the mount, I only needed one mounting point at the top
rather than the two Don has. I also bought some stainless steel hardware
at EAGLE to do the mounting.
_______________
/ ____ |
/ -- -- |
| |__ ---- __| | Curved slot for
| | adjustment
\ |
\ |
\ |
\ |
\ __ |
\ |__| | Fixed screw.
\ | (Light rotates around
\_________| this screw)
Mounting plate - end view
I also decided to mount my light somewhat differently. Don uses a large
washer on both sides of the light. A screw goes through the washer and
into a platenut on the mounting plate. I used a rectangular piece of
.040 aluminum and a dimpled #8 screw (and associated countersunk nut-
plate). I painted everything black so that when you look through my lense
cover, all you see is a neat rectangular reflector. To maintain alignment
of these rectangular hold downs, I used AN426 rivets near both ends.
These rivets go into dimpled holes in the mounting plate. To hold the
rivets in place, I made a special rivet set out of two small blocks of
aluminum. I clamped the two pieces togehter and then drilled a #40 hole
at the intersection that was about 1/8 inch shorter than the rivet. I
countersunk the hole a bit to allow room for the rivet to expand. I then
put the rivet in place and backriveted using this custom fixture and a
hammer! The rivet nicely expands into the counter sink and stays fairly
close to its original size for the part stuck in the fixture. Unclamp
the fixture and remove both haves from the rivet. If you don't use a
two part fixture, the rivet will expand in the #40 hole and you won't
get the fixture off.
______________ _____________
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| ^ | | O |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
|______/ \_____| |______|______|
.040 coutersunk hole
Now, all this took some time and some running around for parts, BUT I HAD
FUN DOING IT, and I like the results.
IMHO, Don's kit is a good value. His lenses are probably nicer than mine
and are thicker. He includes all the parts (there are more than you might
first think) and instructions. If you don't feel like doing this kind of
stuff on your own, I would still recommend his kit. Assuming I didn't
screw up on my outer two ribs, I still think there is a problem with the
stiffening rings in the way. I suspect you could just tighten it down and
it would work fine.
Bottom line: Don's kit will save you a bunch of work and time.
P.S. To give you an additional idea of where I'm coming from, I built my
own spars and didn't buy the pre-punched skins which were an option
when I got my wing kit. Acutally, I have a one piece top skin. I am
trying to build as cheaply as possible and would rather spend the
extra time.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Mark D Hiatt" <OttoPilot_MSN(at)msn.com> |
Subject: | another plane born |
Congratulations, Ken! As someone who just got their info kit, plans, catalog
and video (plus subscription to the newsletter), this is really encouraging!
You actually can take all of those pages (and all of those dollars) and turn
them into an airplane, huh? You must still be giddy! My phosphoric hat
is off, to you. Congratulations, again!
Mark D Hiatt
OttoPilot_MSN
Aviation Forum Manager,
The Microsoft Network
----------
From: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com on behalf of Ken Gray
Sent: Monday, January 15, 1996 6:57 AM
Subject: RV-List: another plane born
The FAA showed up on 1/11 and issued my temporary airworthy ticket. They
checked for the proper placards, data plate and the log books. I received a
VFR day only with a 50 mile radius and 25 hour flight time.
My plane is a RV-6 SN: 23069, N69KG, with O320-E2D and a Warnke prop.
The first flight was at 8:18 am on 1/12 and it was great!!
After 2 years, 2 months and 2100 hours this was great!
Insurance was provided by National at a cost of $1027 per year for $40,000
full
coverage. With a 10 hour and 10 landing up front no coverage. I already have
10 hours in the plane the last three days.
Ken Gray
Bryan, Tx.
N69KG - 10 hours TT
PS: Keep on building, it is worth the time, when you fly it!!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Francis S. Smidler" <102776.1474(at)compuserve.com> |
Robert,
I am building in the basement and I'm using a Sears air compressor that is not
too bad for noise. The only time I really use it is when I'm bucking rivets so
the noise from the air compressor is minor compared to the riveting. The only
rule in my house is that I have to stop riveting at 9:00pm so the kids can go to
bed because of school in the morning. After 9:00pm I go into quite mode and
read plans, instructions, mark rivet holes, sit with the control stick between
my legs and make funny noises, etc. The family doesn't like the noise but it's
only maybe 3 or 4 days a month at most.
Good luck
Frank Smidler
RV-6 fuselage in jig (2 weeks from riveting again)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | ROBERT BUSICK <rbusick(at)nmsu.edu> |
Subject: | Re: Need Advice For Drilling Wing Ribs For Wires |
Chet
What type of conduit do you use and where did you get it. I've
been looking for 1/2" polypropolene tubing and have been unable to find
it. If I use Vans I have to redrill the holes in the ribs, his conduit
is 7/8" I think.
Thanks
Bob Busick
RV-6
On Mon, 15 Jan 1996, Chester Razer wrote:
>
> I placed my wiring conduit at the UPPER FRONT EDGE of the main ribs. I
> placed them here so they would not interfere with the inspection hole area.
> As far as bucking the top skin rivets, if you carefully locate and drill
> the conduit holes you can push it in from the root rib or the tip rib with
> no problems after all the skins are on and the wing is completed. Doing it
> this way allows you to replace the conduit from the wing tip if you ever
> need to. The only disadvantage is you cannot place a bead of RTV around
> each rib hole to protect the couduit. I opted to be able to replace the
> conduit or completely remove it if I wanted to.
>
> Chet Razer
> crazer(at)midwest.net
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Christopher Krieg" <christopher_krieg(at)aoce.austin.apple.com> |
>turbine plus and minuses deleted
Has anyone else wondered why Van's was advertising a job posting for someone
with turbine technical experience?
Turbines are nice to operate. Having flown a Turbine Glasair III, I can tell
you that It is easy to start. It is also very smooth and quiet in flight. This
GIII had a 350 shp turbine and it was a rocket. Off the ground before the
throttle hit 70% power.
chris
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Earl Brabandt" <cwbraban(at)ichips.intel.com> |
Chester Razer posts:
> Recently had trouble locating #4-40 Stainless, phillips head, countersunk
> screws for attaching wing tips.
I bought 100 SS #6 screws from Aircraft Spruce and used most of 'em.
The price break comes at 100. Because I had precious little skin
overlap, I used single leg (two rivet) nutplates. That way, the
nutplates can be angled where they are riveted to the inside of the
fiberglass wingtip flange to improve the edge distance on the rivets
and srews slightly. At least it improves the skin edge distance on
the screws and the rivet edge distance on the fiberglass and nutplate
backing strip. You may wish to consider the resulting geometry if
you don't have much skin overhang which appears to be a common problem.
Cal
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Terence Gannon" <Terence_Gannon(at)msn.com> |
For regular followers of the RV-LIST, you'll be relieved to know that I've
finally STOPPED working on the shop, and I'm now actually working on the
airplane!!! Whew, I thought I'd never get to THIS point...let alone,
finishing the airplane.
A couple of quick questions for you old hands...
1) The taper of the HS-409 flange strip stops three inches from centre,
whereas the taper of the HS-603 spar channel continues right to center. I'm
assuming that this will leave a small gap between the flange of the HS-603 and
the HS-409, even after you finished matching the radius of the HS-603 by
filing one edge the HS-409. I'm assuming this is the way it is supposed to
be?
2) The bend between the web and the flange of the HS-603 appears a little over
90 degrees. I'm assuming that this is to match the profile of the elevator,
once it is attached, or is the bend REALLY supposed to be 90 degrees, in which
case, would you recommend straightening? George and Becki seem to caution
against bending BACK aluminum that has been bent once already.
It's great to have my hands on aluminum, finally!!
Terry in Calgary
S/N 24414
"WORKING ON Empennage!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Elon Ormsby" <Elon.Ormsby(at)quickmail.llnl.gov> |
REGARDING Auto Engines
Steve you ask:
>Don't they use robotics technology?
Lycoming does not. Continental is modernizing their plant. There are two
recent and excellent articles that you should read in "Aviation Consumer"
magazine. I will get you the issue info tomorrow. Some nc is done and some
outsourcing - but nothing to reflect the magnitude in savings that you are
wishing for.
>Will Lycoming be liable for unproved use of their engine?
Unfortunately, under the theory of "deep pockets", any financially strong
entity will be attacked. You can't prevent a law suit from being filed. Even
if you win after years of defense you will have spent $100k's in legal costs.
Why add a product that exposes the corp to further liability risk.
>I don't understand why the system works like this.
Unfortunately, when you die you become a revenue stream for the bottom-feeders
in our society AND your former loved ones (-40%). I don't know the answer
either. We were founded as a free nation defined by laws - the only
efficient way to destroy any society is by using its strengths against itself.
>My comment had nothing to do with starting a company from scratch.
I understand that now. However, I think my numbers are still reasonable for
an existing company producing only 100 items.
There are some excellent technical reasons for using liquid cooled engines
that I will post later.
