RV-Archive.digest.vol-cb
October 24, 1996 - November 02, 1996
////
(o o)
==========oOOo=(_)=oOOo==========
| |
| Go ahead, make my day . . . |
| Show me where I'm wrong. |
=================================
72770.552(at)compuserve.com
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)MBnet.MB.CA> |
| Subject: | Re: MS FLIGHT SIMULATOR |
On Thu, 24 Oct 1996, waks & brady-brian hitchings wrote:
> Hi to all
>
> Does anybody know if any RV's have been "built" for the MS flight simulator?
> Or, for that matter, any other simulator?
I have done the RV-6, 6A and 8 for MS flight simulator flightshop. They
should be available in various flight-sim archives, but I can email them
to you directly if you like.
Curt Reimer
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Hartmann <hartmann(at)sound.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Flap Brace question |
>the outboard end. Do I modify the brace similar to the inboard end
>(seems like overkill for such a short step-up)? Do I just trim the flap
>brace flange to clear the reinforcement plate? What did others do? I
I modified the outboard end of the brace by cutting through the lightening
hole just like the inboard end was modified. You're right - probably
overkill. I'm sure it would work fine to just have the minor step, and it
would probably even be stronger that way. I just did mine because I'm
obsessive about how the parts only I know about look. That's why I'm still
building and not flying.
- Mike
hartmann(at)sound.net
http://www.sound.net/~hartmann
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ray Murphy, Jr." <murphy(at)mail.coos.or.us> |
I've searched the archive and still I'm unsure about a couple of things.
I'm hoping some more of you have had experience that you can pass along
before I plunk down big $$.
1. Has anyone used both the turbine powered set up and the compressor
driven HVLP Gun? If so how di they compare?
2. My current gun (Devilbiss SGA 570) uses a siphon feed cup. Has anyone
used a gravity feed cup?
After reading the archives I know to use my old HPLV gun for any clear coat
I might apply. Thanks to all who have written to the list in the past on
HVLP equipment.
Ray Murphy, Jr.
murphy(at)mail.coos.or
RV-6A empennage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bobh(at)cdac.com (Bob Haan) |
| Subject: | Re: F604 <-> F605 Distance |
I used two 5/8 square pieces of wood and cut their lenght until they just
fit between the main spare and the rear spare of each wing. This was a
great help in getting the distance between the 604 and 605 correct. Also,
it is reassuring to take the jig and check this disatance as other
components are assembled that might cause some movement in the fixturing.
>I was talking to John at Van's the other day about suggestions he might have
>regarding proven ways to be sure to get the exact distance between the Front
>and rear Spar replicated to the F604 and F605. I haven't seen his suggestion
>mentioned on the list so thought I'd share it and also see if anyone has done
>it this way. His suggestion was to make two jigs, one for each wing. The
>first step is to leave your 'dummy' spar extend several inches on each side
>of the F604. Then make a jig by clamping an angle to the aft side of the main
>spar, another angle to the forward side of the rear spar mount, making sure
>the distances from the angle to the rib are the same on both spars. The
>angles are then connected by drilling though the angle into a wooden brace,
>and bolting together. By removing the jig from the wing and clamping to the
>aft side of the 'dummy' spar, the rear angle should align perfectly with the
>rear support. Some scrap aluminim can be clamped to the rear jig angle and
>it should fit perfectly into the mounting slot. This sounds very logical (to
>me anyway) so I plan to try it. Has anyone else done it this way? Any
>additional hints??
>
>Dick Flunker - Getting there..
>(RFLUNKER2AOL.COM)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bob Haan Office 503-636-2348
Cascade Design Automation Mobile 503-720-1132
Pacific Northwest FAX 503-636-2348
District Sales Manager E-mail bobh(at)cdac.com
See our web page at http://www.cdac.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Barry WARD <ward(at)axime.com> |
| Subject: | Exp Bus DC Management Unit |
I have learnt about the above unit and read the various comments on the unit
by Bob Nuckolls and I would like to add my French Francs worth (perhaps I
may even make his day).
The idea of an integrated switching unit no doubt is an easier system to
wire up than having seperate switches and circuit breakers. Another
important advantage is that it will use less panel space, which is always at
a premium.
The main disadvantage I see with the system is that you can't detect when
you have an overload condition. With the circuit breaker it will trip out
and this may be detected sooner or later, as checking the CBs is one of the
pre flight checks.
It should be possible to overcome the above problem by using an electronic
circuit which lights a LED when the electronic circuit breaker has gone to
the high resistance state.
What I would suggest to Bob is that with his experience of aircraft
electrical systems that he designs a better system based on his ideas and
those of us on the RV list. He could then produce and sell us a circuit
board and components so that we could produce our own at a reasonable cost.
It should be possible to integrate other function such as flashing landing
lights and a system to select manual or automatic operation of say the fuel
pump and landing lights so that when in landing and take off configuration
(ie when flaps are down) they are turned ON. Also current detectors could be
built into say the fuel pump landing light and pitot heat circuits to detect
current flow and indicate they are operating.
You could even sell it to the fiberglass crowd at a premium of course, as
they have more money than sense, and make a small fortune.
TGIF, and hope you all have a better weekend than me as I am half way
through Prosealing my second tank
Barry Ward RV6A ward(at)axime.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Timothy J. Etherington" <tjetheri(at)cca.rockwell.com> |
Thanks to everyone that responded to my question on the nutplate rivets for the
rudder horn. On the prepunched kits the holes are already there through the
rear spar and that is why the question came up. The mechanics were easy to
understand (the rivets only hold the nutplate on to keep it from turning) it
was the fact of having the empty hole that was confusing.
