RV-Archive.digest.vol-bj

April 29, 1996 - May 07, 1996



      Bill
      -- 
      
          ___                     _____________________________
          \  \ _      _          /                            /
           \ /? \    / \        /  Bill Costello   Chicago    \
         X-*#####*******......./   N97WC  (reserved)          /
           o/\  \     \_\      \   RV-6 on left elev.         \
              \__\              \  bcos(at)ix.netcom.com         /
                                 \____________________________\
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Patrick O'Reilly" <patricko(at)ihd.com>
Subject: RV Lister in Germany
Date: Apr 29, 1996
Hi guys. A couple of weeks ago I introduced myself as a new RV Lister in South Africa. I received e-mail from someone in Germany asking for details for flying around South Africa while on vacation. Could this person please e-mail me again as I have had all my e-mail archives destroyed by a little glitch when installing the latest update of MS Exchange (Bill strikes again!), and hence lost the name and address etc. Thanks. Patrick O'Reilly (RV-Anything Wannabee) patricko(at)ihd.com Regards, Patrick O'Reilly patricko(at)ihd.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 29, 1996
From: wbpace(at)adnc.com (Bill Pace)
Subject: Re: Tail Jig Specs
Michael, You said: > I'm planning on anchoring >one end right to my wall and having the other end supported by an >upright beam attached to a cement pier on the floor and to the roof at >the top. Remember that you will need to attach a bolt to each of the uprights to help hold the Horizontal Stabilizer. Several methods are shown for this in Van's manual. I ended up mounting a long bolt (6" x 1/4") in a block of wood which I then clamped to the uprights with big "C" clamps. I have noticed since then that other users have also used "C" clamps to hold these bolts on in similar fashion. I would suggest that you figure out how you are going to do the jigging of these bolts before you commit yourself to attaching a post to the wall. I would think that it would work just fine, so long as you plan ahead. I built a free-standing jig like the one shown in 14 Years of the RVator and it worked fine for the HS and VS. It was (and still is) quite sturdy. I just kept rechecking for a trued up jig before I drilled or riveted any holes. Being able to move the retaining bolts turned out to be essential to maintaining the "trueness" of the part being held by them. I haven't decided if I am going to rebuild it as a stationary jig for the wings yet. ----- Bill Pace Life is not so much an adventure wbpace(at)adnc.com as it is a paycheck. (also wbpace(at)aol.com) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Peter Bennett" <bennett(at)healey.com.au>
Date: Apr 29, 1996
Subject: Re: Left Throttle - Right Starter?
Shucks. I built mine with the seats facing backwards. You mean I didn't have to sacrifice my baggage compartment to get a left hand throttle? Peter > I'm going to outdo you all. I'm replacing the throttle in the center with a > foot pedal because it's what I'm used to in my cars. I wouldn't want to get > confused. I've also set out on a quest to find an air powered soldering iron > to complete my tool collection. Imagine how embarassed I'd be if I had other > builder types came by and they found me using unfashionable tools. > > -N1GV (6A fuselage complete) > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Becki Orndorff <rso(at)css.ncifcrf.gov>
Subject: Tail Jig Specs
Date: Apr 29, 1996
------ =_NextPart_000_01BB35A8.07E8DD60 RE: Mounting one end close to the wall.... You will use this same jig = for your wings and you will need to get in through the end of the wing = to buck rivets when closing the second side. You will need 2-3 feet of = room for the various contortions you will have to go through to reach = all the rivets on the end ribs. Becki Orndorff ---------- From: = lawyernet.com!rwoodard(at)matronics.com[SMTP:lawyernet.com!rwoodard(at)matronic= s.com] Sent: Sunday, April 28, 1996 2:33 PM Subject: RV-List: Tail Jig Specs Mike: I talked to Van's about this last week. The word is that the jig for the -6 will work for the empennage/wings of an -8. I borrowed a friend's -6 construction manual and plan to build my jig from it. The manual calls for an "H" shapped jig with 105-109" between the uprights. After checking out the local supply of 4x4 lumber, I have decided to build mine out of plywood--sort of a box. I've talked to another builder who used this setup and he said it works fine. I'm sure you've noticed that in the Orndorff tapes it looks like they're using 2x4's. RE: mounting one end close to the wall. I haven't noticed anything in the Orndorff tapes to suggest that this would interfere with anything, but I bet you'd put an extra couple of miles on your Reeboks going from one side of the jig to the other--the long way around! Good luck... and hopefully both of us will be building soon! Rod Woodard RWoodard(at)lawyernet.com RV8 Empennage on Order Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 14:11:39 From: PatK(at)gnn.com (Patrick Kelley) Subject: Re: RV-List: Tail Jig Specs The jig does not have to be plumb, or even straight. It just needs to be stable so that anything built in it *will* be plumb and unwarped. You can shim your attachments so that any surface built into it will be accurate. Don't get hung up on your jig. Read Van's comments about jigging in the RVator or one of the compilation books. That said, a plumb jig does make it a little easier. I found a 4 by 4 inch beam suitable for building the tail spars on, and I made the length 104 inches with an eye for using the uprights for my wing jig. I am not sure you will find it convienient to attach your jig to the wall, as most people drill into the uprights to attach the end ribs in the tail to keep them plumb (you would have to rig an attachment to the wall). The same problem would occur when you wanted to attach the wing spars at the wall end. I can picture how you could do it - I just think you would find it inconvenient. For instance, you would always have to walk around the other end of the jig, which could get tedious if you are working at the wall end. Still, you may be space-limited. If so, ignore my advice and go ahead and attach to the wall. The important thing is that whatever jig you build is sturdy and stable so that anything you clamp into it does not move. When you clamp a part in place, measure the plumb on the part, never trust the jig. And don't worry if your jig is not the same as anyone else's. You get no prises at Oshkosh for a well-built jig. PatK - RV-6A - Spars assembled, gathering courage to rivet . >From: Michael Angiulo <MICROSOFT.com!mikeang(at)matronics.com> >Sender: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com >To: "'rv-list(at)matronics.com'" >Subject: RV-List: Tail Jig Specs > >Preparations to begin my RV8 kit continue. I've now converted my >entire bedroom and garage into sheet metal shops. I've ordered every >conceivable tool and I've even told several women to never expect my >calls again. Now I have the time and space to focus on what's really >important. > >The only next step I can think of is to start building my tail jig. > I've seen in print that the tail jig is really just a very plumb beam >at waist level with uprights at each side. I'm planning on anchoring >one end right to my wall and having the other end supported by an >upright beam attached to a cement pier on the floor and to the roof at >the top. My questions are: what should the dimensions of the main >beam be (cross area and length). Also am I missing anything or can I >just try to fashion a very secure and plumb mounting scheme for the >horizontal piece? Do most people make oversized tail jigs which then >work for the wings later? > >Thanks, >-Mike PatK ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 29, 1996
From: Robert Acker <75104.3077(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Left Throttle - Right Starter? (CHATTER)
>> I'm going to outdo you all. I'm replacing the throttle in the center with a foot pedal because it's what I'm used to in my cars. << Steering wheel on the left I suppose? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 29, 1996
From: "Johnson, Steve" <spjohnson(at)msmail.mmmg.com>
Subject: Twin Cities Forum
>Bill Benedict was there with the RV-8. (I managed to twist his arm and I >got a ride in it. It screams, 100 mph climbout gave 2500 fpm. Flies just >like all the RVs but with a little more elbow room in back. Without the >V-shaped rollbar as in the RV-4, the rear pax didn't feel quite so cramped. >The footwells for the rear seat passenger are a must. RV-4 builders should >consider this a manditory feature). Bill even sold one RV-8 tail kit that day. >Doug I was there, and I agree a great time was had by all. I learned a couple of things from Bill Benedict's talk that I thought might be of interest to other listers. 1. The "quick build" RV-6 will soon be available without the empennage. Due to construction techniques, it is not possible to separate the wing and fuselage construction, but it is possible to separate the empennage. This may be a consideration for some RV-6 builders working on their empennage kit. This would reduce the price of the quick build by approximately $2000. The "building center" concept they are considering would allow a builder to take his quick build kit to one of these centers, stay at a motel for a little more than a month, and complete the airframe with supervision. 2. The RV-8 will be their most advanced kit to date. They are giving strong consideration to selling it with a pre-assembled spar. It was great seeing the RV-8 up close and sitting in the cockpit! Steve Johnson spjohnson(at)mmm.com RV-8 Gonnabuild ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WStucklen(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 29, 1996
Subject: Re: RV-6-Electric flaps
>What is the cost of the electric flap option these days (flap motor and >hardware only, not the welded thing)?? I got mine quite a while ago and >I'm sure it has gone up. > >Matt > > About $350.00 with shiping if you buy the new weldment, $100 less without it...... Fred Stucklen wstucklen(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WStucklen(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 29, 1996
Subject: Re: Cut down metal props
BOB: I took off the Warnke and put on the metal Sensinich and picked up 10 mph IAS at the same power settings! I'm told that no two props from Warnke are the same, now I believe it! Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV wstucklen(at)aol.com > Warnke makes a beautiful prop. However, in my limited experience, getting >a wood prop that performs as wanted on the first try is a matter of luck. >We have a 6A here that had an unfortunate uh-ho and he shortened his Warnke >prop to about 18" long. He ordered another Warnke, and after a long wait (I >know, when you want to fly your pride & joy, 2 days could be a long wait, >but this wait was a few months) he received another Warnke. Cruise on this >RV-6A with a 180 hp engine was down 20 mph. I believe they sent it back and >it came back with no change. I think then that they received a different >prop. This prop was better than the second but not nearly as good as the >first prop. > This is not an indictment of Warnke props (although the long wait for >service has been mentioned by several RVer's that I've spoken with). Ive' >talked with a couple of prop manufactures and they agreed that they could >make three identical props from three identical prop blanks and end up with >three props with different performance abilities. I would attribute this to >the "hand made" aspect of wood props. I have found, after shipping my Props >Inc. back three times for "re-pitching" and still not getting the >performance that I'm after, that wood prop manufacture is way more art than >science. Of course, "re-pitching" is more re-carving and changing the >airfoil shape of the prop blades. > I'm hoping that there is more "repeatability" or consistency in >Sensenich's metal prop as I'm about to put mine on and test it out. >(Hopefully, by next weekend) I'm thinking that, if the pitch needs some >adjustment on the Sensenich, it will be much more exact to fly the prop to a >repair station and have them re-pitch the prop according to the data sheet >that Sensenich provides than it is to re-shape a wood prop. Gee, after all >of this prop hassle, I sure hope the Sensinich perfoms well right out of the >box. > >Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)ltec.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 29, 1996
From: Scott.Fink(at)Microchip.COM (Scott Fink)
Subject: No radio station license needed for domestic flights!
I just called the FCC and they told me that as of April 12, the commisioner has ruled that you do not need any license for operating an aircraft station if flown domestically. (note this is an interim rule, obviously subject to change (my comment)). You still need forms 404 and 763 if you are flying internationally. Cool, saved me $75! Scott RV6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 29, 1996
From: wesleyt <wesleyt(at)twave.net>
Subject: Re: mounting strobe power pack
I have bought the dual strobe power supply light kit from Van's and I have a question about where to mount the power supply in the wing tip. (1) Should I mount it to the end rib with nutplates & screws or to the main spar? (2) Would a crimped and heat tube connection be enough to connect the strobe power supply to the wing wiring? Wesley Robinson RV-6A Deburring & Dimpling left wing skin & ribs (very repetitious) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Greg Bordelon <greg(at)brokersys.com>
Subject: Millennium Cylinders
Date: Apr 29, 1996
Yeah, Sorry for the confussion John and David. I've been talking oranges = not apples.=20 My flying airplane is a Cessna 150 (Continental 0200). I'm officially a = 6A builder now, I've cut metal. Right? Millennium cylinders for the 0200 are $750 per power pack (piston, = rings, barrel with new valves, rockers, springs etc.). I bought the STUD = assembly clylinders at $557 each, four of them, rings and misc. gaskets. Currently, the plan is to bolt them on Friday and fly (breakin) all day = Saturday. I'll be happy to answer any questions.......... Greg Bordelon greg@brokersys ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JDelveau(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 29, 1996
Subject: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
Thanks for the tips on the twisted/bowed flange strips. I was able to take out most of the twist and some of the bow and that helped but it was still not right. I then found that the inboard spreader bar was high on that side and when I removed it that improved the situation. I have not riveted it back in place yet which brings me to my next question. I have been practicing setting the 3/16" rivets with NOT too much success. :( I had tried the c-frame tool and 4-5lb hammer approach and felt like I was beating the heck out of the rivet and still not getting it set enough, and tipping the rivet over most of the time. I checked the length of the rivet and it was 1.5D protruding through the hole and the fit was good. So I went and got a small (12 Ton) press and gave that a try. The press was tipping the rivets over worse although I could get it set enough. I have stabilized the ram but it seems like the rivet is too long even though it measures right. After setting one and checking it I dont have any too much as far as height or diameter that would indicate an overlength rivet. I have looked for a deadblow hammer for the c-frame approach but can't locate what I thought I needed (at least 3-4lb and steel face, is that about right?) I forget who had the press info that I got from somewhere on internet (it came with two scanned pictures of the setup) but if anyone who used this approach could add anything else that might help I would prefer to use the press. It seems much less destructive than the hammer method. Thanks Again - Jim Delveau (JDELVEAU(at)AOL.COM) RV-6A Wing Spars, and extra heavy duty dust pan parts. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 29, 1996
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: Re: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
If you're using a 4 - 5 lb hammer and having to use more than 3 or 4 good whacks to set a 3/16" rivet, then something is wrong. I don't think 3 lbs would be enough. Suggestions: - Are you doing it on a concrete floor? A wood floor or carpeting or workbench or anything that would dampen the blow would certainly mess you up - Is your arbor true? You might want to check out such things as the fit of the shaft, and whether it's truly square to the base, etc. Also the rivet sets - Is the spar square to the arbor? It should be supported at both ends using wood blocks clamped or screwed to the spar, and possibly also some blocks closer to the arbor, such that the spar is square to the arbor and the rivet, and the factory head of the rivet just barely rests in the cupped rivet set. Also a block of steel under the middle of the arbor, or the extra support attachment that Avery sells for the arbor may be needed. - Only other thing I can think of is you may have old rivets. I'd think they'd have to sit around for quite a long time (years) to make that much of a difference, but it may be worth checking, i.e. ask Vans to send you some more and see if they're softer, or check yours against some other local builders' if possible. Randall Henderson RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 29, 1996
From: Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com>
Subject: Van's Quick Build Kits
Just got back from getting the grand tour of the quick build RV-6 kits over at Van's, and for those of you who are more interested in flying than building this is about as good as you can get. These are not just a bunch of precut and prepunched parts, they are actually riveted assemblies ready for you to start on the fun parts. In order to comply with the FAA rules that allow you to register the airplane as an amateur built there are certain odd things that are not done, but but almost all of the boring, hour-sucking things are finished already. The tail assembly is almost done; you just have to make the rudder yourself, including marking and drilling (no prepunched skin). The wings are done except you must make the outboard ribs yourself out of a flat piece of metal. You also have one skin to rivet on. The fuselage skeleton is complete and all the bottom skins are riveted on. You have to make one small bulkhead from flat metal and trim, drill, and rivet on the top skins. All of this saves the average fully-employed builder about one and a half years by the calender or about 1000 working hours compared to the most recent prepunched kits. You still have to fit the canopy and mount the engine and instruments. For this you pay about $7000 more than you would for the regular kits, so it's a good deal for a lot of people. The kits they have now include sliding canopies and electric flaps. Workmanship on these components is very good, better than most first-time builders can accomplish; there are no dings or extra holes and all the rivets are good. There are components sitting in stock and more are being shipped in. Right now you buy the whole thing at once, but they are planning to do a batch that does not include the emmpenage; this will be good for those who are already building the tail but have decided they don't have enough time to do the whole thing. FKJ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com
Subject: Cockpit Vents (fwd)
Date: Apr 08, 1996
I think it is well known that the naca vents on the canopy skirt of RV4's does not work. This has been published in the RVator. I don't have any experience with these vents. I vented from the rear of the engine through the firewall. The Ellison TBI is around $1,200.00 or so, depending on size of engine. Its a lot for such a simple device. From what I have seen on the net, folks either love them or hate them. Van tried one on his RV 4 a few yrs back. He published some info in the rvator. The airbox to the TBI is critical. Van was going to publish a follow up but I have never seen it. You may want to ask Van directly. Some of the bad things I have 'heard' is they can be difficult to get to idle properly. Also the small holes in the unit can become dirty over time. The good news is it is 'aerobatic' (no float) and I think the factory will OH the unit for about $200.00. Herman (RV4) > > Trying to plan for cockpit ventilation. Putting on RV-4 canopy now. I've > seen NASA vents placed all around. If one is going to use them, where is the > best place. In the canopy? on the side skirts? Fuse ? Your experience. Also > are there good alternatives to the NASA vents. It gets hot in Arkansas, we > need air! > Second subject: Ellison throttle body - Any experience on a 0-320 - > fixed pitch. What is the cost? Best source? > Herman Dierks, Dept. E54S, AWSD, Austin, Texas mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: KHarrill(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 29, 1996
Subject: Re: Battery location...
>At sun'n'fun, I noticed several RV-6's that did not have the battery box in >the >cockpit. This appeals to me for safety reasons (cite last year's accident of >a >battery exploding in an RV-4, resulting in a fatality), and it makes for that >much more room in the cockpit (with my size 13's every bit helps). > >I can only assume these batteries have been moved forward of the firewall >(which >would also help out aft c.g., since I weigh 220 and plan on a fixed-pitch >prop). >Where does one mount the battery? What about extra g-load on the firewall >and/or motor mount? Rob, I, too, noticed the RVs with no battery, and asked the owners. They are using a "Predator" battery. I am not familiar with the brand. It is about the size of a motorcycle battery and the owners report no problem starting the engine. I also asked at the B & C Specialties counter about the "Predator" battery. They were not familar with the brand, but they sell what appears to be a similar battery. They also report that it works fine, but would not last as long in the case of an alternator failure. The CG probably would not be affected very much since the battery is apparently much lighter. Ken Harrill RV - 6 wings ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 29, 1996
From: "Larson, Joe" <Joseph.P.Larson(at)nmb.norwest.com> (Joe Larson)
Subject: Oshgosh info wanted (chatter)
Please excuse the loosely-related topic, but I knew this would be a good place for info. My wife, Jillann, just made a phone call to a Bed & Breakfast in Appleton and made reservations for us Oshgosh opening day (night). Thus, we'll be there for the first two days. We're going to drive in from Mpls. I'm soliciting general information. This is our first year out there. My main goal is to become familiar with the show and to take pics of all the RV-6/6As. Beyond that, if anyone has any suggestions, I would appreciate them. I'd also appreciate any comments for my wife, who is *significantly* less interested in the show than I am. Also, can any of the Minnesotans tell me how long it'll take to drive? -Joe -- Joe Larson ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 29, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: Re: Cut down metal props
>BOB: > I took off the Warnke and put on the metal Sensinich and picked up 10 mph >IAS at the same power settings! I'm told that no two props from Warnke are >the same, now I believe it! > >Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV Fred, Did take off and climb with the Sensenich improve, as well? Also, I didn't mean to single out Warnke. I think that any two "identical" props from any custom wood prop manufacturer have a high probability of not performing the same. Bob Skinner ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.su.OZ.AU>
Subject: Tail Jig Specs
While not wanting to disagree with Becki, you can manage with less room than this. I was very tight for space for my second wing jig and had the upright about 6" from a wall. It was a nuisance but I got everything done. The suggested 2-3 feet would have been nicer. Leo Davies >RE: Mounting one end close to the wall.... You will use this same jig for your wings and you will need to get in through the end of the wing to buck rivets when closing the second side. You will need 2-3 feet of room for the various contortions you will have to go through to reach all the rivets on the end ribs. > Becki Orndorff > >---------- >From: lawyernet.com!rwoodard(at)matronics.com[SMTP:lawyernet.com!rwoodard(at)matronics.com] >Sent: Sunday, April 28, 1996 2:33 PM >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: RV-List: Tail Jig Specs > >Mike: > >I talked to Van's about this last week. The word is that the jig for the >-6 will work for the empennage/wings of an -8. I borrowed a friend's -6 >construction manual and plan to build my jig from it. The manual calls >for an "H" shapped jig with 105-109" between the uprights. > >After checking out the local supply of 4x4 lumber, I have decided to >build mine out of plywood--sort of a box. I've talked to another builder >who used this setup and he said it works fine. I'm sure you've noticed >that in the Orndorff tapes it looks like they're using 2x4's. > >RE: mounting one end close to the wall. I haven't noticed anything in >the Orndorff tapes to suggest that this would interfere with anything, >but I bet you'd put an extra couple of miles on your Reeboks going from >one side of the jig to the other--the long way around! > >Good luck... and hopefully both of us will be building soon! > >Rod Woodard >RWoodard(at)lawyernet.com >RV8 Empennage on Order > > > > >Attachment Converted: f:\user\LEO\eudora\RERV-L11 > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Allan W. Mojzisik" <prober(at)iwaynet.net>
Subject: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
Date: Apr 29, 1996
------ =_NextPart_000_01BB361F.4AD9E2A0 Jim, I believe that the instructions for the arbor press were on John Hovans = web page. He had at least a couple of pictures with the narrative. Al = = = prober(at)iwaynet.net ---------- From: = aol.com!JDelveau(at)matronics.com[SMTP:aol.com!JDelveau(at)matronics.com] Sent: Monday, April 29, 1996 3:01 PM Subject: RV-List: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets Thanks for the tips on the twisted/bowed flange strips. I was able to = take out most of the twist and some of the bow and that helped but it was = still not right. I then found that the inboard spreader bar was high on that = side and when I removed it that improved the situation. I have not riveted = it back in place yet which brings me to my next question. I have been practicing setting the 3/16" rivets with NOT too much = success. :( I had tried the c-frame tool and 4-5lb hammer approach and felt like I = was beating the heck out of the rivet and still not getting it set enough, = and tipping the rivet over most of the time. I checked the length of the = rivet and it was 1.5D protruding through the hole and the fit was good. So I = went and got a small (12 Ton) press and gave that a try. The press was = tipping the rivets over worse although I could get it set enough. I have = stabilized the ram but it seems like the rivet is too long even though it measures right. After setting one and checking it I dont have any too much as = far as height or diameter that would indicate an overlength rivet. I have looked for a deadblow hammer for the c-frame approach but can't = locate what I thought I needed (at least 3-4lb and steel face, is that about = right?) I forget who had the press info that I got from somewhere on internet = (it came with two scanned pictures of the setup) but if anyone who used this approach could add anything else that might help I would prefer to use = the press. It seems much less destructive than the hammer method. Thanks Again - Jim Delveau (JDELVEAU(at)AOL.COM) RV-6A Wing Spars, and extra heavy duty dust pan parts. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 29, 1996
From: jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com (Michael McGee)
Subject: Chatter-Humor-testing
ence-ack(at)rio.com, spraguej(at)ohsu.edu, nexus(at)teleport.com, MilotaM(at)frl.orst.edu, romstead(at)wvi.com, GDFine(at)gnn.com (Glen Dufur), tiger2(at)teleport.com, striblinga(at)lanecc.edu, brkk(at)aone.com I had to share this one. There is a real test like this that I believe Lear Jet to test their windshields, but, well, you'll just have to read this... from a friend of mine: +++++++++++++++ Thought you would get a kick out of the following: In a recent issue of Meat & Poultry magazine, editors quoted from Feathers, the publication of the California Poultry Industry Federation, telling the following story. It seems the US Federal Aviation Administration has a unique device for testing the strength of windshields on airplanes. The device is a gun that launches a dead chicken at a plane's windshield at approximately the speed the plane flies. The theory is that if the windshield doesn't crack from the carcass impact, it'll survive a real collision with a bird during flight. It seems the British were very interested in this and wanted to test a windshield on a brand new, speedy locomotive they're developing. They borrowed FAA's chicken launcher, loaded the chicken and fired. The ballistic chicken shattered the windshield, broke the engineer's chair and embedded itself in the back wall of the engine cab. The Britsh were stunned and asked the FAA to recheck the test to see if everything was done correctly. The FAA reviewed the test thoroughly and had one recommendation: Use a thawed chicken! ++++++++++ ...some peoples' kids... Mike ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 29, 1996
From: Frank Smidler <smidler(at)dcwi.com>
Subject: Re: Dimpling technique
William Costello wrote: >=20 > Hi Folks, >=20 > I just learned a technique from the list recently that I used regarding > dimpling and back riveting that I think worked to perfection (smoother > than a baby=92s butt), so I thought I would pass it along with the > highest of re > commendations. This was on the left elevator of my RV-6. >=20 > First, the tools: > Cleaveland dimple dies > Cleaveland large =93C=94 rivet tool with the rug-covered table = that > they send the plans for with their C tool > Tatco hand squeezer (used on stiffeners) > Avery back-rivet tool > Avery back-riveting flat steel plate > Chicago 3X rivet gun with Sears compressor (25 gal) set at 30 > pounds > 8 oz ball-pien hammer from Ace garbage table for $1.50 > (The most important tool here?) >=20 > The key thing I learned was to use the small ball pien hammer when > dimpling the skin. I tapped the rod holding the dimple die in the C > tool about nine times each dimple (per the suggestion on the list). > The first six taps had one sound (as the dimple was forming?) and the > last three had a more solid higher pitched sound. I forget who put > this technique on the list a short while back, but thank you, thank > you. The results look fantastic. >=20 > I was wishing someone had told me about this before I did any of the > skins on the tail, so I thought gee I have to tell all those getting > ready to start on their planes. I STRONGLY recommend that you give > this method a try. >=20 > Best regards, > Bill Costello Bill, that seems like a lot of tapping. I'm using a hammer with plastic=20 heads and one good wack produces a great dimple. I'm using both Avery=20 and Cleavland dies. I also notice on the second wack a different sound=20 which indicates to me the dimple was set and the second wack was not=20 neccessary. I'll match my one wack dimples to anyones 9 tink, tink,=20 tink dimples any day and do it in considerable less time. RV-6 fuselage out of jig.... Frank Smidler ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 29, 1996
From: Frank Smidler <smidler(at)dcwi.com>
Subject: Re: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
> I have been practicing setting the 3/16" rivets with NOT too much success. :( > I had tried the c-frame tool and 4-5lb hammer approach and felt like I was > beating the heck out of the rivet and still not getting it set enough, and > tipping the rivet over most of the time. I checked the length of the rivet > and it was 1.5D protruding through the hole and the fit was good. So I went > and got a small (12 Ton) press and gave that a try. The press was tipping > the rivets over worse although I could get it set enough. I have stabilized > the ram but it seems like the rivet is too long even though it measures > right. After setting one and checking it I dont have any too much as far as > height or diameter that would indicate an overlength rivet. > Thanks Again - Jim Delveau (JDELVEAU(at)AOL.COM) > > RV-6A Wing Spars, and extra heavy duty dust pan parts. I have found that 1/4" and 3/16" rivets must be slightly under 1.5D in order set them properly. Use 1.25D and you should have no problem. This will not affect the structure as you should still have the correct shop head size when you are finished. Frank Smidler Dir. Eng. Wabash National Corp. Semi Trailer manuf. that used 400 million 3/16" and 1/4" rivets last year. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 29, 1996
From: df(at)hogpa.ho.att.com (J Dennis Fuhr)
Subject: Re: engine breah-in
John, I'd like a copy of the Mattituck procedures. I recently had Mattituck rebuild the IO-360 in my Piper Arrow and the mechanic who installed the engine didn't provide this to me. I'll have to give him heck for that. Thanks for the info. Dennis Fuhr fuhr(at)att.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Zilik(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 30, 1996
Subject: Re: Cut down metal props
>I read an article in Penthouse about the art of being a prostitute. It was >very enlightening, and presented almost a sexual social worker point of >view. I've wondered if I was a good looking woman, would I do that, (pre >aids days fantasy). I think it could be fun for a while, given the right >conditions. did you send this to the wrong list??????? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: alanw(at)netspace.net.au (Alan Williams)
Subject: Trip to U.S.A.
Well my wife has finally talked me into abandoning the project for 3 weeks and we are going to take a vacation in America starting 8 May. We arrive at Vancouver and plan to tour the West Coast down to San Diego but can easily be diverted to anyplace of interest (the cheap Delta tourist tickets help). Obviously a visit to Van's is high on the itinary but question is where else to go. Are there any RV/aviation events in the West during May, or must-see places of (aviation) interest? Any suggestions or contact details greatly appreciated. Alan Williams alanw(at)netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia RV-6A - still building wings ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: bcos(at)ix.netcom.com (William Costello )
Subject: Re: Dimpling technique
You wrote: >Bill, that seems like a lot of tapping. I'm using a hammer with >plastic heads and one good wack produces a great dimple. I'm using >both Avery and Cleavland dies. I also notice on the second wack a >different sound which indicates to me the dimple was set and the >second wack was not neccessary. I'll match my one wack dimples to >anyones 9 tink, tink, tink dimples any day and do it in considerable >less time. > >RV-6 fuselage out of jig.... > >Frank Smidler > I think the motto is, if it works for you, go for it, assuming safety is not a factor, which it certainly doesn't seem to be here. My point is, this method works a lot better for ME, so I thought I would offer it for the group's consideration. Best regards, Bill Costello -- ___ _____________________________ \ \ _ _ / / \ /? \ / \ / Bill Costello Chicago \ X-*#####*******......./ N97WC (reserved) / o/\ \ \_\ \ RV-6 on left elev. \ \__\ \ bcos(at)ix.netcom.com / \____________________________\ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Becki Orndorff <rso(at)css.ncifcrf.gov>
Subject: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
Date: Apr 30, 1996
------ =_NextPart_000_01BB3668.641AD780 Jim, Try rivets closer to 1D. 1 to 1.5 D is acceptable. We have found the slightly shorter rivet will work fine and is acceptable. Becki Orndorff ---------- From: aol.com!JDelveau(at)matronics.com[SMTP:aol.com!JDelveau(at)matronics.com] Sent: Monday, April 29, 1996 3:01 PM Subject: RV-List: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets Thanks for the tips on the twisted/bowed flange strips. I was able to take out most of the twist and some of the bow and that helped but it was still not right. I then found that the inboard spreader bar was high on that side and when I removed it that improved the situation. I have not riveted it back in place yet which brings me to my next question. I have been practicing setting the 3/16" rivets with NOT too much success. :( I had tried the c-frame tool and 4-5lb hammer approach and felt like I was beating the heck out of the rivet and still not getting it set enough, and tipping the rivet over most of the time. I checked the length of the rivet and it was 1.5D protruding through the hole and the fit was good. So I went and got a small (12 Ton) press and gave that a try. The press was tipping the rivets over worse although I could get it set enough. I have stabilized the ram but it seems like the rivet is too long even though it measures right. After setting one and checking it I dont have any too much as far as height or diameter that would indicate an overlength rivet. I have looked for a deadblow hammer for the c-frame approach but can't locate what I thought I needed (at least 3-4lb and steel face, is that about right?) I forget who had the press info that I got from somewhere on internet (it came with two scanned pictures of the setup) but if anyone who used this approach could add anything else that might help I would prefer to use the press. It seems much less destructive than the hammer method. Thanks Again - Jim Delveau (JDELVEAU(at)AOL.COM) RV-6A Wing Spars, and extra heavy duty dust pan parts. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: James Kelley <72466.1355(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
I used a C-tool made by US Ind. tool, had to modify the throat heigth, on a concrete floor. Driven with a three pound hammer. Yea, everyone is correct it takes more wacks than a 4 or 5 lbs hammer. Anyhow the rivets turned out real well! I used the 1.5d height except for the ones at the root, 1.6d or slightly more there. Why? I had a hard time forming a shop head that was at least a min. diameter and height using 1.5d rule. IMHO, I guess that the more stiffeners the rivet passed through caused the rivet to expand slightly more before forming a shop head. The longer rivets gave me the shop head that I desired and I had no problem setting them. James Kelley (Ribs on both spars, in jig.) 72466.1355(at)compuserve.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WStucklen(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 30, 1996
Subject: Re: Metal Props
>Fred, Did take off and climb with the Sensenich improve, as well? Also, I >didn't mean to single out Warnke. I think that any two "identical" props >from any custom wood prop manufacturer have a high probability of not >performing the same. Bob Skinner > > While I didn't specifically document the climb performance of the Wanke prop, I'd have to say that it performed about the same as or a little better than the Sensenich prop. With the O-320-D1A 160 Hp engine and 70CM6S16-0 (79) Sensenich prop, on a cool day I get in excess of 700 FPM at full gross (or a little over). Lightly loaded (10-15 Gals of fuel and my 220 Lbs fat ass) I get 1500-2000 FPM, depending on the air speed (110 - 120 MPH IAS). On climbout, the manifold pressure at full trottle is runing high (27-29 Inches, depending on the current barometer) with RPM's at 2150 at the start of the roll and 2250 in the climb. At 8000' I get 2550 - 2600 RPM at full trottle and 195 TAS MPH (Confirmed by the three 90 degree GPS heading method). I still have the whole Warnke setup. Maybe someday I'll put it back on and really document it correctly. But then again, Warnke makes so many production run changes that I wouldn't know what I'm testing....... Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV wstucklen(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)MBnet.MB.CA>
Subject: Re: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
On Mon, 29 Apr 1996 JDelveau(at)aol.com wrote: > I have been practicing setting the 3/16" rivets with NOT too much success. :( There are a couple of tricks here. First, the rivet and the work piece must be FIRMLY held in place. When doing the real spar, the weight of the spar plus the weight of a couple of sandbags worked for me. The other thing is to get the rivet perpendicular and centered on the rivet dies. If you do it this way and still have problems, perhaps your rivet C-frame tool is out of alignment? I did both spars this way and none of the rivets wanted to bend over. Regards, Curt Reimer ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: Robert Acker <75104.3077(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Trip to U.S.A.
>> Are there any RV/aviation events in the West during May, or must-see places of (aviation) interest? << Alan, Try visiting Chino airport. Somewhat close to Disneyland if you are planning a stop there. May 4&5 there is a large homebuilt-oriented show (i.e. displays, workshops, etc.), should be quite a few RV's there. Also, Planes of Fame air museum is located on the field...many interesting aircraft ranging from Heorner flying wing gliders to MIG's to....etc. The airport is also known for a vast variety of WWII aircraft being flown and restored there. E-mail me for specifics if interested: 75104.3077(at)compuserve.com Rob (RV-6 Quickbuild). ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: Robert Acker <75104.3077(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Battery location...
>> I, too, noticed the RVs with no battery, and asked the owners. They are using a "Predator" battery....The CG probably would not be affected very much since the battery is apparently much lighter. << Ken, Thanks for the reply. I'll have to research this, did you ever find out where they are actually putting the battery? This issue seems like a double-edged sword - get the battery out of the cabin (*some* protection from explosion) but put it into the frying pan (i.e. in the engine compartment with the associated heat). Then again...the Cessnas I have most of my time in had the batteries ahead of the firewall...never had a failure. Rob. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com (Doug Weiler)
Subject: Re: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
Jim: I have used a rivet squeezer apparatus constructed from plans I saw in Sport Aviation several years ago which uses a 6 ton auto jack for the "motive" force. I'd be glad to supply you (or any other Listers) with a diagram and photos. This device worked just fine, very controllable, and has been used to construct 4 sets of spars. Doug -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= = Doug Weiler, pres. MN Wing, Van's AirForce, RV-4 in progress, N722DW = 347 Krattley Lane = Hudson, WI 54016 = 715-386-1239 = email: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: RELOSVCS!WESTREG!EHENSON(at)cldwell.attmail.com (Henson, Eric)
Subject: Trip to U.S.A.
Hi Alan, There are lots of RV's flying around Chino, Ca. on weekends. It's square in middle of the L.A. basin (yes wings can generate lift in that goo) you're bound to find several if you walk around the hangars. It is the S. Cal. homebuilders mecca due to somewhat affordable hangers. There is also planes of fame air museum, lots of WWII iron. It's a lot more fun than visiting that Rat in Anaheim. Eric Henson Dana Point, CA >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reply Separator <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Well my wife has finally talked me into abandoning the project for 3 weeks and we are going to take a vacation in America starting 8 May. We arrive at Vancouver and plan to tour the West Coast down to San Diego but can easily be diverted to anyplace of interest (the cheap Delta tourist tickets help). Obviously a visit to Van's is high on the itinary but question is where else to go. Are there any RV/aviation events in the West during May, or must-see places of (aviation) interest? Any suggestions or contact details greatly appreciated. Alan Williams alanw(at)netspace.net.au Melbourne, Australia RV-6A - still building wings ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Will Outlaw" <outlaw(at)startribune.com>
Date: Apr 30, 1996
Subject: Re: Van's Quick Build Kits
Wannabe builder delurking for just a moment: Does Van's have any plans for an RV-8 quick-build kit? (forgive me if I missed mention of it in an earlier post) I assume since they're just now getting the first RV-8 kits out the door it'll be a while before we see a quick-build -8, but it'll also probably be a while before I have a place to build one. Does anybody have a timetable? I think it's best if I stop reading about the RV-6 quick-build kits. I keep drooling on my keyboard and shorting the darn thing out. Seriously though, a quick-build kit sounds like it's well worth the extra 7 or 8 grand. The one thing that scares me off of building a plane is the time spent waiting to fly it. Cutting that time in half or so may just push me over the edge. Thanks. I'm back to lurking and looking for an apartment with a garage and a full supply of tools. Will ----------------------------------------------------- Will Outlaw, speaking only for Will Outlaw Bulletin Board Editor Star Tribune Online http://www.startribune.com "32 below zero is just a number." ------------------------------------------------------ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: Re: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
>I have been practicing setting the 3/16" rivets with NOT too much success. :( > I had tried the c-frame tool and 4-5lb hammer approach and felt like I was >beating the heck out of the rivet and still not getting it set enough, and >tipping the rivet over most of the time. I checked the length of the rivet >and it was 1.5D protruding through the hole and the fit was good. So I went >and got a small (12 Ton) press and gave that a try. The press was tipping >the rivets over worse although I could get it set enough. I have stabilized >the ram but it seems like the rivet is too long even though it measures >right. After setting one and checking it I dont have any too much as far as >height or diameter that would indicate an overlength rivet. >Thanks Again - Jim Delveau (JDELVEAU(at)AOL.COM) > >RV-6A Wing Spars, and extra heavy duty dust pan parts. Jim, You might consider renting Van's giant rivet squeezer. It rented for $10 when I used it to set the rivets on the spars of my first RV. I used the Avery tool and a hammer on the second set of spars and got along fine. I used a 4-5 lb metal hammer, set the Avery tool on the concrete floor and wacked away. All of my rivets extended 1 1/2 d's and I didn't have any trouble tipping. If you try the Avery tool again, I'd make sure the weight of the spar is resting on the the rivet that is in the #6 cupped set. I used a little bullseye level on the spar to make sure the spar was level in all directions. Three to four hits with the hammer was usually all it took to set the rivet and not one of them tipped. Before I set the rivet, I slipped the hole for the set in the ram over the #6 rivet and lightly tapped the ram to make sure the stack of flange strips were tight, then inserted the flush set and set the rivet. You should wear eye and hearing protection. With your ears protected, the process doesn't sound near as bad. Personally, I wouldn't feel comfortable cutting the rivets shorter than the recommended 1 1/2 D's. Bob Skinner RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: Re: Trip to U.S.A.