Keep on squeezing,
Elon
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | david_fried(at)smtpgwy.dehavilland.ca |
Subject: | Surface mounted heat exchangers |
Many aircraft have their leading edges anti-iced by bleed air from the
engines. It is a one way trip however as the hot air is dumped
overboard.
In the 30's there were a series of float equipped racers vying for the
Schnieder Cup. These were the fastest aircraft of their time with
speeds above 400 mph, records set by them have never been broken. To
cool the large engines of these racers, the surfaces of the floats,
fuselage and wings were covered by contour fitted tubes carrying
coolant or oil. The refrigerator idea is a good one but the area would
have to be large and the required tooling wouldn't be cheap.
The issue of slightly heated air is probably more of an issue for
intake air and charge density. Wings live for smooth high speed
airflow, radiator outlets are anything but. Dynamic pressure is
calculated using the expression, q = 1/2 * rho * speed^2. Halve the
density (rho) and q is halved. Double the speed and q is quadrupled.
This is likely to be the reason for moving race car wings. As for the
exhaust, heat and occasional flames are good reasons not to expose
structure.
David Fried
DF-6 C-____
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: RV-List: Suburu/Rotary Power
Date: 15/01/96 18:09
> I have also been seriously considering some type of rotary option. Of
> major concern, of course, is keeping the thing cool. How about
> running coolant lines just beneath the leading edge skins on the
> wings? Not only would cooling be improved, but it seems that the
> aircraft would be much less susceptible to icing. Have to modify the
> fuel tanks though.
I think some biz jets do this (Canadair Challenger?) with bleed air. I
suppose one concern might be that the wing would always be running in
slightly heated, and therefore less dense, air. I know this is a concern
with race car wings; they always try to get the radiator and exhaust heat
away from the rear wing. Any knowledgable aerodynamics types have thoughts
on that?
In the refrigerator business, they use really neat aluminum heat exchangers
that are made by bonding two sheets together with a pattern of unbonded
areas that will form the refrigerant passages. Then they blow gas into
the unbonded space, expanding it into nice, round passages. If you could
find a way to do that with thin enought aluminum, and have it pop out on
one side only, you might have a very tidy heat exchange and leading edge.
Tedd McHenry
tedd(at)idacom.hp.com
Edmonton, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "B F Gibbons" <bfgibbons(at)intellinet.com> |
Subject: | Re: Archive Search |
> What's the program written in? I work on a UNIX system; if it's written
> in C I might be able to compile it for UNIX from the source files.
>
> Tedd McHenry
> tedd(at)idacom.hp.com
> Edmonton, Canada
>
>
Sorry Tedd,
If I could code C on UNIX I'd be able to make enough
money to have someone build this RV for me. It's coded for Windows
in Delphi, Borland's Object Pascal.
BFG
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "B F Gibbons" <bfgibbons(at)intellinet.com> |
Subject: | Re: Need Advice For Drilling Wing Ribs For Wires |
> Chet
> What type of conduit do you use and where did you get it. I've
> been looking for 1/2" polypropolene tubing and have been unable to find
> it. If I use Vans I have to redrill the holes in the ribs, his conduit
> is 7/8" I think.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bob Busick
> RV-6
>
Bob, I found 1/2" polypropolene tubing at National Home Center.
Places like Lowe's, Home Depot, etc. should also have it.
BFGibbons
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Auto engines & their lawyers |
>Well we may find out--at least if Toyota ever markets the aircraft
>engine that they're rumored to be testing!
>
>
I sure hope your right, even though it's too late for me. Engine buying time
is now and I can't put it off any longer. But either way, any rumors about
their projected prices, power ratings and availability dates?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Richard Chandler" <mauser(at)Claris.COM> |
Frank Smidler says:
> After 9:00pm I go into quiet mode and read plans, instructions, mark
> rivet holes, sit with the control stick between my legs and make
> funny noises, etc. The family doesn't like the noise but it's only
> maybe 3 or 4 days a month at most.
You need to learn how to make better Funny Noises, then maybe they won't mind
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: | crazer(at)midwest.net (Chester Razer) |
Subject: | Re: Need Advice For Drilling Wing Ribs For Wires |
Bob, I finally decided to use some locally available 5/8" o.d. #4120 cpvc.
There is no reason or rhyme to the 4120 cpvc, it was the only stuff
available. I just went out to the garage and took a close look at it and
it's supposed to maintain 100 psi at 180 degrees F. I don't think that
matters either. My recollections of earlier postings regarding the use of
conduit was that 1/2" was sufficient to carry the wiring for strobes,
position lights and landing lights. I used a large unibit to cut the holes
in ribs and then ran an edge deburring tool around the hole a few times to
slightly enlarge it. The possibility of the rib eventually rubbing through
the conduit bothered me so I maintained accurate hole aligmnent and as a
result the conduit can easily be pushed through the now closed wing from
either the tip or root end. I did "Bull Nose" the leading end so it passed
through more easily. Some builders I've talked to stated they placed their
conduit in the wing and ran a bead of RTV or silicone caulk around each
hole to prevent chaffing of the conduit and I believe another ran his
through snap plugs, this sounds like a real good idea and I may do the
right wing this way (snap plugs). My biggest problem is this is my 1st
experience at building and I really don't know what works best as based on
experience, so I try to build in a manner that facilitates ease of repair
and modifications later.
There was a message posted earlier discussing heat buildup in the conduit.
I don't have any experience here either but my instincts tell me that high
quality aircraft wiring (low resistance) under normal working loads will
not present a heat buildup problem. If it had. someone would have written
about it by now. If you noticed, George and Beckie used plastic conduit in
their 2nd RV, (check out their wing video).
Hope this message is not to long and is of some help
Chet Razer
crazer(at)midwest.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Francis S. Smidler" <102776.1474(at)compuserve.com> |
Subject: | Re: Need Advice For Drilling Wing Ribs For Wires |
>From Chet Razer
>Since we are on the subject, I purchased the light weight nylon
>wiring conduit from Vans (Part DUCT NT5/8-50) but didn't use it because of
>installation problems. I thought the ridges in the tubing would hold it in
>place but if you drill the holes undersize (the size of the "valley") you
>can not thread the tubing through it. The only way to install it is to
>drill holes to the outer dimension and then secure the tubing with???
I used the convoluted tubes in my wing (bought at the hardware store locally)
and had no problem installing. I drilled the end rib holes to the minor
diameter and the rest of the ribs to the major diameter. The went right in. At
the end ribs I squeezed the tube down, pushed them into the small holes and then
let them pop back into shape. A few turns of electrical tape on the short part
sticking out from the rib and I was ready to go on. The convoluted wiring tube
is made for routing wire through holes in metal, they don't need RTV at each rib
to prevent chaffing in my opinion.
My location was at the front top part of the main rib. I riveted the top skin
on first, then routed the tubing.
Frank Smidler
RV-6 fuselage in jig.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Richard Chandler" <mauser(at)Claris.COM> |
Subject: | Re: Experimental Limitations |
WStucklen(at)aol.com Says:
> 8. All flight maneuvers will be limited to the maneuvers performed
> during the flight test period. These maneuvers are recorded in
> the airplane records.
Does this mean you have to do a full suite of Aerobatic maneuvers during your
40 hours if you wanna fly them in the future?
--
"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!"
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Problems - Duckworks Landing Light Installation |
I've put two sets of these things in, and another next week, I sure don't
recall the problems you write about. I got a couple strips of foam sealant
tape with my kits to stop water seepage.
Putting the rivets that hold the nutplates that hold the light mount on a
stiffening ridge wouldn't be a problem, would it?
Don is always most helpful, so maybe a call to him, or a note, would help!
I'll help, if I can.
Rgds,
Mark
mlfred(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Elevator skin damage |
Is it on the top or on the bottom? Such a question enters my mind when I
screw up!
I don't see any way to fix it, but it might be hidden with bondo, which could
fall off because of flexing of the skin. If you're worried, skins are cheap.
Tom's advice sounds good.
Rgds,
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Graham Taylor <gmt(at)perth.DIALix.oz.au> |
Subject: | Re: Problems - Duckworks Landing Light Installation |
On Tue, 16 Jan 1996, Jack Gageby wrote:
> I bought the landing light kit that Van offers (Duckworks Landing Light) and
> I'm having some frustation with the installation because of the poor
> instructions/engineering of the kit. This message is to warn you, of the
> rv-list, of the deficiencies of this landing light kit.
...SNIP...
> Anyone else have any experience with the Duckworks Landing Light Kit?
>
I got my kit 6 months ago.
1. No problem with fitting the mount plate to the ribs of my 6A.
2. The 3 nut plates went into the 2 retaining strips as per template.
3. The kit contained 2 feet of adhesive foam strip to use as a moisture
seal betweem the plexi-glass lens and the wing skin. Getting a good fit
between the skin and the lens was the hardest job, but the judicious use
of heat helped (but be careful).
I thought i'd be able to find a cheap spotlight to make a second one
myself, but Down Under there is no such thing as a cheap spotlight. I've
ordered a second kit for the other wing. At $69 its a good deal. Have
you priced the RMD landing light kits as an option? I have no problems
with the installation. The instructions run to 5 pages and are step by
step, with nothing to have to figure out. Perhaps Jack got an earlier
kit.