For those of you getting to this stage, you have some options. This is the
first time that the plans were outright wrong (so far). For me it seemed
difficult and foolish to try and get the rib and spacer in the proper position
along with the rudder horn and the bolt all on and then drill the assembly as a
whole unit. It was just too many parts to get aligned with no way to clamp them
except for a bolt that did not go through all the parts. So, do them one at a
time. Bolt the rudder horn to the rear spar and drill out the holes. The you
can clamp the rib and spacer in place and drill them out. If you can live with
a hole in the rear spar not covered, then don't drill the two holes for the
nutplate through the rib. The other method is to just drill all the holes
through and use -8 rivets for the two holes that attach the nutplate (-7 rivets
are used for the others on the rudder horn). If you drill through all the parts
and attach ith non-flush rivets you don't have to do any machine countersinking
:)
Once again, thanks to everyone who responded to my question.
Tim Etherington
HS done, VS awaiting precover and elevator skin and skeleton complete.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM> |
| Subject: | Exp Bus DC Management Unit |
RE: RV-List: Exp Bus DC Management Unit
>I have learnt about the above unit and read the various comments on the unit
>by Bob Nuckolls and I would like to add my French Francs worth (perhaps I
>may even make his day).
>The idea of an integrated switching unit no doubt is an easier system to
>wire up than having seperate switches and circuit breakers. Another
>important advantage is that it will use less panel space, which is always at
>a premium.
Less panel space only compared to classic switch-panel and acres-
of-breakers approach. When compared to switch/fuseblock installation
panel space is roughly the same but volume immediately behind the
switches is now dedicated to the ECB assembly . . . I like to see
this area stay more open for access to items above. An offsetting
architecture I've seen discussed is to mount the ExpBus assembly
at the TOP of the instrument panel in the center . . . nothing
above it. I see this trading one maintenance difficult for another.
>The main disadvantage I see with the system is that you can't detect when
>you have an overload condition. With the circuit breaker it will trip out
>and this may be detected sooner or later, as checking the CBs is one of the
>pre flight checks.
In 16 years and 1000+ hours with over 600 logged departures, I've
NEVER climbed into an airplane to find a breaker open. At Beech
we used to do receiving inspections on ALL electronic components.
We paid people to sit at a bench and test every resistor, capacitor,
etc. From a customer relations standpoint, it appeared as though
we were REALLY getting a handle on quality . . . I asked an operator
one day, "How many bad resistors do you find every day?" The reply
was, "Never found a bad one yet!" One might conclude that for all
the pomp and circumstance on display in receiving inspection, no
action taken there was doing anything to IMPROVE our product
quality.
Circuit breaker tripping and fuse blowing is a very RARE event
in airplanes, cars, etc. Further, should some fault occur in
flight, I'm not likely to look at the breaker panel until AFTER
I percieve that some piece of equipment isn't working. THEN,
supposing that I do find a breaker popped . . . whats the
probability that resetting it gets me the system back?????
>It should be possible to overcome the above problem by using an electronic
>circuit which lights a LED when the electronic circuit breaker has gone to
>the high resistance state.
What's the problem to overcome? Adding LED's simply drives parts
count higher, adds another cockpit gizmo to distract a pilot
from his flying duties and only serves to confirm that, yes,
the turn coordinator is indeed crapped out. At that time,
I'll suggest that knowing WHY it's crapped out is close to
useless information; interesting but not helpful in accomplishing
a comfortable completion of flight.
>What I would suggest to Bob is that with his experience of aircraft
>electrical systems that he designs a better system based on his ideas and
>those of us on the RV list. He could then produce and sell us a circuit
>board and components so that we could produce our own at a reasonable cost.
I think I've done that. It's up to you guys to show me where it's
wrong. Let me touch on the features of switch/fuseblock installations.
(1) Fabrication time: Except for installation and labeling of switches,
all components are purchased parts. If breakers are used, both breaker
and switch panels have to be fabricated and bus bars built. The
techniques I propose eliminate all but switch panel fabrication.
(2) Weight: 20 slot fuse block loaded with fuses 260 gms
20 miniature breakers 600 gms + bus bars (estimate 100
gms more)
(3) Cost: 20 slot fuse block loaded with fuses approx $36
20 miniature breakers approx $400
(4) Parts Count: The number of pieces between bus bar and powered
item on a non switched branch . . .
FuseBlock: 3
Breaker: 6 (not counting number of pieces INSIDE breaker!)
Polyswitch (solid state breaker): probably somewhere in between .
. .
(5) Parts Count for switched branch:
FuseBlock/Switch: 6 (not counting number of pieces INSIDE switch!)
Breaker: 9 (not counting number of pieces INSIDE breaker or switch!)
Polyswitch (solid state breaker): probably somewhere in between .
. .
(6) Wire Installation: For each non switched branch, there is no
difference in the number of wires for any of the
systems being discussed. For switched circuits,
the switch/fuseblock technique adds only one wire
and two terminals for each switch . . . the piece
that runs from fuse block to switch.
(7) Servicability: Toggle switches with fast-on tabs can be replaced in
3-5 minutes sitting in the pilot's seat. Fuses are easily
replaced in the very rare event that replacement is ever needed.
Given that most failures of electrical system components is
mechanical due to environmental stresses and cycles, one might
give consideration to periodic replacement of ALL switches and
fuse blocks at intervals of say . . . every 5 years?
Fuseblock replacement: About 20 minutes and $36
Breaker replacment: 5-10 hours and $400
Polyswitch replacment: probably not necessary
Replace 7 switches: About 30 minutes and $50
>It should be possible to integrate other function such as flashing landing
>lights and a system to select manual or automatic operation of say the fuel
>pump and landing lights so that when in landing and take off configuration
>(ie when flaps are down) they are turned ON. Also current detectors could be
>built into say the fuel pump landing light and pitot heat circuits to detect
>current flow and indicate they are operating.
These functions go more toward issues of annunciation and pilot workload
reductions with addition of automated operations. I've been working
peripherally on the American General Aviation Technology Experiment (AGATE)
program on behalf of Beech/Raytheon. AGATE is an example of how AUTOMATED
some people believe an airplane should be (or become). As an engineer
who also flys what he builds, I gotta tell you that I'm not impressed with
what I've seen proposed so far. Parts counts (another word for system
complexity) are astounding. When counts go up, so does labor and inital
costs while reliability goes down. For my time and effort, I'm inclined
to keep it simple.