Near Van's: May 9 Van's Air Force Home Wing monthly meeting 7:00pm May 16 EAA Chapter 105 monthly meeting @ twin oaks airpark 7:00pm May 18 Schrock's fly-in at their private grass strip near Corvallis. This is a great friendly local fly-in with BBQ, RVs, Antiques, you name it. CVO is about 60 miles south of Van's, you could probably scam a ride or rides down there though. I hope you get a chance to spend a few days around here, even if there aren't any aviation events on the days you're here, there are always RV people around willing to show someone the sights. Randall Henderson RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: "Richard E Steffens" <resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com>
Subject: Source for Marhyde Primer
Some time ago I remember someone giving a source for the Marhyde primer in aerosol cans. I can't find it so if someone knows where I can get some, please tell me. Avery quit selling the stuff and I like it for some things. Thanks. Dick Steffens Almost ready for the finish kit RV-6 resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: "Johnson, Steve" <spjohnson(at)msmail.mmmg.com>
Subject: Van's Quick Build Kits
>Does Van's have any plans for an RV-8 quick-build >kit? (forgive me if I missed mention of it in an earlier post) >Seriously though, a quick-build kit sounds like it's well worth the >extra 7 or 8 grand. The one thing that scares me off of building a >plane is the time spent waiting to fly it. Cutting that time in half >or so may just push me over the edge. >Thanks. I'm back to lurking and looking for an apartment with a >garage and a full supply of tools. >Will I believe that Bill Benedict said at the Twin Cities Forum that there are "tentative" plans for a quick build RV-8. He did say that currently 75% of their sales are for the RV-6 series, so I would assume it depends upon the RV-8 popularity. In my own opinion, the homebuilding financial justification is very difficult in most cases. I just want to build an RV-8 because I have always wanted to fly a plane I built myself. Of course I say that that's the way to get it equipped just the way I want etc., but the bottom line is that I just want to build it myself. You could find a good used RV-4 today to buy, fly it for several years, and then sell it for about what you paid for it and buy the RV-8 quick build. Wait several more years and you will be able to buy a used RV-8. I may be missing something here, and I invite anyone to correct me, but the real reason to build an RV is the personal satisfaction received from the building process. Van's has several orders for the RV-6 quick build, and it does cut 1000 hours off the project. It will be interesting to see how all of this works out. >From my own perspective, the main advantage of the quick build will be to reduce the errors in the kits that have been mentioned on the list as they have to be made more ready for factory production. My own wish list would be for a more complete kit in terms of electrical system, cabin heating and ventilation, etc. Sorry if I tended to ramble on. Steve Johnson RV-8 Gonnabuild spjohnson(at)mmm.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: Rich Klee <Rich_Klee(at)ccm.fm.intel.com>
Subject: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
Jim, I believe that the instructions for the arbor press were on John Hovans = web page. He had at least a couple of pictures with the narrative. Al = = = prober(at)iwaynet.net The hydraulic press hints are at: http://atlantis.austin.apple.com/people.pages/jhovan/tips/spar.html There are at least half a dozen good ways of doing this - this is one method. If you got questions email me or call me at home, I am hoping the pictures will clue you in fairly well. Since John seems to be a fairly friendly chap, others might want to send him *.gif files of pictures of their set ups - this might help lot of the newcomers who are debating whether or not to go with the Phlogiston spar. ======================================================================= Rich Klee 4564 Chicago Ave. rich_klee(at)ccm.fm.intel.com Fair Oaks, CA 95628 (916) 863-1927 (will accept faxes) ======================================================================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: "Richard Chandler" <mauser(at)Claris.COM>
Subject: Re: Battery location...
> This issue seems like a double-edged sword - get the battery out of > the cabin (*some* protection from explosion) but put it into the > frying pan (i.e. in the engine compartment with the associated heat). > > Then again...the Cessnas I have most of my time in had the batteries > ahead of the firewall...never had a failure. How about a ventilated, or at least insulated battery box? (Although you don't want to overdo it, because cold batteries don't generate as much power). -- "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!" ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: "Richard Chandler" <mauser(at)Claris.COM>
Subject: Re: Trip to U.S.A.
> Well my wife has finally talked me into abandoning the project for 3 > weeks and we are going to take a vacation in America starting 8 May. > > We arrive at Vancouver and plan to tour the West Coast down to San > Diego but can easily be diverted to anyplace of interest (the cheap > Delta tourist tickets help). Obviously a visit to Van's is high on > the itinary but question is where else to go. Vancouver BC? or Vancouver Washington (near Portland)? When you get to Portland, Not only is there Van's to see, but you should also hit the Pearson Air Museum. It's small, but there are some interesting bits of history there, like the first trans-polar flight from Moscow landed here. If you're coming from BC, be sure to stop in Seattle and hit the Boeing Air Museum. I'd consider it second only to the National Air and Space Museum in Washington DC. -- "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!" ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Alternator runaway
RV'ers and other interested parties. Here's an excerpt from a reply I wrote for one of my readers. Seems there's a lot of misconception as to what an alternator runaway is and what components are used to protect the system. For those with and interest . . . ===================================================================== >I'm involved in a discussion with other Velocity builders regarding >alternator output protection. I know you recommend a 70-amp fuse to >protect the wire, but others are saying size it 5 amps under rated >output. The fuse or breaker in the alternator b-lead has nothing to do with protection of the alternator. Breakers and fuses do one and one thing only . . . protect wire. When protecting a wire, one needs to identify the source of energy that threatens the wire. In all but a few cases, the BATTERY is a source of hundreds of amps when faulted to ground. In the case of alternators, we must obviously wire it to the system with wire that is at least BIG enough to carry full alternator output but there's nothing wrong (except for weight) with a wire that's a little TOO big. The 70 amp fuse I call out on most installations is the SMALLEST fuse I've found that features the bolt-thru tabs that make it so EASY to use. Therefore, for all alternators up through 60 amps, I use 4AWG wire and a 70 amp fuse. A breaker or fuse should NEVER be sized less than alternator output . . . good case in point is several thousand Cessnas with 60 amp alternators and 60 amp b-lead fuses. On a cold day, a 60 amp alternator will happily put out 65 to 70 amps! Now (1) leave master switch on last time you parked; (2) use ground power to start engine; (3) turn on alternator and be pleased to see ammeter lay over while it commences charge of the dead battery; (4) launch into the blue with lights, pitot heat, radios, etc all on; (5) punch up through the clouds and fly a few minutes before you realize that EVERYTHING is dead; (6) observe that alternator b-lead breaker is OPEN and you've run down the only partially recharged battery. You're now on top with no electrics. This scenario has been repeated more times than I can count but I guess it hasn't killed anyone yet. That ubiquitous 60 amp breaker was too small from the get-go! >My understanding is that excessive voltage is the problem, and current >flow might be a secondary effect. What causes an alternator to > 'runaway'? Is it a short in the regulator? 99+ percent of all overvoltage conditions are caused by failed regulator . . . usually a shorted pass transistor or an open wire in the voltage regulator sense line. A very tiny number of o.v. failures are cause by mechanical faults inside the alternator but I haven't seen this kind of problem in 20 years. >How can the alternator develop rated amperage unless there is >enough of a short downstream to allow that much current to flow? "Short" isn't the operative word here . . . "Load" is the term. The most common scenario is the one I described in the Dead-Battery- Cessna (I shouldn't pick on Cessna so hard . . . all the single engine airplanes suffer from the same problem). Interestingly enough, you can't hurt an alternator by "overloading" it. An alternator is inherently limited in its output due to mechanical and magnetic concerns . . . generators would happily put out TWICE their rated current and go down in flames. There is some form of over current regulation in a generator's regulator. Alternators require no such feature. >Can an alternator ever be self-exciting so that it would continue to >output even after the field breaker tripped? Only in the very rare number of cases I alluded to earlier. This condition could occur in alternators that had one end of the field circuit connected internally to the B-terminal. Most of these very early systems are gone. All the systems I'm aware of today have one side of the field grounded. >I have been thinking of using a crowbar module to trip an SPDT >contactor to disconnect alternator output in an overvoltage situation. >Before I go to the trouble and expense I'd like your advice as to >whether this would be worthwhile. I recommend this for people who do not wish to remove the built in regulator from a stock automotive alternator . . . this is totally unnecessary for your airplane. >Also, does the LR-3 have a limit on the field amperage that it can >handle? The crow-bar system in the LR-3 trips the breaker open under three conditions: (1) overvoltage, (2) overcurrent to field - usually caused by shorted field winding or leadwire between regulator and alternator and (3) closing the press-to-test button. >Thank you- You're welcome! I'm glad you asked. Please share this with anyone who disagrees . . . especially anyone building another airplane and about to repeat the Cessna/Beech/Piper/Mooney errors. I've been going over the failure mode effects analysis for this system for years but it doesn't mean I've covered EVERY problem. My motto is, "make my day and show me where I'm wrong!" Anyone who thinks I've got my foot stuck in the smelly stuff can call collect and see if they can "straighten me out." Regards, Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ________________________________________________________________________________
From: KHarrill(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 30, 1996
Subject: Re: Battery location...
>did you ever find out where >they are actually putting the battery? Rob. The "Predator" batteries were mounted on the engine side of the firewall just behind and below the dipstick. I tried to get a look through the oil access door, even used a flashlight, but could not see too well in the bright sunlight. It seemed to be kinda crowded in there. Ken Harrill RV - 6 wings ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander)
Subject: Re: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
*** snip *** > >I used the 1.5d height except for the ones at the root, 1.6d or slightly more >there. Why? I had a hard time forming a shop head that was at least a min. >diameter and height using 1.5d rule. IMHO, I guess that the more stiffeners >the rivet passed through caused the rivet to expand slightly more before >forming >a shop head. The longer rivets gave me the shop head that I desired and I had >no problem setting them. Guys, Rivet dimensions again ... :^) .... You only need to meet the below dimensions for a military qualified strength joint. The fininished minimum dimensions for the #6 rivets are as follows: shop head diam. 0.244 inch minimum shop head height 0.075 inch minimum ... these figures come from Mil spec MIL-R-47196A and will give you good, strong joints. If you reduce the 1.5 D length protruding (this is OK to do, especially with a tight fitting hole), just make sure that the final shop head dimensions meet the above measurements. The spec. actually says to use whatever length as long as these minimum dimensions can be met without driving difficulties. ... Gil Alexander .. gil(at)rassp.hac.com PS If you send a large SASE w/2 stamps to the below address, I'll send you a copy of the spec. ... I've sent at least 45 out to other RV-list subscribers already ... :^) Gil Alexander 4434 Stewart Av Los Angeles, CA 90066 > >James Kelley (Ribs on both spars, in jig.) >72466.1355(at)compuserve.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com (Doug Weiler)
Subject: Re: Van's Quick Build Kits
>Wannabe builder delurking for just a moment: > >Does Van's have any plans for an RV-8 quick-build >kit? (forgive me if I missed mention of it in an earlier post) > >I assume since they're just now getting the first RV-8 kits out the door >it'll be a while before we see a quick-build -8, but it'll also >probably be a while before I have a place to build one. Does anybody >have a timetable? > >I think it's best if I stop reading about the RV-6 quick-build kits. I >keep drooling on my keyboard and shorting the darn thing out. > Will: Bill Benedict visited us here in St. Paul last weekend and indicated that eventually the RV-8 will be available in a quick build kit. I would imagine it will be a while since Van's works slow, but I think you will see more and more innovations to help speed these projects along. Doug -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= = Doug Weiler, pres. MN Wing, Van's AirForce, RV-4 in progress, N722DW = 347 Krattley Lane = Hudson, WI 54016 = 715-386-1239 = email: dougweil(at)mail.pressenter.com -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Greg Bordelon <greg(at)brokersys.com>
Subject: Van's Quick Build Kits
Date: Apr 30, 1996
------ =_NextPart_000_01BB36BA.63E6AEE0 The hardest part of home builing is getting started.=20 I spent five years building and flying competition RC aircraft, no ideas = as to how many hours. Finally one day it hit me, with all the money and = time I had spent I could have a real airplane. Then I bought a factory = built and spent two years and 1200 hrs restoring it. I'm using this time = and experience to get an A&P ticket. Now I'm building a 6A. Reflecting = on all this, if I had started sooner I'd would already be flying the = airplane of my dreams. Last year at Oskosh I had decided on the RV6A and = yet I did not order the kit until February. Don't ask me why I waited = because I don't have a good excuse. I think we just spent to much time = debating what to do. There are so many choices to make while building, = engines,props, instrumentation, 6, 6A, 4, 8,. Hell, just deciding on a = primer can cause major confussion. As far as quick builds are concerned = it was a no brainer, not available and couldn't afford it anyhow.=20 My recomendation is order it NOW. Get started. All of the other = decissions will just work out as you build. Hey we all need a little = motivation every now and then, including myself. Get stated so we can = fly together soon. Greg Bordelon greg(at)brokersys.com Houston Tx parts all over the spare bedroom ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: rbusick(at)nmsu.edu (Robert Busick)
Subject: Re: Source for Marhyde Primer
Check your local DuPont paint store. If they don't have it, they might be able to order it for you. My local store (Las Cruces, NM) has the spray cans and a normal liquid quart can that you use in your spray gun. Bob Busick RV-6 rbusick(at)nmsu.edu > Some time ago I remember someone giving a source for the Marhyde > primer in aerosol cans. I can't find it so if someone knows where I > can get some, please tell me. Avery quit selling the stuff and I like > it for some things. Thanks. > > Dick Steffens Almost ready for the finish kit RV-6 > resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: shawn(at)enet.net (Shawn Allen)
Subject: Re: Chatter-Humor-testing
>I had to share this one. There is a real test like this that I believe Lear >Jet to test their windshields, but, well, you'll just have to >read this... > >from a friend of mine: > Read this in a Magazine, but it was Boeing and Brithish Airways. Same result. >+++++++++++++++ > >Thought you would get a kick out of the following: > >In a recent issue of Meat & Poultry magazine, editors quoted from Feathers, >the publication of the California Poultry Industry Federation, telling the >following story. >It seems the US Federal Aviation Administration has a unique device for >testing the strength of windshields on airplanes. The device is a gun that >launches a dead chicken at a plane's windshield at approximately the speed >the plane flies. >The theory is that if the windshield doesn't crack from the carcass impact, >it'll survive a real collision with a bird during flight. >It seems the British were very interested in this and wanted to test a >windshield on a brand new, speedy locomotive they're developing. They >borrowed FAA's chicken launcher, loaded the chicken and fired. >The ballistic chicken shattered the windshield, broke the engineer's chair >and embedded itself in the back wall of the engine cab. The Britsh were >stunned and asked the FAA to recheck the test to see if everything was done >correctly. >The FAA reviewed the test thoroughly and had one recommendation: >Use a thawed chicken! > > >++++++++++ > >...some peoples' kids... > > >Mike shawn(at)enet.net "...philosophy is a walk on a slippery rock, religion is a light in the fog..." Shawn Allen, Phoenix Arizona, Go Blazers!! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: shawn(at)enet.net (Shawn Allen)
Subject: Re: Trip to U.S.A.
>Near Van's: > >May 9 Van's Air Force Home Wing monthly meeting 7:00pm > >May 16 EAA Chapter 105 monthly meeting @ twin oaks airpark 7:00pm > >May 18 Schrock's fly-in at their private grass strip near Corvallis. > This is a great friendly local fly-in with BBQ, RVs, Antiques, > you name it. CVO is about 60 miles south of Van's, you could > probably scam a ride or rides down there though. You might mention that Corvallis is in Oregon, as Alan is an Australian and is probably not aware of where this smaller towns are, or even where to look to find out. 8-) >I hope you get a chance to spend a few days around here, even if >there aren't any aviation events on the days you're here, there are >always RV people around willing to show someone the sights. > >Randall Henderson >RV-6 shawn(at)enet.net "...philosophy is a walk on a slippery rock, religion is a light in the fog..." Shawn Allen, Phoenix Arizona, Go Blazers!! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: flyboy(at)flyboy.com (John D. Ritter)
Subject: Visit to Avery's
Hello All What a *fine* list RVers have here. Until very recently I received all my RV-builder news from the rec.av.homebuilt newsgroup -- pretty skimpy info flow when you are as hungry for advice/tips/chit chat as I am concerning RVs. Since subscribing to this list, I've gotten on average over 20 messages/day -- Wow! Keep 'em coming. Anyways..., I had the opportunity to visit Avery's a few weeks back(just before Sun n Fun), and I was quite impressed, both with the man and his shop. I called him on Saturday only to find that he's normally closed on weekend's, but was happy to have us come out on Sunday and show us around. So my Dad and I drove out to Hicks Airport north of Ft. Worth, TX, and visited with this renowned tool maker. Mr. Avery spent well over an hour answering all our questions, giving me some hands-on with a pneumatic rivet squeezer, and showing us the new fast-build RV-6 kit. Many RV builders attest frequently to the quality of Avery's tools, but let me attest to the man -- top notch! I was also pleased to learn that the Orndorff's, who created the popular RV construction videos, were in the process of moving their operation to Hicks and had built a hangar right across the taxiway from Avery's. John 1300hr/Comm/Multi/Instr/Airplane/Glider/CFI URL ----- http://www.flyboy.com/ email --- flyboy(at)flyboy.com {{{{ RV-8 FANATIC }}}} ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Terry Williams <terry(at)is.com>
Date: Apr 30, 1996
Subject: Re: Van's Quick Build Kits - Chatter
Will wrote: Does Van's have any plans for an RV-8 quick-build kit? (forgive me if I missed mention of it in an earlier post) At this last weekend's Twin Cities RV Forum, Bill Benedict (GM at Van's) said that it would probably be about two years before an RV-8 quick build kit appears. Nothing definite. Just don't wait if you want to build. tw ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Battery hazard (fwd)
Date: Apr 30, 1996
I was out for several days so I am behind on this discussion. I wanted to make everyone aware that you can purchase an electrical bulkhead connector that is made for just this purpose. I bought mine from Racers Wholesale. They are around 10 to $12.00. It is basically a brass stud with a special insulator around it. You drill a hole in the firewall and install this device and then you bolt your starter cable to both sides of it. The disadvantage is that you have to cut the cable going to the starter and put two lug ends on it and then bolt it to the device. Also adds a little more weight. The advantage is that it will not move or chafe so no chance of it shorting out. Herman > From owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com Mon Apr 29 11:09:20 1996 > Errors-To: bounces(at)matronics.com > From: CCGATE.HAC.COM!galexander(at)matronics.com > Date: Fri, 26 Apr 96 17:05:43 PST > Encoding: 68 Text > Message-Id: <9603268305.AA830564245(at)CCGATE.HAC.COM> > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Cc: gil(at)bala.HAC.COM > Subject: RV-List: Battery hazard > Sender: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com > Precedence: bulk > Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > > Listers: > > > >At sun'n'fun, I noticed several RV-6's that did not have the battery box in the > >cockpit. This appeals to me for safety reasons (cite last year's accident of a > >battery exploding in an RV-4, resulting in a fatality), and it makes for that > >much more room in the cockpit (with my size 13's every bit helps). > > Guys ... a serious note caution here. > > On two of the RV's I've inspected (as EAA Technical Counselor), I've > recommended changes in this area. The main battery positive lead is a potential > source of danger in the RV design. The lead passes directly through the > firewall with no safety devices, the lead is very stiff, and there exists a > posibility of this lead chafing through a poorly sized rubber grommet and > directly shorting to ground. Sharp edges on the firewall stainless steel > material don't help this situation (how many cuts do you have from the firewall > edges? ...:^). Choosing a rubber grommet with a small difference between the > inner hole and mounting hole dimensions (possibly to fit behind too small a > firewall shield) can also make things worse. In some cases, the battery lead > passes through the firewall at an angle, also making things worse. > > A direct short across the battery (no fuses or contact breakers would > help in the above firewall chafe scenario) seems to me to be a possible reason > for the battery explosion mentioned above. > > I would strongly suggest that you look carefully at this particular > firewall penetration, and change it if any chance of shorting could be created. > In one case I saw, even the inner hole of the firewall shield could have cased a > problem. > > Some thing you can do: > > 1. Wrap the battery lead with a short length of thick rubber hose where it > poasses through the firewall to provide extra insulation between the wire and > the firewall edges. > > 2. Cut the firewall penetration hole oversize, and rivet on a thicker (say > 0.063) piece of aluminum with the correct size hole for the rubber grommet. > Smooth the hole edges on this aluminum piece. This should reduce chafing of the > rubber grommet. > > 3. Make sure that the hole in the firewall shield is large enough so it cannot > cause a hazard. > > 4. Specifically add this check to your FAA required conditional inspection > checklist. > > 5. If possible, use a more flexible cable (welders cable?) to reduce standing > stresses on the grommet. > > > This is one of the few areas in the electrical system were there are no > fuses or breakers to protect things, so please apply extra caution here. > > > ... build and fly safely ... Gil Alexander > > gil(at)rassp.hac.com ... several cuts already from the firewall ... :^) > RV6A, #20701 > > > > > > *** snip *** > > > >Regards, > > > >Rob. > > Herman Dierks, Dept. E54S, AWSD, Austin, Texas mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: Robert Acker <r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Van's Quick Build Kits
>Wannabe builder delurking for just a moment: > >Does Van's have any plans for an RV-8 quick-build >kit? (forgive me if I missed mention of it in an earlier post) > >I assume since they're just now getting the first RV-8 kits out the door >it'll be a while before we see a quick-build -8, but it'll also >probably be a while before I have a place to build one. Does anybody >have a timetable? > >I think it's best if I stop reading about the RV-6 quick-build kits. I >keep drooling on my keyboard and shorting the darn thing out. > >Seriously though, a quick-build kit sounds like it's well worth the >extra 7 or 8 grand. The one thing that scares me off of building a >plane is the time spent waiting to fly it. Cutting that time in half >or so may just push me over the edge. > >Thanks. I'm back to lurking and looking for an apartment with a >garage and a full supply of tools. > >Will > > I attended the Van's forum at sun'n'fun. It was mentioned that there are plans for an RV-8 quickbuild, it was also mentioned that the RV-8 kit will be the most prefabricated standard kit yet (especially if kitted with a completed wing spar). Seeing the RV-6 Quickbuild kit pushed me over edge . Rob (RV-6 Quickbuild). ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: Rick Osgood <74774.54(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Maryhide Primer
I believe I bought some from Avery's. There is also a company in Banning CA that sells Military can's of Zinc Chromate. Three cans for $10.00. I bought some and they worked fine. I have found a new primer at Sherwin Williams. It is marine primer w/Zinc Chromate. No thinning required but can be cut slightly. Best part is the price, $26.00 a gallon. It's a little slow to dry but when it does it works great. Rick Wing spars under destruction ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: sburch(at)Infi.Net (stan burchett)
Subject: Tools wanted
Hi..My start-up is the -6A fuselage (shpg 5/27) in partnership with a completed empennage and 1 wing builder. I need all the dimpling, riveting, drilling and cutting tools and accessories. If you have any gathering dust, that need a new home, please email description, with prices. Thanks. 804-867-7244 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RICKRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 30, 1996
Subject: Re: Cut down metal props
Ed, The fix Van described for the cracked left fuselage longeron was to first stop drill the crack. Second, attach a triangular shaped plate or gusset, not unlike that used in the RV6, to the top of the longeron. The plate extends from the firewall aft along the longeron, past the four bolts which attach the longeron to the steel firewall bracket, approximately three more inches. The plate is attached to the longeron by the original four bolts plus an additional two bolts aft of the first four. Additionally, the plate is also attached by two bolts to the top of the steel firewall bracket. A spacer was installed between the plate and the bracket in order to get a tight, level fit. This RV4 now has approximately 100 hours on it since the prop failure. So far all of the repairs have held up well. Rick McBride RV6, N523JC ________________________________________________________________________________
From: DerFlieger(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 30, 1996
Subject: 6A Nosewheel
New Topic!? This past Sunday while re-launching the 6A my friend Rusty Ewen bought from Montana, the nosewheel went flat on landing rollout. We happened to have a spare and went on to fly some enthusiasts etc. and had a great time. BTW, when we heard the rim on the asphalt we pulled the stick back further and kept it off until we were almost stopped. When we inspected the tire, we found a hole in the sidewall of the tube, however no nail or anything in the tire which could have caused the hole. We did notice some abrasion to the tube sidewall, full 360 degrees, and on both sides of the tube. Later on looking at a tube removed from another nosewheel, we noticed the same abrasion marks. Called Van's and talked to Tom Green. He said it was probably under-inflation and recommended 30 to 40 psi. The builder had used 20 psi, so we said A HA!. The second tube was used at 35 psi for about 500 hours. Soooooo....... Has anyone experienced anything similar? And what psi are you running in your 6A nosewheel, and why? Anything above 35 psi gives a pretty rough ride. Any suggestions? Converting to a taildragger doesn't count! Jim Stugart 6 converting to 6A DerFlieger(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: Jim Ayers <102337.2252(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Trip to Hamburg, Germany
I'll intersted in visiting any RV projects in the Hamburg area next week, May 6 through May 8. If there are any in progress, or even completed, I would enjoy seeing them. If you can give me any information on how to find the RV's, I would really appreciate it. BTW, I've built an RV-3, am building an RV-4, and have been know to association with RV-6 and -6A builders. Jim Ayers LOM M332A RV-3 N47RV Maroon Marauder 102337.2252(at)compuserve.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Apr 30, 1996
From: Ronald Vandervort <rvanderv(at)linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us>
Subject: Elevator Horns
I just discovered my elevator horns do not agree with the print. The print shows the front edge of the horn to be parallel to the aft face of the elevator spar, or both essentialy vertical when elevator in faired position on a nose gear airplane. Mine is rotated about 4 degrees forward. I wonder if Van's made a change to get more up travel on the elevator, and since the part is fabricated at the factory getting the print changed is low priority. Because it is fabricated one would not normally look at the blueprint of the horn. However since some builders around here have had trouble getting the full up travel, I thought I would take a look. Anyone know anything about this. I will be calling Van's tomorrow to ask about it. Will let you know what I find. Ron Vandervort, RV6 elevators (Quick Build on order) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BPattonsoa(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 30, 1996
Subject: Re: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
I got perfect results with an arbor press using the factory specified rivets. Used a 4 lb. short handled sledge. Took three HARD swings of the sledge. Hold down on the Arbor press handle so it doesn't bounce. You also judge your progress by the movement of the handle. The First swing resulted in a lot of movement in the press handle, the second a little, and the third almost none. I could do about 15 rivets in a session, and then found a reason to rest, such as switching to the other side. Bruce Patton Just unpacking the finishing kit, -6A, about 1 month early ________________________________________________________________________________
From: EBundy2620(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 30, 1996
Subject: Re: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
>I have been practicing setting the 3/16" rivets with NOT too much success. :( > I had tried the c-frame tool and 4-5lb hammer approach and felt like I was >beating the heck out of the rivet and still not getting it set enough, and >tipping the rivet over most of the time. I checked the length of the rivet >and it was 1.5D protruding through the hole and the fit was good. So I went >and got a small (12 Ton) press and gave that a try. The press was tipping >the rivets over worse although I could get it set enough. I have stabilized >the ram but it seems like the rivet is too long even though it measures >right. After setting one and checking it I dont have any too much as far as >height or diameter that would indicate an overlength rivet. I used the hammer method with very good results. The key is to make sure that the arbor is PERFECTLY square to the rivet all the way around. If it starts to bend over, you can alter the angle a little to hit it "back" the other way. It also sounds like you might not be hitting it hard enough. If you hit it too many times you'll work harden it and make it almost impossible to drive. I used a 3 lb hammer and hit it quite hard 3-4 times and the rivets came out perfect. What are you doing with the rivets that came out badly? If you drill them out you'll almost certainly enlarge the hole, and it will become very difficult to put in a new rivet without bending it over. -- Ed Bundy ________________________________________________________________________________
From: EBundy2620(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 30, 1996
Subject: Re: Source for Marhyde Primer
> Some time ago I remember someone giving a source for the Marhyde > primer in aerosol cans. I can't find it so if someone knows where I > can get some, please tell me. Avery quit selling the stuff and I like > it for some things. Thanks. I found it locally at two different auto body supply houses. Just look in the yellow pages under "Body shop equipment & supplies". You also might try "Automobile Customizing". They also carry an excellent enamel also by Marhyde. I used the Marhyde primer and enamel on my canopy frame and engine mount and am very happy with the results. ACS still carries it too, but you have to pay a hazardous shipping surcharge. Much cheaper if you can find it locally. -- Ed Bundy ________________________________________________________________________________
From: EBundy2620(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 30, 1996
Subject: Re: Cut down metal props
> I took off the Warnke and put on the metal Sensinich and picked up 10 mph >IAS at the same power settings! I'm told that no two props from Warnke are >the same, now I believe it! Fred, have you been using the Sens for long? I've been leaning toward it myself and would like to know your likes/dislikes. Is the 2600 rpm limitation much of a problem? -- Ed Bundy ________________________________________________________________________________
From: AHanna2(at)aol.com
Date: Apr 30, 1996
Subject: RV-8 Tail Kits Shipped
Just a short note to let you all know that we shipped the first RV-8 tail kit today. We'll get them out as fast as we can pack them. So far we have sold 80 kits and the orders keep comming. Have fun! Andy Hanna Ahanna2(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: HBenjamin(at)gnn.com (Harold Benjamin)
Subject: Re: Tail Jig Specs
Michael....First things first....Don't run off ALL the Women! Heheh. ;) I set up my jig twice. (Company move) The second time I put it up, I figured out a better way to get the lines on the uprights more accurate. First anchor your jig as solidly and as accurately as possible. Then drill a hole in the center of each upright about 4' above the horizontal cross piece. Put a string through the holes and hang a couple of plumb bobs down to just above the horizontal cross piece. Let them sit awhile. Come back and mark where your center line goes on the cross piece. Then "connect the dots." From there you just draw a line from the line on the horizontal to the hole you drilled in the upright. Leave the line up during tail consruction to check jig for movement & upper parts of tail sections for alignment. Currently skinning wings on the jig. Good luck! Hal Benjamin RV-4, Tallahassee, FL >From: Michael Angiulo <MICROSOFT.com!mikeang(at)matronics.com> >Sender: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com >To: "'rv-list(at)matronics.com'" >Subject: RV-List: Tail Jig Specs > >Preparations to begin my RV8 kit continue. I've now converted my >entire bedroom and garage into sheet metal shops. I've ordered every >conceivable tool and I've even told several women to never expect my >calls again. Now I have the time and space to focus on what's really >important. > >The only next step I can think of is to start building my tail jig. > I've seen in print that the tail jig is really just a very plumb beam >at waist level with uprights at each side. I'm planning on anchoring >one end right to my wall and having the other end supported by an >upright beam attached to a cement pier on the floor and to the roof at >the top. My questions are: what should the dimensions of the main >beam be (cross area and length). Also am I missing anything or can I >just try to fashion a very secure and plumb mounting scheme for the >horizontal piece? Do most people make oversized tail jigs which then >work for the wings later? > >Thanks, >-Mike ________________________________________________________________________________
From: EBundy2620(at)aol.com
Date: May 01, 1996
Subject: Fitting Canopy
I have some general questions regarding canopy trimming (very scary). It's a slider, and I have trimmed the skin directly behind the rear of the canopy frame right to the edge of the frame. I have already mounted the roll-over bar, and it's perfectly 90 degrees to the longeron. In order to get the canopy frame parallel to the roll bar I have to lift the rear of the frame about 1/2" above the rear skin. Shouldn't this be level with the skin, or will something change later, like when I trim the skin to final position? The little pins that catch in the plastic blocks on the back of the frame seem to be the right height above the fuselage, or maybe just a bit high. Also, is there a way to figure out how much to trim the front of the canopy bottom other than trial and error? Or do you just keep trimming a quarter inch or so until it fits? (very tedious, and lots of room for errors to creep in) Any thoughts would be appreciated. The construction manual is quite vague in this area, the slider seems to be an afterthough to the plans. Sort of like all of the nosegear "mods". I had already mounted the vertical stab before I found the "addendum" showing how the tail tie-down is in the way of the lower bolt hole. Would have been nice if they had put that in the PLANS.... -- Ed Bundy ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JamesCone(at)aol.com
Date: May 01, 1996
Subject: Re: Source for Marhyde Primer
I quote from my newsletter: "Marhyde Singel Stage Self Etching Primer (Light Gray) in 19oz. spray cans, is available in case lots at a 20% discount from: SMG Sales, 155 Weldon Parkway, Suite 107, St. Louis. MO 63043. Phone (800) 729-1243 or (314) 569-1196. Jim Cone, Editor Van's Air Force, Tri-State Wing Newsletter ________________________________________________________________________________
From: K8DO(at)aol.com
Date: May 01, 1996
Subject: Re: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
>Only other thing I can think of is you may have old rivets. I'd think > they'd have to sit around for quite a long time (years) to make > that much of a difference, but it may be worth checking, i.e. ask Vans > to send you some more and see if they're softer, or check yours against > some other local builders' if possible. > >Randall Henderson >RV-6 I vaguely remember an article in Sport Aviation concerning the heat treatment of rivets and how to store them after that... the recommended useable time was fairly short post treatment... a few weeks.. Who remembers, or has the details on this? Denny ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: "Gene Gottschalk ((301) 286-0708)" <geneg(at)rattler.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
Randall and all, Randall was right about the difficulty I had with my hammer, it was too light, about 3.5 lbs. I could set the rivets OK, but they were beginning to shop harden by the time I struck them 7 or 8 times. I still think Van's squeezer is the way to go. :-) -Gene ===================================== >If you're using a 4 - 5 lb hammer and having to use more than >3 or 4 good whacks to set a 3/16" rivet, then something is >wrong. I don't think 3 lbs would be enough. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: Scott Gesele <scottg(at)villagenet.com>
Subject: Re: 6A Nosewheel
>New Topic!? > >This past Sunday while re-launching the 6A my friend Rusty Ewen bought from >Montana, the nosewheel went flat on landing rollout. We happened to have a >spare and went on to fly some enthusiasts etc. and had a great time. BTW, >when we heard the rim on the asphalt we pulled the stick back further and >kept it off until we were almost stopped. > >When we inspected the tire, we found a hole in the sidewall of the tube, >however no nail or anything in the tire which could have caused the hole. We >did notice some abrasion to the tube sidewall, full 360 degrees, and on both >sides of the tube. Later on looking at a tube removed from another >nosewheel, we noticed the same abrasion marks. > >Called Van's and talked to Tom Green. He said it was probably >under-inflation and recommended 30 to 40 psi. The builder had used 20 psi, >so we said A HA!. The second tube was used at 35 psi for about 500 hours. > Soooooo....... > >Has anyone experienced anything similar? And what psi are you running in >your 6A nosewheel, and why? > >Anything above 35 psi gives a pretty rough ride. Any suggestions? > Converting to a taildragger doesn't count! > >Jim Stugart 6 converting to 6A >DerFlieger(at)aol.com > > > Jim; I don't know if this has any bearing on you problem, but I noticed that the allen head bolts that attach the wheel pant bracket to the nose gear fork are way too long. If left at standard length, they just BARELY miss rubbing on the side walls. All I did was to grind them so the ends are flush with the inside of the nose gear fork. They are no longer extending into the "tire area" of the fork. -Scott N506RV (waiting on engine) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: Re: RV-8 Tail Kits Shipped
> Just a short note to let you all know that we shipped the > first RV-8 tail kit today. Not that I'd know him, but who, might I ask, was the lucky number 1? Randall ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: Re: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
> > I vaguely remember an article in Sport Aviation concerning the heat treatment > of rivets and how to store them after that... the recommended useable time > was fairly short post treatment... a few weeks.. Who remembers, or has the > details on this? > The process is called "annealing" and it involves using a dentist's oven or similar that you can precisely control to something like 970 degrees (if memory serves), and quenching immediately after removing from heat, and keeping them frozen until use. If you don't do it just right then you will end up with rivets that crack when set, but if you do it right then the rivets are much softer and easier to set. There was lengthy discussion about this on the RV-list a while back, and Van once wrote an article about it in the RVator (Apr 93 issue, "Soft Rivets: Boon or Boondoggle?"). The upshot was that for the average builder it's a lot more trouble than it's worth. Nevertheless, a few people do this and swear by it. I'm sure someone else can point you to the article in SA, I remember reading it but don't know what issue. Regarding annealing the wing spar rivets, yes it would make them easier to set, but 99% of us manage ok without doing it. I'd recommend just getting a bigger hammer :-) Randall Henderson RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: "Gregory N. Puckett" <71155.2336(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: New RV Builder
Hello Everyone, Well here we go, I just placed my order for an RV-8 empennage kit with electric trim today and I have to admit I am very anxious and so far overwhelmed by all the information available(much better than being overwhelmed by the lack of information). This is my 1st kit aircraft so I have a lot of studying and tool buying to do. I would like to hear from other RV-8 people, especially in the Denver area, who are waiting for their RV-8 to arrive. Email me directly if you like at 71155,2336(at)Compuserve.com. I'm still at the not knowing even what questions to ask stage but here are a few: Has anyone seen the Manual for the -8 tail kit yet and how is it? What is the process for certifying the aircraft? Is the work inspected by the FAA during the building process or only upon completion? How hard$$$ is it to insure the finished aircraft? Greg Puckett (71155,2336(at)Compuserve.com) RV-8 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WStucklen(at)aol.com
Date: May 01, 1996
Subject: Re: Source for Marhyde Primer
> Some time ago I remember someone giving a source for the Marhyde > primer in aerosol cans. I can't find it so if someone knows where I > can get some, please tell me. Avery quit selling the stuff and I like > it for some things. Thanks. > > Dick Steffens Almost ready for the finish kit RV-6 > resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com > > Avery has it at about $11.00 per can........ Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV wstucklen(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: n21pe(at)ix.netcom.com (Peter B. Mortensen)
Subject: Re: Tools wanted
You wrote: > >Hi..My start-up is the -6A fuselage (shpg 5/27) in partnership with a >completed empennage and 1 wing builder. I need all the dimpling, riveting, >drilling and cutting tools and accessories. If you have any gathering dust, >that need a new home, please email description, with prices. Thanks. >804-867-7244 > > I have an "RV-Care-Package" consisting of used Boeing Surplus tools. It has 7 assorted bucking bars, 8 assorted rivet sets, 3 used cleco pliers, 20 assorted drill bits and a rudder/elev pivot bushing tool. Price is $90. Please contact me personally at n21pe(at)ix.netcom.com if you are interested. Peter B. Mortensen. ______________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WStucklen(at)aol.com
Date: May 01, 1996
Subject: Re: 6A Nosewheel
I've had a similar problem with the nose wheel tire. With the tire wearing in the center with 35 psi, I thought it might be a good idea to reset the pressure at 25 psi to get better outside edge wear. Well, not too long after, it went flat. A look at the tube showed an abrasion and resultant pinch and hole. Now I run the 35 psi with no other problems except center wear on the tire. The next new tire I installed was a 6 ply tire instead of the 4 ply that Van supplies. The wear is much more even. ^ ply tires are available from Spruce & Specalty..... Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV wstucklen(at)aol.com >New Topic!? > >This past Sunday while re-launching the 6A my friend Rusty Ewen bought from >Montana, the nosewheel went flat on landing rollout. We happened to have a >spare and went on to fly some enthusiasts etc. and had a great time. BTW, >when we heard the rim on the asphalt we pulled the stick back further and >kept it off until we were almost stopped. > >When we inspected the tire, we found a hole in the sidewall of the tube, >however no nail or anything in the tire which could have caused the hole. We >did notice some abrasion to the tube sidewall, full 360 degrees, and on both >sides of the tube. Later on looking at a tube removed from another >nosewheel, we noticed the same abrasion marks. > >Called Van's and talked to Tom Green. He said it was probably >under-inflation and recommended 30 to 40 psi. The builder had used 20 psi, >so we said A HA!. The second tube was used at 35 psi for about 500 hours. > Soooooo....... > >Has anyone experienced anything similar? And what psi are you running in >your 6A nosewheel, and why? > >Anything above 35 psi gives a pretty rough ride. Any suggestions? > Converting to a taildragger doesn't count! > >Jim Stugart 6 converting to 6A >DerFlieger(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: Robert Acker <75104.3077(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: H2AD?