Graham Taylor, (engine in, cowls on, starting to look like an aeroplane)
Australia.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Graham Taylor <gmt(at)perth.DIALix.oz.au> |
On Tue, 16 Jan 1996, Gil Alexander wrote:
> >
> >>Gil Alexander
> >>gil(at)rassp.hac.com
> >>RV6A, #20701 ... re-making fwd. aft turtle deck skin.
> >
> >What happened to your turtle deck skin? Care to save us from the same
> >mistake? (grin)
> >-- Ed Bundy
Made a similar mistake myself. DO NOT trim the skin aft of the canopy as
much as the plans suggest UNTIL you fit the canopy. I was 1/2" short -
a small amount, a large piece of scrape aluminium !!
Graham Taylor gmt(at)perth.DIALix.oz.au
119 Darley Circle, Bullcreek, WA 6149, AUSTRALIA
Phone (619) 332 4094 Fax (619) 310 6048
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Graham Taylor <gmt(at)perth.DIALix.oz.au> |
Subject: | Re: Turbine Power |
On 16 Jan 1996, Christopher Krieg wrote:
>
> Has anyone else wondered why Van's was advertising a job posting for someone
> with turbine technical experience?
>
I think someone at Vans has a wry sense of humor.
Graham Taylor
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "B F Gibbons" <bfgibbons(at)intellinet.com> |
After reading the thread on Don's landing light kit...
Has anyone installed Steve's (BAC) light? I've called and asked for
some information but haven't received it yet. Any experience with
this leading edge kit?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | WStucklen(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Landing lights - long posting |
>
>P.S. To give you an additional idea of where I'm coming from, I built my
> own spars and didn't buy the pre-punched skins which were an option
> when I got my wing kit. Acutally, I have a one piece top skin. I am
> trying to build as cheaply as possible and would rather spend the
> extra time.
>
>
UhOh, a one piece top skin on the wing. That sounds likea major change from
Van's design. Have you talked to them about what this will do to wing
stiffness? And/or the resulting changes in stresses elswhere in the aircraft?
I think I remember readig here or somewhere else about an accident involving
a wood airplane with plywood skins that crashed because the builder used a
single thickness skin in place of the two piece, different thickness skins,
of the original design.
Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
wstucklen(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | WStucklen(at)aol.com |
>Gil A. ..... picking up replacement skin on Thur. night (48 x 72 x 0.025)
> - cheaper than a new canopy!
>
>PS ... Is anyone allowing for any sort of sealing/weatherstripping at the
>edges where the plexiglas is pop riveted to the skins/roll over structure??
>(RTV?, foam tape? ....)
>
>PPS ... I'm still %^$@#*& with myself!!
>
Use Proseal. It makes a very nice bond to the skin and plexiglass, and you
can still remove the plixiglass at a later date if you have to. I also used
flathead #6 SS screws to mount the plexiglass. There's less chance of
cracking the plexi with the screws than the pop rivits.
Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
wstucklen(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | WStucklen(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Experimental Limitations |
>
>WStucklen(at)aol.com Says:
>> 8. All flight maneuvers will be limited to the maneuvers performed
>> during the flight test period. These maneuvers are recorded in
>> the airplane records.
>
>Does this mean you have to do a full suite of Aerobatic maneuvers during
your
>
>40 hours if you wanna fly them in the future?
>
>
>
Yes, but another method that somebody else posted, is to take you aircraft
out of the certified mode, back into the test mode, use the original test
area, and continue the testing process. (see past postings for details.)
After testing is completed, and the proper logbook entries are made, you put
the aircraft back into the certified mode again.
Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
wstucklen(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
>
> In retrospect, I was too eager to get the initial trimming out of
> the way to get down to the serious final trimming ....
>
I can't tell you how many times this sort of thing has bit me. It seems
every time I get in a hurry I end up doing something stupid. The lesson I
have learned is; don't get in a hurry. A builder can always cut off more
material, but it's difficult to put it back. The feeling of wanting to get
results can sneak up on a builder, and before you know it you have screwed
up a part. None of the mistakes have been unfixable, but they have cost
some extra $$. I have learned to stop working when ever I start to say
something like "...almost done..." or "...better get this finished before
dinner/work/10 O-clock/ect...". Sometimes all it takes is a few minutes
to step back and think about what I'm doing. It saves time in the long
run.
I never work when I'm, A. tired, B. hungry, (and most of all) C. after
drinking. I visited a builder at one point to look at his project.
Sitting on the workbench was a bottle of beer (half empty) ((or is that
half full?)). It showed in his work.
We all make little mistakes that will stay with the plane for it's
lifetime. Only the builder will notice them, but I like to feel good
about my work, just for my own satisfaction. The trick is to minimize
the mistakes. It seems that we learn from doing, if so my next RV will
be a show-stopper.
Chris -Drilling the single piece main skin on the left wing.
cruble(at)cisco.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Single piece top skin |
Fred Stucklen wrote:
> UhOh, a one piece top skin on the wing. That sounds likea major change from
> Van's design. Have you talked to them about what this will do to wing
> stiffness? And/or the resulting changes in stresses elswhere in the aircraft?
> I think I remember readig here or somewhere else about an accident involving
> a wood airplane with plywood skins that crashed because the builder used a
> single thickness skin in place of the two piece, different thickness skins,
> of the original design.
>
> Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
> wstucklen(at)aol.com
>
The single piece top skin was (is?) an option directly from Van's Aircraft.
It replaces the inboard .032 and outboard .025 with a single piece .032.
Thus, the plane is actually stronger, but a little bit heavier. I believe
posts in the past have indicated an additional 2 pounds per side. This
additional weight is pretty well right on the cg so it doesn't affect
loading considerations, just useful load. I generally do all the lightning
holes that I am allowed (for instance, the aileron spar) to try to make
up for some of the extra weight.
Doug Medema RV-6A working on the ailerons
dougm@physio-control.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
Subject: | Re: one piece wing skin |
The 'one piece' wing skin is OK as lone as you use the .032
(same as the inboard skin on a two piece skin wing).
You just have a little extra weight as the outboard skin is
normally .025. Van has approved this but he does not think
you need to use the one piece as it adds weight.
Most people do it to avoid the "unsightly" lap joint, which
is a nit IMHO.
Herman
>
>
> >
> >P.S. To give you an additional idea of where I'm coming from, I built my
> > own spars and didn't buy the pre-punched skins which were an option
> > when I got my wing kit. Acutally, I have a one piece top skin. I am
> > trying to build as cheaply as possible and would rather spend the
> > extra time.
> >
> >
>
> UhOh, a one piece top skin on the wing. That sounds likea major change from
> Van's design. Have you talked to them about what this will do to wing
> stiffness? And/or the resulting changes in stresses elswhere in the aircraft?
> I think I remember readig here or somewhere else about an accident involving
> a wood airplane with plywood skins that crashed because the builder used a
> single thickness skin in place of the two piece, different thickness skins,
> of the original design.
>
> Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
> wstucklen(at)aol.com
>
Herman Dierks, Dept. E54S, AWSD, Austin, Texas
mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Re: Turbine Power |
> Date: 16 Jan 1996 11:17:30 -0600
> From: "Christopher Krieg" <aoce.austin.apple.com!christopher_krieg(at)matronics.com>
> Subject: Re(2): RV-List: Turbine Power
> To: "rv-list(at)matronics.com"
>
> Has anyone else wondered why Van's was advertising a job posting for someone
> with turbine technical experience?
It's a joke.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
Subject: | Re: Single piece top skin |
And, the wings look so much better without that seam in the middle.
Chris
> Fred Stucklen wrote:
>
> > UhOh, a one piece top skin on the wing. That sounds likea major change from
> > Van's design. Have you talked to them about what this will do to wing
> > stiffness? And/or the resulting changes in stresses elswhere in the aircraft?
> > I think I remember readig here or somewhere else about an accident involving
> > a wood airplane with plywood skins that crashed because the builder used a
> > single thickness skin in place of the two piece, different thickness skins,
> > of the original design.
> >
> > Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
> > wstucklen(at)aol.com
> >
> The single piece top skin was (is?) an option directly from Van's Aircraft.
> It replaces the inboard .032 and outboard .025 with a single piece .032.
> Thus, the plane is actually stronger, but a little bit heavier. I believe
> posts in the past have indicated an additional 2 pounds per side. This
> additional weight is pretty well right on the cg so it doesn't affect
> loading considerations, just useful load. I generally do all the lightning
> holes that I am allowed (for instance, the aileron spar) to try to make
> up for some of the extra weight.
>
> Doug Medema RV-6A working on the ailerons
> dougm@physio-control.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net> |
Didn't know what to call this post. Wanted something that would attract
attention 'cause I think this company has some "neat stuff" They have all
kinds of different plastic items: containers, tubing, valves, fittings, flat
stock, spray bottles, squeeze bottles, etc.
The discussion on plastic wiring conduit reminded me of a catalog I have
from a plastics company: United States Plastics 1-800-537-9724.