>You could even sell it to the fiberglass crowd at a premium of course, as
>they have more money than sense, and make a small fortune.
You gotta cut these guys some slack . . . they're just not in control . .
. . . it's called BUI (building under the influence . . . of epoxy
fumes).
>TGIF, and hope you all have a better weekend than me as I am half way
>through Prosealing my second tank
My condolences . . . ya don't want to breath much of that stuff
either!
Regards,
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========oOOo=(_)=oOOo==========
| |
| Go ahead, make my day . . . |
| Show me where I'm wrong. |
=================================
72770.552(at)compuserve.com
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
<9610250451.AA30281(at)mail.coos.or.us>
| From: | Brian Yablon <brian(at)lanart.com> |
In message <9610250451.AA30281(at)mail.coos.or.us>, "Ray Murphy, Jr." writes:
>1. Has anyone used both the turbine powered set up and the compressor
>driven HVLP Gun? If so how di they compare?
I went through this when I bought my HVLP gun. My supplier said that
if you have a compressor that can keep up with the high demand of the HVLP
gun then there's no need to get the turbine. In fact, you'll get more
life out of the compressor.
The turbine is small and portable, and is best suited for jobs where
shlepping the compressor is impractical. Since I have a fairly large
compressor, his recommendation was to use it and pass on the turbine;
I could always rent one if I decide to do the picket fence with HVLP ;-).
>2. My current gun (Devilbiss SGA 570) uses a siphon feed cup. Has anyone
>used a gravity feed cup?
Can't help you here. My Accuspray gun is a pressure feed (looks like
a siphon feed, but the cup is pressurized). I was told that the
pressure feed is more flexible and can be used to paint overhead and
with the cup sideways, whereas the gravity feed limits you to
positions where paint will flow into the gun.
-Brian Yablon brian(at)lanart.com
Framingham, MA
RV6A #24751
Elevators in process...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gretzw(at)tcplink.nrel.gov |
It's fine that there are the FAR's as rules, but what is important,
don't do something stupid, like fly in clouds without a heated
pitot!!!!!! I don't say this just because I sell a heated pitot tube
mounting kit, I say it because it is stupid to fly in clouds without a
heated pitot!
Warren Gretz
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: RV-List: Heated Pitot??
Date: 10/24/96 3:35 PM
> What specific FAR are you referring to that requires a heated pitot tube for
> part 91 IFR ? Part 135 requires a heated pitot for IFR, but he's not about
> to do that in a homebuilt. Doesn't part 91.??? list all the minimum
> equipment for VFR/ IFR flight? A heated pitot is not on this list. I got
> my instrument and CFII tickets in an IFR 152 that didn't have a heated
> pitot. I plan on having my RV-6A certified for IFR, without the heated pitot.
Interesting point about the FARs -- I wasn't aware that a heated pitot
was not required in FAR part 91, but apparently you are correct, as I
can't find any such requirement in the part 91 regs (except for CAT II
operations).
BUT... I can only guess that you either live in a hot area of the
country, or that you never fly IFR other than in the summertime.
I bought a heated pitot from Aircraft Spruce, for $129. It doesn't seem
like all that much money to pay for that extra measure of safety. I
have been in situations where I was flying below the reported freezing
level, and looked out the window to see ice forming on the wings. When
it comes to flying in clouds, I'd just as soon not try to cut corners.
Randall Henderson, RV-6
randall(at)edt.com
http://www.edt.com/homewing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RELOSVCS!WESTREG!EHENSON(at)cldwell.attmail.com (Henson, Eric) |
Hi Ray,
I meant to post this product review a few months back but never got around
to it. I plan on painting my RV-6 myself so I set off on my journey to learn
the art by painting my wifes car (well, to start with). I used a Sharpe
gravity fed gun that I got from my overpriced auto paint store here in S.
Cal. I paid about $239.00 for it, and I'm very happy with the result. It
left a slight orange peel that is equal to my neighbors Ford Explorer. As I
was trying to learn how the car show guys do it I laid another full coat on
some parts of the car and color sanded and buffed it to a very flat finish.
The sides of the car I have not touched since spraying and I think they are
much better than some of the paint jobs that come from some of the local
shops.
Obviously, I'm happy with my gravity fed gun. It cleans easily, is not
awkward to use, does not spurt paint-ever. It can be run off any dual stage
compressor. The box says it uses 14 cfm, but I feel that's misleading. I run
a 6HP 60 gal compressor and the comp. only kicks on three times for one
heavy coat on a big car hood. 14 cfm is the max output for my comp. so the
whole rating confuses me.
As far as overspray, I just painted in the garrage with the door covered in
plastic. There was a light layer of overspray about 2 feet wide around the
car. The beauty is it's dry when it hits so you just sweep up.
Hope this helps
Eric Henson
Dana Point, CA
e.henson(at)ix.netcom.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Reply Seperator<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I've searched the archive and still I'm unsure about a couple of things.
I'm hoping some more of you have had experience that you can pass along
before I plunk down big $$.
1. Has anyone used both the turbine powered set up and the compressor
driven HVLP Gun? If so how di they compare?
2. My current gun (Devilbiss SGA 570) uses a siphon feed cup. Has anyone
used a gravity feed cup?
After reading the archives I know to use my old HPLV gun for any clear coat
I might apply. Thanks to all who have written to the list in the past on
HVLP equipment.
Ray Murphy, Jr.
murphy(at)mail.coos.or
RV-6A empennage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fred Hollendorfer <phredyh(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Exp Bus DC Management Unit |
Barry WARD wrote:
>>Snip<<
>
>
> The idea of an integrated switching unit no doubt is an easier system to
> wire up than having seperate switches and circuit breakers. Another
> important advantage is that it will use less panel space, which is always at
> a premium.
>
> The main disadvantage I see with the system is that you can't detect when
> you have an overload condition. With the circuit breaker it will trip out
> and this may be detected sooner or later, as checking the CBs is one of the
> pre flight checks.
>
> It should be possible to overcome the above problem by using an electronic
> circuit which lights a LED when the electronic circuit breaker has gone to
> the high resistance state.