Anyone using (or know of) a H2AD installation in an RV, and what mods are necessary? Thanks, Rob. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Battery Location & Wiring
It's your friendly electro-wienie lurking about again . . . been tracking several threads on this topic and would offer the following comments and observations: ======================================================================== >This issue seems like a double-edged sword - get the battery out of >the cabin (*some* protection from explosion) but put it into the >frying pan (i.e. in the engine compartment with the associated heat). >Then again...the Cessnas I have most of my time in had the batteries >ahead of the firewall...never had a failure. > >How about a ventilated, or at least insulated battery box? >(Although you don't want to overdo it, because cold batteries don't >generate as much power). > >The "Predator" batteries were mounted on the engine side of the firewall >just behind and below the dipstick. I tried to get a look through the oil >access door, even used a flashlight, but could not see too well in the bright >sunlight. It seemed to be kinda crowded in there. >At sun'n'fun, I noticed several RV-6's that did not have the battery >box in the cockpit. This appeals to me for safety reasons >(cite last year's accident of a battery exploding in an RV-4, >resulting in a fatality), and it makes for that >much more room in the cockpit (with my size 13's every bit helps). I had not heard about the explosion, if anyone has access to an accident report and/or failure analysis that was done during the investigation, I'd like to get a copy. With respect to explosion hazards consider the following: Hydrogen and oxygen generation are a fact of life with lead-acid batteries (or indeed any battery with water as an electrolyte constituent). Fortunately, the amount of these gasses liberated can be controlled by (1) reducing the amount of the water in the cell design, (2) sealing the cell from the outside environment and (3) making the cell chemistry more tolerant to moderate overvoltage. Explosion hazard in the presence of these gasses can be mitigated by (1) NOT containing the battery in a poorly ventilated box and (2) keeping the battery away from ignition sources. The new, gas recombinant (starved electrolyte) batteries from B&C, Concord and others are the IDEAL solution to implementing all of the above safety goals. (1) You don't need a battery box for an RG battery hence no chance of collecting an explosive mixture in a confined space. (2) RG batteries contain so little water than even under SEVERE overcharge, the cells vent with a short puff of gasses and it's all over. (3) sealing of the cells via overpressure vents provides the necessary flame arresting barrier between what little explosive mixture within a battery from all possible ignition sources without. I'm not blowing blue smoke here folks . . give the availability of nearly perfect battery solutions, anyone who bolts a flooded- cell battery into his/her airplane is deserving of all the corroded structure, poor performance, misery and HAZARDS these dinosaurs represent. >Guys ... a serious note caution here. > >On two of the RV's I've inspected (as EAA Technical Counselor), I've >recommended changes in this area. The main battery positive lead is a >potential source of danger in the RV design. The lead passes directly >through the firewall with no safety devices, the lead is very stiff, >and there exists a possibility of this lead chafing through a poorly >sized rubber grommet and directly shorting to ground. Sharp edges >on the firewall stainless steel material don't help this situation >(how many cuts do you have from the firewall edges? ...:^). For decades, light aircraft have carried heavy current carrying conductors over long distances in the airframe and one or more sheet metal penetrations without incorporation of fault protection (fuses/breakers) for the wire. As a general rule, this doesn't present a great hazard since faults to thin edge of sheetmetal from a large diameter conductor generally burn or arc "clear" without generating great amounts of heat energy. While the "clearing" occurs, disturbances in the electrical system are generally cause for shutting the system down and landing the airplane to investigate. This pre-supposes that shutdown CAN be accomplished . . . Battery contactors MUST be located immediately adjacent to the battery and connected to the (+) terminal with shortest practical leadwires. If you're taking an ALWAYS hot lead through the firewall to a battery contactor on the other side . . . well, DON'T do it. >Choosing a rubber grommet with a small difference between the >inner hole and mounting hole dimensions (possibly to fit behind too >small a firewall shield) can also make things worse. In some cases, >the battery lead passes through the firewall at an angle, also making >things worse. Excellent point. Sheet metal penetrations with high current conductors should be made with plenty of grommet material between metal edge and the wire . . . like 3/4" minimum hole to pass a #2 conductor. >A direct short across the battery (no fuses or contact breakers >would help in the above firewall chafe scenario) seems to me to be a >possible reason for the battery explosion mentioned above. > >I would strongly suggest that you look carefully at this particular >firewall penetration, and change it if any chance of shorting could be >created. In one case I saw, even the inner hole of the firewall >shield could have cased a problem. >Some thing you can do: > >1. Wrap the battery lead with a short length of thick rubber hose >where it passes through the firewall to provide extra insulation between >the wire and the firewall edges. Mixed feelings on this . . . EXTRA insulation is no substitute for proper installation . .. >2. Cut the firewall penetration hole oversize, and rivet on a thicker >(say 0.063) piece of aluminum with the correct size hole for the rubber >grommet. Smooth the hole edges on this aluminum piece. This should reduce >chafing of the rubber grommet. YES, YES, YES ! I've seen grommets installed in .020" firewall sheets . . . a scenario designed to slice the grommet in two. As further elaboration on this consider a cabin side back up sheet made from aluminum and fitted with nutplates to mount the grommet shields. The grommet should penetrate the sandwich of firewall stainless AND the backup plate. The thicker backup plate gives you a way to utilize flush rivets to hold the nutplates and reduces the total number of holes in the firewall. >3. Make sure that the hole in the firewall shield is large enough so >it cannot cause a hazard. > I like to see a minimum of 0.1" clearance all around the wire to the inside of the grommet shield . . . >4. Specifically add this check to your FAA required conditional inspection >checklist. YOU BET! >5. If possible, use a more flexible cable (welders cable?) to >reduce standing stresses on the grommet. Excellent idea . . . this should be a relatively short piece of wire from battery contactor to starter contactor. It's quite flexible (many strands of tiny wire) and tough (needs to stand up to dump trucks driving over it in a gravel driveway!). >I wanted to make everyone aware that you can purchase an electrical >bulkhead connector that is made for just this purpose. >I bought mine from Racers Wholesale. They are around 10 to $12.00. >It is basically a brass stud with a special insulator around it. >You drill a hole in the firewall and install this device and then > you bolt your starter cable to both sides of it. >The disadvantage is that you have to cut the cable going to the >starter and put two lug ends on it and then bolt it to the device. > Also adds a little more weight. >The advantage is that it will not move or chafe so no chance of >it shorting out. Not recommended . . . it increases the number of parts in the current path from 0 to about 5 or 6 and increases the number of electrical joints from 0 to 4. It's really EASY to do it right using techniques proven in hundreds of thousands of airplanes. Don't loose any sleep over this folks . . . it's not a big task . . . =================================================================== Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Terryg(at)SceptreCal.CCMAIL.CompuServe.COM
Date: May 01, 1996
Subject: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
'Listers -- something that occurs to me with all this talk of Quick Build Kits is the potential impact to the "old fashioned" :-) kits that Van is putting together. I'm definitely a builder that fits the "more-time-than-money-and-besides-I-WANNA-build-it" category, so I'd be disappointed if the innovations we continue to enjoy were slowed down as a result of a new focus on Quick Build Kits. You only have to look as far as the RV-3 to realize that Van's is VERY committed to product longevity and currency, so I'm not the least bit concerned that the standard kits are going to disappear, but whether the Quick Build will soak up the innovation resources. As the subject says, this is chatter, but I thought it might make for some interesting discussion...cheers... Terry in Calgary S/N 24414 "Closing HS, Starting VS" PS. Those of you who thought I'd NEVER finish skinning the HS, I got my sign off from Transport Canada night before last (and pretty good grades, too) so that baby's out of the jig by Sunday!!! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Becki Orndorff <rso(at)css.ncifcrf.gov>
Subject: Orndorffs moving
Date: May 01, 1996
GBI, better known as George and Becki Orndorff, is relocating to Ft. Worth, Texas. In an effort to better support the homebuilt community with new and better product, George and Becki will be located at Hicks Airfield (T67) in Ft. Worth, Texas after June 1, 1996. They will be opening a 3700 square foot builder assist center at this location offering workshops and project assistance. George and Becki will continue to offer their current line of products and services including the RV construction videos, interior finishing products and other related items. Their new address is: 2290 W. Hicks Road, Hanger 1-R Ft. Worth, TX 76131 Their phone is: (817) 439-3280 Geroge and Becki expect to improve their quality support to homebuilders by providing personal service to those who fly in and visit. As always, they welcome questions and requests through the US mail, by telephone and via email at orndorffg(at)aol.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: Rich Klee <Rich_Klee(at)ccm.fm.intel.com>
Subject: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets
Text item: I invested way too many hours into figuring out how to anneal rivets. I got a 3X gun and it would drive the -6 rivets. Well I can say that with annealing it will do this. But here are couple of caveats: 1.) You'll need to get a dental "burn out" oven - one accurate enough is about $300-700. I got a used one for $75 where the controller was burned out and bought a temp controller from Omega for $125. I got an additional 2 thermocouples in there to make sure that the temp is right on the money (which needs to be 925 - 935 F. This needs to be controlled quite accurately. 2.) You need to transfer the rivets from the oven to cold water in less than 3 seconds - actually that is quite easy. But you need to put the tray of rivets in the same place in the oven every time - in the beginning you need to calibrate the oven to see where the hot spots are - up to 20 F if you move you thermocouple 2-3". ( I didn't think it would be this complicated in the beginning either). 3.) Use the rivets within 1/2 hour, or store them in you freezer. But they last only couple of months in the freezer before regaining their original hardness. 4.) Van did pose an interesting question too me when I was discussing the subject of annealing -6 rivets: the spar is the most important structure in the a/c and the -6 rivets are the holding force of the spar - do you reaaaaaly want to experiment in this area. I had 14 hours to think about this (as I was driving the 600 miles home with the wing kit strapped to the roof of my 15 year old Corolla) and decided against it. But I did anneal all the -3 for the wing skins and they were pretty easy to drive. I would suggest the only time to use this technique would be if you intend not to paint the a/c, and keep the Al polished (ala Dave Anders - who did anneal his rivets) Hope this helps. ======================================================================= Rich Klee 4564 Chicago Ave. rich_klee(at)ccm.fm.intel.com Fair Oaks, CA 95628 (916) 863-1927 (will accept faxes) ======================================================================= > > I vaguely remember an article in Sport Aviation concerning the heat treatment > of rivets and how to store them after that... the recommended useable time > was fairly short post treatment... a few weeks.. Who remembers, or has the > details on this? > The process is called "annealing" and it involves using a dentist's oven or similar that you can precisely control to something like 970 degrees (if memory serves), and quenching immediately after removing from heat, and keeping them frozen until use. If you don't do it just right then you will end up with rivets that crack when set, but if you do it right then the rivets are much softer and easier to set. There was lengthy discussion about this on the RV-list a while back, and Van once wrote an article about it in the RVator (Apr 93 issue, "Soft Rivets: Boon or Boondoggle?"). The upshot was that for the average builder it's a lot more trouble than it's worth. Nevertheless, a few people do this and swear by it. I'm sure someone else can point you to the article in SA, I remember reading it but don't know what issue. Regarding annealing the wing spar rivets, yes it would make them easier to set, but 99% of us manage ok without doing it. I'd recommend just getting a bigger hammer :-) Randall Henderson RV-6 Text item: External Message Header The following mail header is for administrative use and may be ignored unless there are problems. ***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***. Subject: Re: RV-List: Wing Spar 3/16" Rivets From: edt.com!randall(at)matronics.com (Randall Henderson) Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 09:25:59 -0700 1 May 1996 17:58:47 GMT ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Alternators et. als.
>I put a car alternator in my RV-4 which is rated at 110amps. I decided to >protect it with what is called "fusable link" instead of a circuit breaker. >This is wire which is designed to burn through when it encounters excessive >current (or voltage) for a period of time. Unfortunately the manufacture >does not put ratings on the package but it is designed for car circuits >which are very similar to my RV-4 set up (identical almost). I didn't >really go out and look for such a high capacity alternator but the new >ones on cars are smaller, lighter, and higher output; I went for smaller >and lighter. So far I haven't seen my digital amp meter exceed 18amps >(after cranking, it then settles out to about 8 amps in flight) >and I can't really tell you how much current will burn the fuseable link >(of course there is a time/current plot here) but I believe it will act >the same as if it was in a car circuit. I'll post any problems I have >with this set-up if and when I have them. >Dan Boudro (electrical engineer) >RV-4 N9176Z just flying What Dan is describing is SAFE . . . he's just not really sure where the link will open and he runs the risk of having a nuisance blow . . . Of course, with a fusable link, a nuisance blow cannot be reset in flight like the undersized breakers in a Cessna, et. als. Actually, one can purchase fuseable links that are rated but I've never seen on that goes up to 110 amps . . . that takes a 4AWG wire minimum . . 2AWG better. Dan, check with local electrical equipment suppliers for Bussman JJN or JJS series fuses (or other manufacturer's equal). These are cylindrical fuses with sturdy tabs on each end. They already have a hole in the tab that permit you to bolt your alternator B-lead directly to the fuse and jumper the other end to you starter contactor on the firewall . . . there's no good reason to bring the alternator b-lead into the cockpit. You can use a couple of layers of heatshrink over the fuse assembly. See if you can find a 100 or 125 amp fuse to use in lieu of the link. I use these fuses as the prefered b-lead protector in most of my new sytems designs including one I'm working right now on a Lancair IVP with dual alternator/battery systems. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection __________________________________ | Go ahead . . . make my day . . . | | SHOW me where I'm wrong! | |__________________________________| ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
Date: May 01, 1996
I don't think the quick build kits would soak up much of the innovation talent at Vans. The off-shore production of these kits is really no different than your or I building the kit. They will 'suck up' kits as I assume Van's must sent them the same components that we would purchase. They also have to receive the fast build components back and re-ship them to the final destination. That is more of a shipping and inventory problem. I guess this opens up Van's market to those with more money than time. That rules out most of us on this list. I would prefer to put the 8K toward a new engine. But if you want to fly sooner and can afford it, well, thats the American way. Herman > 'Listers -- something that occurs to me with all this talk of Quick > Build Kits is the potential impact to the "old fashioned" :-) kits > that Van is putting together. I'm definitely a builder that fits the > "more-time-than-money-and-besides-I-WANNA-build-it" category, so I'd > be disappointed if the innovations we continue to enjoy were slowed > down as a result of a new focus on Quick Build Kits. > > You only have to look as far as the RV-3 to realize that Van's is VERY > committed to product longevity and currency, so I'm not the least bit > concerned that the standard kits are going to disappear, but whether > the Quick Build will soak up the innovation resources. > > > Terry in Calgary > S/N 24414 > "Closing HS, Starting VS" > > Herman Dierks, Dept. E54S, AWSD, Austin, Texas mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: rbusick(at)nmsu.edu (Robert Busick)
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
Interesting comments on the net today about quick build kits. Van has just shipped the first tail kit for the RV-8 and now we all want a quick build RV-8 kit! I ask in a humorous vein, when will Van start shipping prebuilt kits for the RV-8A, the nose wheel version or the RV-8B the side by side version or the deluxe RV-8C the nose wheel side by side version? Like all new products their is considerable hype about the RV-8. I have read all of the flying reports, performance stats etc on the RV-8. In Chuck Berthke's article in Kit Planes he stated very obscurely that the the RV-8 was good, but not as good as the RV-3. Of course just what is good, you can not take much baggage or a passenger in the -3. But if it is flying qualities one is after, then is the -3 the best or will the RV-8 improvements make it a better flying machine? Comparing an RV-3 with an RV-8 is difficult because of the difference in the engine horsepower. I have always been hoping that Van would come out with a hotrod improvement on the RV-3, but I guess you need to go where the money is. Does anyone know what a 200 HP RV-3 can do? Now that you can buy an RV-6 quickbuild kit, I have been wondering, just what is it that convinces a builder to go with the RV-8? Personally I would build the RV-8 for the resale value, I would rather have an RV-3 but I hesitate to go with the RV-3 because of the poor resale value. Although I do not build airplanes for resale, I may not want to keep the aircraft for the rest of my life. After I finish my RV-6 I'll be waiting for the RV-12. Bob Busick RV-6 rbusick(at)nmsu.edu ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: "Richard E Steffens" <resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com>
Subject: Marhyde Primer Source - Thanks
Thanks to those who responded to my request about a souce for the Marhyde primer. Took the advice about calling an auto body/paint store and found that I can get it 10 blocks from my office in Charlotte cheaper than Avery was selling it. The same is probably true about lots of other stuff, I just need to open my eyes. Trish and I enjoyed meeting some RVers at SNF especially Bob Skinner and Fred Stucklen. If I can stick the wings and a motor on my -6, maybe I can fly it there next year. Dick Steffens resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: chinkley(at)ix.netcom.com (Curtis R. Hinkley )
Subject: Re: RV-8 Tail Kits Shipped
You wrote: > >> Just a short note to let you all know that we shipped the >> first RV-8 tail kit today. > >Not that I'd know him, but who, might I ask, was the lucky number 1? > >Randall > I hope the first kit went to George & Becki so they could get the video made. Curtis ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: Robert Acker <75104.3077(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
>> I ask in a humorous vein, when will Van start shipping prebuilt kits for the RV-8A, the nose wheel version << Don't laugh too soon. At Van's sun'n'fun forum, an RV-8 nosedragger was mentioned as a serious possibility. Rob. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: "Mel Barlow (IJD, Ct.)" <102636.54(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: "Bio" from Mel Barlow
Hello rv-listers! I've been lurking in the shadows long enough, I suppose. I am an early RV4 builder (S/N 114). Been flying since 9/'88, 420 Hrs. So far. N 114RV (couldn't resist that S/N with "4" at the end!) has a 160 hp 0-320 E2A turning a Warnke 72X72 prop. I missed S&F this year, but OSH is on my list of "to do's", so hope to see some of you there. Thanks. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: ecole(at)ix.netcom.com (EDWARD COLE)
Subject: Re: Orndorffs moving
You wrote: > > GBI, better known as George and Becki Orndorff, is >relocating to Ft. Worth, Texas. In an effort to better support >the homebuilt community with new and better product, George and >Becki will be located at Hicks Airfield (T67) in Ft. Worth, Texas >after June 1, 1996. They will be opening a 3700 square foot >builder assist center at this location offering workshops and >project assistance. George and Becki will continue to offer >their current line of products and services including the RV >construction videos, interior finishing products and other >related items. > >Their new address is: 2290 W. Hicks Road, Hanger 1-R > Ft. Worth, TX 76131 > >Their phone is: (817) 439-3280 > >Geroge and Becki expect to improve their quality support to >homebuilders by providing personal service to those who fly in >and visit. As always, they welcome questions and requests >through the US mail, by telephone and via email at >orndorffg(at)aol.com. > > Good luck to you and George in your new venture, Becki. Thanks for all the help so far and the videos. Hope to see you guys one day when I finish the RV6. Glad to have you closer to California! Ed Cole RV6A 24430 ecole(at)ix.netcom.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 01, 1996
From: Jerry Springer <jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com>
Subject: Exploding Battery
In reference to a -4 with a exploding battery, I would like to know what evidents there is for this. My understanding of this accident was that it was caused from a metel prop that had been cut and repitched out of manufacturing spec. and part of a blade lost, this could surely cause a battery explosion. -- Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS First Flight July 14, 1989 :-) jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: alanw(at)netspace.net.au (Alan Williams)
Subject: Re: Trip to U.S.A.- thanks
Thanks to all for the help and advice for our trip down the West Coast this month - its just confirmed again what a friendly bunch you Americans are. I promise to drive on the right and look forward to talking to some of you over the next 3 weeks. Regards, Alan Melbourne, Australia RV6A - Building wings - temporarily on hold ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Foyboy6(at)aol.com
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: 6A nosewheel
Jim: I have been using 30 psi on all three wheels on the 6A. 200 hours so far. I had to change the main wheel tires because of bad toe out on the left main. The nose wheel tire and tube are the original and no wear so far. I use 30 psi as the aircraft seems to roll easier with less friction. Oh yes, I had to change brake linings at 100 hours as the main wheel pants were too tight over the brake housings and would not allow the caliper to "float". Hope this helps. Changed the toe out with heat on the leg and twisting. John ________________________________________________________________________________
From: DerFlieger(at)aol.com
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: Re: Battery Location & Wiring
>It's your friendly electro-wienie lurking about again . . . been tracking >several threads on this topic and would offer the following comments >and observations: Bob, I am most appreciative of the postings you have made. There is no substitute for advice derived from actual experience combined with appropriate technical knowledge. Thanks, you help put the "shine" on this list!! Regarding the battery contactor being close to the battery, I would like to say further, and I think you would agree, that it should be on the same side of the firewall as the battery to preclude an "always hot" wire passing through. In my 6A I have an RG battery and master and starter contactors inside the firewall. Jim Stugart Austin, TX ________________________________________________________________________________
From: walsh(at)cpeedy.ENET.dec.com
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: RV3/RV8 chatter...
Bob, Why would you want to "hotrod" an RV3? Chuck Berthe wasn't talking about top end speed when he commented that the RV3 was still the most fun you can have in the sky. To get 200 hp in an RV3, you would easily add 100lbs to the nose of the plane. If you did this, it wouldn't be an RV3 anymore. Chuck also commented that his RV4 with 180/CS is a tad nose heavy when flown solo. He said something to the effect that overheard manuevers were more trouble than they are worth ( referring to high stick forces ). I guess if you want "performance", there is no substitute for light weight. I think the RV8 is a great plane for "big guys". It is undoubtedly the most comfortable RV for non-standard pilots. Making a plane like this is easy. I think Van has spent a lot of time trying to make sure it still performs like an RV. This is not so easy. I'm with you though, all other things being equal I would prefer an RV3. However, like most people, I have to have a second seat. So, I'm building a 4. Now, if I could find a way to make it as LIGHT as a 3, that would be something........... John ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Exploding Battery
>---------- Forwarded Message ---------- >From: Jerry Springer, INTERNET:jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com >TO: (unknown), INTERNET:RVLIST(at)MATRONICS.COM >DATE: 5/2/96 1:59 AM >RE: RV-List: Exploding Battery >In reference to a -4 with a exploding battery, I would like to know what >evidents there is for this. My understanding of this accident was that it >was caused from a metel prop that had been cut and repitched out of >manufacturing spec. and part of a blade lost, this could surely cause a >battery explosion. Thank you for jumping in there Jerry. I am always curious about reports of unusual "happenings" and exploding batteries is one of them. You read about them, hear about them and after awhile, one begins to worry about them without having GOOD foundation. Ignorance breeds distrust breeds fear breeds paranoia breeds a lot of wasted time and effort that could be better applied to other things. Does anyone else have any information about this "event?" Thanks! Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ------------------------------------ | Go ahead . . . Make my Day . . . | | SHOW me where I'm wrong! | ------------------------------------ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: Dan Boudro <dboudro(at)nmia.com>
Subject: Re: Alternators et. als.
On 1 May 1996, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > To: >internet:rv-list(at)matronics.com > *** snip *** > Dan, check with local electrical equipment suppliers for Bussman > JJN or JJS series fuses (or other manufacturer's equal). These are > cylindrical fuses with sturdy tabs on each end. They already have > a hole in the tab that permit you to bolt your alternator B-lead > directly to the fuse and jumper the other end to you starter contactor > on the firewall . . . there's no good reason to bring the alternator > b-lead into the cockpit. You can use a couple of layers of heatshrink > over the fuse assembly. See if you can find a 100 or 125 amp fuse > to use in lieu of the link. I use these fuses as the prefered b-lead > protector in most of my new sytems designs including one I'm working > right now on a Lancair IVP with dual alternator/battery systems. > > Bob . . . > AeroElectric Connection > > __________________________________ > | Go ahead . . . make my day . . . | > | SHOW me where I'm wrong! | > |__________________________________| > > Bob, I found the equivalent fuses from our supplier. The Bussmann JJN equivalent I can get is the Gould Shawmut A3T series from 1 - 1200 amps available. This fuse is rated at 300VAC (to ground) and is used where high available short circuit current exists e.g. on a 220V AC panel or motor protection. The equivalent Bussmann JJS is the Gould Shawmut A6T Series from 1 - 800 amps and rated to 600VAC. I would choose the A6T as it has a higher voltage rating which is better for our DC application. Both have very good current limiting capabilities according the catalog, and both have those tabs which are great for our application. I don't think I'd use a 100amp fuse thought, it seems to me there's no reason for your alternator to be putting out 95 amps. I'd probably stick with the 1.3 rule, ie. I don't think I should ever exceed 20amps during normal operation so 1.3 x 20 = 26, so I'd choose a A6T-30 or 600VAC 30amp. If I have trouble with the fuseable link I'll switch to a fuse setup you've described, never thought of connecting it directly to the b-lead and Starter solonoid, great tip! You could of course use a fuse holder which would make replacement easier. Dan Boudro RV-4 N9167Z (just flying) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: dougweil(at)pressenter.com (Doug Weiler)
Subject: Re: Orndorffs moving
Date: May 02, 1996
Geo, Becky, and all... Best of luck in your new venture. Jerry VanG had mentioned to me that you were moving but didn't know if it was a sure thing yet. Sounds like a change of pace we would all like to make. Doug Weiler, MN Wing. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com>
Subject: Re: H2AD?
On 1 May 1996, Robert Acker wrote: > Anyone using (or know of) a H2AD installation in an RV, and what mods are > necessary? There is an article about this in an old RVator. It's in "14 years of RVator", I think. As I recall, the top portion of the dynofocal ring had to be modified. Best Regards, Dave Barnhart rv-6 sn 23744 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com>
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
I, too, have been thinking a lot about the quick-build kits, and have the following random thoughts: 1. It will certainly result in more sales of kits, but I'm not sure it will result in more completed airplanes. If someone doesn't have the 2000-2500 hours for completing a tradional kit, he probably doesn't have the 1000-1200 hours available for the quick-build kit either. 2. Several of the items in the finishing kit (canopy, cowling, fairings) are some of the most difficult, time-consuming, and tedious parts of building the airplane. Those of us who have built traditional kits have gained a lot of experience along the way that prepares us for the hard parts in the finishing kit. The quick-build kit, however, launches the new builder into those areas with minimal experience. 3. The plans and construction manual for the finishing kit had better get a lot better and more detailed, or most quick-build kit owners are going to have a tough time of it. 4. The quick-build kit will probably put most of the 'hired-gun' RV-6 builders out of that business. In order to stay in business, they will need to switch their emphasis on doing excellent finish-up work (There may well be a goldmine in doing high-quality sliding canopy installations for hire.) and building RV-8's. Best Regards, Dave Barnhart rv-6 sn 23744 skinning the fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: rbusick(at)nmsu.edu (Robert Busick)
Subject: Re: H2AD?
Check out the 14 years of the RVATOR, it has a good article on the H2AD. Last time I talked to VANS about engines they were recommending buying an H2AD core and doing a rebuild, their reasoning was it is a newer engine model, cores can be gotten a lot cheaper, the reliability problem is more a myth than fact, and you can put it into the RV-6, didn't ask about putting it into other RVs. Only real downside I can see is: it has a solid crank. My solution was to go buy an O-360 A1D that I plan on putting a constant speed prop on. Bob Busick RV-6 rbusick(at)nmsu.edu >Anyone using (or know of) a H2AD installation in an RV, and what mods are >necessary? > >Thanks, Rob. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: rust47rg(at)one.net
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
> I guess this opens up Van's market to those with more money than > time. That rules out most of us on this list. > I would prefer to put the 8K toward a new engine. But if you want to > fly sooner and can afford it, well, thats the American way. > > Herman > >> And it opens it up to people with more money then skill. Sure you can go out and buy a built RV but they don't let you sign off the condition inspections. I wonder how long it will be before we hear of a product liability suit on a fast build airplane. Opens up a whole new can of worms......I kind of like knowing all of the construction details of mine when the G meter starts to wind up. If it breaks I have nobody to blame but myself. I guess Van has to stay up with all of the others in the market. Progress? Regards: Rusty Gossard N47RG RV-4 Flying ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michael Angiulo <mikeang(at)MICROSOFT.com>
Subject: It's here!
Date: May 02, 1996
I went to Van's yesterday and picked up my RV-8 emp. kit. It was the first time I've been there, and the first time I've ever seen an 8 in person. I was taken on a factory tour and given a ride in N118RV. I have never had such a perma-grin in my entire life. We did some aileron rolls, wingovers, climbs descents, and I was even given the stick for a while in the back seat. If you're no sold after that demo flight, you're hopeless. By the way I think since the first kit was shipped on Monday, and I was the first one to pick mine up in person, I think I actually was the first person to have an 8 emp kit in hand! I don't even know what I'm doing at work today... By the way when I was there I learned about a "finders fee" which is given to the person most instrumental in my decision to build an RV. Unfortunately I don't know the name of that person. If you are on the list, please respond to me. I met you in Powell's books in Portland, I was there with my girlfriend, and you told me that you were building an RV-4. We spoke for a while about my not owning a garage and such, and I left with confidence and interest in the RV line. I think you're a member of a Portland builders club. If you're out there, just email me the approximate date when we talked and your name and I will fill out this finders form so you get the reward. Thanks, -Mike RV8 pieces scattered on floor ________________________________________________________________________________
From: rust47rg(at)one.net
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: Re: RV3/RV8 chatter...