One of the most usefull items that they stock is UHMW Polyetheylene tape
with an adhesive backing that is .010" thick. You can get it in widths of
1/4" to a maximum of 17". The rolls are 54 feet long. I bought the 5" x
54' for $57.00. I used this material (cut to the appropriate size) for the
leading edge of the flaps instead of using stainless steel tape. I also
used a strip about an inch wide on the contact surface on the bottom of the
top wing skin. That way you have UHMW rubbing on itself with a total
thickness of .020". The material is almost transparent and is barely
noticable on my white flaps. I've also used this material anywhwere there
is a chance of rubbing. I built my RV-6 tilt up canopy so the side skins
overlap the fuselage. I put a stip of the UHMW on the inside of the canopy
side skins to help prevent chafing on the fuselage. I molded a fiberglass
lip on the rear of my canopy that overlaps the roll bar and use the UHMW on
the bottom of the lip to help prevent rubbing on the rear glass. I used it
on the engine mount anywhere there was a chance of something rubbing the
paint off the mount: vertical bottom cowl hinge pin, scat tubing, etc. I put
stips around gear leg fairings to help prevent rubbing and it could be used
on the two piece gear leg fairings at the joint on both pieces to prevent
rubbing of the paint.
Another idea that you might find useful. I got this idea from Andy Bajc
from Lincoln, Nebr. He built a RV-4 that won, I believe, "best metal"
airplane at Sun & Fun several years ago. He put a plastic "cable cover"
over his rudder cables. This material comes in 6 foot lengths, $1.00/piece
(from old invoice) and is slit the full length. It snaps over the cable.
When you use this you eliminate possible cable wear on the snap-in busings
and therefor will probably never have to replace them. It also makes things
quieter as you eliminate the "sawing" noise echoing in the tail cone. I got
this cablecover from: West Marine, 1-800-538-0775 (order), 1-800-262-8042
(customer service)
Bob Skinner RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | JIM SCHMIDT <JIM.SCHMIDT(at)mail.mei.com> |
Subject: | Problems - Duckworks Landing Light Installation |
-Reply
Yes I put them in my Rv6 and had none of the
problems you mentioned. There is some rubber
tape suppplied as seals that should be
adequate.
>>> Jack Gageby
01/16/96 08:29am >>>
I bought the landing light kit that Van
offers (Duckworks Landing Light) and
I'm having some frustation with the
installation because of the poor
instructions/engineering of the kit. This
message is to warn you, of the rv-list, of
the deficiencies of this landing light kit.
1. The light assembly brackets mount between
the outer two wing ribs close to the nose of
those ribs. The design and instructions
assume that the rib web in the mounting
position is flat, which is not the case with
my RV4 ribs, having been formed with
stiffening rings and a vertical aligned
stiffening indentation near the nose of the
ribs. When using the provided template for
drilling the mounting holes in the ribs, one
of the holes was in a crease of this
stiffening indentation. This was my first
disappointment with this kit. The
work-around (achieving a flat surface to
mount to) consumed a lot of time.
2. The next problem I ran into was with the
lense mounting. There are these little bone
shaped pieces of that you cutout of AL,
using a supplied template, which go on the
top and bottom of the plexiglass lense.
Nut-plates are to be installed on these bone
shaped pieces. After drilling the screw
holes per the supplied template, I
discovered bone shaped pieces are too short
to install the nutplates.
3. Finally, my last complaint, is that with
this kit there is no weather seal to prevent
rain from entering between the plexiglass
lense and the wing skin. So, I guess I
should some put drain holes somewhere in the
bottom of the wing to get rid of any water
that might collect. This in not covered in
the kit instructions.
Anyone else have any experience with the
Duckworks Landing Light Kit?
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | rcrothers(at)rcrothers.seanet.com (Randy Crothers) |
Subject: | Re: Auto engines & their lawyers |
>
>>Well we may find out--at least if Toyota ever markets the aircraft
>>engine that they're rumored to be testing!
>>
>>
>
>I sure hope your right, even though it's too late for me. Engine buying time
>is now and I can't put it off any longer. But either way, any rumors about
>their projected prices, power ratings and availability dates?
NEW
Stratus in Seattle will begin a production version of 160HP Subaru in March.
Price with NW Aero reduction drive will be very near 10K. NSI is on a
similar schedule with considerably higher prices for a firewall forward
package. NSI will be mailing out a catalog soon that will answer many
questions. I'm not sure if they will sell just an engine or just a reduction
drive. BTW, I understand the NSI EA81 engine is now certified in Europe
(Germany?) but ther are no plans to certify here due to liability exposure.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Re: Landing lights - long posting |
> I heated the
> acryllic in our oven and then quickly wrapped it over the leading edge of
> my fuel tank. The side edges curl up when you do this so you have to file
> or sand them down to get a good fit. I may still try to make some more
> lense covers using something for a female part of the mold while continuing
> to use my fuel tank for the male part. Or I may see if Don is willing to
> sell just his lense covers.
Yes he will sell them seperately (I think), but you'll end up with the
same thing. What he does is ship the lens covers about 1" or more wider
than their final shape, and it's up to you to trim off the excess,
which includes the "curled up" part.
I agree it wouldn't be difficult to make your own landing light
set-up. But for the price I think the time you save in fabricating the
mounting plate, making a lens, figuring out the shapes and sizes of
everything, and running around buying the lights and various screws,
nut plates, etc., I think it was well worth it.
As for the stiffening rings -- what's wrong with having the flange of
the mounting plate ride on top of them? As I recall this is the way
it's designed and works fine. Only thing you have to watch out for is
that the nutplates clear the stiffening ring, but that only involves
relocating a minor amount at most.
BTW don's e-mail address is don_wentz(at)ccm.hf.intel.com.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Re: Landing lights - long posting |
> UhOh, a one piece top skin on the wing. That sounds likea major change from
> Van's design. Have you talked to them about what this will do to wing
> stiffness? And/or the resulting changes in stresses elswhere in the aircraft?
> I think I remember readig here or somewhere else about an accident involving
> a wood airplane with plywood skins that crashed because the builder used a
> single thickness skin in place of the two piece, different thickness skins,
> of the original design.
>
> Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
> wstucklen(at)aol.com
>
I bought my single-piece top skins from Van's.
Randall
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | crazer(at)midwest.net (Chester Razer) |
Subject: | Tip for Wing Builders |
Tried this today and thought I'd pass it on to wing builders. When you are
ready to drill your tank and outboard leading edge skins, instead of using
hex nuts to secure the rib tips on the threaded rod, use some 1" long
plastic tubing cut longitudinaly. Make sure the tubing is smaller in dia.
than the threaded rod. The tubing placed on both sides of the rib holds it
secure enough that it doesn't move when fitting the skin and will move when
you have to joggle the rib in order to line up the rib with the prepunched
skin. I did my second outboard leading edge this morning and completed it
in much less time and with greater accuracy than my first wing.
Chet Razer
crazer(at)midwest.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | James Kelley <72466.1355(at)compuserve.com> |
Subject: | EAA Technical Counselor |
After seeing the message on Avemco insurance I was glad to see the price for the
insurance was not much more ($400) than I paid for a cherokee 180 with less of
a
hull value. Seeing it also raised a few questions about the EAA tech counselor
program.
(1) At what point would you want a counselor to come out an view your project?
(2) Do they sign anything to confirm their visit?
(4) How do they make reccomendations? In writing, verbal?
(3) Is there a cost for their service?
Thanks in advance!
James Kelley (Working on main spars.)
72466.1355(at)compuserve.com
Atlanta, GA
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
Subject: | Re: Landing lights - Did them myself |
To whomever wrote this posting:
I appreciate your comments at the end. To be sure, my kit is NOT the
most elegant (from an appearance standpoint) that could be built. My
goal was value and ease of installation, which most builders appreciate.
The amount of effort you went to MOST builders would happily trade for
$70 and a ready to use kit, but you are always welcome to do it yourself
if that is part of why you built a kitplane anyway.
I hope that whatever you copy from my design you do not share with other
builders in a 'how to' situation, as that is probably not fair.
As to the lenses, they continue to be the most difficult and least
enjoyable part of the kit for us to produce. In addition, I have tried
using 'Lexan' instead of Plexiglas, but it is more expensive, more
difficult to cut, much more difficult to mold without more wasted parts,
and scratches more easily when installed than plexi. The one advantage
it has is being less brittle, but plexi installed correctly will not
break either.
You are certainly welcome to order lenses separate from the kit, just
give us a call - 503-543-2298. If you want them molded out of Lexan,
you will need to send 2 blanks for each 1 lense needed, cut to size, and
we will mold them for you at the same price as a std lense.
As to the lightening hole ring, I know that on one side it protrudes
against the mount, but that is understood and not a problem. If Jerald
doesn't mind, I'll go take another look at his installation to see it
again.
Don Wentz
Old message below:
--------------------------------------
Date: 1/17/96 1:21 AM
From: rv-list(at)matronics.COM
(Note: you may have to be familiar with the Duckwork's landing light kit
for all of my comments to make sense.)