>
> What I would suggest to Bob is that with his experience of aircraft
> electrical systems that he designs a better system based on his ideas and
> those of us on the RV list. He could then produce and sell us a circuit
> board and components so that we could produce our own at a reasonable cost.
>
> It should be possible to integrate other function such as flashing landing
> lights and a system to select manual or automatic operation of say the fuel
> pump and landing lights so that when in landing and take off configuration
> (ie when flaps are down) they are turned ON. Also current detectors could be
> built into say the fuel pump landing light and pitot heat circuits to detect
> current flow and indicate they are operating.
>
> You could even sell it to the fiberglass crowd at a premium of course, as
> they have more money than sense, and make a small fortune.
>
> TGIF, and hope you all have a better weekend than me as I am half way
> through Prosealing my second tank
>
> Barry Ward RV6A ward(at)axime.com
>
>
I agree with Barry about the Exp DC Bus needing more of a track record
and circuit over load detection/identification on the part of the pilot
needs to be further addressed. Placement and number of switches/circuits
in any given A/C can vary with the builder which may lead to not enough
or too many switches on one or a multiple of the PC boards.
The other thing Barry mentioned about auto circuits, i.e. landing lights
and fuel pumps, I thought was great. I fly bigger A/C in a crew concept
for a living and any thing you can successfully and efficiently do to
take the work load off the pilot is great! For example, in the fuel pump
and landing light circuits working off the flap operation, if you can
visulize two, three position rocker switches (ldg lights & fuel pump)
and a little LED in the top part of the rocker that illuminates when
power is going through the switch (item turned on). The bottom position
Off, middle Auto, up ON would give the flexability of manual or auto
operation.
I too am a believer of the "Keep It Simple Stupid" but also the
Different Strokes" theory. I Know , I Know, more stuff = more Buck$
but the CONCEPT is great.
Keep the ideas flowin'
Fred>
--
FC Hollendorfer
RV-8 Garage & Tools
Denver, CO
phredyh(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ddickson(at)sisna.com |
| Subject: | Re: Rudder Horn question |
I have recently finished my RV-6 rudder spar and the nutplate is flush riveted
to the rudder
horn(R405) only. That is the first riveting operation. Then the other rivets go
through the R406
stiffener,R402 spar, R405 horn, R404 root rib and/or the shim. good luck , it's
a piece of cake.
-------------------------------------
Name: duane dickson
E-mail: ddickson(at)sisna.com
-------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Van's E-mail address? |
> What is Van's E-mail address?
>
> Finn
>
> finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com
>From the rv-list FAQ:
Q: Is Van's on the Internet?
A: Yes. They can be reached at: "76455.1602(at)compuserve.com"
Randall Henderson, RV-6
randall(at)edt.com
http://www.edt.com/homewing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
Arrrrggggghhh. That's the sound of embarrassment.
On the tile question, I'll have to go with;
Giovannino de' Dolci
Chris
>
> Chris,
> With all due respect the "Sistine Chapel" ceiling was painted by Michael =
> Angelo and I would be more impressed with your knowledge of history if =
> you knew who tiled the floor. Nice attempt at "committing humor" though. =
> AL
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Chandler" <mauser(at)Claris.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Exp Bus Follow Up |
You know, reading Bob's stuff about this solid state breaker system, and about
even breaker/switches leads me to this thought: Bob Nuckolls is the Dick
VanGrunsven of aircraft electrical systems.
What do you think? Am I close?
--
(Sorry Randall, no more room for the Yakko Warner quote)
Richard Chandler
RV-6: Garage bought, saving for tools and tail kit (Christmas?).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ddickson(at)sisna.com |
| Subject: | trailing edge bender design |
I'm building an RV-6 empennage and am at the stage of doing the trailing edge bend
on the
rudder and elevators. I have George Orndorf's empennage video and there appears
to be a
difference in the way the trailing edge bender(brake) is built by George and the
way Van
recommends it be built in the construction manual. Van shows the bending surfaces
as the
wide sides( 8" surface) of the two 2X8's. Orndorf however, uses the edges(2" edges)
of the
2X8's as the bending surface. Which is the best way to go, or does it make any
difference?
Are there any "gotchas" in making the trailing edge bends? I'm new to the rv-list
and am all by
myself in Cortez, Colorado so it's great to be talking and listening with other
builders.
Thanks gang, happy building.
-------------------------------------
Name: duane dickson
E-mail: ddickson(at)sisna.com
-------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mikel(at)dimensional.com |
>Anybody that uses ATS tools will look back on his/her work later and SEE
>the difference between superior tools (Avery, Cleveland, etc) and
>inferior (ATS) tool quality results.
>
> ATS TOOLS ARE JUNK......
>
>I know, because I bought their "RV Builders Kit" for $990.00 when I
>started my RV-6A. I had to replace just about everything whem I learned
>what constitutes good quality tools.
>
>Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
>wstucklen1(at)juno.com
>
EXACTLY what happened to me. EVERY tool I had to replace including the
Cleco pliers...how do you screw up making a pair of Cleco pliers??? The
only way they are still in business is they are selling to the UNINFORMED.
Happy to spread the word. "The only expensive tool is a cheap one."
Michael RV-4 232SQ
mikel(at)dimensional.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | info. from the valley |
would one of you rvers from the San Joaquin valley yell at me...would like
to ask you a few questions...John Lucas ...Thanks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dr John Cocker <jcocker(at)medhumor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Exp Bus DC Management Unit |
I am sure that this has been suggested before, most of my ideas have been,
but what about having the auxiliary fuel pump coming on when the the C/S
prop is put into fine pitch ? That would cover takeoff, climbing and landing.
John Cocker.
(Only a few weeks to go till painting.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vaccaromik(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Heated Pitot?? |
Mr. Gretz,
Could you please publish your address/phone number on the list again--I'd
like to order one of your mounting kits.