SNIP >Chuck also commented that his RV4 with 180/CS is a tad nose heavy when flown >solo. He said something to the effect that overheard manuevers were more >trouble than they are worth ( referring to high stick forces ). I guess >if you want "performance", there is no substitute for light weight. > SNIP >I'm with you though, all other things being equal I would prefer an RV3. >However, like most people, I have to have a second seat. So, I'm building >a 4. Now, if I could find a way to make it as LIGHT as a 3, that would >be something........... > >John >John: If you put the battery in the back you can correct the "Tad nose heavy" problem. It's worked for me for 2 years. Regards: Rusty Gossard N47RG RV-4 Flying 180 c/s (with the battery in the back) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WStucklen(at)aol.com
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: Re: 6A nosewheel
>Jim: I have been using 30 psi on all three wheels on the 6A. 200 hours so >far. I had to change the main wheel tires because of bad toe out on the left >main. The nose wheel tire and tube are the original and no wear so far. I use >30 psi as the aircraft seems to roll easier with less friction. Oh yes, I had >to change brake linings at 100 hours as the main wheel pants were too tight >over the brake housings and would not allow the caliper to "float". Hope this >helps. Changed the toe out with heat on the leg and twisting. >John > > Ouch! Hope you re-heat treated them when you were done..... Fred Stucklen RV6A N925RV wstucklen(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com (John Ammeter)
Subject: Re: 6A nosewheel
>Jim: I have been using 30 psi on all three wheels on the 6A. 200 hours so >far. I had to change the main wheel tires because of bad toe out on the left >main. The nose wheel tire and tube are the original and no wear so far. I use >30 psi as the aircraft seems to roll easier with less friction. Oh yes, I had >to change brake linings at 100 hours as the main wheel pants were too tight >over the brake housings and would not allow the caliper to "float". Hope this >helps. Changed the toe out with heat on the leg and twisting. >John > > John, Wouldn't you affect the temper of the steel by using heat to correct the toe-out? Also, what brand of tires are you using? My tires certainly don't last as long as they should. I think my gearlegs are also toe'd out too much. John Ammeter ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com Seattle WA, USA RV-6 N16JA Flying 5 years ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com (John Ammeter)
Subject: Re: "Bio" from Mel Barlow
>Hello rv-listers! I've been lurking in the shadows long enough, I suppose. >I am an early RV4 builder (S/N 114). Been flying since 9/'88, 420 Hrs. So >far. N 114RV (couldn't resist that S/N with "4" at the end!) has a 160 hp >0-320 E2A turning a Warnke 72X72 prop. I missed S&F this year, but OSH is on my >list of "to do's", so hope to see some of you there. Thanks. > > > Mel, Glad to see you here. Now we expect you to contribute to the Q & A sessions constantly occurring here. I've got one for you already. I've got an E2A also but mine is 150 HP. It came from a Cherokee 140 that had been damaged in a windstorm. Have you changed the pistons in your E2A? If so, how difficult was it and what parts did you replace? Again, Welcome. John Ammeter ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com Seattle WA, USA RV-6 N16JA Flying 5 years ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: RELOSVCS!WESTREG!EHENSON(at)cldwell.attmail.com (Henson, Eric)
Subject: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatt
I certianly don't mean to offend but did anyone see the RV-4 nosedragger in SA a few years back? It will make you yearn for a tailwheel checkout. Some things are not meant to be. After all we're not talking about a Pitts. Eric >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reply Separator <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< On 5/2/96 My pal Rob wrote........ Don't laugh too soon. At Van's sun'n'fun forum, an RV-8 nosedragger was mentioned as a serious possibility. Rob. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: "Elon Ormsby" <Elon.Ormsby(at)quickmail.llnl.gov>
Subject: Exploding Battery
REGARDING Exploding Battery I think the reference to an exploding battery is not about the current event describing a prop failure but rather, an accident that took place about 3 months ago. Supposedly, an RV was on down-wind and a witness head a loud explosion. Preliminary hear-say reported it as a battery explosion. The crash was fatal. Don't know any details about an investigation. -Elon ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Bat Contactor Location
>Regarding the battery contactor being close to the battery, I would >like to say further, and I think you would agree, that it should be >on the same side of the firewall as the battery to preclude an "always >hot" wire passing through. In my 6A I have an RG battery and master >and starter contactors inside the firewall. >Jim Stugart >Austin, TX Jim, You bet . . . with all switches off you should have a very bare minimum of hot wires . . . whether or not they penetrate a bulkhead or firewall. Now . . in defense of the exceptions . . you need a certain number of always-hot wires to support electric clocks, radio memories, dome lights that operate without battery master on, AND electronic ignition. These leads always get fused right at the battery and in nearly ALL cases do not exceed 5 amperes in capacity. My only comment about your setup is that I generally put the battery contactor inside the cockpit or behind the seat right next to the battery and put the starter contactor on the firewall as close as possible to the starter power input and alternator output (B-Terminal). This allows one to feed alternator power into the system right on the firewall and eliminate the 50-80 amp breaker with all its attendant noises and magnetic fields OUT of the cockpit. Thank you for the interest and input. . . . Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ------------------------------- | Go ahead . . . Make my day. | | SHOW me where I'm wrong! | | www.southwind.net\~nuckolls | ------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Becki Orndorff <rso(at)css.ncifcrf.gov>
Subject: Medical transport
Date: May 02, 1996
All, Please indulge my diversion. I have a friend who requires medical = treatment in a city about 1000 miles away weekly for 12 weeks. Does = anyone know of pilot organizations that might help? Thanks for the help = in advance! Becki Orndorff ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
I have to admit, part of me wasn't too happy when I saw these quick build kits and realised that for $7000 someone else will be able to take delivery of an RV that's further along than I am after 3 years of building. That being said, I think that this development is going to go a long way towards making Van's the Cessna of homebuilts. If I ever cave and decide to build a -6A I'm sure I'll get the fast build "Van Can". Randall Henderson RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: "Richard E Steffens" <resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com>
Subject: Exploding Battery
I've had two experiences with exploding batteries, both in automobles. First was when my girlfriend called me for help because her battery had just blew up. I did't think she knew what she was talking about until I looked under the hood. Yep, it blew up. Few months later when I tried to start my car after work - Bang - everything dead. The side of the Die-Hard blown clean off - battery acid everywhere. Both batteries blew on trying to start after setting for a while. I think both were probably low on fluid and gas proportions just right when the starting load caused an internal spark. Makes one cross fingers and close eyes on starting. Hate to have that happen in my airplane. A battery box 'might' contain the blast, but not the acid. I like what Bob says and will probably get a RG battery for my -6. I'm considering dual electronic ignition so I'll need two. A big one and a small one. At least one will be mounted on the front side of the firewall. Bob, does your book have a good circuit for dual electronic ignition with two batteries? (I know if it has a circuit, it will be a good one). Guess I better get your book. Dick Steffens resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: PatK(at)gnn.com (Patrick Kelley)
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
Personally, I'm waiting for the RV-6J (You didn't REALLY think that ad in the RVator for an engineer with turbo experience was a joke, did you?). PatK - RV-6A - Riveting the spars this weekend; it's hard to type with all my digits crossed... >From: nmsu.edu!rbusick(at)matronics.com (Robert Busick) >Sender: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: Re: RV-List: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter) > > > > Interesting comments on the net today about quick build kits. Van >has just shipped the first tail kit for the RV-8 and now we all want a >quick build RV-8 kit! > > I ask in a humorous vein, when will Van start shipping prebuilt >kits for the RV-8A, the nose wheel version or the RV-8B the side by side >version or the deluxe RV-8C the nose wheel side by side version? > > > > Like all new products their is considerable hype about the RV-8. I >have read all of the flying reports, performance stats etc on the RV-8. In >Chuck Berthke's article in Kit Planes he stated very obscurely that the the >RV-8 was good, but not as good as the RV-3. Of course just what is good, >you can not take much baggage or a passenger in the -3. But if it is >flying qualities one is after, then is the -3 the best >or will the RV-8 improvements make it a better flying machine? Comparing >an RV-3 with an RV-8 is difficult because of the difference in the engine >horsepower. I have always been hoping that Van would come out with a >hotrod improvement on the RV-3, but I guess you need to go where the money >is. Does anyone know what a 200 HP RV-3 can do? > > Now that you can buy an RV-6 quickbuild kit, I have been wondering, >just what is it that convinces a builder to go with the RV-8? Personally I >would build the RV-8 for the resale value, I would rather have an RV-3 but >I hesitate to go with the RV-3 because of the poor resale value. Although >I do not build airplanes for resale, I may not want to keep the aircraft >for the rest of my life. After I finish my RV-6 I'll be waiting for the >RV-12. > >Bob Busick >RV-6 >rbusick(at)nmsu.edu > > PatK ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michael Angiulo <mikeang(at)MICROSOFT.com>
Subject: Source for Marhyde Primer
Date: May 02, 1996
I called them and they are planning to discontinue shipping canned primer as the shipping hassles aren't worth the effort. If you haven't started buying this primer from them they will recommend you try a local body shop first. ---------- From: aol.com!WStucklen(at)matronics.com[SMTP:aol.com!WStucklen(at)matronics.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 1996 9:57 AM Subject: Re: RV-List: Source for Marhyde Primer > Some time ago I remember someone giving a source for the Marhyde > primer in aerosol cans. I can't find it so if someone knows where I > can get some, please tell me. Avery quit selling the stuff and I like > it for some things. Thanks. > > Dick Steffens Almost ready for the finish kit RV-6 > resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com > > Avery has it at about $11.00 per can........ Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV wstucklen(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: Robert Acker <75104.3077(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Exploding Battery (longish)
>> in reference to a -4 with a exploding battery, I would like to know what >evidents there is for this. My understanding of this accident was that it >was caused from a metel prop that had been cut and repitched out of >manufacturing spec. and part of a blade lost, this could surely cause a >battery explosion. Thank you for jumping in there Jerry. I am always curious about reports of unusual "happenings" and exploding batteries is one of them. You read about them, hear about them and after awhile, one begins to worry about them without having GOOD foundation. Ignorance breeds distrust breeds fear breeds paranoia breeds a lot of wasted time and effort that could be better applied to other things. Does anyone else have any information about this "event?" Thanks! Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection << ********************************************************************************* **** Gentlemen, The alleged battery explosion I wrote about was, indeed, recalled from memory. So on your entirely valid concerns for some proof...I dug out my rv-archives, old rvators, etc. to find it. Here's what I found...I may have mistakingly passed on hearsay, nonetheless it prompted my concern. Point is, regardless if this actually did or did not occur, IT COULD. I'm looking for ways to minimize its potential, so it does not happen to you or to me. So far Bob's suggestion of RG batteries seems the best solution, if they indeed are explosion proof. Rob (RV-6 Quickbuild). P.S. Bob, how do I get a copy of your book? ********************************************************************************* ** From: barr(at)netcom.netcom.com (Keith Barr) Subject: Re: RV-List: RV crash at Longmont CO Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 21:18:33 -0700 (PDT) John Ammeter says: > I just heard that an RV-4 spun in and burned last Saturday afternoon at the > airport at Longmont CO. The pilot was killed, no passengers. Witnesses > stated the aircraft had smoke coming from it as it spun into the ground next > to the runway. No word yet as to who was the pilot. The number on the > aircraft seems to be N611R from a newspaper article a friend sent me. It was a few weekends ago. Apparently (heard this at the last local EAA meeting) his battery exploded, probably killing, or at least disabling, him immediately. The airplane then dropped about 800' onto the airport. It was some sort of gell-cell battery. I cannot remember his name, but he recently moved to the Longmont area from the Dallas area. ___________________________________ _____ | Keith Barr barr(at)netcom.com \ \ \__ _____ | COM-ASMEL-IA-A&IGI \ \ \/_______\___\_____________ | Westminster, Colorado, USA }-----< /_/ ....................... `-. | http://chinook.atd.ucar.edu/~barr / `-----------,----,--------------' |___________________________________/ _/____/0 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: "Mark N. Hilsen" <71322.1267(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Engine Building
I have just been introduced to the RV-List by Seattle's John Ammeter, and after reading a couple hundred notes decided to join in. I am building with my father-in-law an RV-4 #2420 and have finished the tail feathers and wings, and the major fuselage is jigged up. It has taken us 3 years so far so we figure another 3 years to go -- but the work itself is the joy and we are in no hurry to finish. Can anyone offer me some insights into the business of finding an engine? I wanted to build up an O-360-A1A but with H2AD pistons, an Ellison TBI, and perhaps electronic ignition, and both flow and dynamically balanced -- but finding the core may be a problem. (When I started three years ago I saw guaranteed crankshaft cores for $4000, but dealers laugh out loud if you mention those numbers and availability today.) One option is to build an engine from parts -- the "Johnny Cash" engine -- but with no experience to guide me I worry that this may result in an expensive engine with lots of parts mis-fit problems downline. Of course, I can always buy a new engine from Van's but then I get something that is not exactly what I want, but at least it will be *brand new*. And I might get back later with questions about constant speed propellors ... Thanks. Mark N. Hilsen 71322.1267(at)compuserve.com Kent, Washington ________________________________________________________________________________
From: david_fried(at)smtpgwy.dehavilland.ca
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: Nosedraggers
How about nosepusher instead of nosedragger. If you are moving something around from a position behind it, you are pushing, not dragging. Besides, it seems easier to say with affection. It's bad enough that the folks with conventional (I can hear the replies now) landing gear got stuck with taildragger. :) David Fried DF-6 C-____ dfried(at)dehavilland.ca ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: FW: RV-List: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatt Date: 5/2/96 02:03 PM I certianly don't mean to offend but did anyone see the RV-4 nosedragger in SA a few years back? It will make you yearn for a tailwheel checkout. Some things are not meant to be. After all we're not talking about a Pitts. Eric >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reply Separator <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< On 5/2/96 My pal Rob wrote........ Don't laugh too soon. At Van's sun'n'fun forum, an RV-8 nosedragger was mentioned as a serious possibility. Rob. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: jflahert(at)elmer.tcinc.com (John Flaherty)
Subject: Re: H2AD?
Date: May 02, 1996
Received in a message composed by David A. Barnhart > > > > On 1 May 1996, Robert Acker wrote: > > > Anyone using (or know of) a H2AD installation in an RV, and what mods are > > necessary? > > There is an article about this in an old RVator. It's in "14 years of > RVator", I think. As I recall, the top portion of the dynofocal ring had > to be modified. > > Best Regards, > Dave Barnhart > rv-6 sn 23744 > > I understand that this might be to clear the accessory case. Has anyone tried to replace the accessory case to see if this would allow use of the stock mount? John Flaherty ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Alternators et. al.
Dan Boudro wrote: >I found the equivalent fuses from our supplier. The Bussmann JJN >equivalent I can get is the Gould Shawmut A3T series from 1 - 1200 amps >available. This fuse is rated at 300VAC (to ground) >and is used where high available . . >I don't think I'd use a 100amp fuse thought, it seems to me there's >no reason for your alternator to be putting out 95 amps. I'd probably >stick with the 1.3 rule, ie. I don't think I should ever exceed 20amps >during normal operation so 1.3 x 20 = 26, so I'd choose a A6T-30 . . . >or 600VAC 30amp. >If I have trouble with the fuseable link I'll switch to a fuse setup >you've described, never thought of connecting it directly to the b-lead >and Starter solonoid, great tip! You could of course use a fuse holder >which would make replacement easier. Dan, I don't size the b-lead fuse to the expected normal loads. Fuses are to protect wires, wires should be rated for NO LESS than full alternator output but there's nothing wrong with making them BIGGER than necessary. Hence, we sell a kit consiting of the JJN-70 and terminals for 4AWG wire along with bolts and heat shrink. This is a single solution to all alternators up to and including 60 amp machines. It's quite possible to get a 60 amp machine to put out MORE than 60. Run battery flat on cold, drippy day. Use ground power to start the engine. Note that alternator is on line and charging. Turn on all the heat, lights and radios and launch into the blue. A GOOD battery will take as much as the alternator will willingly deliver which, WHEN IT IS COLD is generally greater than nominal rated output (that's why so many SpamCan drivers have experienced nuisance trips of their panel mounted 60 amp b-lead breaker. It's the general knowlege of nuisance tripping that leads people to believe that it NECESSARY to put that breaker on the panel. I suggest that the breaker shoudl NEVER open under any and all NORMAL conditions including the scenario described above. The JJN-70/4AWG combo works up to a 60 amp alternator. For larger machines, the fuse/wire combo needs to go up ASSUMING that that there are conditions under which the alternator will put out a tad MORE than rated current. Not for very long but obviously long enough to pop a breaker in the SpamCans. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ------------------------------- | Go ahead . . . Make my day. | | SHOW me where I'm wrong! | | www.southwind.net\~nuckolls | ------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Terry Williams <terry(at)is.com>
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
In June's Plane and Pilot, Alison Behr describes her experience = "building" a One Design. I have to admit to a little disgust. She = wants all of the performance, but doesn't want the cost of an = Extra 300. So, she felt that she could get what she wanted in a = One Design for just under $100K. Geez! A hundred thousand dollars! = How many RV-???s could I build for that? Some people and their = money. Hardly a "one design" if you ask me. At least for what I = consider an airplane in the "one design" category to be. She and a = team of 5 aircraft performance specialists have constructed a = quick build One Design. It has one of the most awsome engines that = I have ever heard of. A LyCon IO-360 that gets 231 hp on the dyno. = Wow! Imagine that airplane in an Advanced competition. But, man = what a price tag. Must be nice. Anyway, I have much more time than money. I want to build an RV-4 = (I don't like the -8 as much as the -4; so, call me irrational). = There really isn't anything that would qualify as "quick build" = for the RV-4. You can't even get a pre-drilled tail for the -4 = (though I think you can get pre-drilled wing skins). But, that's = O.K. I'm in no hurry. I guess I will be pretty good at drilling = holes in sheet metal by the time I'm done. My plane will get = finished when it gets finished. And I won't overspend in the = process, because I don't have the extra money. My plane may not = win any awards, but I'll bet that it will fly as good as those = that have gone before. And I will have the pride to have been the = person that smashed 13,000 rivets and two thumbs to make it fly. = BTW... there is a local builder that finished his RV-4 in 18 = months. So, I guess anything is possible. He said that he = religiously spent 3 - 4 hours everyday. I doubt that I will have = that much time to spend on my project. But again, I'm not in a = hurry. IMHO, the quick build kits are nice, but unnecessary and too = expensive. I guess if you have the money, go for it. If you and I = start at the same time I will probably have to watch you blow by = me from the cockpit of my rented C-150 for several years. But, one = of these days...check your (rv)six o'clock. You might be a "target = of opportunity." ;) tw Begin forwarded message: From: one.net!rust47rg(at)matronics.com Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 12:04:29 -0400 Subject: Re: RV-List: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter) > I guess this opens up Van's market to those with more money = than > time. That rules out most of us on this list. =20 > I would prefer to put the 8K toward a new engine. But if you = want to > fly sooner and can afford it, well, thats the American way. >=20 > Herman > >> =20 And it opens it up to people with more money then skill. Sure you = can go out and buy a built RV but they don't let you sign off the = condition inspections. I wonder how long it will be before we hear of a = product liability suit on a fast build airplane. Opens up a whole new can = of worms......I kind of like knowing all of the construction details = of mine when the G meter starts to wind up. If it breaks I have nobody to = blame but myself. I guess Van has to stay up with all of the others in the = market. Progress? Regards: Rusty Gossard N47RG RV-4 Flying ________________________________________________________________________________
From: walsh(at)cpeedy.ENET.dec.com
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: exploding battery
I am not positive but I believe this is the accident that we are talking about when referring to the "exploding battery". This is the NTSB preliminary account. John A homebuilt RV-4 collided with terrain near mid-field on the airport prevailed for the local flight. According to witnesses, the aircraft was trailing white smoke as it passed over the airport at roughly 800 feet AGL. Several witnesses described hearing a "popping" noise. They then saw the aircraft nose down and spin to the ground beside Runway 29 at about mid-field. The witnesses said that the aircraft began to burn shortly after the collision. The aircraft was destroyed and the pilot/owner was fatally injured. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: Robert Acker <r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
> >> I guess this opens up Van's market to those with more money than >> time. That rules out most of us on this list. >> I would prefer to put the 8K toward a new engine. But if you want to >> fly sooner and can afford it, well, thats the American way. >> >> Herman >> >>> >And it opens it up to people with more money then skill. Sure you can go >out and buy a built RV but they don't let you sign off the condition >inspections. I wonder how long it will be before we hear of a product >liability suit on a fast build airplane. Opens up a whole new can of >worms......I kind of like knowing all of the construction details of mine >when the G meter starts to wind up. If it breaks I have nobody to blame but >myself. I guess Van has to stay up with all of the others in the market. >Progress? > >Regards: >Rusty Gossard >N47RG RV-4 Flying > > Well, having bought a quickbuild kit I have to jump in here and defend my choice . Everyone is presenting some good points here. Here's my $0.02 worth on the Quickbuild. Several "skill building" procedures, such as making wing ribs and fuselage formers from scratch, must be performed. My understanding is the Quickbuild still forces you to do at least *one* of every operation needed in the standard kit. The repetition is gone though. No, most quickbuild kit builders will not have the airframe expertise of plans or standard kit builders, but they will know far more than most pilots do about their airplane (i.e. average spamcan driver). From the finish kit on (i.e. engine, avionics, and system installation) they will definitely "know" their airplane. I too had concerns about the integrity of the non-visible structure. I have carefully inspected what I could see, and have been assured by Van that what's underneath is okay as well. 6G's will tell . Plans-built, kit-built, or quick-built, I'm still the manufacturer so if it breaks its my fault. Why did I choose the quickbuild instead of standard? I have a noise sensitivity issue. I was faced with building a composite plane (on-site) or the RV (off-site). The Quickbuild allows me to build the plane I really want at home. No, I do not have the extra money. I took out a loan to finance the difference, and am gaining a roomate to make the payment. So instead of that shiny new Lycoming that I had planned, I am looking for a good used one. Anybody have any leads (seriously)? Rob. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: Richard Jorgensen <rpjorgen(at)wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us>
Subject: Re: Nosedraggers
The wheel does drag behind the steering axis and that provides the stability in the steering goemetry much like "castor" in a car or "trail" in a bike steering geometry. ***************************************************************************** rick jorgensen email address:rpjorgen(at)wheel.ucdavis.edu On Thu, 2 May 1996 smtpgwy.dehavilland.ca!david_fried(at)matronics.com wrote: > How about nosepusher instead of nosedragger. If you are moving > something around from a position behind it, you are pushing, not > dragging. > > Besides, it seems easier to say with affection. It's bad enough that > the folks with conventional (I can hear the replies now) landing gear > got stuck with taildragger. > > :) > > David Fried > DF-6 C-____ > dfried(at)dehavilland.ca > > > ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ > Subject: FW: RV-List: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatt > Author: rv-list(at)matronics.com at unix.po > Date: 5/2/96 02:03 PM > > > > I certianly don't mean to offend but did anyone see the RV-4 nosedragger in > SA a few years back? It will make you yearn for a tailwheel checkout. Some > things are not meant to be. After all we're not talking about a Pitts. > > Eric > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reply Separator <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > > On 5/2/96 My pal Rob wrote........ > > Don't laugh too soon. At Van's sun'n'fun forum, an RV-8 nosedragger was > mentioned as a serious possibility. > > Rob. > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Terryg(at)SceptreCal.CCMAIL.CompuServe.COM
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
Rusty wrote... "And it opens it up to people with more money then skill. Sure you can go out and buy a built RV but they don't let you sign off the condition inspections. I wonder how long it will be before we hear of a product liability suit on a fast build airplane. Opens up a whole new can of worms......I kind of like knowing all of the construction details of mine when the G meter starts to wind up. If it breaks I have nobody to blame but myself. I guess Van has to stay up with all of the others in the market. Progress?" I think that any project/activity/product that makes Van's a robust, viable entity is good for aviation in general and homebuilding specifically. But I do subscribe to the philosophy that if anything should happen to my RV when it's done, I'll only have myself to blame, and therefore, I'll probably end up doing all the work myself (for better or worse)! I hadn't thought about the product liability thing, that I don't want to! Cheers... Terry in Calgary S/N 24414 "Riveting Second Side of HS, Starting VS" ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Terryg(at)SceptreCal.CCMAIL.CompuServe.COM
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatt
Eric Wrote... "I certianly don't mean to offend but did anyone see the RV-4 nosedragger in SA a few years back? It will make you yearn for a tailwheel checkout. Some things are not meant to be. After all we're not talking about a Pitts." That'd make it look like a Varga Kachina (sp?), methinks... Terry in Calgary S/N 24414 "Riveting Second Side of HS, Starting VS" ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: "Elon Ormsby" <Elon.Ormsby(at)quickmail.llnl.gov>
Subject: nose-pusher
REGARDING nose-pusher Dave that is true only if YOU are "pushing" it. The prop is still in FRONT of the nose gear and therefore the gear it is still being pulled (or dragged) along by the prop. I guess it depends on who is doing the work - you or the dinosaurs. -Elon ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Terryg(at)SceptreCal.CCMAIL.CompuServe.COM
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
Dave Wrote... "I, too, have been thinking a lot about the quick-build kits, and have the following random thoughts: 1. It will certainly result in more sales of kits, but I'm not sure it will result in more completed airplanes. If someone doesn't have the 2000-2500 hours for completing a tradional kit, he probably doesn't have the 1000-1200 hours available for the quick-build kit either." You might be right, but I don't think that we should underestimate the psychological value of having something that STARTS OFF looking like an airplane, and only gets better. "2. Several of the items in the finishing kit (canopy, cowling, fairings) are some of the most difficult, time-consuming, and tedious parts of building the airplane. Those of us who have built traditional kits have gained a lot of experience along the way that prepares us for the hard parts in the finishing kit. The quick-build kit, however, launches the new builder into those areas with minimal experience." Really interesting thought, and could very well be true. However, I'm finding that for the first while, at least, EVERYTHING is on the learning curve, but so far, nothing has stumped me (priming came close). I can only assume that this will apply to the Quick Build. "3. The plans and construction manual for the finishing kit had better get a lot better and more detailed, or most quick-build kit owners are going to have a tough time of it." True, but I have found that the RV-LIST has been invaluable for supplementing written instructions from Van's, as have FKJ's instructions as well. "4. The quick-build kit will probably put most of the 'hired-gun' RV-6 builders out of that business. In order to stay in business, they will need to switch their emphasis on doing excellent finish-up work (There may well be a goldmine in doing high-quality sliding canopy installations for hire.) and building RV-8's." You'd have to think that it would have an impact on those, like the Orndorff's, that are setting up builder assistance centres. I can't think it's going to mean a drop in business, but it could well mean a change in the nature of the assistance being provided, as you say. Cheers... Terry in Calgary S/N 24414 "Riveting Second Side of HS, Starting VS" ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: billphil(at)ix.netcom.com (William Phillips )
Subject: A Screamin' machine
I was asked when joining the rv mailing list to describe the project in which I am involved. First of all I have advanced degrees in nuclear physics and a nuclear engineering from the university of Washington. I also hold six flight instructor ratings and an ATP. I was asked to join an RV-6A building project going on in Las Vegas (primarily as a technical expert and pilot) by Jess Meyers (Belted Air Power), Glenn Smith (the owner of the airplane), Bill Harold (retired Lockheed engineer), Don Heath (retired engineer) and Tom Jones (not the actor, but another engineer). Glenn, Don, Bill and Tom built the airplane. Their primary concern was to build an RV-6A and mate it with a 200HP Chevy Vortec 6-cylinder automobile engine using Jess Meyers commercially available belt reduction drive. The airplane was written up in KITPLANES March issue page 34. The real project is to develop a firewall forward alternative to Lycoming engines that is reliable and inexpensive. Then make it available to anyone who wants it. My contributions at this point have been as a scientist involved in a research project. We conduct it like a graduate school project on a daily basis and we have infinite time because we are all basically retired. I cant tell you how much fun I have had doing some of the calculations that are needed. I use Excel primarily to spread-sheet out many of the items. I like the instant graphs one can produce etc. Some of the first things I calculated were the gyroscopic precession loads from the propeller on the belt drive bearings. Recently I have been looking at the instantaneous torque from the engine as a function of cylinder pressure curves to get a feel for the peak torque loads vs the average torque output from the engine at various horsepower and loadings. We need this to figure worst case scenarios for belt and bearing loading. Since the engine is liquid cooled the flow rates of coolant and air through the radiator vs horsepower and speed are what Im looking at today. We have a radiator on the airplane now but its efficiency is unknown since we havent flown yet. Oh, and I forgot to say that I am the test pilot too. So I have asked that some things be modified for traditional pilotage. Like, all the toggle switches with horizontal throws switch right for normal flight and left to OFF or auxillary fuel pumps, backup batteries etc. They were previously random. We are running two independent coils and dual points, i.e. "Start Coil" and "Run Coil". The start coil is retarded roughly 6 degrees and the dwell set differently. Tom Jones is the engine man and hes tweeking the system for flight as I write. For some reason even though we have a mechanical timing advance he wants to try this differential. It may run cooler in one configuration. We are almost ready to fly but the propeller we had was built for a 150HP engine and at 200HP I was severely overdriving it in high speed taxi runs. So we ordered a carbon fiber prop from Warp-Drive that should be here within a few days. If it works out, I should test fly the bird within a day of the mounting of that prop. In the interim we bolted a big metal Cessna climb-prop (72X58) on it so I can drive it up and down the runway at 60 to 70 taking data and making some final checks on fuel flow, temperature and belt-drive adjustment etc. Thats about it. If anyone wants to write to me at my email address feel free. Email: billphil(at)ix.netcom.com. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: rbusick(at)nmsu.edu (Robert Busick)
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
I know of an O-360 A1A runout with about 2100 hrs. Owner is asking about $6000. Engine is in Truth or Consequences NM, came out of a Cessna used for environmental animal tracking in the mountains. If interested Email me direct. I think it is still available. Bob Busick RV-6 rbusick(at)nmsu.edu >No, I do not have the extra money. I took out a loan to finance the >difference, and am gaining a roomate to make the payment. So instead of >that shiny new Lycoming that I had planned, I am looking for a good used >one. Anybody have any leads (seriously)? > >Rob. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
Date: May 02, 1996
From: "Earl Brabandt" <cwbraban(at)ichips.intel.com>
> I'm sure I'll get the fast build "Van Can". Hey wait a minute!!! That's my derogatory term. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: Jerry Springer <jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com>
Subject: Re: exploding battery
cpeedy.ENET.dec.com!walsh(at)matronics.com wrote: > > I am not positive but I believe this is the accident that we are talking > about when referring to the "exploding battery". This is the NTSB > preliminary account. > > John > > A homebuilt RV-4 collided with terrain near mid-field on the airport > prevailed for the local flight. According to witnesses, the aircraft > was trailing white smoke as it passed over the airport at roughly > 800 feet AGL. Several witnesses described hearing a "popping" > noise. They then saw the aircraft nose down and spin to the ground > beside Runway 29 at about mid-field. The witnesses said that the > aircraft began to burn shortly after the collision. The aircraft > was destroyed and the pilot/owner was fatally injured. This is the accident I was thinking about, being only a few miles from Van's I hear things. I won't qoute anyone but I was told it was caused by a prop failure. Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS First Flight July 14, 1989 :-) jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: Re: Airplane data
It occured to me that we might have some new flying RV's on the list and I thought maybe they would like to fill out one of these forms. Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)ltec.net Here is a blank form for entering RV data for flying RV's. Please add anything about your airplane that I may have left out. Hopefully, this will transmit OK and be easy to use. I hope we get some good information that we can all use. Don't forget to delete this paragraph before re-transmitting. Thanks, Bob Skinner RV-6 MODEL: DATE FINISHED: TOTAL TIME: ENGINE: PROP: CANOPY: STARTER: ALTERNATOR: VOLT. REG.: BATTERY: EXHAUST: ELEVATOR TRIM: FLAPS: BRAKES: TIRE PRESSURE: PANEL: LIGHTING: PAINT: INTERIOR: INSURANCE: OTHER (MISC): PROBLEMS: Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)ltec.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: jperri(at)interserv.com
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: King KLX-100
Anyone have or seen one of these rare beasts ? Looking for a reason why they are taking so long to get . Suspect they were having problems between the GPS and Comm during dual use. Any confirmation? Waiting for the delivery man ..about a year now. Thanks JMP RV-6 400 hrs. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: Tire wear
I was glad to see other RVer's comments on short tire wear. I thought maybe it was just me and my landings. Now that others have fessed up, I'll come clean. I replaced my first set of tires (factory McCrearys) after 63 hours. Of course, this time period was during my first 40 test period and I was learning about the RV-6 and making lots of landings (coffee and Diet Pepsi). I replaced them with Goodyear Flight Custom 11 5.00x5-6 ply tires. These tires have 192 hours on them, now. I'm about to replace them again because of the wear on one tire. I got carried away with flying and neglected to rotate in a timely manner and have one tire that has worn past the tire groove. The other tire is OK. I guess I tend to land on the left tire first and the tires on my plane wear on the inside. I've started using 40 pounds, mainly to make the airplane easier to move, especially on sod. Had I rotated the Goodyears in a timely manner, I would guess that the tires might go 250 hours, plus. I was talking to our FBO the other day about tire wear. He said he had a hard time keeping tires on his fuel truck. I live in a small town and there is not that much aviation activity. In other words, his isn't the world's busiest fuel truck. He said the runways and taxiways were as rough as he had ever seen, so maybe that's part of my tire wear problem. Also, for the first 169 hours, I had trouble staying off of the brakes---long legs, big feet. I drilled new mounting holes on my rudder pedals and tipped the rudder pedals forward. This made a big difference in take offs and landings. I'm sure a lot of my earlier landings were made with just a bit of brake applied. Even so, with 255 hours, my brake pads are still OK. Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)ltec.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: "Michael l. Casmey" <104456.204(at)compuserve.com>
Subject: How do I sign up
How do I get placed in the rv-list Mike Casmey INTERNET:104456.204(at)Compuserve.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BPattonsoa(at)aol.com
Date: May 02, 1996
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
Having gone thru the whole thing to where I am starting on the finishing kit part of my -6, I am having some strange reactions to the Quick-Build. Watching a friend (?) get 90% of his Lancair IV done by a Pro, I reacted in a similar fashion. I built another airplane, and fly it a lot, but my objective in building it and the RV was just the pure pleasure and sense of accomplishment in doing it all myself, including the spar. You also get an airplane. What I wish Van would do, is make some small change on the quick-builts, like a different fin/rudder profile so those who have done it all can tell the difference, and feel just slightly superior, or something, if it is in you makeup. Bruce Patton ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander)
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
*** snip *** > >Well, having bought a quickbuild kit I have to jump in here and defend my >choice . Everyone is presenting some good points here. Here's my $0.02 >worth on the Quickbuild. > >Several "skill building" procedures, such as making wing ribs and fuselage >formers from scratch, must be performed. Yes ... but in reality, you just know what's going to happen.... For probably an extra $100 to $200 you can buy replacement parts from Vans ... and by checking the plans and giving the right part numbers, they will magically come pre-formed ... :^) If you can really afford $7000 extra for the kit, why bother forming a wing rib from scratch when Vans sells them so cheaply ($30?) ready formed?? Either that, or the RV-building cottage industry will create an extra sideline business in forming your "educational" parts for you, (as well as actually building it for you in a completion center ... :^) I personally see no way to stop any of the above happening (how many Lancair IVs or Glasair IIIs do you think are really being built by their owners??), but if it improves the quality of RV6 kits and instructions, I'm all for it. I guess the real problem belongs to the FAA at registration time. The $7000 Vans option is a real bargain compared to the "RV cottage industry" quotes I've heard -- $5000 to complete wings only. >My understanding is the Quickbuild >still forces you to do at least *one* of every operation needed in the >standard kit. The repetition is gone though. > >No, most quickbuild kit builders will not have the airframe expertise of >plans or standard kit builders, but they will know far more than most pilots >do about their airplane (i.e. average spamcan driver). From the finish kit >on (i.e. engine, avionics, and system installation) they will definitely >"know" their airplane. Ultimately, if the structural work is good, then this is probably more important. A lot of homebuilt accidents relate to "systems" installations, especially when someone does it "non-standard". With some type exceptions, very few accidents are outright structural failures. I hope the Quick-build kits lead to more detailed instructions from Vans that give really complete directions for popular installations (such as a 180 HP C/S installation), even down to the level of detail as to what penetrates the firewall, and how, and which part numbers to use ... as discussed in the parallel thread on "battery hazard" ..... :^) Builders could still customize, but at least they would have a known, good starting point. > >I too had concerns about the integrity of the non-visible structure. I have >carefully inspected what I could see, and have been assured by Van that >what's underneath is okay as well. 6G's will tell . Plans-built, >kit-built, or quick-built, I'm still the manufacturer so if it breaks its my >fault. *** snip *** >Rob. ... building it all myself (but it took 5 years to get to where the quick build kit starts! .. :^) ... Gil "working slowly" Alexander ... Use your local EAA Technical Counselor .... gil(at)rassp.hac.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: gil(at)rassp.hac.com (Gil Alexander)
Subject: Re: Bat Contactor Location
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > > >>Regarding the battery contactor being close to the battery, I would >>like to say further, and I think you would agree, that it should be >>on the same side of the firewall as the battery to preclude an "always >>hot" wire passing through. In my 6A I have an RG battery and master >>and starter contactors inside the firewall. > >>Jim Stugart >>Austin, TX > > Jim, > > You bet . . . with all switches off you should have a very bare > minimum of hot wires . . . whether or not they penetrate a bulkhead > or firewall. Bob, I fully agree with you, however this is one case where our other favorite guru (Tony Bingelis) has shown something different in the past. His RV6 schematic in the May 1990 (and photos in March 1990) Sport Aviation, "Wiring the Electrical Power Systems", shows both the Battery relay and Starter relay on the engine side of the firewall, and a cockpit battery. An earlier poster said he installed the battery relay on the battery box "a la Bingelis". Has Tony B. issued different drawings on his later RVs that changes this layout?? Since so many of us reference Tony's articles, perhaps you should document the "battery location" thread as an article for the RVator and help all of those other builders not on the RV-list ... :^) These are the sort of details that Van needs to get into his finish kit instructions for the quick-builders .... I personally will change my planned battery relay location to the aft of the firewall based on your postings. ... thanks for the good info .... Gil Alexander, RV6A, #20701 ... got the relays in question , but not mounted them yet ... gil(at)rassp.hac.com > > Now . . in defense of the exceptions . . you need a certain number > of always-hot wires to support electric clocks, radio memories, > dome lights that operate without battery master on, AND electronic > ignition. These leads always get fused right at the battery and > in nearly ALL cases do not exceed 5 amperes in capacity. > > My only comment about your setup is that I generally put the battery > contactor inside the cockpit or behind the seat right next to the > battery and put the starter contactor on the firewall as close as > possible to the starter power input and alternator output (B-Terminal). > This allows one to feed alternator power into the system right > on the firewall and eliminate the 50-80 amp breaker with all its > attendant noises and magnetic fields OUT of the cockpit. > > Thank you for the interest and input. . . . > > Bob . . . > AeroElectric Connection > > > ------------------------------- > | Go ahead . . . Make my day. | > | SHOW me where I'm wrong! | > | www.southwind.net\~nuckolls | > ------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: "Mel Barlow (IJD, Ct.)" <102636.54(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: 160 Horse Lyc. E2A??