>From previous posts:
> > I bought the landing light kit that Van offers (Duckworks Landing
Light) and
> > I'm having some frustation with the installation because of the poor
> > instructions/engineering of the kit.
>
> > The design and instructions assume that the rib
> > web in the mounting position is flat, which is not the case with my RV4
> > ribs, having been formed with stiffening rings and a vertical aligned
> > stiffening indentation near the nose of the ribs.
>
> Between which ribs are you mounting the light, Jack? I mounted mine
> between the outermost ribs in my -6 and didn't have this problem. I
> think (but it's difficult to recall), that because the outer rib faces
> flange in (backwards from the rest) the stiffening rings and indentation
> were pointed away from the brackets on both ribs. At any rate, I didn't
> have any interference. I don't know--are any of your ribs mounted
> backwards with the flange pointed the wrong direction, ie., did you use
> the rib from the opposite wing?
>
I looked at the Duckwork's landing light kit that another builder had
purchased when I was trying to decide what to do. I noticed the same
problem the first poster ran into -- the stiffening rings get in the
way of tightening down the light. I believe I have my ribs in correctly, the
stiffening rings always go "into" the rib and the outer rib has the flanges
pointed towards the root of the wing while the inboard ribs (except the
inmost 4 or 5) all point toward the wingtip. This would mean that
the stiffening rings get in the way.
>
> > 2. The next problem I ran into was with the lense mounting. There
are these
> > little bone shaped pieces of that you cutout of AL, using a supplied
> > template, which go on the top and bottom of the plexiglass lense.
> > Nut-plates are to be installed on these bone shaped pieces. After drilling
> > the screw holes per the supplied template, I discovered bone shaped pieces
> > are too short to install the nutplates.
>
> What do you mean my too short? Granted, it was difficult to reach
> the threads on the nutpalates with the screws supplied until the
> lens was installed because it wasn't yet "sucked-up" tight. I
> just used a longer screw temporarily to bring the lens up tight,
> then replaced it with the shorter, more appropriate length screws
> supplied.
>
Again, I believe the first poster is correct. I believe he is referring to
riveting the platenut to the "bone shaped" piece. The outermost rivet will
be very close to or perhaps even off the bone shaped piece. The easy fix
to this is just to lengthen the bone shaped piece. This is a pretty minor
issue and easy to fix.
(Deleted third point and response.)
AFter reading some messages about people making their own lenses and looking
at Don's kit, I decided to make my own. I purchased a pair of driving
lights from a local auto supply place (Schuck's). They are exactly the same
ones that Don uses and cost $20 for the pair. I bought a hunk of .100
acrylic from EAGLE hardware for $5 which is enough for 3 lenses. I had extra
platenuts and aluminum already so these items were not a problem. I then
got a book from the library and found out that heating the acrylic to
around 300-325 degrees makes it pliable but too much so. I heated the
acryllic in our oven and then quickly wrapped it over the leading edge of my
fuel tank. The side edges curl up when you do this so you have to file or
sand them down to get a good fit. I may still try to make some more lense
covers using something for a female part of the mold while continuing to use
my fuel tank for the male part. Or I may see if Don is willing to sell just
his lense covers.
I designed mine somewhat differently to alleviate the problem of the rib
stiffeners getting in the way. I decided to forgo any left/right adjust-
ment and just keep the up and down adjustment. This allowed me to use
a hole just big enough for the screw in the bottom and a slot in the
top which allows for the adjustment. I then used some of my taperings
from 1/8 inch main spar stiffeners to make some offset blocks that go
between the light and the rib. I used the longest AN426 rivets I had
to connect both the offset block and the platenut to the rib. Since I
used a slot in the mount, I only needed one mounting point at the top
rather than the two Don has. I also bought some stainless steel hardware
at EAGLE to do the mounting.
_______________
/ ____ |
/ -- -- |
| |__ ---- __| | Curved slot for
| | adjustment
\ |
\ |
\ |
\ |
\ __ |
\ |__| | Fixed screw.
\ | (Light rotates around
\_________| this screw)
Mounting plate - end view
I also decided to mount my light somewhat differently. Don uses a large
washer on both sides of the light. A screw goes through the washer and into
a platenut on the mounting plate. I used a rectangular piece of .040
aluminum and a dimpled #8 screw (and associated countersunk nut- plate). I
painted everything black so that when you look through my lense cover, all
you see is a neat rectangular reflector. To maintain alignment of these
rectangular hold downs, I used AN426 rivets near both ends.
These rivets go into dimpled holes in the mounting plate. To hold the
rivets in place, I made a special rivet set out of two small blocks of
aluminum. I clamped the two pieces togehter and then drilled a #40 hole
at the intersection that was about 1/8 inch shorter than the rivet. I
countersunk the hole a bit to allow room for the rivet to expand. I then
put the rivet in place and backriveted using this custom fixture and a
hammer! The rivet nicely expands into the counter sink and stays fairly
close to its original size for the part stuck in the fixture. Unclamp
the fixture and remove both haves from the rivet. If you don't use a
two part fixture, the rivet will expand in the #40 hole and you won't
get the fixture off.
______________ _____________
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| ^ | | O |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
|______/ \_____| |______|______|
.040 coutersunk hole
Now, all this took some time and some running around for parts, BUT I HAD
FUN DOING IT, and I like the results.
IMHO, Don's kit is a good value. His lenses are probably nicer than mine
and are thicker. He includes all the parts (there are more than you might
first think) and instructions. If you don't feel like doing this kind of
stuff on your own, I would still recommend his kit. Assuming I didn't
screw up on my outer two ribs, I still think there is a problem with the
stiffening rings in the way. I suspect you could just tighten it down and
it would work fine.
Bottom line: Don's kit will save you a bunch of work and time.
P.S. To give you an additional idea of where I'm coming from, I built my
own spars and didn't buy the pre-punched skins which were an option
when I got my wing kit. Acutally, I have a one piece top skin. I am
trying to build as cheaply as possible and would rather spend the
extra time.
------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------
id sma041164; Wed Jan 17 00:52:20 1996
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 96 15:29:50 PST
From: physio-control.com!dougm(at)matronics.COM (Doug Medema)
Subject: RV-List: Re: Landing lights - long posting
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Don Wentz <Don_Wentz(at)ccm2.hf.intel.com> |
Subject: | Response: Problems - Duckworks Landing Light Installati |
Jack, I'm disappointed you didn't call the vendor (me) for help before you sent
this out. Let me respond to your concerns below:
From: Jack Gageby <lafn.lafn.org!aj752(at)matronics.com>
Subject: RV-List: Problems - Duckworks Landing Light Installation
>I bought the landing light kit that Van offers (Duckworks Landing Light) and
>I'm having some frustation with the installation because of the poor
>instructions/engineering of the kit. This message is to warn you, of the
>rv-list, of the deficiencies of this landing light kit.
====> I have rec'd many positive comments about the completeness of the
instructions, but as with anything, they aren't perfect and I will add
anything learned here (as I did with some feedback Herman Dierks gave me
recently).
>1. The light assembly brackets mount between the outer two wing ribs close
>to the nose of those ribs. The design and instructions assume that the
>rib web in the mounting position is flat, which is not the case with my
>RV4 ribs, having been formed with stiffening rings and a vertical aligned
>stiffening indentation near the nose of the ribs. When using the provided
.template for drilling the mounting holes in the ribs, one of the holes was
>in a crease of this stiffening indentation. This was my first
>disappointment with this kit. The work-around (achieving a flat surface
>to mount to) consumed a lot of time.
===> There is no need to 'flatten' the rib-webs to improve the fit
here. The clamping action of the large washers on the large mount
tab/flange against the uneven surface of the web causes the mount to be
held nice and rigid. Mounting it this way keeps the design/parts/cost
of the kit very low, a major goal of the kit. It also eliminates any
need to put rivets in the skin of the wing, also a nice feature. Had
you called I could have prevented your unnecessary work-around effort.
I will add some text to the plans that prevents this mis-understanding
in the future.
>2. The next problem I ran into was with the lense mounting. There are
>these little bone shaped pieces of that you cutout of AL, using a supplied
>template, which go on the top and bottom of the plexiglass lense.
>Nut-plates are to be installed on these bone shaped pieces. After drilling
>the screw holes per the supplied template, I discovered bone shaped pieces
>are too short to install the nutplates.
===> You are correct, the small pieces were designed for a different,
shorter nutplate and when the nutplate was changed recently I overlooked
changing that dwg. A local builder (Jerald Hall) was kind enough to
show me that and I have revised the dwg, all kits shipped since late
December have the update in them.
If any of you Listers have kits from late 95, be aware that you will
need to make that piece slightly larger to have adequate room to rivet
on the nutplates. This is a small piece that is fabricated by the
builder out of scrap .032 or .040, as per a dwg in the plans.
>3. Finally, my last complaint, is that with this kit there is no weather
>seal to prevent rain from entering between the plexiglass lense and the
>wing skin. So, I guess I should some put drain holes somewhere in the
>bottom of the wing to get rid of any water that might collect. This in not
>covered in the kit instructions.