Thank you,
Mike Vaccaro
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Osgood <Rick(at)ccc.henn.tec.mn.us> |
| Subject: | Re: trailing edge bender design |
sisna.com!ddickson(at)matronics.com wrote:
>
> I'm building an RV-6 empennage and am at the stage of doing the trailing edge
bend on the
>
> rudder and elevators. I have George Orndorf's empennage video and there appears
to be a
>
> difference in the way the trailing edge bender(brake) is built by George and
the way Van
>
> recommends it be built in the construction manual. Van shows the bending surfaces
as the
>
> wide sides( 8" surface) of the two 2X8's. Orndorf however, uses the edges(2"
edges) of the
>
> 2X8's as the bending surface. Which is the best way to go, or does it make any
difference?
> Are there any "gotchas" in making the trailing edge bends? I'm new to the rv-list
and am all by
>
> myself in Cortez, Colorado so it's great to be talking and listening with other
builders.
>
> Thanks gang, happy building.
> -------------------------------------
> Name: duane dickson
> E-mail: ddickson(at)sisna.com
> -------------------------------------
Hi Duane .... from a former Durango 'ite. It really does not make much
of a difference if you use the edge or whole surface of the 2 x 8 for
the bend. The advantage of using the whole surface is you have more
conact area on the skins. The gotchas are few.. Use a 1/4 dole rod to
protect from overbending, Put tape on the wood surfaces to protect the
skin and finally when you put your hinges on dont make the gap any
bigger than the 1/4" or you cant get the radius you want.
We miss Durango ... Stuck in Minnesolcold (minnesota)
Good luck
--
Rick(at)ccc.henn.tec.mn.us
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Gamble" <Micky_G(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | info. from the valley |
Just thought I would mention a bunch of RV enthusiasts meet in Bakersfield at
the Airport on Union Ave. Might check it out. I'm not in the fold yet, but
doing a lot of dreaming.
Mick
----------
From: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com on behalf of ibm.net!lhlucas(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, October 25, 1996 2:31 PM
Subject: RV-List: info. from the valley
would one of you rvers from the San Joaquin valley yell at me...would like
to ask you a few questions...John Lucas ...Thanks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Greg Puckett <71155.2336(at)CompuServe.COM> |
| Subject: | RV-8 Wing Kit Coming |
Hello Everyone,
I received a long awaited call today from a shipping company today wanting to
know when would be a good time to bring me my partial wing kit.. I told them in
about 15 minutes would be good, unfortunately the choices were this coming
Thursday or Friday. I think if I can get through the rib and skin prep. soon I
still might find a couple good priming days before winter gets too serious
around here.
Just to warn everyone, get ready for some newbee wing questions.
Greg Puckett
71155.2336(at)compuserve.com
RV-8 80081
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jpl(at)showpg.mn.org (Joe Larson) |
| Subject: | Re: trailing edge bender design |
> .. the bending break for the trailing edge ....
>
> Van shows the bending surfaces as the
>
> wide sides( 8" surface) of the two 2X8's.
> Orndorf however, uses the edges(2" edges) of the
> 2X8's as the bending surface.
Duane --
You will find that 98% of the bending movement is in the first 1/2 inch of
the bending surface. Remember -- the part is supposed to have straight
surfaces from leading to trailing edge -- no curl.
To achieve the bend, you have to over-bend a bit. For me at least, this
requires a significant amount of force.
Using the edges of the 2x8s may provide you with more leverage than using
the faces. You're going to need it.
-Joe
--
Joe Larson jpl(at)showpg.mn.org 612-591-1037
Showpage Software, Inc. http://www.wavefront.com/~showpg
14190 47th Ave N.
Plymouth, Mn 55446 Future RV-6A pilot.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "E. Amadio" <e_amadio(at)vaxxine.com> |
| Subject: | Insulating Garage Doors |
------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC2DA.018D09E0
Richard:
I'm in the throws of the same dilema. I have an un-insulated =
Stanley Steel door on my shop that is one hell of a heat sink in the =
winters around here (Niagara Falls, Canada).
I have decided to fill the hollow sections of the door with =
"Roxul" insulation in bats left over from insulating the shop ceiling. =
This stuff cuts easily to any shape or thickness you may want. I will =
glue it in with an industrial adhesive from a caulking gun (available at =
any lumber yard or hardware store for installing paneling in rec rooms =
etc.).
Once this is complete I'll glue a sheet of plastic over =
the entire inside of the door to cut drafts and contain the Roxul from =
shedding.
The insulation is "CHEAP" as is the glue and plastic.=20
My primary concerns were two fold;
1) cut down heat loss, obvious right! In the 2 1/2" =
thickness I'll get roughly R-8.
2) It had to be flame Resistant at the very least. This =
stuff is fire PROOF, It wont burn with direct application of a propane =
torch and does not gas off the way the typical Styrofoam door =
insulations do. I felt this was critical since I will quite likely be =
welding and or burning in this building and did not want to be trapped =
by clouds of toxic fumes should a spark happen to blow the wrong way.
Hope this helps.
Ernie Amadio
The building is almost done, starting shop set up.
Cessna 170-B C-FJJK
e_amadio(at)vaxxine.com
------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC2DA.018D09E0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------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC2DA.018D09E0--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com (Finn Lassen ) |
| Subject: | RV-3 cowling size? |
I intend to copy Tracy Crook's RV-4 Mazda 13B rotary with Ross
reduction drive installation, but this question just occured to me:
Is the RV-3's cowling (size) the same as the RV-4's?
Finn
finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV Builders' Yeller Pages |
boundary="PART.BOUNDARY.0.22336.emout11.mail.aol.com.846310950"
--PART.BOUNDARY.0.22336.emout11.mail.aol.com.846310950
With all you virgins coming on line I thought I'd post the new rev of the RV
Builders' Yeller Pages. Don't spend all of your money in one place.