On 02-May at 15:19, John Ammeter asked about my RV4 engine. Yes, John, I had the engine overhauled with the Hi Comp. pistons, thus it is now a 160. BTW. My engine came out of a Cherokee 140 with 2100 Hrs. I put it in the RV and put 300 Hrs. on it. No problem. B/4 starting it, we borescoped the Cyls. to check for corrosion, Etc. Also o-hauled the mags & the carb. After sitting in a basement for a couple of years, it started almost immediately, and ran well until I got the $$$ to get it overhauled. Looking forward to helping where I can with answers, suggestions, Etc. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Bat Contactor Location
---------- Forwarded Message ---------- From: Gil Alexander, INTERNET:gil(at)bala.HAC.COM DATE: 5/2/96 10:23 PM RE: Bat Contactor Location >>Regarding the battery contactor being close to the battery, I would >>like to say further, and I think you would agree, that it should be >>on the same side of the firewall as the battery to preclude an "always >>hot" wire passing through. In my 6A I have an RG battery and master >>and starter contactors inside the firewall. > >>Jim Stugart >>Austin, TX > > Jim, > > You bet . . . with all switches off you should have a very bare > minimum of hot wires . . . whether or not they penetrate a bulkhead > or firewall. >Bob, > I fully agree with you, however this is one case where our other >favorite guru (Tony Bingelis) has shown something different in the past. >His RV6 schematic in the May 1990 (and photos in March 1990) Sport >Aviation, "Wiring the Electrical Power Systems", shows both the Battery >relay and Starter relay on the engine side of the firewall, and a cockpit >battery. Tony and I don't disagree on very much but the general practice in SpamCans has been to keep uncontrolled hot lead lengths to an absolute minimum in length and minimum number of penetrations. Virtually every single engine airplane flying has the battery contactor right at the battery box with the hot lead coming through only one layer of sheet metal . . . the box. The new RG batteries don't need to come through ANY metal, they don't need a box! > An earlier poster said he installed the battery relay on the >battery box "a la Bingelis". Has Tony B. issued different drawings on his >later RVs that changes this layout?? Not that I'm aware of > Since so many of us reference Tony's articles, perhaps you should >document the "battery location" thread as an article for the RVator and >help all of those other builders not on the RV-list ... :^) These are the >sort of details that Van needs to get into his finish kit instructions for >the quick-builders .... I'll put the idea in the pot with about 50 other ideas for articles . . . if I only had a 36 hour day . . . no . . maybe 40 would do it. Dee has deposited all the checks on backordered copies of the 'Connection. She figures (rightly so) that I'll get the next issue to the printers by Monday! > I personally will change my planned battery relay location to the >aft of the firewall based on your postings. Very Good! Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ------------------------------- | Go ahead . . . Make my day. | | SHOW me where I'm wrong! | | www.southwind.net\~nuckolls | ------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com (John Ammeter)
Subject: Battery Relay Location
I've been reading the recent notes regarding the location of the battery, relay and wiring. Thought I'd add my comments, too. My battery is in the normal location for an RV-6 and the master and start relays are on the front side of the firewall. Both battery cables go through the firewall; the negative (ground) cable goes directly to the engine and the positive (hot) cable directly to the master relay. I was very concerned about the possibility of the positive cable shorting to the firewall or to the front side of the battery case. Being a belt and suspenders kind of guy I used a couple of 'tricks' to make the cable as safe as possible. First off, use aircraft wire. Insulation used on jumper cables and welding wire is much softer than aircraft grade wire. Second, that thin Stainless Steel firewall is much like a knife; it'll easily cut through even aircraft wire. I added 0.063 aluminum as a doubler to the firewall; in fact, I made sure that the hole in the SS firewall was larger than the hole in the aluminum. I used a rubber grommet in the hole for the wire. Should have also added a metal backup for the rubber but never got around to it. Be sure to form the wire so it doesn't have any strain on it as it goes through the firewall. Being an electrician I get to see many videos of what happens when short circuits occur. After doing all the above I got to thinking about what else I could do to make it even safer. So---, the next time I had the cowl off I added a teflon 'sheath' to the wire. I took a 3" piece of 1/2" tubing, split it lengthwise, slipped it over the wire and slid it inside the rubber grommet. Now I feel safe. Between the copper wire and the firewall there is the teflon insulation of the wire, the fiberglass cover of the wire, the teflon tubing and the rubber grommmet. Were I to build another RV I would do one more item. I would definately put the master relay next to the battery. What I have now is almost as safe. But, hey, why not build as safe as you can if you have the opportunity. John Ammeter ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com Seattle WA, USA RV-6 N16JA Flying 5 years ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 02, 1996
From: ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com (John Ammeter)
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
>What I wish Van would do, is make some small change on the quick-builts, like >a different fin/rudder profile so those who have done it all can tell the >difference, and feel just slightly superior, or something, if it is in you >makeup. > >Bruce Patton > I can understand Bruce's feelings. I know that I feel that by building my own airplane that I accomplished something not every Tom, Dick and George has done. There is a real sense of pride when I fly MY airplane. I don't know if we need to be able to look at an aircraft and be able to instantly tell if the plane was built in a basement/garage or by a 'pro' builder. You can usually tell within minutes (or seconds) of talking to the owner whether or not he/she built the aircraft. Of course, where do you draw the line? What if the wings were built by someone else? What if you bought the aircraft from someone that lost interest in it but you needed to finish it? What if you took advantage of the phlogistron spars? Are the first RV-6's built more homebuilt than the later models? I know that when I look at the kits now available I feel somewhat jealous. I had to fashion my elevator hinge brackets, cut all the lightening holes in the ribs, locate and drill all the rivet holes, I even had to drill the holes in the landing gear. Does that make my airplane better and more MINE than someone else's? Not really. Kits now available are easier to build but the finished aircraft is still a homebuilt aircraft and the builder has a right to feel 10 feet tall when it leaves the ground for the first time. No matter how much the kit is 'prebuilt' we all feel the same when _our_ RV flies for the first time; the 'RV grin' really shows up on your first flight. John Ammeter ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com Seattle WA, USA RV-6 N16JA Flying 5 years ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Robert Acker <75104.3077(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
Gil: >> Yes ... but in reality, you just know what's going to happen....For probably an extra $100 to $200 you can buy replacement parts from Vans ... and by checking the plans and giving the right part numbers, they will magically come pre-formed ... :^) I suspect you are right. Me...i'll be making mine. That $200 is one months payment on the $8K loan I took out to get the quickbuild kit . I wonder if the FAA inspectors will be wise to this. I suspect the making of ribs, etc. was required to satisfy the amateur-built 51% rule. If an inspector comes out and sees that the ribs were obviously not handmade, he could certify the aircraft, but not as "amateur built". Rob. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Robert Acker <75104.3077(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
>> What I wish Van would do, is make some small change on the quick-builts, like a different fin/rudder profile so those who have done it all can tell the difference, and feel just slightly superior, or something, if it is in you makeup. << Not needed, you'll be able to pick out us quickbuild builders with ease (we'll be the ones lowering our heads in shame, as we taxi by the standard kit rivet gods . There's a couple of guys locally who *scratch built* a beautiful T-18...how do kit builders taxi by them? Rob. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: rust47rg(at)one.net
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: Re: Engine Building
SNIP>>>> >Can anyone offer me some insights into the business of finding an engine? I >wanted to build up an O-360-A1A but with H2AD pistons, an Ellison TBI, and >perhaps electronic ignition, and both flow and dynamically balanced -- but >finding the core may be a problem. (When I started three years ago I saw >guaranteed crankshaft cores for $4000, but dealers laugh out loud if you mention >those numbers and availability today.) One option is to build an engine from >parts -- the "Johnny Cash" engine -- but with no experience to guide me I worry >that this may result in an expensive engine with lots of parts mis-fit problems >downline. Of course, I can always buy a new engine from Van's but then I get >something that is not exactly what I want, but at least it will be *brand new*. > >And I might get back later with questions about constant speed propellors ... >Thanks. > > Mark N. Hilsen 71322.1267(at)compuserve.com > Kent, Washington > Mark: I did the same "chase down an engine" routine 4 years ago and ended up buying a new 0-360 A1A. There may be ways to do it, but I found that if you really do it right that by the time you find a core with a good crank and case, send everything out to verify that it's right and rebuild it the right way you only save a few grand off of the THEN new price. I don't know what they are going for now, but you may find math is similar. And you get a warranty....Which I used as my brand new 0-360 had a bad cylinder from the factory. Lycoming was great about it and we replaced it at 10 hours. I would do the new routine again unless I found a core cheap (good luck) that I could verify the history on. Get one with a bad crank or case and you will find a pain in the wallet. There is a guy in my home town that bought a field overhauled 320 that he dead sticked twice before he paid 13 large to T.W.Smith to overhaul right. The second dead stck was when a rod exited thru the right side of the case. Ask him what he would do. Good luck whatever you do. Regards: Rusty Gossard N47RG RV-4 Flying 190 hrs TT ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: dcahoon(at)intellinet.com (David Cahoon)
Subject: Whelen strobes?
I want to have wingtip strobes and a nav light on the rudder. What is the pro and con on the two systems offered by Van's. 1) one power pack working both strobes 2)power pack in each wing? David Cahoon (starting electrical) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Foyboy6(at)aol.com
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: main gear adjustment -6A
We tried to keep the heat to the gear leg as low as possible-just enough red to twist the leg- the amount of twist was about 3/16". Then I used the wood formers for the gear leg wrapped with fibreglass tape. Over it all are the one piece metal fairings. So far no problems and I have been in and out of a few bumpy sod fields. My 6A came in at 1140 lbs so it is no light weight even empty. With my over 200 lbs and passenger plus full fuel and the usual accessories, wheel chocks, rudder gust lock, tool kit, etc most of the flying is close to my 1750 gross. My usual touchdown is pretty close to 75 mph indicated so the tires get a good usage. The second set of tires are McCreary "air hawk" which is the next step up from Van's. The gear leg was not reheat treated. Hope this helps. John ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HowardRV(at)aol.com
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: Chatter
The number of minutes retriving messages has really increased. A suggestion, if people wish to express their ideas about quick builds, tail draggers, etc. then do it to each other and don't send it to everyone. There are some great tips I have and continue to learn, but personal opinions would probably be best shared between those that would like to "chatter". Matt has asked that when we sign off, that we put our address so this could be done. Thanks, Howard Kidwell howardrv(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: walsh(at)cpeedy.ENET.dec.com
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: engine building
Hello Mark Hilson. There are a couple of advantages to building your own engine. You can use the "good stuff" like: Superior cylinders, electronic ignition,Ellison or Fuel injection, balancing etc.. To do this with a FNEW engine...., well you wouldn't due to $$$. Also, you get to verify the crank and cam yourself as well as all other internals. If you can do all of this for the same as a FNEW engine, I would argue that you would have a better engine for the same money. Quality at Lycoming and Continental has been... let's be kind here.... suspect. Never let it be said that there is a lack of opinions on the 'ol RV-LIST.... John ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6junkie(at)aol.com
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: Re: Medical transport
You want to contact the Corporate Angels Network. They ate located at Westchester County Airport (HPN). Phone is (914) 328-1313. They are a national non-profit organization that takes the empty seats on corporate jets and uses them for medical purposes. They really are a great group of people. Gary Corde RV-6 N211GC ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6junkie(at)aol.com
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: Quick Build Van Cans
Van Cans...that's funny! I think that it's great that Van will be able to get more people into RV's by offering quick-build kits. But caveat emp tor (spelling). I got an early RV-6 kit...no pre-drilled/punched anything. I wish that I had one of Van's contempory kits but I don't think I would have ordered a quick build kit however because I enjoyed building the aircraft....up untill the finish kit. Finishing the airplane was torture. It seemed like it would never end. I built the airframe in two years...and it took me an additional three years to finish the plane. I'm sorry to scare the heck out of some of you but finishing the plane is the hardest part by far. That's why I think that they'll be a lot of quick build kits on the used market. People are going to think "hay, I only have to do a few things to finish". NOT. They will be getting their airframe at the most difficult part of construction. I think that the quick-build kit is a bargin for those of us that know what we are doing. I think that it's the RV-trap for the unknowing. BTW, the scratch build people look down at kit people, kit people look down on quick-build people, and quick build people look at their empty wallets. Only Kidding. There was an earlier post about marking quick-build kits by making a different rudder. This is the same as marking lepers. Give me a break. If somebody finishes a quick-build kit it will be as great as an accompleshment as a regular kit. The airframe is so easy to build that it doesn't matter how it gets done. It's more important that it be done correctly...and that is the benifit of a quick-build kit. Order carefully. Gary Corde RV-6 N211GC ________________________________________________________________________________
From: EBundy2620(at)aol.com
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: Re: Chatter
>The number of minutes retriving messages has really increased. A suggestion, >if people wish to express their ideas about quick builds, tail draggers, >etc. then do it to each other and don't send it to everyone. There are some >great tips I have and continue to learn, but personal opinions would probably >be best shared between those that would like to "chatter". Matt has asked >that when we sign off, that we put our address so this could be done. >Thanks, This is very similar to the discussions before and after the "new list" (remember "new Coke"?) I have gotten a lot of enjoyment and tidbits of good info off of these topics, and I would hate to see them all go private. That's the object of this list IMHO. I LIKE seeing a lot of messages when I sign on. You can always delete them later, and a couple of extra minutes doesn't seem too high to pay. One thing I think might help though, is that sometimes people get a little carried away with quoting from the previous message. I've seen 5 paragraphs of quoting and a 2 line reply. I'd rather see more consice (sp?) quoting rather than a decrease in messages. My thoughts are my own, and subject to change... -- Ed Bundy ebundy2620(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: csanchez(at)BayNetworks.com (Cheryl Sanchez)
Subject: Re: Medical transport
> >All, > Please indulge my diversion. I have a friend who requires medical = >treatment in a city about 1000 miles away weekly for 12 weeks. Does = >anyone know of pilot organizations that might help? Thanks for the help = >in advance! > Becki Orndorff > > Becki, I seem to recall, that when I was in the 99's a few years ago, that they talked about this. There is a group that organizes this kind of thing. One of their goals was to find empty seats on corporate jets. So try the 99's and they would know. Cheryl Sanchez csanchez(at)world.std.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: EBundy2620(at)aol.com
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: Canopy
I'm still fitting my slider; I've made 413 cuts, and it's starting to fit somewhat. The right side windshield fits very well along the fwd skin, and across the rollover bar/canopy junction, but the left side doesn't. The left side seems to have a problem being bowed out a little from the roll bar. It lifts the front edge off of the fwd skin. If I push the conopy down onto the skin, it pulls away from the side of the canopy frame. i.e.: it's pivoting where it contacts the roll bar. Any suggestions? If I attach the canopy at the roll bar, then cut and separate the rest of the canopy, it seems like it would lay flat, but possibly the canopy edges wouldn't be square to each other any more? Ed Bundy (convered in plexi dust and not having much fun) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: csanchez(at)BayNetworks.com (Cheryl Sanchez)
Subject: Power Bus?
Hi, As I am starting to do the detail planning on the intstrument panel and electrical system for my 6A I wonder what should I use for a power bus? I was thinking of maybee just using a copper bar and putting some brass bolts into it for connections. Ideas? Suggestions? Thanks. Cheryl Sanchez csanchez(at)world.std.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Battery Relay Location
Nuckolls' comments on John Ammeter's contribution to the discussion. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >I've been reading the recent notes regarding the location of the battery, >relay and wiring. Thought I'd add my comments, too. > >My battery is in the NORMAL (Nuckolls Emphasis) location for an RV-6 and >the master and start relays are on the front side of the firewall. Both >battery cables go through the firewall; the negative (ground) cable goes >directly to the engine . . . . This is an important point. An article I wrote was published recently in Kitplane Builder concerning ground systems. The next revision to the 'Connection heavily reworks the chapter on grounding. Many airplanes ground the battery locally . . . to some part of the airframe nearby. When everything is shiny and new, voltage drop in the ground path is low and acceptable. If one traces the TOTAL number of ground conductors and joints in ground path for an airplane, it's not unusual to find that time has taken its toll on bond integrity . . . I've traced a number of starting problems to GROUND path drops in addition to SUPPLY path drops. This is 95% cranking issue and about 5% systems performance. The degradation is so slow that most pilots aren't aware of it. In the mean time, the time that it takes to crank an engine slowly increases putting more stress on battery, contactors, starter motor brushes, etc. etc. It wasn't until I began working with B&C on their line of lightweight starters and flying airplanes fitted with them that I came to understand how much improvement can be realized by careful attention to design and maintenance. I now strongly recommend that the FIRST wire in the airplane be a fat single conductor from battery (-) to crankcase. This single conductor with two bolted joints is VERY LOW in resistance and EASY to maintain in service. >. . . and the positive (hot) cable directly to the master relay. > >I was very concerned about the possibility of the positive cable >shorting to the firewall or to the front side of the battery case. >Being a belt and suspenders kind of guy I used a couple of 'tricks' >to make the cable as safe as possible. > >First off, use aircraft wire. Insulation used on jumper cables and >welding wire is much softer than aircraft grade wire. I would agree to a point here . . unlike automotive battery cable welding cable is designed to withstand a LOT of physical abuse. It gets handled a lot, run over by dump trucks, etc. The insulation is THICKER and the wire heavier but I generally use only short pieces where flexibility is desired. Further, it's generally NOT tinned so I generally use solder to attach the lugs and close the joint with dual wall heat shrink sleeves. >Second, that thin Stainless Steel firewall is much like a knife; >it'll easily cut through even aircraft wire. I added 0.063 aluminum >as a doubler to the firewall; in fact, I made sure that the hole in >the SS firewall was larger than the hole in the aluminum. Excellent! this conforms to an earlier suggestion I brought forward this week except that the holes can be identical. If the doubler is immobile with respect to the firewall then the very thin firewall material is no hazard. >I used a rubber grommet in the hole for the wire. Should have >also added a metal backup for the rubber but never got around to it. I presume he is talking about the grommet shield . . important if you wish to have a roaring flame in FRONT of the firewall to be CONFINED there. >Be sure to form the wire so it doesn't have any strain on it as it >goes through the firewall. This is a little vague . . . "strain" is and of itself not a hazard. PRESSURE is . . . sharp edges of firewall material against a wire creates GREAT pressures . . . by definition this is how a knife works . . . the very small area (sharp) edge puts great PRESSURE on the material it touches with low FORCE applied. The grommet has several functions not the least of which is to increase area of contact with wire thereby reducing PRESSURE. Firewall doubler above does the same thing for the grommet. >Being an electrician I get to see many videos of what happens when short >circuits occur. I too have witnessed some spectacular ARCING events but very few on airplanes. Low voltage, high current DC has its own special quirks. If I were to characterize most of the catastrophic failures I've investigated over the years, the initial manifestation of failure would be heating followed by charring followed by combustion of components. So far, I've NOT encountered a situation precipitated by firewall or bulkhead penetrations. >After doing all the above I got to thinking about what >else I could do to make it even safer. So---, the next time I had >the cowl off I added a teflon 'sheath' to the wire. I took a 3" piece of >1/2" tubing, split it lengthwise, slipped it over the wire and slid it >inside the rubber grommet. Now I feel safe. Between the copper wire >and the firewall there is the teflon insulation of the wire, the >fiberglass cover of the wire, the teflon tubing and the rubber grommet. Here's another point where I would suggest that careful analysis and adherence to establish practice is in order. Adding lots of layers may promote and atmosphere of confidence but consider how failures precipitate. You want to minimize the total number of components in the system to maximize integrity of the seal and ability to hold off fuel-fed flames. Simple reduction of PRESSURE insures that stress against components is BELOW yields for their materials. Proper immobilization is just as important . . I don't care how many layers you put between to components that you want to keep apart. Mix a little dust with a little grease and you have a grinding compound that will ultimately compromise the system if GRINDING is allowed to take place. If it were my airplane, a simple shield and grommet treatment combined with some acid free silicon seal for immobilization and keeping out the dust/grease is about as far as I would need to go. BTW . . . . this same discussion applies to ALL FIREWALL PENETRATIONS no matter what the size of wire or function of the system. Integrity of the firewall as a fire barrier is far more important than continued function of any system. > >Were I to build another RV I would do one more item. I would definitely >put the master relay next to the battery. What I have now is almost as >safe. But, hey, why not build as safe as you can if you have the >opportunity. > John, I don't think you have much to worry about. As a builder/ pilot the fact that you've been participating in this discussion makes you 1000% more aware of potential problems than most SpamCan drivers and about 200% more than most A/P mechanics. There's no such thing as a SAFE car, airplane, hand gun, etc. All these things will KILL YOU DEAD. As TOOLS there are ways they can be use and serviced to maximize utility and minimize risk. Risk minimization comes from respect for the hazards and a through understanding of the mechanisms. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ------------------------------- | Go ahead . . . Make my day. | | SHOW me where I'm wrong! | | www.southwind.net\~nuckolls | ------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com>
Subject: Re: engine building
> From owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com Fri May 3 08:39:02 1996 > From: cpeedy.ENET.dec.com!walsh(at)matronics.com > Date: Fri, 3 May 96 10:30:08 EDT > To: mail11:; (@rvlist) > Subject: RV-List: engine building > Sender: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com > Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Content-Length: 651 > > > Hello Mark Hilson. There are a couple of advantages to building your own > engine. You can use the "good stuff" like: Superior cylinders, electronic > ignition,Ellison or Fuel injection, balancing etc.. To do this with a > FNEW engine...., well you wouldn't due to $$$. Also, you get to verify > the crank and cam yourself as well as all other internals. If you can > do all of this for the same as a FNEW engine, I would argue that you > would have a better engine for the same money. > Don't forget roller cams and lifters, and other performance stuff. Have you ever looked at the ports on a Lyc.head? Performance is the last thing on their minds when they produce these things. Good porting will not only produce more HP, but will improve fuel consumption due to more homogeneous fuel/air mixture. The roller cam/rockers that can be had are free HP in the form of reduced internal friction. I would like to put in an engine and fly, but the lure of a better than new engine keeps calling. Oh well, at this rate I have several years to think about it. Chris ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: Engines
I talked to the Superior people (no, not RVer's, the engine parts builders) at S&F a few weeks ago. You might remember a few years ago an item in Sport Aviation that said Superior was going to develop a kit engine based on the Cont O-200 and Lyc. O-320. I never heard anything about it again. The representative for Superior that I talked to said they are working on a Lycoming O-360 engine-in-a-box. They are developing a crankcase and crankshaft and some of the other parts that they do not now manufacture. They put the O-200 and O-320 on hold and decided to concentrate on the O-360 because they thought that this engine would have the widest market. I couldn't pin him down on when this engine would be available but possibly in the next 1-2 years. This is something I'm definately interested in--at the rate I'm going on this second RV, they'll have plenty of time to come up with an engine. Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)ltec.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WStucklen(at)aol.com
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: Re: Sensenich Prop
>> I took off the Warnke and put on the metal Sensinich and picked up 10 mph >>IAS at the same power settings! I'm told that no two props from Warnke are >>the same, now I believe it! > >Fred, have you been using the Sens for long? I've been leaning toward it >myself and would like to know your likes/dislikes. Is the 2600 rpm >limitation much of a problem? > >-- Ed Bundy > > Ed: I've been using the Sensenich for about a year now. Hard rain has taken the leading edge paint off much like you see on any other metal prop used in IFR conditions. So far it's held up quite well considering the 400 Hrs or so that I've put on it. The 2600 RPM limitation is NOT a problem. I've got the 72" X 79" prop for the -6 on my -6A. It's powered by a O-320-D1A 160 Hp engine.I get 2150 - 2250 RPM static, and that increases slightly on the take off roll. (full throttle). 90% of my cruise flying is at 2300 RPM (@ approx 8 gals/Hr) At 8000' and full throttle, the RPM is at 2550 -2600. You do have to whatch the RPM's during a decent at full throttle: it will over-rev in that condition. While at Sun 'N Fun this year, I talked the the Sensenich people. They also believed that the 2600 RPM limitation ment little to most pilots because of their personal flying habits (ie, cruise at best economy rather than balls to the walls). I tend to agree with them on that point. Hope that helps..... Fred Stuckle RV-6A N925RV wstucklen(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WStucklen(at)aol.com
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
>No, I do not have the extra money. I took out a loan to finance the >difference, and am gaining a roomate to make the payment. So instead of >that shiny new Lycoming that I had planned, I am looking for a good used >one. Anybody have any leads (seriously)? > >Rob. > > > Hope the room mate likes to buck rivets! (or is at least good looking!) Go for whatever get you what you want... Good luck... Fred Stucklen Rv-6A N925RV wstucklen(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Mitchell Faatz <mitch(at)netmanage.com>
Subject: Chatter
PwRCO~s"A~`xv&z.hE;P"7`$"90KI\asWliWt7"xGPLa/:\\o(at)MYS5h.uOMyoh.lSrBB]%_8rJ[9}U ~O/w3:S\<\&p)Nt0s|KA5s|kuD/K.j&?#'*P8W/lP28(Lo[j^##fU9};tipZvOqv] Please keep sending it to everyone. Thats exactly what this list is for. I love hearing everyones opinions and hearing what problems people have had. Don't underestimate how much you learn on topics "you don't care to hear about" - I've learned a lot about engines and finishing procedures, and I haven't even ordered the tailkit yet! Keep it coming Mitch - uh, still procrastinating... The number of minutes retriving messages has really increased. A suggestion, if people wish to express their ideas about quick builds, tail draggers, etc. then do it to each other and don't send it to everyone. There are some great tips I have and continue to learn, but personal opinions would probably be best shared between those that would like to "chatter". Matt has asked that when we sign off, that we put our address so this could be done. Thanks, Howard Kidwell howardrv(at)aol.com -----------------End of Original Message----------------- O/ Cut here -------------------Q\-------------------------------------- Mitchell Faatz Software Engineer mitch(at)netmanage.com NetManage Inc. Team Lead - Internet (408) 342-7248 Home of Chameleon TCPIP Applications for Windows MIME Enclosures OK ----------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6junkie(at)aol.com
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: N211GC
MODEL: RV-6 DATE FINISHED: February 11, 1996 TOTAL TIME: Stoped counting at 2,000 (canopy complete) I would guess 2,500 ENGINE: O-320-E2H 160 HP conversion. PROP: Performance Propellers 3 bladed wood prop 62 X 74 CANOPY: Slider STARTER: Toyota ALTERNATOR: Mazda VOLT. REG.: Ford BATTERY: B&C EXHAUST: Hi Country SS X-over ELEVATOR TRIM: Electric FLAPS: Yes....only kidding...manual BRAKES: as supplied in the kit. Pilot only TIRE PRESSURE: 28lbs PANEL: Full IFR including autopilot, EPI-800 guages, CD Player, LIGHTING: PAINT: INTERIOR: INSURANCE: OTHER (MISC): PROBLEMS: ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: JIM SCHMIDT <JIM.SCHMIDT(at)mail.mei.com>
Subject: A Screamin' machine -Reply
There are quite a few of us on this list that are VERY interested in the work you are doing. Please keep us informed of this project. It sounds like there are some really talented folks working on this. There has been much skepticism about Auto conversions as well there should be. To have some one to give us prospective buyers real data would be fantastic. Keep up the good work and reports. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: "Elon Ormsby" <Elon.Ormsby(at)quickmail.llnl.gov>
Subject: Screamin'
REGARDING Screamin' Thanx for the intro Bill. It sounds like you are collecting reams of wonderful data. I hope you have plans top share some of this interesting information with us. Also, do you have plans to publish a white paper? Please let me know. You indicated an ignition question about differential mechanical timing v.s. the mechanical advance mechanism. About 30 years ago I used this method with good success. On my drag racing engines I would run two sets of mechanical points. One set was retarded about 3 degrees from the other set. The "advanced" points were set to where the engine would just start to detonate when under load pulling high gear. This was always the hardest pull for the engine and would build the most heat. Both sets of points were connected to selecting switch and I ran the engine on only one set at a time. At the start of the race when the engine was under less load (due to the low gear mechanical advantage and the rapid rise in RPM) the engine was on the "advanced set" and would NOT detonate. About third gear (on a 4 speed) the top-end pull could not be sustained with the extreme advance and the points were then switched to the retarded set to complete the run. I had a functional mechanical advance on the engine. The two point set-up was just a method of extracting maximum continuous horsepower by always being 2 -3 degrees away from detonation. Of course, total advance and the differential were changed by testing and tuning at each track for optimum conditions due to differences in altitude, temperature, fuel and believe it or not, the "track conditions". It sounds like Tom Jones may be consideringa a similar scenario to gather as much useful data with less flight time. -------------------- You stated "... The real project is to develop a firewall forward alternative to Lycoming engines that is reliable and . Then make it available to anyone who wants it. Here comes my heartburn again but I will not respoond here because the other listners will stone me! However, I would like to know what you have done (inexpensively) to make the engine more RELIABLE. I still have some issues to post on alternate engines but will do it in brief on the list and at length privately next week. -Elon ormsby1(at)llnl.gov ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: Chatter
I know I'm just adding to it with this message, but.... Has anyone else noticed that the messages that complain about too much chatter are always the ones that end up generating the MOST chatter? How about if we all try to resolve to NOT proliferate the "Too Much Chatter" threads by just ignoring them (me included, after this one.... :-) Randall Henderson RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: Re: Power Bus?
> As I am starting to do the detail planning on the intstrument >panel and electrical system for my 6A I wonder what should I use for >a power bus? I was thinking of maybee just using a copper bar and >putting some brass bolts into it for connections. Ideas? Suggestions? > >Cheryl Sanchez >csanchez(at)world.std.com Cheryl, I thought you were building a 3. Don't tell us you decided to stretch, widen, and put a nose gear on the 3 :) I highly recommend the AeroElectric Connection that Bob Nuckolls puts out. I didn't have this reference when I built my 6 but intend to use a lot of Bob's ideas on the 6-A that I'm building now. I really like his ideas of using blade type fuses as opposed to conventional A/C circuit breakers. I figured that using this one idea would have saved me $ 400.00 or so. Plus, it would make wiring easier and much lighter. I'm glad to see that Bob Nuckolls lurks on the RV-list. I think we should show our support by buying his manual. That way, maybe he will continue to hang out here and we will have easy access to an expert's advice in the future. The only problem I have with the AeroElectric Connection is that it reminds me of how much I have left to learn about aircraft electronics:) Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)ltec.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: "Elon Ormsby" <Elon.Ormsby(at)quickmail.llnl.gov>
Subject: engine building
REGARDING engine building Chris Rubel you state ..."Good porting will not only produce more HP, but will improve fuel consumption due to more homogeneous fuel/air mixture" Chris you have two theories in one statement. Even Victor Aviation (the Gold Seal rebuilder) is very careful to call it"flow matching". The idea is to get the all the ports to FLOW the same volume and therefore promote EQUAL cylinder filling and therefore equal and balanced power pulses. Porting, on the other hand, is an age old concept fostered by racing. (air, water, go-carts, motorcycles, you name it). The idea is to ENLARGE the ports because the STOCK ports were designed for reasonable RPM's and when you start to wind to 6,000, 7,000 RPM they become too small. The optimum gas velocity for ANY engine (stock or racing) is about 190 to 220 feet per second. Outside of that envelope the gas molecules drop-out (or puddle in the corners) or do other funny things. The ONLY reason to ENLARGE ports is to get correct gas velocities. Obviously cranking 7,000 RPM on a port designed for an optimum of 4,500 RPM will increase the gas velocity. You enlarge it (by porting) and the velocity (and pressure drop) is lowered. Now look at your stock Lycoming. You are turning 2,400 - 2,600 RPM! The port VOLUME is optimized for that RPM and good economy. Sure, if you are a formula racer fire up yea olde die grinder and hog them out but if you are running stock RPM be very careful. A very delicate clean-up of casting flash may be considered but if you don't have a FLOW BENCH and good experience you are in no-mans land! Porting does not improve or degrade fuel consumption however, it INCREASES fuel burn. Obviously if the mixture is to remain optimum - when air flow increases then fuel flow must increase. But if the gas velocities are correct the brake-specific-fuel-consumption (BSFC) should stay about the same for either engine unless you need fuel for cooling and then porting would cause the BSFC to get worse. -Elon ormsby1(at)llnl.gov ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6junkie(at)aol.com
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: N211GC
Sorry, I accidently sent half of my aircraft data in a flash-session before I finished it. Here is the complete information on my RV-6; serial number 21194, FAA Registration Number N211GC "Malia's Missery": Although I have been an active contributor to this list for sometime now, I have not really shared any information about my RV. Here goes: MODEL: RV-6 DATE FINISHED: February 11, 1996 TOTAL TIME TO BUILD: Started in 1990. Stoped counting hours at 2000 (Canopy) ENGINE: O-320-E2H 160 HP Conversion. First run removed from a C-172 @ 1500 hours TTSN for a Penn Yan Super Hawk conversion. PROP: Performance Propellors 3 bladed wood prop 62 X 74. This is the perfect prop for an RV. It performs great, looks good, sounds cool, is smooth and has excellent ground clearance. One problem...it cost $1400! It was worth it! CANOPY: Slider STARTER: Landoll (Datsun 810/280ZX) ALTERNATOR: Landoll 35 amp. (Ford/Mazda) VOLT. REG.: Ford electronic BATTERY: B&C (As well as all of my switches) EXHAUST: Hi Country SS X-over ELEVATOR TRIM: Electric FLAPS: Yes. Only kidding...manual (electric flaps don't make sense on a -6) BRAKES: as supplied in the kit. Pilot only TIRE PRESSURE: 28lbs PANEL: Full IFR including Navaid autopilot, EPI-800 guages, CD Player and too many other things to list. I'm most proud of my panel. LIGHTING: Flush wing tip position/ Bob Olds Landing/ Post lights/ IP Flood lights PAINT: Unpainted. Can't afford to paint yet besides, having to much fun to stop flying. INTERIOR: DJ Laursten/Local Auto Shop/K-Mart INSURANCE: COMAV $1,200 annual (1,000,000 liab & 50,000 hull) i'm in the business PERFORMANCE: Please Note...everybody lies about this issue so here are my lies:-) Top: About 175-177 KTS @ 2740-2760 RPM Cruise: 168-170 KTS @ 8,000' @ 2660 RPM (Full Throttle) 21.8" MP Climb: I don't know because it all depends on weight and speed but in general it is about 1800-2000 fpm solo @ 110 KTS and 1300-1500 gross Empty Weight: 1,038 with the CG located at 70.3 inches PROBLEMS: I had a heavey left aileron (fixed) Had to attach a small trim tab on the rudder. Killed my Prestolite starter (due to kick back) at 8 hours and replaced it with an automotive unit. Impulse coupler repaired. I still have a carburation problem that causes me to have high CHT/EGT reading on two cylinders. Larry Vetterman has sent me a possible fix which I will try this weekend. The fix consists of a small screen which goes between the airbox and carb and a vent extention. Larry says that it happens to all 10-5135 Carbs using the FAB airbox. I'll let you all know how I make out Dream it, Build it, Fly it. It is an awesome sense of satisfaction. There is no substitute! Gary Corde RV-6 N211GC ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Frank K Justice <Frank_K_Justice(at)ccm.ssd.intel.com>
Subject: Re: Canopy
Text item: > The right side windshield fits very well along the fwd skin, and >across the rollover bar/canopy junction, but the left side doesn't. Seen this before; must be a defect in the molding process > If I push the conopy down >onto the skin, it pulls away from the side of the canopy frame. i.e.: it's >pivoting where it contacts the roll bar. > >Any suggestions? If I attach the canopy at the roll bar, then cut and >separate the rest of the canopy, it seems like it would lay flat, but >possibly the canopy edges wouldn't be square to each other any more? You must clamp the canopy to the frame sides each time as you are marking for trimming because this alters the shape at the front (makes the center bow up). When it finally sits all the way down on the roll bar and the curve of the canopy along the top matches that of the top fore-aft bar on the frame you are through (it will not fit the forward bow of the frame although it should touch at one or two points). Then you can drill the canopy to the roll bar and cut the windscreen part loose from the rest of the canopy. You will probably find that you must actually cut out a section which is wedge-shaped with the large end on the bottom edge so the canopy part will fit the frame accurately. You will probably find that the line where the windscreen touches the forward skin is not quite the same curve on the left side as it is on the right. You can either force the curve to be the same on both sides at the end or assume that nobody will notice (only other builders can see it). FKJ Text item: External Message Header The following mail header is for administrative use and may be ignored unless there are problems. ***IF THERE ARE PROBLEMS SAVE THESE HEADERS***. Subject: RV-List: Canopy Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 11:19:52 -0400 From: aol.com!EBundy2620(at)matronics.com 4.1) (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA03795 for ; Fri ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: John.Saare(at)Eng.Sun.COM (John Saare)
Subject: ? wrt OAT probes.
I've been flying around with an RMI uEncoder for some time now. I love it. But I never have gotten around to wiring the OAT probe. I've always wondered about the overall accuracy of these units when it comes to measuring actual ambient air temperature. Basically, I want the unit to perform accurately in the following situation: I fly in to, say, Pine Mtn Lake, CA. (a place in the Sierra foothills). It's summer..., and density altitude is a consideration. I decide to take off during the middle of the day. I hit the "density altitude" switch on the uEncoder, and with confidence, I can believe what it says. Is IR heating on the structure to which the probe is mounted much of a factor? How is the probe isolated from this effect? FYI, the unit is installed in a `48 Bonanza..., the RV will be started shortly, now that maintenance on the Bonanza is settling down. Thanks! -- John Saare ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com>
Subject: Re: engine building
"ENLARGE"???? Who said anything about enlarge? Go out and remove one intake runner from your Lyc., and reach up in there whith your finger....see what I mean? Yeah...pretty crappy, hugh? Now I'm sure you will agree that removing all that raggity stuff will improve things. Right? BTW, I see you are located at "the lab", if you don't have the time to remove parts from you Lyc., stop by the next time you are in Milpitas. I have a jug on the shelf that you can look at. Chris cruble(at)cisco.com > Porting, on the other hand, is an age old concept fostered by racing. (air, > water, go-carts, motorcycles, you name it). The idea is to ENLARGE the ports > because the STOCK ports were designed for reasonable RPM's and when you start > -Elon > ormsby1(at)llnl.gov ________________________________________________________________________________
From: rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: Re: Wd 657 step
A builder here located the step as per the drawing which left a gap at the lower (upper on jig) edge of the skin/step interface. He then heated this area of the step mounting plate with a tourch and bent it to conform with the contour of the fuse skin. The fit looks nice. He also machine countersunk the step mounting plate for a flush finish. To top it all off, he chrome plated the steps. Looks very nice. Ross Mickey skinning fuse (still) >Gil, >Great to see your reply. I sweated blood over that damn step and the >drawings and instructions are a positive disadvantage. The first instruction >is to drill the hole so that the tube is just below the skin of the >triangular rib (F623?). If you do this and mount the plate flat then the >teflon inner bearing would have to protrude below the belly skin. I finished >up with an unpleasant oval hole before I was happy, fortunately enough edge >clearance left for the rivets. I agree with your, fit the plate flat first >method. The holes in the internal baggage ribs can easily be oversized to >accomodate the tube. > >Leo Davies 6A >making brake pedals. > >>Scott, >> Short memory and lack of Van's logging trouble calls .... >> >> Tom Green even offered (over the hotline) to get mine re-welded >>because of a similar problem. My Left and Right steps were not >>symmetrical. >> >> I have only drilled for one side (L) and decided to wait on the >>other since I didn't want the step protuding until as late as possible in >>the construction process. >> >> I found a few things: >>1. Small errors and inconsistent measurements on the drawing. >>2. The "internal tube" portion of the mount is supplied too long and needs >>to be trimmed (find that in the instructions! - at least in my 1 year old >>ones, and I bet they haven't changed) >>3. My step portion was "swept forward" (at least 10 degrees) and slightly >>"tilted up". Looks pretty tacky. >>4. Mount the inner plastic block on F-626 after you have got the outer >>plate flat against the side skin. That is, don't move the outer hole to >>get the plate to fit flat against the skin, lower the inner mounting. >>5. When it's all mounted, cut off the step portion, bring over your >>favorite aircraft welder and have him weld it back on pointing in the >>direction _you_ want. Personally, I think the steps should be at 90 >>degrees to the centerline, and on a horizontal reference plane. >>6. The factory is to quick to say "no-one else has that problem" or "they >>are all built differently" instead of really fixing their drawings or jigs. >>In actual fact, I have found remarkable consistency between local RV6s >>built by folks of widely different skill levels. >>7. Builders calls are still not logged. >> >> >> So try lowering your inner mounting block and see if that helps. >>Get the outer plate flat against the fuselage side, and then just re-weld >>the step portion on as you like it. If I remember correctly, the inner >>tube lies pretty close to the bottom skin. >> The theory behind this is that if the outer plate is not flat >>against the side, it will look absolutely awful ... so get it flat and then >>fix the outer portion. >> In all fairness to the original welder, there is really nothing to >>reference the various pieces of the step to each other in making the >>assembly. >> >> Also remember that the factory planes are the non-standard ones in >>this area, since they move the F-625 and F-626 ribs inwards to compensate >>for some component dimensional problems. This probably gives rise to item >>#2 above. I bet that your F-625 and F-626 are located at the dimensions >>shown on sheet # 33 of the plans. >> >> .... good luck ... Gil Alexander >> >>gil(at)rassp.hac.com >>RV6A, #20701 ... took advantage of some 80 F weather and drilled >> my plexi to the tip-up roll over bar! >> >> >>PS. wish Vans hotline would start logging those calls ... check the >>archives for the electric flap/tip-up canopy interference problem. >> >> >>>I'm having problems mounting the Wd 657 external step and would like to hear >>>from anybody that has done it. >>> >>>My fusilage (RV 6A) is in the skeleton stage and I have the plastic block >>>mounted on the F626 baggage rib. The hole is cut in the F625 rib. Now, if >>>I position the plate where the instructions say to, the top edge of the >>>plate is at least a half an inch out from the skin line and the tear drop >>>shaped foot rest part of the step diverges from the airstream by at least 12 >>>degrees. I called Van's and they said nobody else has had a problem as far >>>as they know. >>> >>>I can get the plate to conform to the skin line by moving it up 5/8" or so, >>>but they said it was not a good idea to move it up as there might be >>>interference between a persons toe and the edge of the flap. I won't be >>>able get the foot rest to conform to the airstream unless I cock the plate >>>at a weird angle. Has anyone else had problems with this or did I get a >>>screwed up weldment? >>> >>>Scott Sawby >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Power Bus?