===> Included in the kit is a small roll (appx 2" diameter) of 3/16 x
1/16 self adhesive foam, gray in color. There are also instructions in
the manual where to install it. If we somehow left that foam out of
your kit, let me know and we will mail you some immediatly. As the
instructions said at the start, inventory the kit against the parts list
and let us know if any items are damaged or missing.
>Anyone else have any experience with the Duckworks Landing Light Kit?
===> I must say that we have shipped in excess of 900 LL kits over the
last 3-4 years to many builders, including several hired-gun shops and
several Oshkosh award winning RVs. These folks greet me with smiles and
positive comments when I reveal who I am at fly-ins, and the custom
shops continue to recommend our kit to the folks they are building for.
Certainly not EVERY customer is satisfied, but those who aren't usually
provide feedback that I am able to add to the plans/kits, to make them
better for the next builder.
I will do the same with your 'feedback'. I regret you had problems
installing your kit, but as with most items and RV projects, if
something doesn't seem right to you, or the fit isn't working, ask
someone, and usually the frustration will be reduced. If you have
further concerns, please respond to this posting.
Regards, Don 'The Duck' Wentz, N790DW, 180HP RV-6, #20369
Designer and manufacturer of the Duckworks Landing Light Kits
PS - Thanks to those of you who responded with your positive remarks about our
product, and who forwarded the message to me so I could gather this data.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | ROBERT BUSICK <rbusick(at)nmsu.edu> |
Can someone tell me what is the weight difference between the O-360
and O-320. Is the O-360 worth the extra weight? Is the O-360 with C/S
prop worth the extra weight for mild aerobatics. I am concerned about
weight and the 1325 max allowable weight for aerobatic maneuvers.
Thanks
Bob Busick RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
Subject: | Re: EAA Technical Counselor |
> .... a few questions about the EAA tech counselor
> program.
>
> (1) At what point would you want a counselor to come out an view your project?
I don't think there is a requirement or specification from the
insurance companies or the EAA for this. I'd think having someone out
early in your project to give pointers and check your techniques would
be a good idea, as well as periodic "pre-closing" inspections, i.e.
stabilizers and/or elevators/rudder, fuel tanks (!), wings. And during
engine installation would be good to, as well as a final (before the
FAA inspection).
Up till now there haven't been any designated Tech Counselors in our
local EAA chapter but some people have recently signed up so I intend
to have the required 3 (or more) done between now and finish, which as
I understand will still satisfy Avemco, even though I'm already done
with my wings and tail.
> (2) Do they sign anything to confirm their visit?
They fill out and sign the EAA Tech Counsellor forms. They do NOT sign
your log book.
> (4) How do they make reccomendations? In writing, verbal?
I think it's pretty much verbal.
> (3) Is there a cost for their service?
This is somewhat ambiguous. They can get compensated for travel
expenses I think, but are not supposed to charge for Tech Counselor
work. But they could theoretically charge you for NON-tech counselor
work, which could be anything. So I suppose they could in effect charge
you for whatever portion of their visit they decide is "unofficial". I
know at least one person who does this.
Randall Henderson
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | sburch(at)Infi.Net (stan burchett) |
Subject: | Hampton Roads,VA Builder Partner(s) WANTED |
Time is of the essence..DON'T MISS OUT!
Two of us are aboard! 1 or 2 more and we're ready to order the first
complete kit of what will surely become the world's most popular homebuilt
aircraft! We'll build sections concurrently sharing knowledge, tools,
costs, etc..and order 2nd kit after first fly off. You don't need a pilot
licence..just hands on skills, the motivation to build and share a team
effort and the desire to be an aircraft owner!! Contact email or
804-867-7244
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander) |
Subject: | Re: EAA Technical Counselor |
James .... I'll try and answer your questions .... Gil Alexander
>After seeing the message on Avemco insurance I was glad to see the price for
>the
>insurance was not much more ($400) than I paid for a cherokee 180 with less of
>a
>hull value. Seeing it also raised a few questions about the EAA tech counselor
>program.
>
>(1) At what point would you want a counselor to come out an view your project?
At least three to four visits seem to be recommended. The best times would
be the equivalents to the old FAA "pre-cover or pre-closure inspections.
That is just before you "seal-up" a major assembly. This allows the
internal structure to be easily inspected.
For a RV:
* during tail assembly before skinning
* before skinning the wings (preferably with the flaps and ailerons ready
for close-out) - may be 1 or 2 visits.
* before the top decking is riveted onto the fuselage, but after the
controls etc. are installed.
* just before the final FAA/DAR inspection
Most Technical Counselors will also visit if you get "stuck" or have majors
conerns at any stage in your construction. Join your local EAA chapter and
use the Technical Counselors as a construction advice resource. Technical
Counselors are not restricted to visiting their own Chapter members only,
but you must be a EAA member to take advantage of this program.
>
>(2) Do they sign anything to confirm their visit?
>
NO, specifically on instructions from the EAA. But they do send a form in
to the EAA documenting their visit. You get to sign the form, the
Counselor keeps a copy and sends a copy to the EAA, where it is filed
referencing your project.
The Counselor has a standard notation that it is recommended that YOU write
in your logbook documenting the visit. Don't forget to ask him what this
notation is.
>(4) How do they make reccomendations? In writing, verbal?
>
Verbally to you. Some recommendations can be documented on the form they
send back to the EAA.
>(3) Is there a cost for their service?
>
They are specifically NOT allowed by the EAA to charge for their service.
Reimbursment for travel and lodging is allowed if needed.
>
>Thanks in advance!
>
>James Kelley (Working on main spars.)
>72466.1355(at)compuserve.com
>Atlanta, GA
Gil Alexander .... going to see my 3rd RV6A project to-nite
gil(at)rassp.hac.com
Technical Counselor, EAA Chapter 40
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Plastic hose on nose ribs |
>Tried this today and thought I'd pass it on to wing builders. When you are
>ready to drill your tank and outboard leading edge skins, instead of using
>hex nuts to secure the rib tips on the threaded rod, use some 1" long
>plastic tubing cut longitudinaly. ....
>Chet Razer
>crazer(at)midwest.net
Chet's Idea sounds good, threading nuts is a pain!
You could also do what I did - Plastic clothes pins - the ones with a spring...
they hold on to the threads really well and prevent any movement in the nose
ribs during drilling etc.
Just 'bout the best 75c I ever spent
Regards, Rob
Fairings/primer & paint - getting close now!!!!
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | John Flaherty <John.Flaherty(at)evolving.com> |
Hello RVers.
My name is John Flaherty.
I plan on building an RV6A and do have a few questions.
I have been reading the priming discussion. Many suggest to those with
specific questions to call the manufacturer and this is all well and good
but I am in a position where I can choose. I would like to hear what
you would do if you could choose. I am interested in corrosion protection
with minimal work. It sounds like epoxy primer might be the solution.
Is there a problem with riveting together two pieces that have this stuff
sandwiched between?
Also, Is there anyone on this list in the Denver area willing to show off
their plane and/or project?
--
-- John
John Flaherty | Internet: jwf(at)evolving.com
Evolving Systems, Inc. | Phone-Net: (303) 689-1327
8000 E. Maplewood Ave. |
Englewood, CO 80111 | Something really witty goes here...
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
Subject: | EAA Technical Counselor (fwd) |
See answers inserted after your questions below.
I am not a TC but I had several out to look at my project
(Tony Bingelis, etc). Herman
> From root Wed Jan 17 15:17:06 1996
> Errors-To: bounces(at)matronics.com
> Date: 17 Jan 96 14:51:18 EST
> From: James Kelley <compuserve.com!72466.1355(at)matronics.com>
> To: rv-list
> Subject: RV-List: EAA Technical Counselor
> Message-Id: <960117195118_72466.1355_EHB88-1(at)CompuServe.COM>
> Sender: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com
>
> After seeing the message on Avemco insurance I was glad to see the price for
the
> insurance was not much more ($400) than I paid for a cherokee 180 with less of
a
> hull value. Seeing it also raised a few questions about the EAA tech counselor
> program.
>
> (1) At what point would you want a counselor to come out an view your project?
ANS: When ever you schedule them. Good times would be
before the test flight for a final look, maybe before closing
up the wings, maybe after engine/instruments are installed.
As far as I know there are no rules as when they visit the project.
>
> (2) Do they sign anything to confirm their visit?
>
ANS: NO!!! You sign their form and they send it in to EAA.
You can put a not in you log saying that "Tech Counselor
so and so looked at my project today and found it airworthy"
and sign your name and date it.
> (4) How do they make reccomendations? In writing, verbal?
>
ANS: Verbal. They can write comments on the form they send to EAA.
> (3) Is there a cost for their service?
>
ANS: Typically, no. These are just local members of your EAA chapter.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> James Kelley (Working on main spars.)