Cheers,
Gary VanRemortel
vanremog(at)aol.com
--PART.BOUNDARY.0.22336.emout11.mail.aol.com.846310950
name="AV1.TXT"
TELL THEM YOU SAW IT IN THE RV BUILDERS' YELLER PAGES
REVISED 10/25/96 GV
AIRCRAFT REMANUFACTURING 619-749-0239 infobot(at)pdsig.com BJ NASH'S OUTFIT
AIRCRAFT SPRUCE 800-824-1930 714-870-7551 http://www.aircraft-spruce.com =
EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT SUPPLIES
AIRSTAR 800-AIR-STAR CONTROL CABLE SADDLE CLAMPS
AIR-TEX PRODUCTS INC 215-295-4115 UPHOLSTERY MATERIALS
AM-SAFE 602-233-2802 SAFETY HARNESSES
DAVE ANDERSON 919-245-3363 USED ENGINES AND PARTS
ANGEL FLIGHT 310-390-2958 MEDICAL TRANSPORT NETWORK
APM-HEXSEAL 201-569-5700 SEALING HEAD SCREWS
AUA 800-727-3823 AIRCRAFT INSURANCE
AUSTIN HARDWARE 800-648-1150 702-359-3031 GLARESHIELD EDGING & MISC HDWR
AVEMCO 800-276-5207 AIRCRAFT INSURANCE
AVERY ENTERPRISES 817-439-8400 SHEET METAL AND MISC PRODUCTS
AVIATION DEV CORP 800-944-3011 206-546-3011 REMOTE OIL FILTER
AVIATION PRODUCTS 805-646-6042 TAILWHEEL ASSYS
BARNARD AIRCRAFT COMP 916-676-5601 FAST BUILD RV WING KITS =
BARRY CONTROLS 818-843-1000 ENGINE ISOLATOR MOUNTS
B&C SPECIALTY PRODUCTS 316-283-8000 ALTERNATORS/STARTERS AND ELEC
B&F AIRCRAFT SUPPLY 312-422-3220 AIRCRAFT BUILDING SUPPLIES
BOBBY'S PLANES AND PARTS 817-682-4220 USED ENGINES AND PARTS
BOEING SURPLUS 206-393-4060 SURPLUS AIRCRAFT TOOLS AND SUPPLIES
BROWN AVIATION TOOL SUPPLY 800-587-3883 405-495-4991 browntool(at)aol.com SH=
EET METAL TOOLS
CABLECRAFT 206-475-1080 THROTTLE/MIX/PROP/MISC CONTROL CABLES
CARLINGSWITCH 800-243-8556 203-793-9281 VARIOUS PANEL SWITCHES
CHIEF AIRCRAFT 800-447-3408 541-476-6605 chief(at)magick.net AIRCRAFT SUPPLI=
ES
CLEAVELAND TOOLS 800-368-1822 515-432-6794 cat3tools(at)aol.com AIRCRAFT TOO=
LS
COPPER ISLAND AVIATION 604-675-4428 RV FLOAT KIT DEVELOPER
COURTAULD'S AEROSPACE 800-332-7686 PRIMERS, COATINGS, SEALANTS
D&D AIRCRAFT SUPPLY 800-468-8000 603-926-8881 AIRCRAFT HARDWARE
DIGIKEY 800-344-4539 http://www.digikey.com ELECTRONICS PARTS
DUCKWORKS (DON WENTZ) 503-543-2298 RV LANDING LIGHT KITS
DYNAMIC PROP BALANCING 800-562-7746 PROP BALANCING
EAR COMPOSITES 317-692-1111 NOISE CONTROL PRODUCTS
EASY PUBLISHING 505-865-3466 PFPA(at)aol.com 16 YEARS OF THE RVATOR BOOK
ELECTRONICS INTL 503-628-9113 DIGITAL GAUGES
EXP AIRCRAFT ASSN 414-426-4800 OUR GREAT ORGANIZATION
FAA AIRCRAFT REGISTRY 405-954-4206 REGISTRATION NUMBERS
FASTENING HDWR SUPPLY 716-681-1675 STAINLESS AND OTHER FASTENERS
CARL FICH 360-699-1800 COMPLETED RV FUEL TANKS
MARK FREDERICK 512-219-8467 mlfred(at)aol.com DISCOUNTED AEROFLASH DISTRIBUT=
OR
STEVE FREY ENG 610-692-3553 RV FUSELAGE JIGS
FUMOTO ENGINEERING 206-869-7771 OIL DRAIN VALVE T-202N FOR <$20
GENUINE AIRCRAFT HDWR 805-239-3169 AIRCRAFT FASTENERS
WARREN GRETZ 303-770-3811 HEATED PITOT TUBE MTG BRKTS
JOHN HAEHN 307-367-6522 RV4 SLIDING CANOPY KITS
HARBOR FREIGHT TOOLS 800-423-2567 805-445-4791 JUST TOOLS CHEAP
HONEYWELL-MICROSWITCH 800-537-6945 815-235-6847 GOOD QUALITY SWITCHES
HOOKER HARNESS 815-233-5478 SAFETY HARNESSES
HORIZON INSTRUMENTS 800-541-8128 GRAPHIC INSTRUMENTS
JAMES AIRCRAFT 941-675-4493 RV FAIRINGS AND PANTS
J.C. AERO SUPPLY 707-452-8041 AIRCRAFT FASTENERS
J.P. INSTRUMENTS 714-557-5434 SMALL DIGITAL INSTRUMENTS
KAYNAR MFG CO 714-871-1550 THE PLATENUT MANUFACTURER
KIT AIRCRAFT BUILDER 800-827-5070 KAB MAGAZINE
RICH KLEE 916-863-1927 LANDING LIGHT BLINKER
LANDOLL 405-392-3847 STARTERS, DAMPERS, ALTERNATORS
DJ LAURITSEN 515-432-6794 SEATS
LIGHTSPEED ENGINEERING 805-933-3299 ELECTRONIC IGNITION
LONDON AND ASSOCIATES 503-543-3986 PREBUILT RV FUEL TANKS
LONG-LOK FASTENER CORP 800-LONG-LOK SELF-SEALING SCREWS
LY-CON 209-651-1070 PERFORMANCE ENGINE MODS AND REBUILDS =