Cheryl, Unless you're firmly locked down on breakers, please consider using Bussmann fuse blocks (available from B&C @ 316-283-8000 ask for David). These the fast-on spade terminals for ease of wiring and sell for about $1.50 per slot as opposed to $20 per slot for miniature breakers. In addition, they'll save hours and hours of fabrication, installation and wiring time. IMPORTANT . . you mount these things out of reach under the instrument panel . . . all good rv'ers build failure tolerant electrical systems . . . RIGHT? There is not and never has been a good reason for mounting acres of breakers on the panel of an airplane . . never-the-less, tradition and habit prevail. Save your panel space, dollars and time for something you can USE on the panel like another GPS receiver or perhaps a good panel mounted intercom? For background please read . . . "Aircraft Electrical Systems: A philosophy for Reliability." Sport Aviation, February 1993, Page 80. "Fuses or Circuit Breakers?" Sport Aviation, March 1993, Page 86. "Failure Mode Effects Analysis: Confidence by design." Sport Aviation, June 1994, Page 83. "Avionics Master Switches." Sport Aviation, July 1994, Page 80. "Aircraft Electrical Systems for Homebuilders", SportPlane Resource Guide, 1995/1996 edition published by Kindred Spirit Press, 3001 21st Street NW, Winterhaven, FL 33881. If you're locked down on using breakers, then let's talk about the best way to install them . . it's not difficult . . just tedious. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ------------------------------- | Go ahead . . . Make my day. | | SHOW me where I'm wrong! | | www.southwind.net\~nuckolls | ------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: rbusick(at)nmsu.edu (Robert Busick)
Subject: Re: engine building
> > Don't forget roller cams and lifters, and other performance stuff. >Have you ever looked at the ports on a Lyc.head? Performance is the >last thing on their minds when they produce these things. Good porting >will not only produce more HP, but will improve fuel consumption due to >more homogeneous fuel/air mixture. The roller cam/rockers that can be had >are free HP in the form of reduced internal friction. > Chris Chris Please tell me more. How do I do this and get this performance stuff. My engine is sitting in my garage now just waiting to be flown or improved. I like your ideas and I agree that the exhaust ports are very crude to say the best, haven't looked at the intake ports? Bob Busick RV-6 rbusick(at)nmsu.edu ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: rbusick(at)nmsu.edu (Robert Busick)
Subject: Re: Finding an Engine/Engine for Sale
Mark The way to find an engine is to start asking around. You will be suprised at how much will start turning up. In Jan I put out a request and by end of March I had about 6 different engines to choose from. By April I was still getting calls after I had bought an engine. I have been really surprised where you will find these engines, they are not everywhere, but they are in the stangest places. For those interested my EAA Chapter has an O-320 -C3B 150 HP with most of the accessories, RV-6 engine mount, crossover exhausts and mufflers. The engine came out of an RV-6 cowl and was flown only once before the builder died. It is almost a complete firewall forward deal. About 120 hrs TSO. The asking price for EAA Chapter 555 members was $4500. Price may be higher for non Chapter members, of course tell Mike you want to join and get the chapter deal. If interested contact Mike Pfeifer (505) 526 8656. Bob Busick RV-6 rbusick(at)nmsu.edu > >Can anyone offer me some insights into the business of finding an engine? I >wanted to build up an O-360-A1A but with H2AD pistons, an Ellison TBI, and >perhaps electronic ignition, and both flow and dynamically balanced -- but >finding the core may be a problem. > > Mark N. Hilsen 71322.1267(at)compuserve.com > Kent, Washington ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com>
Subject: Re: Whelen strobes?
On Fri, 3 May 1996, David Cahoon wrote: > I want to have wingtip strobes and a nav light on the rudder. What is the > pro and con on the two systems offered by Van's. 1) one power pack working > both strobes 2)power pack in each wing? David Cahoon (starting electrical) I faced this decision about a year ago. The sad news is that Whelen now manufacturs only the 'Comet Flash' series of power supplies. Here are Aircraft Spruce's prices for Comet Flash power supplies: Single Strobe supply: $268.95 Threee strobe supply: $329.00 As you can see, it is almost cost-prohibitive to use anything other than a centrally-located three-strobe supply, particularly if you plan to install a strobe light at each wingtip and one on the tail. Best Regards, Dave Barnhart rv-6 sn 23744 skinning the fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Lewis <lewisjw(at)hqsocom.af.mil>
From: lewisjw
Subject: -8 QBK OnOn 4-30-96 Will Outlaw asked: When will Van have a -8 quick build kit?ro ched N FunIIbroacheed the subject with an un-named rep who guessed that the -8 QBK would be out in about 3 years. Can you wait that long? Regards, Joe Lewis, -6A, Tampa Bay ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Brown" <danb(at)a.crl.com>
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: Re: engine building
This idea of "engine kits" sounds very interesting. I understand that, for now, it's in the idea stage, but I have a few questions (speculation is fine): 1. If I understand this correctly, the idea is that Superior will sell a box with all the parts for, say, an O-360--right so far? 2. Do I correctly assume that the resulting engine would _not_ be certified? If so, is there any way it could be? 3. What is the (approximate) expected cost of such a thing? 4. Would this be a bolt-together proposition, or would there be a lot of fitting, lapping, machining, etc. involved? How would it compare to rebuilding an auto engine? -- Dan Brown, KE6MKS, danb(at)a.crl.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: ? wrt OAT probes.
From: John Saare, INTERNET:John.Saare(at)Eng.Sun.COM RE: RV-List: ? wrt OAT probes. >I've been flying around with an RMI uEncoder for some time now. I love it. >But I never have gotten around to wiring the OAT probe. >I've always wondered about the overall accuracy of these units when it >comes to measuring actual ambient air temperature. >Basically, I want the unit to perform accurately in the following >situation: >I fly in to, say, Pine Mtn Lake, CA. (a place in the Sierra foothills). >It's summer..., and density altitude is a consideration. I decide to >take off during the middle of the day. I hit the "density altitude" >switch on the uEncoder, and with confidence, I can believe what it says. >Is IR heating on the structure to which the probe is mounted much of a >factor? How is the probe isolated from this effect? John, I've always wondered about this myselft but let's consider the physics involved. As a measurement device, there's no reason for ANY modern temperature sensing component to have less than plus or minus 1 degree C accuracy . . . electronically, there's little reason to be concerned. I've considered the effects of, say IR radiation from a sun-baked ramp and one of these days, I'll do an experiment to measure the effect but in the mean time the only thing IR effects can do is give you an error in the SAFE direction . . . you're not going to get a density altitude reading that is LOWER than TRUE. My gut feeling is that IR effects are going to be pretty small . . like on the order of a couple of degrees C. I think I would mount a probe on the belly, shaded from direct sun and not on metal heated by direct sun. As soon as the weather gets warmed up here, I'll get out some test equipment and do some experiments. Watch this space for the results. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection FYI, the unit is installed in a `48 Bonanza..., the RV will be started shortly, now that maintenance on the Bonanza is settling down. Thanks! -- John Saare ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: "Mel Barlow (IJD, Ct.)" <102636.54(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Airplane data
MODEL:RV-4 DATE FINISHED:9/1988 TOTAL TIME:425 ENGINE:O-320-E2A/160HP PROP:Warnke 72X72, 1992 Model CANOPY:YES(g) STARTER:S-TEC Hi-Torque ALTERNATOR:Interav VOLT. REG.:Van's Adjustable BATTERY:Gel Cell EXHAUST:Tolle (no cracks yet!) ELEVATOR TRIM:Manual FLAPS:Manual BRAKES:(Per Plans??) TIRE PRESSURE: 30psi. PANEL:VFR, elec. T&B, no vsi, 4-probe CHT & EGT, Fly-Bud LORAN, ICOM h/h CS-10 linear pwr. amp., Gmeter. LIGHTING:Whelen 3-strobes (Wing tips & V.S.), Nav Lts., Olds Lndg.Lts. PAINT:Ext.Imron over Variprime; Int. etched,alodined & zinc chromated. INTERIOR:Cockpit & Baggage - Laquered over the zinc chromate (MISTAKE!!) INSURANCE: Liability only - IAC, Forest Agency OTHER (MISC): Wt. 918# with oil, no fuel, painted. Yes, I did 1st flight. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: Exploding Battery
There seems to be a lot of speculation on the crash at Longmont, CO of a RV-4. Some say prop and some say battery. I understand the interest that we all have in RV accidents, we don't want to make the same mistakes, etc. However, as we all know, spectators on the ground are not the best source of information. It's probably best to wait until the NSTB releases it's findings. Then we will have a pretty good idea of what happened (hopefully). In the mean time, I think we should all take to heart things that we do know and build our airplanes in the most airworthy manner possible. There have been some good ideas on the airworthy installation of batteries and I think most of us know about the dangers of cut-down, re-pitched metal props. I talked to a RVer today that told me of a friends' experience of losing the tip on a cut down, re-pitched metal prop. The pilot cut the mags as quickly as possible and landed OK. Virtually all of the rivets along the longeron failed due to the vibration. Needless to say, it sure got the pilots attention. Bob Skinner RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: CHT/EGT
Gary, I have a little trouble with EGT's and CHT's on my 150 hp, as well. I'm using a Facet 4SPA 10-3678-32. The engine runs fine, but there is quite a spread of CHT's and EGT's at less than full throttle. At full throttle, all EGT's and CHT's even out. My CHT's are 275-325, depending on OAT, at full throttle. At reduced throttle settings, cylinders 1 & 2 are low on CHT's and EGT's. CHT's of 250 (I have a GEM, so no accurate measurement of EGT's). CHT's on cylinders 3 & 4 run 300-350 and EGT bars go to full scale. at reduced throttle. I tried the screen that Larry Vetterman suggests and it seemed to help a little, cylinder 1's EGT rose. The pattern changed a little, as well. I think there always going to be distribution problems on the 150-180 hp, carburated Lycoming engines. Maybe someone else on the list has solved this problem without going to the expense of FI. On the Glasair that we built, we had a lot of trouble getting the Ellison Throttle body carb to work. We tried all sorts of flow dividers and never got the results that we wanted. Maybe when I get tired of flying my RV (possible?), I'll do some experimentation with different kinds of dividers, etc. and see if we can come up with some answers. By the way, I really like the way Van has the FAB airbox set up. Sure hope this isn't part of the problem. Speaking of the FAB airbox. How often do you guys service your K&N filters when operating off paved surfaces? Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)ltec.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: Re: engine building
> This idea of "engine kits" sounds very interesting. I understand >that, for now, it's in the idea stage, but I have a few questions >(speculation is fine): > >1. If I understand this correctly, the idea is that Superior will >sell a box with all the parts for, say, an O-360--right so far? > >2. Do I correctly assume that the resulting engine would _not_ be >certified? If so, is there any way it could be? > >3. What is the (approximate) expected cost of such a thing? > >4. Would this be a bolt-together proposition, or would there be a lot >of fitting, lapping, machining, etc. involved? How would it compare >to rebuilding an auto engine? >-- >Dan Brown, KE6MKS, danb(at)a.crl.com Dan, 1.-Yes, 2.-No to certification, no way. 3.-Don't know, 4.-I'm assuming a bolt together deal. Maybe if we all called Superior with excitement in our voices about their engine, they would get in gear and get the job done. Bob Skinner RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Jerry Springer <jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com>
Subject: Re: ? wrt OAT probes.
John Saare wrote: > > I've been flying around with an RMI uEncoder for some time now. I love it. > But I never have gotten around to wiring the OAT probe. > > I've always wondered about the overall accuracy of these units when it > comes to measuring actual ambient air temperature. > > Basically, I want the unit to perform accurately in the following > situation: > > I fly in to, say, Pine Mtn Lake, CA. (a place in the Sierra foothills). > It's summer..., and density altitude is a consideration. I decide to > take off during the middle of the day. I hit the "density altitude" > switch on the uEncoder, and with confidence, I can believe what it says. > > Is IR heating on the structure to which the probe is mounted much of a > factor? How is the probe isolated from this effect? > > FYI, the unit is installed in a `48 Bonanza..., the RV will be started > shortly, now that maintenance on the Bonanza is settling down. > > Thanks! -- John Saar I have been flying my RMI encoder for six years with the temp probe hooked up and it works great and is very accurate. Infact if the temp probe is not hooked up you lose one of the functions I like best and that is being able to fly with it set to TAS, I have checked it against the E6B and it is always right on. When setting on the ground and getting temp from ATIS it alway close to the temp they give. I took the guts out of a headphone jack and epoxied the temp probe in that and mounted it on the left side of my RV-6 about where the front of the canopy is and down a couple of inches. -- Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS First Flight July 14, 1989 :-) jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Allan W. Mojzisik" <prober(at)iwaynet.net>
Subject: Chatter
Date: May 03, 1996
------ =_NextPart_000_01BB3948.F18D04C0 Allright Mitch, this is for your own good......... get off your butt and = get out the checkbook and order the tailkit!!!!!! If you keep waiting = when you do order it, it will probably come allready finished!!!! now = don't worry about where you'll build it or tools, all that stuff will = work itself out with a few postings to this list for advice. I got a = tail kit and it's going in the jig in october no matter what is = unfinished on this house......the wife will just have to live with = it... AL = prober(at)iwaynet.net ---------- From: Mitchell Faatz[SMTP:netmanage.com!mitch(at)matronics.com] Sent: Friday, May 03, 1996 5:58 AM Subject: RE: RV-List: Chatter=20 Please keep sending it to everyone. Thats exactly what this list is = for. I=20 love hearing everyones opinions and hearing what problems people have = had. =20 Don't underestimate how much you learn on topics "you don't care to hear = about" - I've learned a lot about engines and finishing procedures, and = I=20 haven't even ordered the tailkit yet! Keep it coming Mitch - uh, still procrastinating... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JamesCone(at)aol.com
Date: May 03, 1996
Subject: Re: ? wrt OAT probes.
Mount the OAT probe out of direct sunlight on a non-metal surface like inside of the air vent. It is very accurate. I tested mine using ice water, boiling water and it was right on. It also matches a mercury thermometer in my shop. Jim Cone jamescone(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Pat McClung <pmc123(at)mail.airmail.net>
Subject: Project Summary
My Project is an RV-6. I received my plans and empenage kit in Feb, '93 and hope to make my first flight within a month, I hope. I was careful not to keep track of the time or money spent. Took about 6 months off to build a place to live, and worked along fairly steady, but making a few fly-ins and airshows along the way--one trip to Van's Sept 94 reunion. Installed O320, with pacesetter 68X69--Clam Shell Canopy. I'm retired and live on Aerocountry Airport(TXO5) about 6 mi West of McKinney, TX (214-347-3103)All transient RV's are welcome. The rv-list provides a lot of helpful info and it would have helped if I had got on the net a couple of years back. Pat McClung. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: Pat McClung <pmc123(at)mail.airmail.net>
Subject: Re: How do I sign up
Michael l. Casmey wrote: > > How do I get placed in the rv-list > > Mike Casmey > INTERNET:104456.204(at)Compuserve.comMike, I don't see any immediate replies so this is what I did. e-mail to: rv-list-request(at)matronics.com Use the word "subscribe" in the subject and in the message. No need to say anything else--it seems to be automatic--you should get an acknowledgement and then within 24 hrs, a welcom message of about 19 pages. send me e-mail if you are interested in RV project. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 04, 1996
From: "Mark N. Hilsen" <71322.1267(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Engine Superior Kit
I have called Superior's (800) number every few months for the last year, since I first read of their interest in building an O-360 kit, with the -A1A configuration given greatest emphasis, and this is what I have been told. Superior has enjoyed such a rise in business that the O-360 kit project has been back-burnered indefinitely; there has been no progress on an O-360 kit that they will admit to within the last year. Their plans had called for mating existing, rebuilt cases secured from the general marketplace to custom built crankshafts, with most of the other rotating parts being from the Millenium line. As to the crankshafts the story-line grew hazy, but I believe Superior had intended to buy machined crankshafts (unlike the forged crankshafts Lycoming factory engines use) being developed by the guy that got his ticket punched in a Questaire in Colorado, or some other high performance single or some other state, when the crankshaft he had built broke on his custom TSIO-540 (not Continental, but I believe it was called a PCM engine) -- but you probably know more or even accurate details than this. What I heard from an engine builder (and *not* from anyone at Superior) was "when their [Superior's] crankshaft guy died, the crankshaft itself and Superior kit idea died with him." I think a new production O-360 crankshaft runs about $5800, and used, yellow-tagged crankshafts are difficult to find. I have heard but cannot yet confirm that left-turning crankshafts from LIO-360's cannot be used in certified *right turning* O- or IO-360's, but that in design terms Left is no different from Standard/Right, that the crankshaft "can't tell which way it is rotating", and that a homebuilder might be able to get into one of those for about $3800 into a perfectly satisfactory experimental engine. If anyone knows the details I would love to hear about it. I do know that many other Left-Lycoming parts cannot be used on a Standard/Right engine, but how the list breaks down is way beyond me. I was told that a kit-built Superior O-360 *might* be a certified engine so long as all parts and the method of assembly were in conformance with OEM specifications and performed by an A&P (or just P) who then signed it off. A hobbyist such as myself could build the same engine and it would be experimental only. On the other hand, I could disregard convention altogether and build or an engine with non-certified parts or certified parts in a non-certified configuration and I could end up with an experimental engine that would better match my needs or desires. As to mods for power: I believe that all other things being equal, power extracts life from an engine, so whether that power is extracted by H2AD high compression pistons, or better electronic ignition timing, or fancy roller cams, or flow balancing, porting and polishing, or an Ellison TBI, or siply higher RPMs -- your engine will die a little or a lot sooner. As my racing friends like to say: "Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go?" And there I was, kind of thinking, "kind of fast, guys." The following is from my Rolodex. A series of friendly and encouraging letters might bump these nice people off TDC and into overcoming the production problems and producing a kit before I am committed to another route. I do not know if they have an e-mail or website. David Sisson, President Precision Air Parts, a division of Superior Air Parts, Inc. 14280 Gillis Road Dallas, Texas 75244 P.O. Box 735 Addison, Texas 75001 (800) 229-5802 voice/cust svc (214) 233-5474 fax ["Called re: engine "kits" for the Lycoming O-360 or IO-360 engines: they are thinking about it, and perhaps in 6 months (4/95) ... Project on hold (9/95) ... Not sure, might be something to reconsider but no immediate plans (12/95) ... On hold indefinitely, too much other good business occupying their attentions, call back again (3/96)."] Best regards, Mark N. Hilsen RV-4 #2420 (fuselage jigged) 71322.1267(at)compuserve.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 04, 1996
From: wbpace(at)adnc.com (Bill Pace)
Subject: When to drill trim tab hinge
I've just drilled most of the left elevator skin to the skeleton, but I'm not sure when to drill the hinge to the rear spar. Neither Van's instructions or the Justice instructions make it clear whether I am to drill the hinge to the spar now (and rivet it later after I build the trim tab) or if I should wait until the trim tab is done and then drill the hinge to both the spar and the TT at the same time (to maintain alignment). Can someone give me some help out here? On a related note, I'm really looking forward to the Chino Airfare this weekend. If you see some guy in a white Tiger cap staring at your elevators, that's me :-). ----- Bill Pace Life is not so much an adventure wbpace(at)adnc.com as it is a paycheck. (also wbpace(at)aol.com) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 04, 1996
From: Robert Acker <75104.3077(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Project Summary
>> ...I was careful not to keep track of the time or money spent. << Pat, Great philosophy. I'm just gearing up to build, and was wondering if I should keep track of every dime and minute (my usual style), or make it fun instead and just go with it. Congrats on your progress. Rob. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 04, 1996
From: bcos(at)ix.netcom.com (William Costello )
Subject: Re: When to drill trim tab hinge
You wrote: > >I've just drilled most of the left elevator skin to the skeleton, but I'm >not sure when to drill the hinge to the rear spar. Neither Van's >instructions or the Justice instructions make it clear whether I am to >drill the hinge to the spar now (and rivet it later after I build the trim >tab) or if I should wait until the trim tab is done and then drill the >hinge to both the spar and the TT at the same time (to maintain alignment). >Can someone give me some help out here? > Bill, I am at the same place and I think I would be very cautious about drilling either side (elevator or trim tab) without the other one being there. It seems to me the trick will be to get the trim tab exactly filling the 'hole', moving up and down without binding at the hinge, and keeping the same distance between the outboard edge of the trim tab and the elevator. I will probably try to place and check and check them with clamps, then drill the outboard hole on both the tab and elevator end of the hinge, then cleco and clamp the other end and check, check, check. If you or anyone else gets a better idea, I, too, very much welcome all suggestions. Best Regards, Bill Costello -- ___ _____________________________ \ \ _ _ / / \ /? \ / \ / Bill Costello Chicago \ X-*#####*******......./ N97WC (reserved) / o/\ \ \_\ \ RV-6 on left elev. \ \__\ \ bcos(at)ix.netcom.com / \____________________________\ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 04, 1996
From: Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com>
Subject: Re: engine building
> Chris > Please tell me more. How do I do this and get this performance > stuff. My engine is sitting in my garage now just waiting to be flown or > improved. I like your ideas and I agree that the exhaust ports are very > crude to say the best, haven't looked at the intake ports? > > Bob Busick > RV-6 > rbusick(at)nmsu.edu There was an article some time back in Sport Aviation about the roller cam/lifters. I don't remember what month/year. A call/mail to LPM should get an answer. I subscribe so I'll ask them. The cams are "experimental only" at this point, and there is not a real big number of them running, so I'm a little leary of the reliablity. On the other hand, roller cams in other application have a reputation of increased cam life as well as improver efficency of the the engine. Almost all "high mileage" auto engines use roller cams now, for just this reason. The roller lifters are STCed for certified AC. There are at least two shops producing them. They have the advantage of reducing valve guide wear as well as a slight performance gain. Contrary to what some think, porting (Yikes! there's that word again) has come as long way since the old days of huge ports to facilitate maximum flow. Manufacturing concerns (read; cost) sometimes dictate that some compromise must be made to produce a reasonable product at a saleable price. For an example; Chevy struggles to produce 275 smog-legal HP from their 350CID engine. Now, anybody can buy heads/ cam/intake/exhaust that are matched that will produce about 475 smog-legal HP at about 4K RPM. Needless to say this costs more. The same rules apply to Lycoming. There is one AC shop (I don't have the name handy) that claims they can make your O-360 produce 220HP and be more reliable. Claims being what they are, I have doubts, but even a real 180HP would be an improvement over what a stock O-360 produces. How much do you want to spend? What I,m attempting to say with all this is that there is alot that can be done to improve the Lyc. engines. Since we are building "experimental" AC, we can do all of these things. The down side is that the changes push further into the relm of unknown. I assume that we have all accepted that there is risk in flying a homebuilt. Changes made to a stock Lyc. will change that risk. Maybe for the better? I for one have no desire to get into the complexity of an auto conversion, but I welcome any advances made by the auto industry to inprove the AC engines we have today. We _all_ know they need it. Chris cruble(at)cisco.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Tailspin(at)ix.netcom.com
Date: May 04, 1996
Subject: are quick build kits primered?
I just got my latest issue of EAA Sport magazine, and it has a nice picture of Van's quick build rv-6 kit in it. After looking at the picture it struck me that none of the parts looked like they were primered. Does anyone know if they are or not? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 04, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: ? wrt OAT probes.
From: INTERNET:JamesCone(at)aol.com, INTERNET:JamesCone(at)aol.com RE: Re: RV-List: ? wrt OAT probes. >Mount the OAT probe out of direct sunlight on a non-metal surface like inside >of the air vent. It is very accurate. I tested mine using ice water, >boiling water and it was right on. It also matches a mercury thermometer in >my shop. >Jim Cone >jamescone(at)aol.com This confirms my earlier assumption that ELECTRONICALLY these critters are generally pretty good. Mounting to avoid direct radiation from sun heated surfaces is the also a GOOD idea. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 04, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: CHT/EGT
---------- Forwarded Message ---------- From: Bob Skinner, INTERNET:BSkinner(at)ltec.net DATE: 5/3/96 11:54 PM RE: RV-List: CHT/EGT >Gary, I have a little trouble with EGT's and CHT's on my 150 hp, as well. >I'm using a Facet 4SPA 10-3678-32. The engine runs fine, but there is >quite a spread of CHT's and EGT's at less than full throttle. At full >throttle, all EGT's and CHT's even out. One of my subscribers is a retired power plant type from GM and currently consults for the likes of McClarren, etc. He ran some test cell work on a well known throttle body carburetor for his personal O-235 powered Long-Eze and discovered wide variations in mixture distribution depending on power settings. Some fuel delivery systems are better than others and I'm willing to bet that with the right instruementation, we can probably find consideable variation in supposedly identical systems. This has been one of the beefs I've had with the the latest fads for monitoring lots of engine parameters. In many cases, we find out a whole bunch of things we don't understand and begin to worry about it. From a practical point of view as a 1000+ hour pilot, there are few things about engine operation that I really NEED to monitor and of the few things which require diligent attention, none take priority over my responsabilities as a pilot. A lot of the whizbangs that show up in airplanes are there simply because we can do it, not necessarily because we need it. Of course there's nothing wrong with investigating and uderstanding every possible aspect of your aircraft's systems but don't mix systems analysis with piloting . . . remember the L-1011 that FLEW into the Everglades a few years back . . the whole cockpit crew were doing systems failure analysis . . . somebody forgot to fly the airplane! Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection My CHT's are 275-325, depending on OAT, at full throttle. At reduced throttle settings, cylinders 1 & 2 are low on CHT's and EGT's. CHT's of 250 (I have a GEM, so no accurate measurement of EGT's). CHT's on cylinders 3 & 4 run 300-350 and EGT bars go to full scale. at reduced throttle. I tried the screen that Larry Vetterman suggests and it seemed to help a little, cylinder 1's EGT rose. The pattern changed a little, as well. I think there always going to be distribution problems on the 150-180 hp, carburated Lycoming engines. Maybe someone else on the list has solved this problem without going to the expense of FI. On the Glasair that we built, we had a lot of trouble getting the Ellison Throttle body carb to work. We tried all sorts of flow dividers and never got the results that we wanted. Maybe when I get tired of flying my RV (possible?), I'll do some experimentation with different kinds of dividers, etc. and see if we can come up with some answers. By the way, I really like the way Van has the FAB airbox set up. Sure hope this isn't part of the problem. Speaking of the FAB airbox. How often do you guys service your K&N filters when operating off paved surfaces? Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)ltec.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 04, 1996
From: Bob Haan <bobh(at)synopsys.com>
Subject: Re: When to drill trim tab hinge
>I've just drilled most of the left elevator skin to the skeleton, but I'm >not sure when to drill the hinge to the rear spar. >----- >Bill Pace Life is not so much an adventure >wbpace(at)adnc.com as it is a paycheck. >(also wbpace(at)aol.com) I drilled the trim tab hinge to the elevator after I had finished the trim tab and had the hinge drilled to the trim tab. Bob Haan Portland, OR RV6-A both wings in the jigs LEs & Top Skins Riveted on, working on tanks bobh(at)synopsys.com Evenings 503-636-3550 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 04, 1996
From: John Darby <johnd@our-town.com>
Subject: Re: Airplane data
>MODEL: RV6 (plans No. 20142) >DATE FINISHED:24 March 1994 >TOTAL TIME: to build:2170.25 hours to first take off, flown 139.5 to date. >ENGINE:0-320 E2D (2nd runout and rebuilt by hand) >PROP:(easy now, hold your horses) Modified metal Sensinich >CANOPY:tilt forward >STARTER:Mark Landoll >ALTERNATOR:Ford >VOLT. REG.:Ford >BATTERY:Elec Wheel chair gel cell >EXHAUST:L. Vetterman SS cross over. >ELEVATOR TRIM: manual >FLAPS:Electric >BRAKES:left side only TIRE PRESSURE: 40 pounds >PANEL:all that I cared to afford, the requied plus Elec Intnl single cly EGT, CHT and OAT; MK11 comm; Tpxn;Apollo Loran (604TCA); GCA 400 intercom. > >LIGHTING:Duckworks single, single strobe, normal position, internal. >PAINT: DuPont > >INTERIOR:Laurenstein seats, carpet on all floors, fabric on all walls. > >INSURANCE:Liability only. > >OTHER (MISC):Total cost of airplane to date(does not include fuel, oil etc nor any repairs since first flown) $27,396.30. (It does include all special tools I had to buy for building, a heater for the work shop, all heater fuel.) >Named "Toddy Too", no, not poor english. My 15 year old Yorkie Terrier who matched my build time hour for hour by making ZZZs. He was to go on my first flight with me, but died one month before the first flight. He built it 'too'. > >PROBLEMS:Separating strong personnal opinions, stated as fact, from facts. For instance, before started, went to a builders group, heard discussion about wearing gloves while construc., Not only to wear gloves, but which was best, cotton or nylon (nylon too 'sharp', might scratch), what powder, corn starch, talc, rice. Opinions stated as fact--do not build the RV unless you wear cotton gloves and use talc powder, you could put minute scratches in the metal. My conclusion after thinking this over: BS!! Every metal painter I know 'roughs' up the metal, treats it and then paints it over. Never seen a scratch that was caused by no gloves or wrong gloves or powder. Frank Sinatra had it right-- I did it my way, dirty hands, sloppy shop, sweat, blood and some tears. It flys. Conclusion: listen to any and all opinions, use your brain to separate what works for you and press on. John Darby RV6 N61764 flying johnd@our-town.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Frank Pruitt <pruitt(at)erols.com>
Subject: RV6A Drawing 8a
Date: May 04, 1996
------ =_NextPart_000_01BB39CC.6BE67E80 Would someone check their plans for the length dimension of the nose = section of HS-607. That dimension is missing on my drawing which shows = only the total length (17.58"). Thanks, Frank Pruitt pruitt(at)erols.com From: ted_boudreaux(at)om.cv.hp.com From: ted_boudreaux(at)om.cv.hp.com Date: Sat, 4 May 96 13:01:50 -0700 Subject: Re: RV-List: are quick build kits primered? Yes, they are. During my recent tour of the factory, Bill Benedict showed us the quick build components. The fuse and wings are primered on the inside, but not on the outside. Another interesting tidbit was the amount of primer used: not very much. Bill said that it's very common for builders to use too much primer. Hope this helps. Ted Boudreaux RV6A #22435 ted_boudreaux@hp-pcd.hp.com ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: RV-List: are quick build kits primered? HP-Corvallis,mimegw1 Date: 5/4/96 4:59 AM I just got my latest issue of EAA Sport magazine, and it has a nice picture of Van's quick build rv-6 kit in it. After looking at the picture it struck me that none of the parts looked like they were primered. Does anyone know if they are or not? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "B F Gibbons" <bfgibbons(at)INTELLINET.COM>
Date: May 04, 1996
Subject: For Sale - RV6 Empenage (complete) / Wing Kit (WIP)
I have an RV6 / 6A empenage with electric trim and a wing kit for sale (located in North West Arkansas - USA). For details, e-mail me at bfgibbons(at)intellinet.com. For those of you with interest, here is some more info (everyone else can hit [DEL] now): Price: I haven't figured it all up but it will be the kit cost plus the cost of the additional components (discounted a little because nobody else will want exactly what I wanted). People who try to charge for their labor just piss me off so that won't be included in the price. You can probably figure it as well as I can. The right wing is WIP (work in progress), left wing is unstarted. Right wing is ready to close as soon as the control surfaces are fitted. Tank work has not been started. Wing kit includes Phlogiston spar, BAC components (not BAC fast build option, just the components), RMD landing light kit, Vision Microsystems fuel probes (with custom machined fittings - uninstalled), Whelen strobe/nav light combo for wing tips - tail light/strobe combo for rudder bottom (these are the high intensity four flash Whelens and are very expensive). Quality of work is, in my opinion, average to better than average (not show quality). Fit of the rudder on the vertical stab, fit of the fiberglass caps on the elevators, horizontal, vertical, and rudder top is excellent. Nice lines, good fit on the elevators. No smiles anywhere. One spot on the vertical that could use a little bondo before painting - I didn't intend to however. I suggest you e-mail one of the following people for their opinion on the workmanship. Both have seen the project and can give you their unbiased opion if you e-mail them directly: Stowe Hoffius: shoffius(at)aol.com Bob Skinner: bskinner(at)itec.net Why? That's what I always wanted to know when I heard about people selling their projects. 1) Time. I haven't worked on the project for almost four weeks. I don't know when I'll get back to it. It is taking way too long (two years calendar time to get to this point). 2) Space. I have less than 1/2 of a two car garage carved out for a 'shop'. It is crowded and frustrating to work in. It has stopped being fun. 3) Speed. I picked the RV6 because it goes fast compared to the airplanes I was flying three years ago. I'm fortunate enough to fly a faster airplane now, faster than an RV6, so the -6 speed in not as impressive. 4) Slow, fun flying. I also like the RV6 because it allows soft field possibilities and safe, fun flying. My partner and I recently purchased a 1941 J3 Cub. Need I say more? The hardest thing about making the 'sell' decision is the feeling that I'm quitting. I really hate that feeling! I may start another project some day. I would only do it if I could find a > 300 MPH kit that I though was safe and well engineered. If you have interest, give me a shout. I'm going to place an ad in Trade-a-Plane in a few weeks. BFG bfgibbons(at)intellinet.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 04, 1996
From: "Elon Ormsby" <Elon.Ormsby(at)quickmail.llnl.gov>
Subject: Engine Building
REGARDING Engine Building Hi Chris Cruble: You stated ... "Now I'm sure you will agree that removing all that raggity stuff will improve things. Right?" You are absolutely right Chris. And that is why I mentioned that a simple clean-up of the casting-flash may be considered, but to go beyond that you are in no mans land without a FLOW BENCH and a lot of experience. You are quite right to indicate that we have come a long way from the old days of blindly grinding away to make it "look pretty" or to straighten out what looked like a contorted port. Modern shops all have a precision flow- benches to accurately QUANTIFY their results. Recently, wet chemistry has been introduced to the advanced flow-benches to better replicate or to understand what is happening to the gas molecules as they travel down the port. The point is, that simply LOOKING at a port (without the aid of modern instruments or technology to quantify before and after results) is not the way to go. I have "looked" at just a few Lycoming ports but without the aid of a flow-bench and a dummy cylinder to grind on I would be neutral on the best approach - especially since these are very LOW RPM motors and I do not have a good feel for the air/fuel velocities and the effect obstructions may have. Chris, I don't want to get in a issue of semantics since it is clear you have a good understanding of modern engine technology. I also greatly respect your cautious approach to the reliability issue and how you are clear to point out the cause-and-effect engine changes have on reliability. However, I feel common usage still assumes PORTING means ENLARGEMENT of the ports. Your own example clearly illustrates the point when you say... "... porting (Yikes! there's that word again) has come as long way since the old days of huge ports to facilitate maximum flow. ... For an example;Chevy struggles to produce 275 smog-legal HP from their 350CID engine. Now, anybody can buy heads/cam/intake/exhaust that are matched that will produce about 475 smog-legal HP at about 4K RPM... All of the manufactures of Chevy aftermarket heads you are referring to (i..e, Brodix, AFR, Dart, Trick, Edelbrock, etc.) specify intake runner VOLUME for their heads. For comparison various stock (as cast) heads manufactured by Chevy may be about 157cc - 169cc. All of the others sell high performance heads with Intake VOLUMES FAR GREATER than STOCK. Most start around 190cc and can go as high as around 280cc of intake VOLUME (Dart does sells a STOCK replacement head at 170cc). The reason racers or high performance enthusiasts buy these heads is because of greatly LARGER THAN STOCK PORT VOLUME. Sure, port shape, valve angle, combustion chamber geometry and plug angle all are attributes that come along with theses higher performance heads. Some of these LARGE VOLUME heads are even sold with very THICK walls so they can be even further enlarged (yech, "ported") over the as-cast condition. Because of the specialty market, you can buy cast-in, LARGE volume, intake/exhaust ports and may not have to do additional grinding. But if you have a stock part and you want to INCREASE flow it is still considered enlargement via PORTING since slight shape changes and modest clean-up does not provide dramatic improvement in flow at the RPM dictating the need for large ports. Hmmnn roller cams and Detroit .. now that is another issue. Elon ormsby1(at)llnl.gov ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: Scott.Fink(at)Microchip.COM (Scott Fink)
Subject: Re: RV6A Drawing 8a
Frank, It is not on anyone's plans. I my two nose sections were of different length, both were marked correctly. I called Van's and he said that was impossible as they were machine stamped. After convincing him that they were indeed of different lengths, he decided that I had one mismarked RV3 nose rib. I never did get the proper dimension from him, but they did send me a correct one. The RV3 rib was about an inch too short. I now check all parts for correct dimensions before using them. Everyone makes mistakes sometimes, I just want to make sure that their mistake doesn't become my problem. From the drawing it should be a little over 7", but I don't have an exact dimensin. Scott Fink scott.fink(at)microchip.com Would someone check their plans for the length dimension of the nose section of H S-607. That dimension is missing on my drawing which shows only the total length (17.58"). Thanks, Frank Pruitt pruitt(at)erols.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com (Michael McGee)
Subject: Email attachments
I would like to see what these attachments are that some of you are sending with your messages. Owing to the probability that I do not have my software set up correctly, what kind of files are you attaching? Pictures, .RTF. .dwg's? Each time one comes through it hangs my downloading. The most recent references are Beckie Orendorf & Frank Pruitt. I am running win95/Eudora1.44 Thanks for your help, email me personally if you like. jmpcrftr(at)teleport.com Mike McGee sn23596 Vancouver, WA ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: alanw(at)netspace.net.au (Alan Williams)
Subject: Re: are quick build kits primered?