> 72466.1355(at)compuserve.com
> Atlanta, GA
>
>
>
>
>
--
--------------------------------------------------------
*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
AIX Network Performance Measurement/Analysis
phone: TL 678-2831 outside: (512) 838-2831
MS: 9530 fax: 512-838-1801
mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | dierks(at)austin.ibm.com |
Subject: | Engines Weights (fwd) |
Engine weights vary some depending on the specific dash numbers
on the engine. Here are some examples:
Some Dry weights:
O-320-A, E 244 lb 150 HP
O-320-B, D 255 lb 160 HP
O-360-A 265 180 HP
IO-360-A, C 293 200 HP
AEIO-360-A 299 200 HP aerobatic
You would probably be comparing the 160 HP vs the 180 HP so there
is only about 10 lb. difference on those two.
Herman
> Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Can someone tell me what is the weight difference between the O-360
> and O-320. Is the O-360 worth the extra weight? Is the O-360 with C/S
> prop worth the extra weight for mild aerobatics. I am concerned about
> weight and the 1325 max allowable weight for aerobatic maneuvers.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bob Busick RV-6
>
--------------------------------------------------------
*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: | twg(at)blink.ho.att.com (Tom Goeddel(x5278)) |
Subject: | Re: EAA Technical Counselor |
>> (1) At what point would you want a counselor to come out an view your project?
I would recommend a visit fairly early in the project if you are a first time
builder, like maybe just prior to closing the horizontal stab. It's good to
catch any basic flaws in your technique before you get too far into it.
After that, maybe once before closing the wings, and again well into
the fuse. More often if you have one close by.
>> (2) Do they sign anything to confirm their visit?
When I had one over to look at the HS, he filled out a form to send back to
the EAA. They are not supposed to sign a building log or anything like that
(I suppose due to liability concerns... what else is new).
You can and should record their visit yourself:
"So-and-so, EAA Technical Counseler, visted the project on
and found the HS assembly airworthy."
or something to that effect...
>> (4) How do they make reccomendations? In writing, verbal?
I don't recall anything written (at least that I received). You should get
verbal advice as appropriate. I didn't get much on the HS visit (I had
already taken care of my screw-ups), but it was a good confidence builder.
I spend a lot less time fretting over "problems" now. I suspect when I
get to engine/system installation time, a Tech Counseler visit will be even
more valuable.
>> (3) Is there a cost for their service?
There is not in general, as I recall - they are volunteers.
In my case, he was an RV-6 builder from the local EAA chapter,
lived relatively close by, had already helped me get started with tool
advice, etc. If you are in an area where none are close by, I would think
at least paying for any travel expenses would be appropriate. The
more experienced eyes you can have to look over your work the better.
I also try to have other local RV builders over to get their input as well
(with visits usually timed to match when I need bucking help...).
Tom Goeddel
RV-6a (trying to get mentally prepared to pro-seal the second tank...)
t.goeddel(at)att.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Tracy Crook <71175.606(at)compuserve.com> |
Subject: | Mazda powered RV-4 |
Have received several relayed messages (via E-mail at my compuserve address)
about getting on the rv-list. Several people expressed interest in finding out
more info on my Mazda rotary powered RV-4. At 172 flight hours it is doing well
and I continue to slowly increase the cruise power as I gain confidence in it.
Top speed is now about the same as 160 Lyc powered RVs (202 mph)
Don't know the ropes on the rv-list so I'm sort of sending this message into the
blind. If anyone wants more info on the engine or aircraft, I'd be glad to
answer questions.
E-mail me at 71175.606(at)compuserve.com
Is there a way for me to directly access rv-list from compuserve?
Regards to all, Tracy Crook
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Elon Ormsby" <Elon.Ormsby(at)quickmail.llnl.gov> |
REGARDING Auto Engines
The magazine "Aviation Consumer" visited both the Continental and Lycoming
engine manufacturing facilities last year. They published two excellent,
in-depth, articles. If you want to have a complete understanding of current
US piston engine manufacturing and a look at how they are preparing for the
future - you should read the articles. I cannot emphasize how informative the
articles are. Both companies are taking two DIFFERENT paths to ensure their
corporate the future! Who is going to survive? Very, very interesting.
August 1995 = "The Future of the Engine", pp 4-11 (about Continental)
November 1995 = " The Future Of The Engine", pp 4-8 (about Lycoming)
The Aviation Consumer
Belvoir Publications, Inc
POB 309
Newtown, CT 06470
203/661-6111
Fax 203/426-9205
ISSN# 0147-9911 (for library stuff)
Happy Winter (Northern Hemi) Flying,
Elon
ormsby1(at)llnl.gov
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | lewisjw(at)hqsocom.af.mil |
Subject: | Tracey Crook's Rotary RV4 |
Ref Tracey Crook's 13B Mazda in his RV4 --
Tracey told me last week that he is now doing some aerobatics and plans to
continue every time he flies. He fixed the heat problem that caused the
glitch with one of his 3 Micuni carbs and has put about 30 hours on the plane
since then.
Ref his 13B engine mount, I have seen it and I believe it is sound for high G
loads.
He has finished his conversion/installation manual for the rotary and I think
we will hear more about this soon.
What did you all think of the 13B installation in the Long EZ in the Jan 96
issue of Sport Avn? It is not discussed, but the engine has been turned 90
degrees and a new wet sump was placed on the side.
Joe Lewis working on empennage Rv6 lewisjw(at)hqsocom.af.mil
Tampa Bay, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | amunro(at)amunro.seanet.com (Alex Munro) |
Subject: | Re: Auto Engines |
>REGARDING Auto Engines
>
>Steve Day writes...
>Question: If R&D costs a lot, why hasn't the price of a Lycoming dropped?
>After all these years you'd think they might have sold enough engines to pay
>for something that hasn't changed in eons.
>
I'd like to take a stab at the reason for high cost. I'm not a lawyer, but
I do make aircraft parts and tooling for a living. It's all centered around
the word "certified", which apparently some people think means: "Well, we
did a pretty damn good job making this, so we'll certify it for aircraft
use", or that certification means that you have the FAA's approval to sell
the beast.
The last company I worked for made lots of sheet metal and extrusion parts
(I programmed the turret punch press that Van's has recently discovered.
BTW, they've been around for 30 years now...), all "certified".
Put briefly, if a plane crashes (lets say a 747 has a shear pin failure and
the motor falls off), the crash investigators find that part and begin
tracing it's origin. It is possible to trace that part clear back to which
hole in the ground the ore was dug from, locate the foundry where it was
poured, rolled, extruded, etc., and to find out any machine shop that
performed ANY operation to that part. That includes all minor operations
including deburring, and includes the names of workers and dates they worked
on the part.
Airplane parts aren't like stove parts (yes, I did teach my grandma to suck
eggs...). If you're supposed to make 30 parts and you start out with 33
pieces of rough sawed material but you screw up 5 of them, you can't simply
go get a few more pieces of material and "make up" the order. BIG NO, NO!
You finish the parts in your batch, and document what happened to the bad
parts. You also don't just toss the scrap parts, because you have to be
accountable for them.
In our machine shop when material shows up, we send a sample to be
"certified" (there's that word again). Just because we're standing over a
big pallet of .063 2024-T3 250/4 doesn't mean that some loser didn't stamp
the stuff wrong at the mill. Each sample of material comes from individual
batch lots (which in turn were made on different days in different mills,
and came from different holes in the ground... You get the picture).
Likewise, lot's of parts must be sent out to heat treat or age or paint, etc
at places that are (get this) "certified" to do business for the customer.
You are also subjected to random audits. On any given day, an inspector can
come in and wander around your shop. He checks on the work in process.
What's that? You have 36 parts on your bench and are supposed to have 32?
Big trouble. You have 7 parts on a bench with no paperwork? Your dial
calipers were supposed to be re-calibrated two days ago? Uh-oh.
Doing business this way is difficult, exacting and expensive.
---AND---
>"I also wonder why they can't manufacture a second version of the engine that
>isn't stamped 'certified', but for all practical purposes is."
I believe they did. Others can and will correct me, but I understand that
Lycoming made Ground Power Units that ran on 0320 or 0360 type motors. Of
course it wouldn't be certified, carry a log book, etc. They are found on
the market, and experimental flyers put them on planes. If I owned a GPU,
which I needed to make electricity and not haul my family aloft, I would be
tempted to slap one together cheaply out of "red-tagged" parts. You can get
them for scrap value -- once they are released from certification...
;)
---AND---
>
> Product liability insurance for a certified motor is obscene - what do
>you think it would be for a un-certified motor? Try "unavailable"!
>
Like another poster pointed out, the only way to survive in a legally
hostile environment is to incorporate, stay small and don't carry insurance.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Munro
amunro(at)amunro.seanet.com
My other Sig is a P220
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Auto Engines |
From: | Ed Weber <ebw(at)hpfiebw.fc.hp.com> |
> I also wonder why they can't manufacture a second version of the engine that
> isn't stamped 'certified', but for all practical purposes is. Isn't that
> one of the factors that make the lycoming so expensive?
>
> Also, if I understand it correctly, for the average Joe to go and buy a new
> lycoming is more like $30k+ right??? Van's Aircraft makes a deal to buy
> them at $18-20k. What is this $10k for??? This must be the shaft the
> customer dollar figure. I wonder what the profit margin is. (not trying to
> put down Lycoming, just one of those facts of reality that affects me in a
> bad way. :)
These two issues are related.