MATRONICS 510-606-1001 http://www.matronics.com/ FUEL FLOW COMPUTER/SERVO=
SPEED CONTROL/LIST ARCHIVE CDROM
McMASTER-CARR 310-692-5911 INDUSTRIAL HARDWARE AND MATERIALS
MENZIMER AIRCRAFT COMP 619-598-0592 SERVOS AND STICK GRIPS
FAA METAR 202-267-7770 FAA/ASY-20 96/001 METAR PUBLICATIONS
MIKE'S AERO 707-965-2411 ENGINE SERVICE
MOUNTAIN HIGH EQUIPMENT 800-468-8185 PULSE DEMAND OXYGEN SYSTEMS
MS INSERTS 408-946-6565 FASTENERS AND RELATED HARDWARE
NATIONAL HOSE 713-920-2030 AEROQUIP INDUSTRIAL HOSE
NATIONAL TEST PILOT SCHOOL 805-824-2977 ntps(at)ntps.com TEST PILOT COURSES
NAVAID DEVICES 423-267-3311 TRACKING SINGLE AXIS AUTOPILOT
NORTHWEST AERO PRODUCTS 206-735-5022 AIRCRAFT HARDWARE
OIL ANALYSIS 918-492-5844 ENGINE OIL ANALYSIS KITS
OLANDER 408-735-1850 FASTENERS AND TOOLS
OLDS ENTERPRISES 501-965-7835 RV LANDING LIGHT KITS
OREGON AERO 800-888-6910 COCKPIT COMFORT ITEMS
G&B ORNDORFF 817-439-3280 orndorffg(at)aol.com RV VIDEOS, SEATS AND MISC
JEFF POSCHWATTA 206-639-1212 MR. LYCOMING
PRECISE FLIGHT 541-382-8684 PULSELITE SYSTEM
PRECISION AIRMOTIVE 206-353-8181 OEM CARBURETORS
RADIO SYSTEMS ENG 916-272-2203 http://www.rst-engr.com KIT AVIONICS
REED MFG 541-471-6289 BLADDER BUSTER RV WING TANKS
RICH INDUSTRIES 520-758-2777 STAINLESS STEEL HOSE FITTINGS
RICK ROBBINS 303-422-9389 HEAT MUFFS
RMD AIRCRAFT LIGHTING 503-681-0685 RV WING TIP LANDING LIGHTS
ROCKY MTN INSTRUMENT 307-864-9300 MICRO-ENCODER =
RV FLIGHT BAG 503-648-3464 RV PARAPHERNALIA
SACRAMENTO SKYRANCH 800-433-3564 916-421-7672 http://www.sierra.net/skyra=
nch AIRCRAFT SUPPLIES
TRACY SAYLOR 805-933-8225 FIBERGLASS RV GEAR LEG FAIRINGS
SEAL PACK 316-942-6211 PROSEAL IN SMALL KITS
T.A. SHULGIN CO. 510-228-2512 STAINLESS STEEL FITTINGS AND HOSE ASSYS
SKYBOLT AIRMOTIVE 407-889-2613 AIRCRAFT FASTENERS
SKYLINE AVIATION 800-535-8640 810-635-8724 RV ROLLING TOWBARS
SKYSPORTS INTL 800-247-7883 http://www.usaol.com/YP/aviation/SkySports_In=
ternational.html INSTRUMENTS, CAPACITANCE FUEL GAUGES
SKY-TEC 800-476-7896 941-324-7979 LIGHT WEIGHT STARTERS
SOUNDCOAT 516-242-2200 NOISE CONTROL PRODUCTS
SPENCER AIRCRAFT 206-763-0800 AIRCRAFT HARDWARE
STEALTH TECHNOLOGIES 888-333-5933 AIRCRAFT ALARM SYSTEMS
DOUG STENGER 503-324-6993 RV SUBASSY BUILDER
SOFTCOM 800-255-2660 602-917-2328 HEADSETS AND INTERCOMS
TBO ADVISOR 203-834-0330 ecurrent(at)aol.com GOOD AIRCRAFT ENGINE RAG
TEMPERFOAM 402-470-2346 TEMPERFOAM
TEXTRON LYCOMING 717-323-6181 LYCOMING TECHNICAL SUPPORT
TPS AVIATION 510-475-1010 AIRCRAFT SUPPLIES
USHER INDUSTRIES 503-647-0015 OEM RV FUEL CAPS
UNITED PLASTICS CORP 800-537-9724 UHMW TAPE AND MISC PLASTICS
U.S. TOOL 800-521-7394 313-455-3388 BUILDER'S TOOL KITS
VAN'S AIRCRAFT 503-647-5117 RV KITS, SOURCE OF EQUAL PARTS PLEASURE AND G=
RIEF
VARGA ENTERPRISES 800-966-6936 CUSTOM FUEL AND OIL HOSES
VETTERMAN HIGH COUNTRY 303-932-0561 RV EXHAUST SYSTEMS
VISION MICROSYSTEMS 360-398-1833 DIGITAL ENGINE MONITORS
WAG AERO 800-558-6868 414-763-9586 AIRCRAFT SUPPLIESWEST MARINE 800-538-0=
775 BOATING SUPPLIES FOR AIRPLANES
WHELEN ENG 203-526-9504 AIRCRAFT LIGHTING SYSTEMS
WICKS AIRCRAFT 800-221-9425 618-654-7447 EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT SUPPLIES
WOODWARD/SMALL AIRCRAFT CONTROLS 815-624-2499 PROP GOVERNOR MFR
THE YARD 800-888-8991 TOOLS
YING LING AIRCRAFT 800-835-0083 AIRCRAFT PARTS
=0D
--PART.BOUNDARY.0.22336.emout11.mail.aol.com.846310950--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roy Burkhead" <snaproll(at)peaka.net> |
| Subject: | Re: strange e-mail |
*Chuckle* I hope you guys are better at building airplanes than you are
at art history. Michelangelo is one name. Michelangelo Buonarotti
painted the Sistine Chapel but prefered sculpture.