I had a good look at the kit in Mangalore (Australia) last month and yes it is fully primed. Alan > After looking at the picture it struck me that none of the parts >looked like they were primered. Does anyone know if they are or not? > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RICKRV6(at)aol.com
Date: May 04, 1996
Subject: Re: Tire wear
Bob, I put Goodyear Flight Special, 5.00-5, 4 ply tires on my RV6 and now have about 340 hours on them. The inside tread is now worn out, so it's time to replace them. I should have been more diligent at rotating, I'd probably get more time out of them. I've been pretty rough on these tires, my landings usually leave a lot to be desired. I'd say these tires held up quite well. Rick McBride RV6, N523JC ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 04, 1996
From: Bob Haan <bobh(at)synopsys.com>
Subject: Tank Testing with water
Has anyone tested the tanks for leaks by putting them in a jig, leading edge down, and filling them with water before closing them up with the assembly of the rear baffle? The advantage would be the discovery and repair of leaks while the tank could still be accessed through the rear baffle area. If you have not tested the tanks this way, do you have any comments on this process? Of course, after completion, the tanks would still need pressure testing. Bob Haan Portland, OR RV6-A both wings in the jigs, LEs & Top Skins Riveted on, working on tanks bobh(at)synopsys.com Evenings 503-636-3550 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 03, 1996
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: Re: Quick Build Thoughts (Chatter)
> What I wish Van would do, is make some small change on the quick-builts, like > a different fin/rudder profile so those who have done it all can tell the > difference, and feel just slightly superior, or something, if it is in you > makeup. Hey, I LIKE that idea. Too bad it probably won't happen -- doesn't make much business sense for Van to have extra parts just to appease the egos of us REAL airplane builders.... (I hope no scratch-builders are listening :-) Randall Henderson RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 04, 1996
From: Jerry Springer <jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com>
Subject: Re: For Sale - RV6 Empenage (complete) / Wing Kit (WIP)
B F Gibbons wrote: > 3) Speed. I picked the RV6 because it goes fast compared to the > airplanes I was flying three years ago. I'm fortunate enough to fly > a faster airplane now, faster than an RV6, so the -6 speed in not as > impressive. > > 4) Slow, fun flying. I also like the RV6 because it allows soft > field possibilities and safe, fun flying. My partner and I recently > purchased a 1941 J3 Cub. Need I say more? OK BF What are you flying that is faster than a RV-6? :-) -- Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS First Flight July 14, 1989 :-) jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: "Elon Ormsby" <Elon.Ormsby(at)quickmail.llnl.gov>
Subject: Need address
REGARDING Need address Mark Hilsen could you please send me your private e-mail address - I lost it. Thanks, ormsby1(at)llnl.gov ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: "Richard Chandler" <mauser(at)Claris.COM>
Subject: Re: Engine Building
Elon says: >...you are in no mans land without a FLOW BENCH and a lot of experience. What exactly IS a flow bench and how is it used? (For some reason, I'm picturing an intake manifold upside down on a bench, with clear plastic tubes attached to the outlets with ping-pong balls and compressed air being blown into it. The manifold being modified until the balls all blow to the same height.) Silly, I know. I also recall a long time ago reading that sometimes a rough surface on the manifold is better than a smooth one, that the rough surface provides some turbulance which helps break up fuel droplets that might collect on a mirror finished inner wall. -- "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!" ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com (John Ammeter)
Subject: Elon, what's your email address
Elon, I'd like to ask you some questions about automobile engines but, having just deleted all past messages, I find that I need your address to send the questions to you. To prime your engine, start thinking about V-6 engines and their application to use in a Jensen-Healey car. John Ammeter ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com Seattle WA, USA RV-6 N16JA Flying 5 years ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: Mike Hartmann <hartmann(at)sound.net>
Subject: Re: Tank Testing with water
>Has anyone tested the tanks for leaks by putting them in a jig, leading >edge down, and filling them with water before closing them up with the >assembly of the rear baffle? > >If you have not tested the tanks this way, do you have any comments on this >process? I didn't test mine that way, but I don't see any major problems with your idea. You might have some difficulty discriminating between a very slight 'weeping' leak and condensation on the outside of the tank. If you live in a dry climate or use warm(er than the surrounding air) water you might not have the problem. Here in east Kansas it is ALWAYS humid (but the T-storms like it that way). Also consider that your method won't test the integrity of the rear baffle seal, which in my opinion is the most likely to cause a problem. If you made the outer rib inner nose plates to conform closely to the skin, the next most likely leak is in the four corners of the rear baffle to outboard ribs. The inboard end is not so much of a problem as it is accessable, but the outboard end caused me some concern (but not enough to make corner plates, just enough to use lots of Proseal there). I considered what you are proposing and skipped the step, but I did spend some extra time cleaning up and Prosealing all of the rivet shop heads and seams that were accessable prior to installing the rear baffle. I used the balloon and soapy water method of leak testing - the only ones I found were the tank cap and a few of the screws holding on the access plate and fuel sender, easily corrected. C-U - Mike hartmann(at)sound.net RV-6A in progress ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: dcahoon(at)intellinet.com (David Cahoon)
Subject: Re: Tire wear
I'd say 500,000 on a set of tires was purdy damn good.!!! >Bob, > >I put Goodyear Flight Special, 5.00-5, 4 ply tires on my RV6 and now have >about 340 hours on them. The inside tread is now worn out, so it's time to >replace them. I should have been more diligent at rotating, I'd probably get >more time out of them. I've been pretty rough on these tires, my landings >usually leave a lot to be desired. I'd say these tires held up quite well. > >Rick McBride >RV6, N523JC > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: John Darby <johnd@our-town.com>
Subject: Re: Exploding Battery
>>From: Jerry Springer, INTERNET:jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com Exploding Battery >>In reference to a -4 with a exploding battery, I would like to know what >>evidents there is for this. My understanding of this accident was that it >>was caused from a metel prop that had been cut and repitched out of >>manufacturing spec. and part of a blade lost, this could surely cause a >>battery explosion. Jerry, out of curiosity, how does the prop. breakage figure in the batt. explosion? John D John Darby RV6 N61764 flying johnd@our-town.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: John Darby <johnd@our-town.com>
Subject: Re: Power Bus?
> As I am starting to do the detail planning on the intstrument >panel and electrical system for my 6A I wonder what should I use for >a power bus? I was thinking of maybee just using a copper bar and >putting some brass bolts into it for connections. Ideas? Suggestions? >Cheryl Sanchez >csanchez(at)world.std.com Cheryl, I would think that you will first need to decide if you are going to use regular c/b s or the blade type of fuses. Having done the reg. c/b in mine, then reading Bob Nuckolls book and ideas, I would suggest the balde type for economy and for ease of installation. But if you are going the c/b route, I used only connecting wires from c/b to c/b. This way the tedious accuracy of fitting the bar to the screw spot was eliminated, plus if you later have to pull one c/b out, you would not have to undo the bar on all of them. For what it's worth, if I were to do it over, I would go the Bob Nuckolls method. You can get his book, and I think it is a good investment. (no, I don't have stock in his business). John D John Darby RV6 N61764 flying johnd@our-town.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Power Bus?
Date: May 05, 1996
I just saw in Chief's latest catalog that they are selling a copper bus bar. I think it was about $4.00. It is predrilled, but for the spacing used for circuit brakers (I think it was the Klixon brakers). If you are using the circuit braker switches that Vans (and Chief and others sell) then these may take a different spacing of the holes. You have to decide what CB or CB switches you are going to use and then work back to the bus strip. All of these CB and CBSwitches are expensive. As Bob N. suggested, you can use other methods. If you need a copper strip, I think I bought them at the local hobby shop where they sell RC model parts. Herman > Hi, > > As I am starting to do the detail planning on the intstrument > panel and electrical system for my 6A I wonder what should I use for > a power bus? I was thinking of maybee just using a copper bar and > putting some brass bolts into it for connections. Ideas? Suggestions? > > Thanks. > > Cheryl Sanchez > csanchez(at)world.std.com > Herman Dierks, Dept. E54S, AWSD, Austin, Texas mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com (Finn Lassen )
Subject: RV-3 Flap Brackets
The flap brackets are bolted to the spar and rib. Do you also rivet through the bracket flange when riviting the skins to the root rib? Or do you drill holes to make room for the shop head for these rivits? Finn finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Quick Build Van Cans
Date: May 05, 1996
Gary, I was thinking the same thing. The part of the RV I enjoyed building most was all the sheetmetal parts. The worst part of the RV's is the fiberglass work, the canopy, and even the cowl. I would rather build a fuel tank than the canopy. Without the skill learned along the way, these finish items will be a major barrier to these 'quick builders'. I expect some will still be finished by the Pro Shops. Its still a nice option and a good move on Van's part. Herman > Van Cans...that's funny! > > I think that it's great that Van will be able to get more people into RV's by > offering quick-build kits. But caveat emp tor (spelling). > > I got an early RV-6 kit...no pre-drilled/punched anything. I wish that I had > one of Van's contempory kits but I don't think I would have ordered a quick > build kit however because I enjoyed building the aircraft....up untill the > finish kit. Finishing the airplane was torture. It seemed like it would > never end. I built the airframe in two years...and it took me an additional > three years to finish the plane. I'm sorry to scare the heck out of some of > you but finishing the plane is the hardest part by far. > > That's why I think that they'll be a lot of quick build kits on the used > market. People are going to think "hay, I only have to do a few things to > finish". NOT. They will be getting their airframe at the most difficult > part of construction. I think that the quick-build kit is a bargin for those > of us that know what we are doing. I think that it's the RV-trap for the > unknowing. > > BTW, the scratch build people look down at kit people, kit people look down > on quick-build people, and quick build people look at their empty wallets. > Only Kidding. > There was an earlier post about marking quick-build kits by making a > different rudder. This is the same as marking lepers. Give me a break. If > somebody finishes a quick-build kit it will be as great as an accompleshment > as a regular kit. The airframe is so easy to build that it doesn't matter how > it gets done. It's more important that it be done correctly...and that is the > benifit of a quick-build kit. > > Order carefully. > > Gary Corde > RV-6 N211GC > Herman Dierks, Dept. E54S, AWSD, Austin, Texas mail: dierks(at)austin.ibm.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: Re: Tire wear
>Bob, > >I put Goodyear Flight Special, 5.00-5, 4 ply tires on my RV6 and now have >about 340 hours on them. The inside tread is now worn out, so it's time to >replace them. I should have been more diligent at rotating, I'd probably get >more time out of them. I've been pretty rough on these tires, my landings >usually leave a lot to be desired. I'd say these tires held up quite well. > >Rick McBride >RV6, N523JC Rick, Maybe I'll try the Flight Specials next time. You're doing better on wear than I am. What kind of tire pressure are you using? Also, my tires wear on the outside first, not the inside as I stated in my previous post. Bob Skinner ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: Sensenich Prop
I did my first test on the 70x77 Sensenich metal prop today. First, the net weight increase was 7.8 pounds and the Sensenich prop moved the CG forward .53" I weighted the old Props, Inc. prop, spinner, both bulkheads, the two sets of bolts ("I" extension to crankshaft and prop to "I" extension), the 4 inch "I" extension and cruch plate. This installation also had a 1/4" steel spacer for positionaing the front spinner bulkhead farther forward. This set-up weighed 25 pounds. I removed the Landoll harmonic balancer and it weighed 11.5 pounds with the attach bolts. The Sensenich prop, two bulkheads, spinner, prop bolts and the Sensenich supplied prop extension weighed 44 1/3 lbs. I only did one test today as it was very rough. Maybe early one of these mornings, I'll get better data. First, the static RPM was 2082 as opposed to 2230 with the Props, Inc. On the first (and only) flight, it was so rough that I don't have a good feel for comparing take-off and climb. I'll do some climb test in smooth air as soon as I can find some. My full throttle RPM leaned for maximum RPM's was 2470 at 7,500 feet and the MP was 23. Temp was 47 degrees. The TCAS was 178 mph. This compares to 2640 RPM's for the Props, Inc. prop and a MP of 22.75. TCAS was 180-181. In other words, about the same TCAS but turning 170 rpm's less with the Sensenich. The low static with the Sensenich and low RPM's at cruise have got me back to thinking that this engine is just not putting out power like it should. I'll doing more testing on the prop but will also try to find out if there is something I'm missing on the engine's performance. It would be no trouble to re-pitch the Sensenich to increase rpm's but will wait until I make sure there isn't something I'm missing on the engine. In other words, if others can turn this same prop up more rpm's, why can't I. It doesn't seem like I should have to reduce pitch to increase performance when others don't seem to have to do so. Initial reaction: Props, Inc. prop-pretty. Sensenich-yawn. I like the idea of no longer having to check prop bolt torque and of being able to fly through rain. I like the way the metal prop "feels" in operation and have been able to reduce idle rpm's. More news at it developes. Bob Skinner RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: props
Date: May 05, 1996
John, sorry for the delay. I will also post this to the net. See answers added to your note below. > Herman, just read your note about switching from the 'eperimental' metal > prop to the factory model. > I'm flying one of the exper. types, haven't had any trouble and it seems to > perform well, BUT, I've listened to all of the horror stories and have been > considering switching. A few questions if you don't mind and have time. > 1. Did you have any problems, or were you just dissatified with performance? > I take it from what you said in the note that is was no big problem to > switch over, just the 'dowel' thing. Used the same spinner and plates? ANSWER: Several factors. All my friends suggested I not use the cut down prop. When I was still building my plane I bought a 'cutdown' prop from a local RV3 builder for $200.00. I always liked the way the cut down metal props performed as I saw them flyout of Kittyhill with two people on board and they got off fast and also had good top speed. It was also a low cost alternative vs the $1600 new prop. I did not like the issues of having to torque the wood props and also the rain errosion problems. There were several things that made me switch. First, my friends heard a strange sound in the first prop I had aroud 1600 RPM. My only explanation is that I think the blades were not exactly the same twist and it made one blade bite harder than the other and this gave it a strange sound (but this is all a guess). Also, I did not want to sacrafice my plane and my kids (passengers) on these expermintal props. Regarding the posting about a weekago on the RV4 that lost a blade and it casused major damage to his airframe in just a few seconds. It turns out I know this person and had not seen him for about 2 yrs. I saw him at the Georgetown flyin Saturday. We were talking RV's and he told me the story about loosing a part of his prop. Everything posted in the earlier note is true. He had lots of dammage in a few seconds. The wild part is the dammage to the elevators. He built new elevators. He is lucky he did not loose the entire engine off of the airframe. He said he bought this prop only after Bob B. looked at it and it only had minor damage to one of the tips and Bob said this would be cut off anyway. Bob modified the prop per his normal cutdown (shorten and thinning of the blades). The owner converted from a wood prop. He said he loved the metal prop as it performed better and used less fuel than another RV he flew with. After hearing this true story first hand, I am glad I got rid of the experimental cut down prop. I suggest you do the same. You are setting on a time bomb. You don't know what RPM will cause destructive harmonics in the prop. Even if you do the static vibration test that they do in CA, it could be different on the plane and in flight as the spinning prop is more ridgid. Also, I flew two different expermental metal props. The first climbed good and got off the ground fast the did not have very good top speed. When we heard the strange noizes it made, I pulled it off and ordered the factory sensensich. In the mean time, If put on another experimental prop that another local RV pilot had taken off his plane. This prop had good cruse and top end speed but the takeoff was VERY slow and climb was not very good either. The factory metal prop gets off the ground good and climbs good and has good cruse and top speed. So, I am happy with it. Yes, I used the same spinner and spinner bulkheads. The only problem was having to back drill the two 1/2 inch holes for the two dowls. The newer backing plates have these holes now (I am told). This change over also added 5 pounds over the cutdown props. Some if this is in the prop and some is in the long through bolts and in the heavier 4 inch spacer. > 2. Was your choice to go to another metal prop based on wt&bal, or > performence of metal over wood? ANS: I still like the metal prop so I don't have to worry about rain and retorquing. It has the added advantage of giving a little more wt. up front in the RV4 so you can carry more in the back. However, for acro, I think it adds too much wt up front. Not a big problem but you can tell the difference. > When Vans came out with his article and wound up saying take the metal off > before next flight, I was convinced, but the very next article was that the > wood props were also coming apart. > I would appreciate your thoughts and ideas on this subject, I'm just in a > quandry and haven't been able to make up my mind. In the back of my mind is > always the terrible stories I've heard. I did send mine to Calif. to have > the harmonic vibration test run on it and it got a very good test score, a > node at 2750 that it should not be operated constanly at, but I understand > the factory model has one similar. > You thought would be appreciated. ANS: I don't think the 2600 RPM limit is a problem. At least for my 150 HP 2600 RPM is about all I can pull at full throttle at 2,000 ft. I don't like to cruse at this power setting and prefer 2400 RPM or so anyway. > John D > John Darby RV6 N61764 flying > johnd@our-town.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: JamesCone(at)aol.com
Date: May 05, 1996
Subject: Re: Project Summary
The FAA requires that you keep a "contemporaneous log" of your building time. When I got my first homebuilt certified, I had about 400 pictures in an album, a log of every minute I spent building it and all of the paperwork for certification. The two inspectors that did the certification hardly looked at the plane or the pictures. They examined every page of my builders log item by item. That took over an hour. The inspection of the plane took ten minutes. I don't know if that is typical or not but it sure surprised me. Better keep a log just in case. Jim Cone jamescone(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com (John Ammeter)
Subject: Re: Exploding Battery
> >>>From: Jerry Springer, INTERNET:jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com > Exploding Battery >>>In reference to a -4 with a exploding battery, I would like to know what >>>evidents there is for this. My understanding of this accident was that it >>>was caused from a metel prop that had been cut and repitched out of >>>manufacturing spec. and part of a blade lost, this could surely cause a >>>battery explosion. > >Jerry, out of curiosity, how does the prop. breakage figure in the batt. >explosion? >John D >John Darby RV6 N61764 flying >johnd@our-town.com > > John, I hate to tell you this but I think Jerry is pulling your leg. He's been known to do that on occasion. John Ammeter ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com Seattle WA, USA RV-6 N16JA Flying 5 years ________________________________________________________________________________
From: blea(at)hic.net
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: Re: Email attachments
I also would like to now in advance just what is being attached. I'd suggest that if you choose to use the attachment feature you mention it in the text of your message and state the what software is required to view the attachment. Infact, posting binary attachments to E-mail mesages may cause some problems with some of the more primitive out there. I use internet in a box V2.0 and the files come across as unknown.tmp. Well, now I have to guess what they are: Wordstar,Word perfect,MS Word, AmimPro Dos text, Excel, Lotis, Quatropro, Supercalc, Autocad, visio, MathCad.... could be anything.... not to mention what version they are.... I'd also suggest that you sign the message with an E-mail address so that it's easier to reply with out posting to the whole list. Bill Lea ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: Jerry Springer <jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com>
Subject: Re: Exploding Battery
John Darby wrote: > > >>From: Jerry Springer, INTERNET:jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com > Exploding Battery > >>In reference to a -4 with a exploding battery, I would like to know what > >>evidents there is for this. My understanding of this accident was that it > >>was caused from a metel prop that had been cut and repitched out of > >>manufacturing spec. and part of a blade lost, this could surely cause a > >>battery explosion. > > Jerry, out of curiosity, how does the prop. breakage figure in the batt. > explosion? > John D > John Darby RV6 N61764 flying > johnd@our-town.com Come on John think about it, are you aware of the violent vibrations and shaking caused by a broken prop blade? Don't you think that a positive battery cable could directly short and cause a explosion on a violently shaking engine? I did go back and read the prelimanary report on this accident and the one I read said nothing about a battery explosion. I am not saying I have the answers, I am just saying I was told by RV people that should know that it was a broken prop. -- Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS First Flight July 14, 1989 :-) jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 05, 1996
From: Ronald Vandervort <rvanderv(at)linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us>
Subject: 180 HP 0-320
In "The Best of Puget Sound Aviators" publication, Bill Amos of Rocky Mt. RVaTORS tells of an 0-320 E2D that was "pumped up" by Dick Demars Aero of Ft. Collins, Col. i.e. grinding cam, flow matching, balancing, domed pistons etc. Does anyone know how this has worked out for Mr. Amos. How costly something like that is, and reputation of Dick Demars Aero? How much shortened the TBO might be? etc. Thank You, "Partial Wimp" Ron Vandervort, Did empenage then ordered fast build. Do I still have to pound out my own wing rib? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Administrator(at)auto.rockwell.com
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: Message not deliverable
>MODEL: RV6 (plans No. 20142) >DATE FINISHED:24 March 1994 >TOTAL TIME: to build:2170.25 hours to first take off, flown 139.5 to date. >ENGINE:0-320 E2D (2nd runout and rebuilt by hand) >PROP:(easy now, hold your horses) Modified metal Sensinich >CANOPY:tilt forward >STARTER:Mark Landoll >ALTERNATOR:Ford >VOLT. REG.:Ford >BATTERY:Elec Wheel chair gel cell >EXHAUST:L. Vetterman SS cross over. >ELEVATOR TRIM: manual >FLAPS:Electric >BRAKES:left side only TIRE PRESSURE: 40 pounds >PANEL:all that I cared to afford, the requied plus Elec Intnl single cly EGT, CHT and OAT; MK11 comm; Tpxn;Apollo Loran (604TCA); GCA 400 intercom. > >LIGHTING:Duckworks single, single strobe, normal position, internal. >PAINT: DuPont > >INTERIOR:Laurenstein seats, carpet on all floors, fabric on all walls. > >INSURANCE:Liability only. > >OTHER (MISC):Total cost of airplane to date(does not include fuel, oil etc nor any repairs since first flown) $27,396.30. (It does include all special tools I had to buy for building, a heater for the work shop, all heater fuel.) >Named "Toddy Too", no, not poor english. My 15 year old Yorkie Terrier who matched my build time hour for hour by making ZZZs. He was to go on my first flight with me, but died one month before the first flight. He built it 'too'. > >PROBLEMS:Separating strong personnal opinions, stated as fact, from facts. For instance, before started, went to a builders group, heard discussion about wearing gloves while construc., Not only to wear gloves, but which was best, cotton or nylon (nylon too 'sharp', might scratch), what powder, corn starch, talc, rice. Opinions stated as fact--do not build the RV unless you wear cotton gloves and use talc powder, you could put minute scratches in the metal. My conclusion after thinking this over: BS!! Every metal painter I know 'roughs' up the metal, treats it and then paints it over. Never seen a scratch that was caused by no gloves or wrong gloves or powder. Frank Sinatra had it right-- I did it my way, dirty hands, sloppy shop, sweat, blood and some tears. It flys. Conclusion: listen to any and all opinions, use your brain to separate what works for you and press on. John Darby RV6 N61764 flying johnd@our-town.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WStucklen(at)aol.com
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: Re: Power Bus?
> As I am starting to do the detail planning on the intstrument >panel and electrical system for my 6A I wonder what should I use for >a power bus? I was thinking of maybee just using a copper bar and >putting some brass bolts into it for connections. Ideas? Suggestions? > > Thanks. > >Cheryl Sanchez >csanchez(at)world.std.com I used coper pipe per Tony's Sport aviation article.... Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV wstucklen(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: OrndorffG(at)aol.com
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: Re: are quick build kits primered?
Yes the quick build kit is primed with Sherman Williams wash primer ,the one we have is . The parts that come with the kit to finish the kit are not primered you have to do that yourself. If you have any other question on the kit please write or call 301-293-1505..... ..George Orndorff ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: Bob Kutschke <73244.1501(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: RV6A Project 4 Sale
Partially Complete RV-6A for sale: Tail kit 95% complete: Fiberglass tips need to be put on Lead counterbalance for elevators needs to be poured Wing kit 90% complete: One completed flap still to hang on wing Wingtips need to be fitted Fuselage kit 0%: Kit has been inventoried, but no work has been started. This 6A has everything: electric elev & aileron trim, electric flaps, Philogston spar, BAC wing component kit, Sliding canopy option. Fuselage kit has the new predrilled firewall from Van's. Both wings have installed landing lights. Also includes all plans, videos (tail, wing, & fuse), 14yrs of RVAtor. Many tools are also available but not included in price. Asking price: $10,500, o.b.o. Reason for selling: New job has drastically cut my "building time" The kit is in Birmingham, AL. Please feel free to inquire about the kit. E-Mail me privately as I don't always get the RV-List messages. You can also call me at (205) 969-7199 after 6:30PM Central. Bob Kutschke 73244.1501(at)compuserve.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Exploding Battery
---------- Forwarded Message ---------- From: Jerry Springer, INTERNET:jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com RE: Re: RV-List: Exploding Battery >Come on John think about it, are you aware of the violent vibrations and >shaking caused by a broken prop blade? Don't you think that a positive >battery cable could directly short and cause a explosion on a violently >shaking engine? >I did go back and read the prelimanary report on this accident and the >one I read said nothing about a battery explosion. I am not saying I have >the answers, I am just saying I was told by RV people that should know that >it was a broken prop. I've been following the responses to this topic with interest. As an engineer with some experiences in accident analysis, I'm understandably suspicious of cause and effect hypothesis not uncoverd by good investigation and confirmed by good science. IMHO . . . if wiring (particularly the fat guys carrying unbridled battery current) is installed using techniques in common usage, vibration such as that generated by an unbalanced prop would not cause secondary damage to the wiring. Furhter, high current faults to ground do not cause instant battery explosion. Most tests I've witnessed and read about note that battery electrolyte temperature begins to climb because all the battery's energy is being disipated within the battery's own internal resistance. It is tens of seconds to minutes before the water boils and generally vents as gysers of steam out the vent caps. True battery explosions have been documented and even repeated in the lab. These invariably hinge on an extended overcharging of the battery which liberates volumes of hydrogen/oxygen mix which is explosive only while still condfined within the limited airspace of the cells and must then be ignighted through a very small hole (natural flame arrestor). Once the gas mixture escapes the cell, it's immediatly poluted by lots of nitrogen in the atmosphere, enriched by excess oxygen and retarded by CO2 in atmosphere. As you can see, once the gasses escape the battery's confines, explosive qualities are quickly lost. This is why I don't like battery boxes . . . they keep acid off the airplane but provide a secondary collection site for hazardous combinations of gas. For those worried about this event taking place in their airplane, I can tell you that every attempt I've seen to create an explosive condition in laboratory tests of batteries failed to produce an explosion. It's one of those things you hear about and undoubtedly they DO occur but I'd be far more concerned about things like proper bolt torques on props, water in gas, etc . . . Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ________________________________________________________________________________
From: DerFlieger(at)aol.com
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: Re: ? wrt OAT probes.
writes: >Mount the OAT probe out of direct sunlight on a non-metal surface like inside >of the air vent. It is very accurate. I tested mine using ice water, >boiling water and it was right on. It also matches a mercury thermometer in >my shop. > > Being not satisfied with the measurements with the OAT probe in first the left and then the rights NACA vent, I located it in the aileron bellcrank access plate where it works very nicely. Jim Stugart Austin, Tx Derflieger(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Power Bus?
---------- Forwarded Message ---------- > As I am starting to do the detail planning on the intstrument >panel and electrical system for my 6A I wonder what should I use for >a power bus? I was thinking of maybee just using a copper bar and >putting some brass bolts into it for connections. Ideas? Suggestions? > > Thanks. > >Cheryl Sanchez >csanchez(at)world.std.com >> >> I used coper pipe per Tony's Sport aviation article.... Tony and I don't disagree on much but I've got to object to using flattened copper pipe for bus bars . . . it's difficult to insure flat bonding surfaces here. I use flattened copper to build ground busses where the brass hardware is SOLDERED to the pipe and FAT ground system wires are SOLDERED into one or both ends. Bus bars on rows of breakers should be fabricated from flat, straight brass or copper. Hobby shops have brass shapes and sheet from which these bars can be made . . . but why bother? You CAN buy a bus bar already fabricated with LOTS of inexpensive but very reliable circuit protection devices already mounted. A complete installation of 40 protected circuits and associated bus bar should take about 10 minutes. What's more, you save mucho square inches of panel space . . . Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Message not deliverable
---------- Forwarded Message ---------- >PROBLEMS:Separating strong personnal opinions, stated as fact, from facts. For instance, before started, went to a builders group, heard discussion about wearing gloves while construc., Not only to wear gloves, but which was best, cotton or nylon (nylon too 'sharp', might scratch), what powder, corn starch, talc, rice. Opinions stated as fact--do not build the RV unless you wear cotton gloves and use talc powder, you could put minute scratches in the metal. My conclusion after thinking this over: BS!! Every metal painter I know 'roughs' up the metal, treats it and then paints it over. Never seen a scratch that was caused by no gloves or wrong gloves or powder. Frank Sinatra had it right-- I did it my way, dirty hands, sloppy shop, sweat, blood and some tears. It flys. Conclusion: listen to any and all opinions, use your brain to separate what works for you and press on. John Darby RV6 N61764 flying johnd@our-town.com John, This is a big problem for everyone. I get several calls/messages per week from builders who have recived visitors to their shop who have offered lots of free advice for their price of admission. Some of it's good, some bad, some indifferent . . . but RIGHT HERE is the place to sort the chaff from the grain . . . Anyone who does not have access to services like the RV-list for their project is bound to suffer the consequences. Fortunately, most problem advice simply leads to lost time and wasted effort. Its open forums where the merits can be disected and discussed; here's where the real filtering can take place. Thanks for sharing this with us! Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ________________________________________________________________________________
From: EBundy2620(at)aol.com
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: Re: Sensenich Prop
> While at Sun 'N Fun this year, I talked the the Sensenich people. They >also believed that the 2600 RPM limitation ment little to most pilots because >of their personal flying habits (ie, cruise at best economy rather than balls >to the walls). I tend to agree with them on that point. > Hope that helps..... > >Fred Stuckle RV-6A N925RV >wstucklen(at)aol.com Thanks for the info Fred. It seemed that one wouldn't spend a lot of at those kind of power settings for a normal "cruising" airplane, but it helps to hear it from someone who's been there. -- Ed Bundy RV6A(soon) N427EM > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: rwoodard(at)lawyernet.com
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: Jig built, etc.