Van's agreement with Lyc is that engines will only be sold with
complete RV kits, one to a customer. I believe this is exactly why
Van's gets them cheaper - Lyc knows they are going on a homebuilt so
their liability exposure is less.
--
Ed Weber Hewlett-Packard Company
voice: (970) 229-3241 ICBD Product Design
fax: (970) 229-6580 3404 E Harmony Road, MS 72
email: ebw(at)fc.hp.com Fort Collins, Co 80525
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | lewisjw(at)hqsocom.af.mil |
Subject: | RV List Archives on Disk - Best of the Internet, A.Gold |
On 16 Jan 96, Andy Gold wrote: Would you like to have a "best of the internet
RV-list Archives book" published?
I for one have found that wading through the first 9 months of the files
there is a goldmine on info there, but 60% of the entries are useless. The
archives take up 10 meg of space on a hard drive and are hard to handle.
Andy, the info is already digitized, it just needs massive editing,
cataloging and sorting. I'd gladly pay for a copy of the archives if done
right, but someone is going to have to spend hundreds of hours organizing it.
Joe Lewis RV6 Emp Tampa Bay, FL lewisjw(at)hqsocom.af.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com (John Ammeter) |
Subject: | Re: EAA Technical Counselor |
I've been a Tech Counselor for about 3 or 4 years now and will try to answer
your questions:
>After seeing the message on Avemco insurance I was glad to see the price
for the
>insurance was not much more ($400) than I paid for a cherokee 180 with less
of a
>hull value. Seeing it also raised a few questions about the EAA tech counselor
>program.
>
>(1) At what point would you want a counselor to come out an view your project?
>
The first visit should be before you have closed the empennage; we need to
see the riveting on the spar, edge tolerances of rivets, quality of your
aluminum finishing, in general how careful is your work. You need at least
three visits to qualify for the reduced insurance. These visits can be by
the same TC or different TC's. The other two visits, IMHO, should be before
closing the wing and after you've installed the engine and all the
'systems'. There is nothing to prevent more than three visits; in fact,
anytime someone visits your project ask them to critique it.
>(2) Do they sign anything to confirm their visit?
>
Nope, nada, nothing in writing. What you can do is put an entry in your
logbook that the TC visited and note whatever comments he made. He will,
however, fill out a report that you will sign and a copy will be sent to the
National EAA. The TC keeps a copy. We don't sign your logbook because of
liability factors.
>(4) How do they make reccomendations? In writing, verbal?
>
I make recommendations only verbally; no written record is left with the
builder. Of course, you should be taking copious notes as the TC is
inspecting your RV.
>(3) Is there a cost for their service?
>
>
No cost to the builder. Of course, if the TC has to travel some distance
you could offer to pay his gas. Most will refuse but the offer is nice.
BTW, donuts and coffee are also always welcome.
>Thanks in advance!
>
>James Kelley (Working on main spars.)
>72466.1355(at)compuserve.com
>Atlanta, GA
>
>
>
>
John Ammeter
ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com
Seattle WA, USA
RV-6 N16JA
Flying 5 years
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | joehine(at)mi.net (joehine) |
Subject: | Re: Turbine Power |
>>You may have solved my dilemma: how to get my RV to the geographic north
>>pole. Avgas isn't available north of Cambrige Bay, NWT !
>
>hehe. Are you serious? Please educate me as to why Avgas is not avail. Is
>there a problem at extreme low temps? Or is it one of those "Next Rest Stop
>2000 miles" :-) Meaning no pumps at all.
>
>-Steve Day
>sday(at)pharmcomp.com
>(CK ID - RV6a RV for short)
>
>
>
You guys need to watch a few National Geographic programs about Canada's
north. Its a fairly empty spot, and more and more so the further north you
go. Most people who need avgas make their own arragements for a fuel cache
in 45 gallon drums, but it is very expensive to ship. Beautiful country though.
Joe Hine
joehine(at)mi.net
506-452-1072 Home
506-452-3495 Work
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: RV List Archives on Disk - Best of the Internet, A.Gold |
>
> Andy, the info is already digitized, it just needs massive editing,
> cataloging and sorting. I'd gladly pay for a copy of the archives if done
> right, but someone is going to have to spend hundreds of hours organizing it.
>
> Joe Lewis RV6 Emp Tampa Bay, FL lewisjw(at)hqsocom.af.mil
>
Has anyone moved the archive to a place where it can be anonymous ftp'd?
My isp won't let me get a mail message big enough to hold it all.
I could probably (at least!) thread the archives and create a
concordance of sorts by using some text tools I have - but
I need to get them first!
Mickey Baker | Sage Research Corporation
mbaker(at)gate.net | Pompano Beach, FL
KC4ZU PP-ASEL-IA Cheetah N9856U | (305)785-2354
"Is a sentence fragment" is a sentence fragment.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com (Finn Lassen ) |
Subject: | Re: Mazda powered RV-4 |
You wrote:
>
>Is there a way for me to directly access rv-list from compuserve?
>
>Regards to all, Tracy Crook
>
Tracy, Your message posted just fine. Suggest you subscribe to the
list. Simply send an e-mail message to rv-list(at)matronics.com with
subscribe
as the only word in the body of the message.
Do expect to get a lot of messages, though. Typically 10 - 20 per day
appear from this forum.
Finn
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Terence Gannon" <Terence_Gannon(at)msn.com> |
Subject: | You Think YOU Have Problems With Priming (Major Chatter) |
I'm just about at the step of taking my first stab at priming, and decided to
go the Variprime route. Searched all over town, and everyone looked at me
like I was from another planet. Finally called the Dupont office half a
continent away, and turns out that they CHANGE all the product names in
Canada!! I don't have a clue WHAT I'm buying!!! :-)
Cheers...
Terry in Calgary
S/N 24414
"Working on Empennage"
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | WStucklen(at)aol.com |
> I presume you just applied an even film of proseal over the whole
>mating area, added the screws, and then just wiped off the excess before it
>hardened?
Once the canopy is in place with whatever fasteners you choose to use (I used
screws and nuts) you just wipe the excess ProSeal away, cleaning up the area
with a little lacquor thinner (it won't attack the plexi).
> Did you also use Proseal where the aft portion attaches to the
>rollover structure?
Yes, and use it liberly in this area. I have the tiltup canopy and wanted a
good watertight seal in this area, on both halves of the canopy. I did
install a metal, two piece, strip over the joint, attached to the tiltup
part, overlapping the rear part. This strip also has proseal under it to keep
water from getting in via the normal airflow. There is also ProSeal between
the plexi and arch on the rear of the tilt up section.
> I had thought of the screws, and it seems very worthwhile. Did you
>also use screws to attach the canopy to the roll-over structure by tapping
>6-32 holes?
Yes again. Just be careful not to over torque them. Let the Proseal do the
attaching. The screws just secure it. Also, you don't have to space them very
close. Toy Bingilis wrote an article in Sport Aviation a while back on this
subject. Might be worth your while to look it up.
One other note. If you are using the tiltup canopy, be sure to ProSeal the
drip edge to the F668 bulkhead. This is a major water leak area otherwise.
Good luck.....
Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
wstucklen(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "B F Gibbons" <bfgibbons(at)intellinet.com> |
Subject: | Re: Plastic hose on nose ribs |
> >Tried this today and thought I'd pass it on to wing builders. When you are
> >ready to drill your tank and outboard leading edge skins, instead of using
> >hex nuts to secure the rib tips on the threaded rod, use some 1" long
> >plastic tubing cut longitudinaly. ....
> >Chet Razer
> >crazer(at)midwest.net
>
> Chet's Idea sounds good, threading nuts is a pain!
>
> You could also do what I did - Plastic clothes pins - the ones with a spring...
> they hold on to the threads really well and prevent any movement in the nose
> ribs during drilling etc.
>
> Just 'bout the best 75c I ever spent
>
> Regards, Rob
>
> Fairings/primer & paint - getting close now!!!!
>
Sometimes I feel so stupid! Why are the best ideas always the
simplest. You can bet that I'll use one of these methods on the
second wing.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Michael.R.Grubb(at)sam.usace.army.mil |
Subject: | Which Plane To Build? Now I Know |
I've been lurking around for quite some time now, gathering
information and comparing data on many different kit aircraft. After
receiving the information pack from Vans last night, the search is
over! The RV series seems to be the most versatile plane available -
no matter what money range your looking at.
I know this post is of no information to you who are already building,
but I hope this helps those other dreamers and lurkers hanging around
on the net.
Now the question is - Which RV to build? No question here, I'll be
waiting on the RV-8.
Back to lurking...
Mike Grubb
Mobile, AL
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | EBundy2620(at)aol.com |
Subject: | Re: Engines Weights |
> Can someone tell me what is the weight difference between the O-360
> and O-320. Is the O-360 worth the extra weight? Is the O-360 with C/S
January 09, 1996 - January 18, 1996
RV-Archive.digest.vol-ay