Well folks, I (with the help of a friend) built my jig this weekend for my -8. I have to admit that there was some pent-up building energy that went into my jig. I think I may have overbuilt it just a tad... :-) It's plumb, level & true in every direction possible. If it would have been possible to triangulate off GPS satellites, we would have done it. We made one mistake, however. The working surface between the uprights was supposed to be 109". It came out to be 108-31/32". I'm sure my friend lost sleep over it last night. I'll live... I also received my initial tool order from both Avery and Cleaveland last Friday. It's amazing how many $$$ worth of stuff can come in such _small_ boxes! I bought an air compressor at Sam's on Saturday evening. Ran it for the 30 minute break-in period and no tripped breakers... whew! Looks like all I need now is to see my friendly UPS driver! Take care all. Rod Woodard RWoodard(at)lawyernet.com RV-8 #33 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: K8DO(at)aol.com
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: Re: Engine Building
>You are absolutely right Chris. And that is why I mentioned that a simple >clean-up of the casting-flash may be considered, but to go beyond that you >are >in no mans land without a FLOW BENCH and a lot of experience. Bravo... well said.... You do not want to change the shape of the port in any way.. and you do not want the inner surfaces of the ports absolutely _smooth_... for the same shape, a mirror smooth port will not flow as well as one with a certain degree of "tooth".... all you want to do is knock down the jaggies and the lumps... if you get overwhelmed by the desire to go further, take them to a pro with a flow bench... and expect to pay for it, because it is time consuming, and requires much experience... Denny ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)MBnet.MB.CA>
Subject: Re: engine building
On Fri, 3 May 1996, Chris Ruble wrote: > "ENLARGE"???? Who said anything about enlarge? Go out and remove one intake > runner from your Lyc., and reach up in there whith your finger....see what I mean? > Yeah...pretty crappy, hugh? Now I'm sure you will agree that removing all that > raggity stuff will improve things. Right? I could be dead wrong, because I don't have much experience with engine building, but everything I have read about porting says that intake runners are SUPPOSED to be rough on the inside. Apparently, the roughness actually improves fuel atomization/evaporation. Of course, this would reduce the gas velocity, but from what Elon was saying, this is not a problem, per se, as long as you are only turning 2700 rpm. I think Lycomings are a lot better design than some people give them credit for. They are, after all, designed to be reliable aircraft power plants, not drag racing engines. Respectfully Yours, Curt Reimer ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Engine Building
> > You are absolutely right Chris. And that is why I mentioned that a simple > clean-up of the casting-flash may be considered, but to go beyond that you are > in no mans land without a FLOW BENCH and a lot of experience. You are quite > right to indicate that we have come a long way from the old days of blindly > grinding away to make it "look pretty" or to straighten out what looked like a > contorted port. Modern shops all have a precision flow- benches to accurately > QUANTIFY their results. Perhape I wasn't clear when discussing "porting". Perhaps porting is not the word that I should have used, but I don't have the advantage a a marketing dept like Victor. When I say "porting", I mean any modification of the intake/exhaust ports. I would never attempt this sort of work myself. Porting has always been a black art, best done by those that have the experience and equipment to make improvements. I have done some work on automotive heads, but trashing a $20 hunk of cast iron from a wreking is a little better than scrapping a $1000+ AC jug. In any case the wort I did was very minor clean-up. > > Chris, I don't want to get in a issue of semantics Hmmmmmmmmm... Me thinks we are in up to our knees at this point. > since it is clear you have a good understanding of modern engine technology. > I also greatly respect your > cautious approach to the reliability issue and how you are clear to point out > the cause-and-effect engine changes have on reliability. However, I feel > common usage still assumes PORTING means ENLARGEMENT of the ports. Your own > example clearly illustrates the point when you say... > > All of the manufactures of Chevy aftermarket heads you are referring to (i..e, > Brodix, AFR, Dart, Trick, Edelbrock, etc.) specify intake runner VOLUME for > their heads. For comparison various stock (as cast) heads manufactured by > Chevy may be about 157cc - 169cc. All of the others sell high performance > heads with Intake VOLUMES FAR GREATER than STOCK. Most start around 190cc and > can go as high as around 280cc of intake VOLUME (Dart does sells a STOCK > replacement head at 170cc). The reason racers or high performance enthusiasts > buy these heads is because of greatly LARGER THAN STOCK PORT VOLUME. If a larger volume is what works, than that is what works. The rules will be different for an AC engine, but that does't change the fact that some changes may be in order. Stock Lycomings are just production line compromises and can be improved. I have no idea what that my involve, but I'll bet hard money that there are people out there that do and are willing to ply their trade for a price. > But if you have a stock part > and you want to INCREASE flow it is still considered enlargement via PORTING > since slight shape changes and modest clean-up does not provide dramatic > improvement in flow at the RPM dictating the need for large ports. > Once again, nobody said that there was a need for large ports, weather it be dictated by high RPM or anything else. My statment in the original mail was "good porting" (read; proven-properly-ballanced-not-necessarly-larger-done-by- a-profesional-that-has-all-of-the-equipment-to-do-the-job-right-the-first-time- and-not-screw-up-a-part-costing-more-than-$1000). For brevitys sake, I will shorten this to "PPBNNLDBAPTHAOTETDTJRTFTANSUAPCMT$1K". No, no...how about I just call it "porting"? ;-) Chris > Hmmnn roller cams and Detroit .. now that is another issue > Elon > ormsby1(at)llnl.gov > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)MBnet.MB.CA>
Subject: Re: Airplane data
On 3 May 1996, Mel Barlow (IJD, Ct.) wrote: > > INTERIOR:Cockpit & Baggage - Laquered over the zinc chromate (MISTAKE!!) > Why?? What is the way to do this - skip the primer? I noticed the Orndorffs don't prime their interior panels or seats. Curt Reimer ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: Re: 180 HP 0-320
> In "The Best of Puget Sound Aviators" publication, Bill Amos of >Rocky Mt. RVaTORS tells of an 0-320 E2D that was "pumped up" by Dick >Demars Aero of Ft. Collins, Col. i.e. grinding cam, flow matching, >balancing, domed pistons etc. Does anyone know how this has worked out >for Mr. Amos. How costly something like that is, and reputation of Dick >Demars Aero? How much shortened the TBO might be? etc. > >Thank You, >"Partial Wimp" Ron Vandervort, Did empenage then ordered fast build. Do >I still have to pound out my own wing rib? Bill Amos was killed in the crash of his RV-4, I believe, a couple of years ago. I think Dick Demars has a good reputation but I beleive that he sold the business. the last I knew, Dick was still acting as a "consultant" for the new owner. Bob Skinner ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: PatK(at)gnn.com (Patrick Kelley)
Subject: Spar riveting
Well, I started to do my spars last weekend. The #4 rivets went Ok, though I have a question about the 4-22 rivets. Are the shop heads supposed to completely fill the countersunk area? If so, I need longer rivets. I think I have good shop heads, and they are flush, but there is a noticable gap between the rivet and the edge of the countersunk area. The next question is about the #6 rivets. In the Orndorff video it looks as if George has inserted all the rivets and is just going down the line, hammering them into place. When I tried that, I got a gap between the spar strips and the web. After drilling out the rivets (sob!), I found that I could do them one at a time with bolts in the adjacent holes to maintain compression. Was this something I missed, or am I doing it the hard way because of something simple I haven't caught on to. Please help, because it is really tiresome setting a rivet and then moving a bolt and then placing the next rivet and then aligning the tool, and so on. PatK - RV-6A - Wing spars going together (with fear and trepidation) PatK ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com>
Subject: Re: engine building
> > I could be dead wrong, because I don't have much experience with engine > building, but everything I have read about porting says that intake runners > are SUPPOSED to be rough on the inside. Apparently, the roughness > actually improves fuel atomization/evaporation. Of course, this would > reduce the gas velocity, but from what Elon was saying, this is not a > problem, per se, as long as you are only turning 2700 rpm. > Yes, this is true. A polished surface will condense the atomized fuel into dropletts. I never intended to imply that ports should be enlarged, reshaped or polished. > I think Lycomings are a lot better design than some people give them > credit for. Yes, they are a good design, however, design and production line product are two different things. > They are, after all, designed to be reliable aircraft power > plants, not drag racing engines. > OK, forget I said "porting". Sorry guys, but for lack of a better (IMO) choice I did use the "P" word. I _promise_ I will never use it again on the list. Wherever I have used it, substitute something like "fluid IO optimization technique". This phrase should be safe, as it does not imply enlargement (AKA, volumetric augmentation), substantially reshaping (AKA- spacial-reconfiguration), polishing (AKA surface-anomaly abatement). The satire-genaratin circuts in my atomic-powered Tritum-enhanced hair-splitter are about to slag down, so I have to reduce the duty-cycle on it. My applogies for any missunderstandings that I may have caused. I wasn't expecting this thred to take a hard por^H^H^H errrr, left turn like this. Chris P.S. Here are some "smilies" to sprinkle where thay may be needed above; ;-) :-) :-) :-) :-) > Respectfully Yours, > > Curt Reimer > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: SENGELHART(at)aol.com
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: Navaid Devices address
I would like to find the current address of Navaid Devices, Inc Thanks ! RV6-A in WI. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BARNES_ERIC(at)Tandem.COM
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: Medical transport
Hi Becky, Found a few organizations on the Web: http://xymox.palo-alto.ca.us/av/angelflight.html The contact information is listed as follows: 3237 Donald Douglas Loop South Santa Monica, CA 90405 (310) 390-2958 (310) 397-9636 (fax) The text also mentioned two other groups - Corporate Angel Network and AirLifeLine - although no contact information was given. Another site is Air Care Alliance: http://www.america.com/%7Ejpringle/acahome.html This site has a bunch of links by US Region for additional organizations. Hope this helps! Eric Barnes BARNES_ERIC(at)tandem.com ------------ ORIGINAL ATTACHMENT -------- SENT 05-02-96 FROM SMTPGATE (rso(at)css.ncifcrf.gov) All, Please indulge my diversion. I have a friend who requires medical = treatment in a city about 1000 miles away weekly for 12 weeks. Does = anyone know of pilot organizations that might help? Thanks for the help = in advance! Becki Orndorff ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: Re: Spar riveting
>... I > have a question about the 4-22 rivets. Are the shop heads supposed to > completely fill the countersunk area? No they don't have to, you just need a good shop head (like anywhere else). > The next question is about the #6 rivets. In the Orndorff video it looks as > if George has inserted all the rivets and is just going down the line, > hammering them into place. When I tried that, I got a gap between the spar > strips and the web. After drilling out the rivets (sob!), I found that I > could do them one at a time with bolts in the adjacent holes to maintain > compression. I've heard of this before and don't know why... I didn't have this problem. But instead of using bolts couldn't you just use clamps? Come to think of it, I might've done that, I don't remember for sure though.... I do remember I had to tape in the rivets or they'd fall out since they were upside down. I used rivet tape on the factory head side. That is the way you're doing it, right? With the factory head on the bottom and resting in the die? Which side are the shop heads on? Which end are you at? If you are on the outboard end where there are no flange strips on one side, you need to make sure to put the factory head on the spar web (thin material) side. Randall Henderson RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: John.Ammeter(at)ci.seattle.wa.us
Subject: Free Air Travel for Cancer Patients
Someone, was it you, Becki?, wanted to know if there was an organization that would fly patients to/from treatment centers. I found an ad for the 'Corporate Angel Network, Inc' in Times Magazine. Their phone number is 914-328-1313. The ad says they will fly _Cancer_ patients nationwide free of charge. Don't know if they handle other types of patients; in any case, this may help you. John Ammeter ammeterj(at)ammeterj.seanet.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: MikeT(at)aol.com
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: Re: Navaid Devices address
I called NavAid a couple of months ago and got their product info so here's their latest address: Navaid Devices, 615-267-3311, 641 N Market St, Chattanooga, TN 37405. Mike Talley RV-6(?) miket(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: John Brown <jmbrown(at)aimnet.aimnet.com>
Subject: Re: Medical transport
Date: May 06, 1996
Hight recommend the AngelFlight Org.!!! I don't know if they are on the east coast or not, but they are 100% professional.... Hey Pilots on the RV-List, why not JOIN AngelFlight, or an org. similar in your area... See the previous message for moreinformation on contacs, etc. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ jmbrown(at)aimnet.com CP-ASEL-IA jmbrown(at)BayNetworks.com "Looking for an excuse to fly" Building an RV-6 #23568 N610JB "The Golden BeeBee" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: Re: Spar riveting
At 02:21 PM 5/6/96, you wrote: >Well, I started to do my spars last weekend. The #4 rivets went Ok, though I >have a question about the 4-22 rivets. Are the shop heads supposed to >completely fill the countersunk area? If so, I need longer rivets. I think >I have good shop heads, and they are flush, but there is a noticable gap >between the rivet and the edge of the countersunk area. >hammering them into place. When I tried that, I got a gap between the spar >strips and the web. After drilling out the rivets (sob!), I found that I >could do them one at a time with bolts in the adjacent holes to maintain >compression. > >PatK Pat, I had the same thing happen on the #4 rivets, don't think it's a problem. On the #6 rivets, I put bolts in the holes that aren't to be riveted. Before I set the #6 rivets, I slid the hole in the ram over the shank of each #6 rivets and lightly tapped the ram, thus making sure that all of the flange strips were packed tight. I then put the flush set in the ram and set the rivet. Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)ltec.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: New AreoElectic Connection
> Bob . . . > AeroElectric Connection > > > ------------------------------- > | Go ahead . . . Make my day. | > | SHOW me where I'm wrong! | > | www.southwind.net\~nuckolls | > ------------------------------- Bob, When is the next edition of the Areo Connection going to be ready? I have been sending you email direct, but have not gotten any reply. I am wondering if all of those messages have gone into etherland. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- Ross Mickey Phone: 541-342-1892 2300 Oakmont Way #205 Fax: 541-342-5492 Eugene, Oregon 97401 email: rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: John Darby <johnd@our-town.com>
Subject: AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION
Some one a week or so asked about how to get the a/c certified. I don't recall seeing an answer. I would suggest a copy of the book "How to License a Homebuilt Aircraft" by Paul Bergen Abbott. It sure helped me, cleared up some of the questions I had after studying the info in Tony Bingelis' book. John Darby RV6 N61764 flying johnd@our-town.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Exploding Battery
Date: May 06, 1996
From: Mike Kukulski <kukulski(at)indirect.com>
Previously written: >For those worried about this event taking place in their airplane, >I can tell you that every attempt I've seen to create an explosive >condition in laboratory tests of batteries failed to produce an >explosion. It's one of those things you hear about and undoubtedly >they DO occur but I'd be far more concerned about things like proper >bolt torques on props, water in gas, etc . . . > > Bob . . . > AeroElectric Connection SHACK, lead! Let's retire this thread and get on with something with a more reasonable probability of occuring, like 1000 to 1, or better. Mike Kukulski (kukulski(at)indirect.com) RV-4 N96MK, fabricating wing root fairings ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: John Darby <johnd@our-town.com>
Subject: Left Throt. pics.
To those of you that requested the picture of the throttle quardant installation, I mailed them today (6 May 96). If you don't recv. in near future, re-contact me. John Darby RV6 N61764 flying johnd@our-town.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: Pat McClung <pmc123(at)mail.airmail.net>
Subject: Re: Message not deliverable
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- > > >PROBLEMS:Separating strong personnal opinions, stated as fact, from facts. > For instance, before started, went to a builders group, heard discussion > about wearing gloves while construc., Not only to wear gloves, but which was > best, cotton or nylon (nylon too 'sharp', might scratch), what powder, corn > starch, talc, rice. Opinions stated as fact--do not build the RV unless you > wear cotton gloves and use talc powder, you could put minute scratches in > the metal. My conclusion after thinking this over: BS!! Every metal painter > I know 'roughs' up the metal, treats it and then paints it over. Never seen > a scratch that was caused by no gloves or wrong gloves or powder. Frank > Sinatra had it right-- I did it my way, dirty hands, sloppy shop, sweat, > blood and some tears. It flys. Conclusion: listen to any and all opinions, > use your brain to separate what works for you and press on. > John Darby RV6 N61764 flying > johnd@our-town.com > > John, > > This is a big problem for everyone. I get several calls/messages per > week from builders who have recived visitors to their shop who have > offered lots of free advice for their price of admission. Some of it's > good, some bad, some indifferent . . . but RIGHT HERE is the place to > sort the chaff from the grain . . . Anyone who does not have access > to services like the RV-list for their project is bound to suffer the > consequences. Fortunately, most problem advice simply leads to > lost time and wasted effort. Its open forums where the merits can > be disected and discussed; here's where the real filtering can > take place. > > Thanks for sharing this with us! > > Bob . . . > AeroElectric ConnectionOne of the biggest problems I have had is all the "free" advice of the casual visitors. I usually ask them "what does your RV look like" and find that they are not builders, just "tire kickers" with lots of talk but little action.--Press on!!! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: John Darby <johnd@our-town.com>
Subject: Re: Project Summary
Jim, Guess this goes to prove what I've thought all along- It's not the FAA nor the Government that is the problem, it's the individual in the position. The guy that did mine, didn't look at any of my paper work, spent about 10 minutes on a walk around (but he did a thorough job), then about 5 minutes putting numbers etc on papers, and said I was clear to go. About as nice, friendly guy as I've ever done business with. Yet, the one thing that he caught, proved that he was thorough. (some thing I fixed in about 30 seconds). But I agree with you about the log. It may have been the fact that I had it out, ready for inspection, was good enouh for him. >They examined every page of my builders log item by item. That took over >an hour. The inspection of the plane took ten minutes. I don't know if >that is typical or not but it sure surprised me. > Better keep a log just in case. > >Jim Cone >jamescone(at)aol.com > John Darby RV6 N61764 flying johnd@our-town.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)ltec.net>
Subject: Re: Spar riveting
At 02:21 PM 5/6/96, you wrote: >Well, I started to do my spars last weekend. The #4 rivets went Ok, though I >have a question about the 4-22 rivets. Are the shop heads supposed to >completely fill the countersunk area? If so, I need longer rivets. I think >I have good shop heads, and they are flush, but there is a noticable gap >between the rivet and the edge of the countersunk area. >hammering them into place. When I tried that, I got a gap between the spar >strips and the web. After drilling out the rivets (sob!), I found that I >could do them one at a time with bolts in the adjacent holes to maintain >compression. > >PatK Pat, I had the same thing happen on the #4 rivets, don't think it's a problem. On the #6 rivets, I put bolts in the holes that aren't to be riveted. Before I set the #6 rivets, I slid the hole in the ram over the shank of each #6 rivets and lightly tapped the ram, thus making sure that all of the flange strips were packed tight. I then put the flush set in the ram and set the rivet. Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)ltec.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: jhparker(at)epix.net
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: Medical transport
Becki--- from where to where? In Northeast Penna. it would be quite possible to secure help. Please reply! ------------------------------------- Name: John H. Parker, Sr. E-mail: jhparker(at)epix.net Date: 5/6/96 Time: 10:20:59 PM This message was sent by Chameleon ------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION
---------- Forwarded Message ---------- From: John Darby, INTERNET:johnd@our-town.com DATE: 5/6/96 8:33 PM RE: RV-List: AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION >Some one a week or so asked about how to get the a/c certified. I don't >recall seeing an answer. >I would suggest a copy of the book "How to License a Homebuilt Aircraft" by >Paul Bergen Abbott. >It sure helped me, cleared up some of the questions I had after studying the >info in Tony Bingelis' book. >John Darby RV6 N61764 flying >johnd@our-town.com Not sure if the questioner was asking about getting a homebuilt LICENSED or a production aircraft CERTIFIED for manufacture and sale. Paul's book is certainly good. EAA has a number of publications also. CERTIFICATION is covered in a stack of books about a foot thick . . . I can get him the document numbers if he's REALLY interested. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ________________________________________________________________________________
From: AB320FLYER(at)aol.com
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: RV8 empenage
Phil, Rod, Greg, and RV Listers, This afternoon my RV8 empenage kit arrived ( how sweet it is!) and everything is present and accounted for. The only problem was that the vertical stabilizer skin was bent at the top due to rough handling or improper packaging. I assume there's no problem just bending it back, but if there is maybe someone could tip me off. Now that I'm all set to get started, wouldn't you know I have to leave town tomorrow for four days. Hopefully my sixteen year old son won't have it done before I get back. I want to thank all of you contributors for bringing me up to speed over the last six months I've been reading the list. I can't imagine starting the project without the background I've gained from all you guys. Again many thanks. Joel Harding AB320FLYER(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: bcon(at)ix.netcom.com (Robert M. Cornacchia )
Subject: Re: Navaid Devices address
You wrote: > >I would like to find the current address of Navaid Devices, Inc >Thanks ! > >RV6-A in WI. > Navaid Devices 641 N. Market Street Chattanooga, Tenn. 37405 615-267-3311 Fax 615-756-6154 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: TLump(at)aol.com
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: RV-3 vs. Midget Mustang
I am currently building an RV-4. While I'm waiting for the fuselage kit to arrive I was thinking about what my next project would be. I've been considering building an RV-3, but I've always liked the looks of the Midget Mustang particulary the with the optional bubble canopy. Does anyone out there know how the two aircraft compare in terms of performance. Not just top speed, but flying qualities, landing speeds, etc. Also, any word on Mustang Aeronautics as a company and the quality of their kits? Thanks, Ted ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: "Mel Barlow (IJD, Ct.)" <102636.54(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Spar Rivets
On 5\6\96, Patrick Kelley asked about spar rivets: It's been a long time since I did my spars -(13 Years??), but I do remember that the 4-22 rivet shop heads did not completely fill the c-sunk holes. I concluded that they were ok based on the rivet min. shop head Dia. Don't have the spec. handy, but someone on the list has quoted it before. On the -6 rivets, you don't want any gaps between the parts, IMHO. I used Van's rental pneumatic squeezer and bolted everything together at intervals. Then squeezed rivets between the bolts then removed the bolts, Etc. Time consuming, yes, but effective. As the man says - this is the most important structure in the whole A/C. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JamesCone(at)aol.com
Date: May 06, 1996
Subject: Fred Meyer
Anyone who knows where Fred Meyer of Huntley IL moved to, please have him send me his new address. He paid good money for my newsletter and deserves to get it. Thanks. Jim Cone Editor, Van's Air Force, Tri-State Wing Newsletter jamescone(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 06, 1996
From: "Mel Barlow (IJD, Ct.)" <102636.54(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Cockpit Interior
On 5/6/96, Curt Reimer asked why I referred to my laquer over zinc chromate cockpit paint as a mistake. Main problem is the laquer is not durable enough. It is too brittle and is chipping, Etc. If I were doing it today, I would find a waterborne primer made by Deft, which Sikorsky uses in their helo. cabin areas. It is self priming & saves weight. I think they use it over alodine. BTW, I have D.J.Lauritsen (sp?) seats - great. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 07, 1996
From: Lewis <lewisjw(at)hqsocom.af.mil>
From: lewisjw
Subject: Johnny Cash Engine On May 2, 96, Mark Hilsen wrote concerning O-360 engines: thinking about building up one from parts. ---SNIP--- Superior will have all parts for doing this soon. The last item they have to produce is the crankcase. They have everything else already. Regards, Joe Lewis, Tampa Bay ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 07, 1996
From: Lewis <lewisjw(at)hqsocom.af.mil>
From: lewisjw
Subject: Bob Skinner's Tire Discussion, Michelin Tires Bob, I've been reading with interest your discussion on tires. I agree they don't last long enough. I've used retreads for 15 years with varying degrees of success, but at SnF or OSH last year I visited the Michelin aviation tire reps and examined the new a/c tires they have. The material looks and feels a lot more durable than traditional tire rubber. You might give a set of Michelins a try --- then post the results for the rest of us! Does anyone else have experience with these new Michelin tires? Joe Lewis, Tampa Bay, RV-6a, lewisjw(at)hqsocom.af.mil ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WStucklen(at)aol.com
Date: May 07, 1996
Subject: Re: ? wrt OAT probes.
> >Being not satisfied with the measurements with the OAT probe in first the >left and then the rights NACA vent, I located it in the aileron bellcrank >access plate where it works very nicely. > >Jim Stugart Austin, Tx Derflieger(at)aol.com > > I wonder how accurate it would be when mounted on the bottom side of the wing root seal just back from the leading edge? I currently have mine in the left NACA vent, and it reads high. I suspect this is due to warm air leaking out of the cowl. What is the longest length of thermocpuple wire that can be used ans still get an accurate measurement? Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV wstucklen(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WStucklen(at)aol.com
Date: May 07, 1996
Subject: Re: Power Bus?
Bob: I've been reading the thread on the blade type fuses for a couple od days now, and still don't know exactly the type of fuse you are referring to. Are these the now standard auto fuses: plastic bodies with blade connectors? If this is the case, and you are mounting them under the panel, how does one go about replacing a failed fuse while in flight? As far as using a flattened pipe for a power bus is concerned, if one is careful to flatten the pipe as much as possible, the amount of contact area lost due to the remaining curvature of the material would result in only a slightly higher contact current density (ie, Amps per square inch). Given the area of a standard breaker of switch connection , and the currents that most of our protected equipment use, the resultant contact current density should still be reasonable. Possibly the only exception might be the landing light circuit, which could draw 20 - 25 Amps, and the alternator main which could draw full plus alternator currents. These contact areas might require special attention to contact area. Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV wstucklen(at)aol.com > Tony and I don't disagree on much but I've got to object to using flattened > copper pipe for bus bars . . . it's difficult to insure flat bonding > surfaces here. I use flattened copper to build ground busses where the > brass hardware is SOLDERED to the pipe and FAT ground system wires are > SOLDERED into one or both ends. Bus bars on rows of breakers should be > fabricated from flat, straight brass or copper. Hobby shops have brass > shapes and sheet from which these bars can be made . . . but why bother? > You CAN buy a bus bar already fabricated with LOTS of inexpensive but > very reliable circuit protection devices already mounted. A complete > installation of 40 protected circuits and associated bus bar should take > about 10 minutes. What's more, you save mucho square inches of panel > space . . . > > Bob . . . > AeroElectric Connection > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: OrndorffG(at)aol.com
Date: May 07, 1996
Subject: Re: RV8 empenage
Guyes, any damage to the kit should be reported to vans for replacement ...George ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 07, 1996
From: Royce Craven <roycec(at)ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Re: Instrument Panel
Gene, this sound great. Please send some more info. Royce Craven roycec(at)ozemail.com.au >Elon, RV-Listers, > >Another alternative to labeling panels (or anything else) is silkscreening. >For many years I was involved in the prototyping and limited run production >of electronic equipment. The standard labeling procedure was silkscreening >of the nomenclature with epoxy resin inks. Although the lettering could be >scraped off with enough determination it was quite durable, as difficult to >remove as any other epoxy. Any color, or combination of colors is possible, >as with any other silkscreening process. The materials and equipment for >this process are relatively cheap, and can be fabricated easily by anyone >building an RV. All the materials would cost around $150 (+/- 3dB). The >lettering (film positive) can be done by hand with transfer lettering, on a >computer, or professionally set by a commercial typesetter. Epoxy ink is >also readily available from commercial sign material vendors. There is some >craftsmanship required, but it's relatively easy to learn. If you can rivet >you can silkscreen. If there is any interest I'll prepare some directions >and e-mail anyone requesting additional information. > >-Gene, RV6a, fuse going into jig. >geneg(at)rattler.gsfc.nasa.gov > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 07, 1996
From: allsop(at)l14h13.jsc.nasa.gov (David Allsop)
Subject: More on Superiors O-360 (longish)
Hello all, Well, in the interest of knowing more then one should, I forwarded Mark Hilsen's questions to a good friend who used to work at Superior on the O-360 clone. The following is what he sent to Mark and myself, and should be taken with a grain of salt as he tends to be a bit blunt with the facts. I should note that I have removed both his name and the company that he is now working for who is comprised mostly of the O-360 cloning group. They are cloning another aircraft engine altogether, nothing that a RV will ever need, but you never know. Read on. David ps. sorry this is difficult to follow, I attempted to space between the comments as best as possible. >Date: Mon, 6 May 1996 09:53:06 -0700 (MST) >To: allsop(at)l14h13.jsc.nasa.gov (David Allsop) >Additionally, if you notice the name "David Sisson" below, he is C.E.O. of >Superior Air Parts, and he was at just this past >Friday meeting with our president! >Also, I have contacted the original poster directly. >>I have called Superior's (800) number every few months for the last year, >>since >>I first read of their interest in building an O-360 kit, with the -A1A >>configuration given greatest emphasis, and this is what I have been told. > >>Superior has enjoyed such a rise in business that the O-360 kit project >>has been back-burnered indefinitely; there has been no progress on an >>O-360 kit >>that they will admit to within the last year. Their plans had called for >>mating existing, rebuilt cases secured from the general marketplace to >custom >built crankshafts, with most of the other rotating parts being from >the >Millenium line. >Wrong. Superior is in a questionable financial situation. They are by no >means near bankruptcy, but they are having serious cash flow difficulties. >They just closed down their profitable turbine division for reasons I can't >elaborate on. They are not pursuing any new development. Hence, no >crankshafts. >>As to the crankshafts the story-line grew hazy, but I believe Superior had >>intended to buy machined crankshafts (unlike the forged crankshafts Lycoming >>factory engines use) being developed by the guy that got his ticket >>punched in a Questaire in Colorado, or some other high performance single >or >some other state, when the crankshaft he had built broke on his custom >TSIO-540 >(not Continental, but I believe it was called a PCM engine) -- but >you probably >know more or even accurate details than this. What I heard >from an engine >builder (and *not* from anyone at Superior) was "when their >[Superior's] >crankshaft guy died, the crankshaft itself and Superior kit >idea died with >him." >The crankshafts were to be forged and then machined. With the lay-off of >60% of Superior's Engineering staff, no development has progressed. >>I was told that a kit-built Superior O-360 *might* be a certified engine >>so long as all parts and the method of assembly were in conformance with OEM >>specifications and performed by an A&P (or just P) who then signed it off. A >>hobbyist such as myself could build the same engine and it would be >>experimental only. On the other hand, I could disregard convention >altogether >and build or an engine with non-certified parts or certified >parts in a >non-certified configuration and I could end up with an >experimental engine that >would better match my needs or desires. >Regarding certification, this is basically correct. Superior would have to >certify the *entire* engine via the 150 hr. endurance test. They would be >awarded their own type certificate and would thus become an OEM for the >Superior O-360. More likely, they would stick with PMA'ing the entire >engine. Each individual component would be "certified," but the engine as a >whole would not be. It would require a Lycoming data plate. >>As to mods for power: I believe that all other things being equal, power >>extracts life from an engine, so whether that power is extracted by H2AD high >>compression pistons, or better electronic ignition timing, or fancy roller >>cams, or flow balancing, porting and polishing, or an Ellison TBI, or siply >>higher RPMs -- your engine will die a little or a lot sooner. As my racing >>friends like to say: "Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go?" And >>there I was, kind of thinking, "kind of fast, guys." >Generally speaking, yes. If power gains are realized by reducing mechanical >wear (friction), i.e. fancy roller bearings or reduced valve guide wear, you >will actually increase engine life. However, the power gains from such >techniques are generally modest, 5-15 hp on a 260hp+ engine. Electronic >ignition systems improve power by improving fuel burning efficiency (very >loosely stated). Again, the performance increase is modest. The greatest >increase in power is gained by increasing the compression ratio, i.e. high >compression pistons. Higher pressures equal higher efficiency (read: more >power), and higher engine stresses. >>The following is from my Rolodex. A series of friendly and encouraging >>letters >>might bump these nice people off TDC and into overcoming the production >>problems and producing a kit before I am committed to another route. I do >not >know if they have an e-mail or website. >No they do not. Given what I have experienced *directly* with the company >and the development staff, I would recommend that you pursue another route, >completely discounting Superior as a player in any new development. >Right in the middle of this time period, their top engineer and their two >top turbine salespeople left under unpleasant circumstances. >>Not sure, might be something to reconsider but no immediate plans (12/95) ... >Read: We have no money for development of new programs. Well, you wanted the hard cold facts. david ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 07, 1996
From: Tim Lewis <lewis(at)mailcenter.cmet.af.mil>
Subject: RV List: Temp probe, seekingIFR experiences in RV-6
Regarding the posts on air temperature probe locations: I had good luck putting a thermocouple on the landing gear leg (near the bottom, as far away from engine exhaust as possible) of my Grumman Lynx. The probe was mounted inside a rubber sleeve (for insulation from the metal gear leg), with the tip of the probe extending beyond the rubber, protruding into the slip stream. I was happy with the results. I don't know if the following post made it to the list. If so, please ignore this repost.... Until today (Saturday) I had intended to purchase a Zenith Zodiac kit (in fact, I was less than a month away from sending in my deposit). Then somebody in this group mentioned seeing the quick build option for the RV-6A in Sport Aviation. According to the Sport Aviation blurb, I could fork over $20K and build an RV-6A in 1000-1200 hrs. The only reason I'd vetoed the RV-6A in the past was the long build time. With the quick build option I'm having to reevaluate all my aircraft building decisions. The speed of the RV is appealing, as is the strong reputation of Vans and the strong builder-to-builder information flow I've seen in this mailing list. I think my biggest concern is that I want a plane that's stable enough for IFR use. I owned a Grumman AA1 (Lynx) for 3 years, and flew it IFR quite a bit, so I'm used to a less-than-rock-stable platform. I'd like to hear the experiences of RV-6 owners regarding flying the plane IFR. Thanks, Tim Lewis San Antonio TX (EAA Ch 35) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: sheinlein(at)VNET.IBM.COM
Date: May 07, 1996
Subject: messed up left elevator stiffners... sigh...
Well, I have successfully completed the HS, VS, rudder, and right elevator. Then, I got to the left elevator, carefully read the warning a few times about how everyone makes their empennage mistakes on this piece and vowed NOT TO MAKE ANY! sigh... Well, you guessed it... I got all the tough stuff done right, but I messed up the easy stuff! I DIMPLED ALL MY STIFFNERS BACKWARDS!!! (key word being "ALL"!) I called Van's and while their gut feel was that it probably would be ok to re-dimple them back in the proper direction, they didn't want to commit to this being safe. I don't blame them, because I'm sure no one has done any "testing" of such a screw-up! I've kinda resigned myself to re-making all the stiffners, but I wanted to run this by the RVLIST to see what you all thought... I re-dimpled one stiffner back and it looks fine, but hey, how can I really tell it will be ok? Any suggestions and comments are appreciated! Thanks! Stephen Heinlein (RV-6/6A... pushing off decision as long as possible!) sheinlein(at)vnet.ibm.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JDelveau(at)aol.com
Date: May 07, 1996
Subject: Re: Spar riveting
Pat, I just finished the left spar last Sunday. I put bolts in all the holes that call for bolts and rivets in all the other holes. I then clamped on each side of the rivet to be set using two of those vice-grip clamps with the flat/swivel pads and small wood block on the flange side to clear the flange and concentrate the pressure. I checked most of the rivets with a feeler gauge to make sure that parts were not separating and that the factory head was tight to the web of the spar. I used the cleaveland C-Frame Tool, a solid cup set, and a solid flush set ram in the top. While my wife held the whole assembly down on the cup set, I put a nut over the the rivet and lowered the ram down on it and then tapped it several times to seat the rivet before driving it. I had to wack each one at least eight times with a short handle 3lb sledge hammer (I have a nuematic squeezer so I don't have huge biceps :) If you look through the hole in the C-Frame Tool before you put the ram in you can see if every thing is lined up. And after seting about 10 rivets on the garage floor I realized that I was paralized from the knees down, so I moved the whole operation up to an old kitchen cabinet and a roller device. The cabinet was not solid wood but I positioned the C-Frame Tool at the corner and had no problems. This sure helped my knees! I had described a problem earlier about some practice rivets tipping over and I think the problem was over length rivets, even though they measured ok they were longer than needed to provide a good shop head. I did cut quite a few rivets, not by much but I don't think it was enough extra work to risk trying to set a too long rivet and messing it up. I have one of those two block rivet cutters that has the short handle and various holes for each size rivet. With a foot extension of pipe on the handle this was not a big deal but I wonder if some of those plier style cutters would even cut a 3/16 rivet? (Whew! This guy never stops!) Jim Delveau (JDELVEAU(at)AOL.COM) RV-6/6A Wing Spars ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6junkie(at)aol.com
Date: May 07, 1996
Subject: Re: Sensenich Prop
> While at Sun 'N Fun this year, I talked the the Sensenich people. They >>also believed that the 2600 RPM limitation ment little to most pilots >because >>of their personal flying habits (ie, cruise at best economy rather than >balls >>to the walls). I tend to agree with them on that point. Well, for what its worth...I fly balls to the wall all the time. I didn't build my RV to put-put around the sky. Look out...here I come (there I go). Gary Corde RV-6 N211GC ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV4Bell(at)aol.com
Date: May 07, 1996
Subject: Re: RV8 empenage
That bend will always be there! Bruce Bell RV-4 #2888 Left wing and tail done, right wing in jig. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 07, 1996
From: PatK(at)gnn.com (Patrick Kelley)
Subject: Spar riveting
Thanks to those who replied - it is a comfort to know that I haven't made a serious mistake, yet. I have put all the manufactured heads of the rivets on the forward side of the spar; with clamping and bolting the spar strips, this seems to work Ok. It's just that the Orndorff video makes it look so easy! Of course, the videos also make it look as if you can finish an RV in a few hours. Guess looks are decieving. I am going to continue doing it a rivet at a time and get there tortise fashion - slow but sure. Thanks again for all the advice. PatK - RV-6A - Wing spars coming together PatK ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 07, 1996
From: Dan Boudro <dboudro(at)nmia.com>
Subject: VOR
I need some advice guys. I've got a KX-125 and can't seem to find any VOR signals. When I tune to the ABQ VOR I do hear the weather forcast (113.2) but not very clearly, the FLAG annunciator always stays on. On other frequencies I don't hear the morse code and FLAG is on. From reading the instructions this means the radio hasn't "found" a signal. I've got a home built vor antenna build into a wing tip, it's a half wave dipole (each section 25"). Does anyone else have a similar set-up that's working? This weekend I'm going to pull the wing-tip and check all the coax connections for continuity, anything else I can do while I'm playing around? I guess I could buy a VOR antenna and install it but that is my last resort. My GPS works fine so I'm not in a panic to get this thing fixed but I would like it working at some point. TIA Dan Boudro RV-4 N9167Z Albuquerque, NM dboudro(at)nmia.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 07, 1996
From: Dan Boudro <dboudro(at)nmia.com>
Subject: Re: messed up left elevator stiffners... sigh...
Stephen, IMHO, I'd re-dimple the stiffeners, finish the elevator and get on with it. If that's your worst mistake your're going to have a great AC! :-) Dan Boudro RV-4 N9167Z Albuquerque, NM dboudro(at)nmia.com On Tue, 7 May 1996 VNET.IBM.COM!sheinlein(at)matronics.com wrote: > > I DIMPLED ALL MY STIFFNERS BACKWARDS!!! (key word being "ALL"!) > > Any suggestions and comments are appreciated! Thanks! > > Stephen Heinlein (RV-6/6A... pushing off decision as long as possible!) > sheinlein(at)vnet.ibm.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 07, 1996
From: <tcraig-stearman(at)laugate1.lau.aetc.af.mil> (Tom Craig-Stearman)
Subject: New subscriber
I am a new subscriber to the RV list, though I have been building an RV-4 for about two and a half years. I wish I had heard of this group much earlier! My name and address: Tom Craig-Stearman craig-stearmant(at)laugate1.lau.aetc.af.mil I am an Air Force instructor pilot in the T-37. I studied aeronautical engineering at the Air Force Academy. Some three years ago I took a ride in a friend's RV-6, and I was hooked! I had never before flown a civilian airplane that handled like a military jet. I consider the RV series the finest all-around aircraft on the market, and certainly the most reasonably priced. My project: RV-4, ready for finishing kit. Wings and tail are done, fuselage off the jig, tail mounted, controls connected except for those on the wings. Cockpit is mostly done, seats are in, instrument panel done exept for radios and connections forward of the firewall. I am presently wiring a minumum IFR setup, with gyros, ILS, and King GPS/Com (GPS for VFR only, of course . . .) I figure I am about 90% finished, with 75% left to go. Equipment of interest: I installed three-axis electric trim, switches mounted on the stick and throttle. I mounted a heated pitot-static tube in the left wing (a WHOLE lot of work; if I had it to do over again, I would not bother.) I recently modified my tail spring and installed Van's new full-swivel tail wheel (took a local machine shop about one hour and $10; definitely worth the trouble!) I installed Bob Olds landing lights in both wings. I saw a friend taxi his RV-4 at night with the Bob Olds lights, and the illumination was impressive. I am using a single strobe on the vertical stab, power supply mounted by the elevator bell crank. Nav lights are on the rudder bottom and flush mounted in the wing tips. I am planning on all interior antennas except for the transponder (I just can't bear to have ANYTHING hanging on the outside of such a clean airplane!) If any of you have experience, good or bad, with interior antennas, please let me know. And now for the fun part. I am in the market for an engine. I am planning to buy a firewall forward Subaru package from Formula Power. 183 hp, 240 pounds installed, less radiator and coolant, 0.42 lb/hp.hr BSFC. If anyone has experience, good or bad, with Subaru conversions, please tell me. I can't stand the idea of bolting on a 1930s era air-cooled four-banger that costs twenty grand! I just watched the chat here for a week, to see what goes on. Looks like lots of good discussion. I'm glad to see Bob Nuckolls, the Orndorffs, and several other names that I know by reputation taking part regularly. I wish I had such a wealth of knowledge available when I started my project! Regards, Tom Craig-Stearman ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 07, 1996
From: "David A. Barnhart" <barnhart(at)crl.com>
Subject: interior painting
On the subject of painting the cabin/baggage area: I've chosen Imron in a standard fleet grey color for this. When I was trying to decide what to use, I went to see the automotive paint supplier whom I've been doing business with for a long time. I told him I wanted something very scuff-resistant. We came to the conclusion that Imron would be the best thing for the job. For best adhesion, DuPont recommends the following steps: Alimiprep Alodine Prime with Veriprime Prime with an epoxy primer (I forget the dupont product's name) Apply the Imron. Best Regards, Dave Barnhart rv-6 sn 23744 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: May 07, 1996
From: RELOSVCS!WESTREG!EHENSON(at)cldwell.attmail.com (Henson, Eric)
Subject: Superior Engines
Hi Joe, Please keep us updated with any scuttlebutt you hear on this, by the way it was great talking to you at Sun & Fun. Hope to see you next year. Eric Henson Dana Point, CA >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reply Separator <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< From: lewisjw Subject: Johnny Cash Engine On May 2, 96, Mark Hilsen wrote concerning O-360 engines: thinking about building up one from parts. ---SNIP--- Superior will have all parts for doing this soon. The last item they have to produce is the crankcase. They have everything else already. Regards, Joe Lewis, Tampa Bay ________________________________________________________________________________
From: karl@dg-rtp.dg.com (Donald Karl)
Subject: Re: AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION
Date: May 07, 1996
Assuming the question was to licensing a homebuilt... At sun-n-fun, I went to some FAA booth and asked about the procedure and they gave me two bunches of paper stapled together. I don't recall the titles. If anyone is interested, email me and I'll post the titles when I get home. Also, I'd bet that they'll have more copies at Oshkosh. dk BTW, I haven't read any of it yet. > > Some one a week or so asked about how to get the a/c certified. I don't


April 29, 1996 - May 07, 1996

RV-Archive.digest.vol-bj