I know I shouldn't "chit-chat" on the list, but I couldn't resist this
one! :)
Roy
RV-8 #80096
starting control surfaces
Allan W. Mojzisik wrote:
>
> Chris,
> With all due respect the "Sistine Chapel" ceiling was painted by Michael Angelo
and I would be more impressed with your knowledge of
history if you knew who ti
>
> ----------
> From: Chris Ruble[SMTP:cisco.com!cruble(at)matronics.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 1996 12:09 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: strange e-mail
>
> >
> > I have noticed occasionally some peoples messages are
> > appended with some quotes about painting the ceiling, I forget, and some
> > other pseudo-philosophical crap. I've seen the exact same quotes several
> > times but have no idea where they originated. >
> >
>
> I believe the "painting the ceiling" thing is a quote from a satuirday morning
> cartoon called "Animainiacs". It's in reference to that guy that painted pictures
> on the sealing of the Cystine Chapel. I think his name was Leonardo daVinci,
or
> something like that. He was a pseudo-philosopher in his time, and spent his
non-
> painting years dreaming of flying and other such nonsense.
>
> Chris
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Attachment 2 Type: application/ms-tnef
> Encoding: base64
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | spjohnsn(at)ix.netcom.com (Stephen Paul Johnson) |
| Subject: | RV-8 Wings (Chatter) |
Hi all,
Now that the RV-8 wing kit is coming out, there are several decisions
that I will be making in the months ahead. I will be looking at
autopilot options as well as heated pitot tube mounting and landing
light options. I will not be one of the first to start the wings, but
I will be interested in discussing the above topics with any and all
RV-8 builders who might be interested.
I just finished the HS this week (no dents!) and will be able to spend
a bit more time on the RV-8 as the weather deteriorates around here.
Steve Johnson
RV-8 #80121
spjohnsn(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Angiulo <mikeang(at)MICROSOFT.com> |
| Subject: | RV-8 Wings (Chatter) |
By the way I just finished unpacking the RV8 wing kit. It rules!! I'm so
happy that I no longer have to spend my time emailing flame bait to the
list (explosion proof primer booth chatter) and that I can get back to
building. First impressions: those wing tips are huge! Also cool to see
all the prepunched skins, especially pre punched/precut stiffeners! I
couldn't believe it. I'm not sure if they are for the flaps or ailerons
yet (manual is backordered) but I have a nice symmetrical stack of
precut/prepunched control surface stiffeners. It's almost embarrassing how
perfect they look (ok, I said almost).
I'm about to go inventory the whole kit. I made a huge mess of my shop
last night unpacking and throwing paper about.
-Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: ix.netcom.com!spjohnsn(at)matronics.com
[SMTP:ix.netcom.com!spjohnsn(at)matronics.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 1996 8:51 AM
Subject: RV-List: RV-8 Wings (Chatter)
Hi all,
Now that the RV-8 wing kit is coming out, there are several decisions
that I will be making in the months ahead. I will be looking at
autopilot options as well as heated pitot tube mounting and landing
light options. I will not be one of the first to start the wings, but
I will be interested in discussing the above topics with any and all
RV-8 builders who might be interested.
I just finished the HS this week (no dents!) and will be able to spend
a bit more time on the RV-8 as the weather deteriorates around here.
Steve Johnson
RV-8 #80121
spjohnsn(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ammeterj(at)seanet.com (John Ammeter) |
| Subject: | Insulating Garage Doors |
>Richard:
>
>
> I have decided to fill the hollow sections of the door with
"Roxul" insulation in bats left over from insulating the shop ceiling. This
stuff cuts easily to any shape or thickness you may want. I will glue it in
with an industrial adhesive from a caulking gun (available at any lumber
yard or hardware store for installing paneling in rec rooms etc.).
>
>
> 2) It had to be flame Resistant at the very least. This
stuff is fire PROOF, It wont burn with direct application of a propane torch
and does not gas off the way the typical Styrofoam door insulations do. I
felt this was critical since I will quite likely be welding and or burning
in this building and did not want to be trapped by clouds of toxic fumes
should a spark happen to blow the wrong way.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
>Ernie Amadio
>The building is almost done, starting shop set up.
>Cessna 170-B C-FJJK
>e_amadio(at)vaxxine.com
>
>
I'm glad you specified fireproof. There was a fire recently here in the
Seattle area that left a sixteen unit apartment building severely damaged
and several families homeless. It was caused by a 500 watt halogen
worklight being placed near the wall in one of the units. That unit's
occupant had covered the walls (in that room) with 2 to 4 inches of
'eggcrate' foam insulation. The heat of the light had ignited the foam
which burned extremely fast and with a lot of smoke.
The article didn't say why the tenant found the need to have such a sound
proof room in conjunction with halogen worklights but my imagination _is_
working on it.
After I finished my RV I finally replaced the uninsulated wood doors in my
garage with insulated steel doors. Should have done it years ago; it only
cost around $700 for both doors.
John Ammeter
ammeterj(at)seanet.com
3233 NE 95th St
Seattle WA, 98115 USA
RV-6 N16JA
First flight August 1990
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV-3 cowling size? |
<< Is the RV-3's cowling (size) the same as the RV-4's?
Finn
finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com
>>
Hi Finn,
The RV-4 Firewall is 0.5" wider and 1.12" taller than the RV-3 Firewall.
Jim Ayers
LOM M332A Ivoprop N47Rv Maroon Marauder
LesDrag(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
I'm fitting my flap to the wing (second wing), and I noticed quite a bit of
gap between the wing template and the wing itself. The problem is ONLY on
the section of the wing where the fuel tank comprises the leading edge. On
the outboard half of the wing, the template fits the wing pretty well.
On the inboard half of the wing, on the lower side of the wing, the gap
between the template and the wing is about 1/4" at the main spar. Forward of
the spar the gap closes. Aft of the spar, the gap gradually closes a bit
forward of the aft spar. I can warp the template to fit the curvature of
the bottom portion of the wing by pressing very hard on the template, forcing
the gap closed. As soon as I release the pressure, the gap is back.
On the top of the wing the gap starts at the spar and grows to about 1/4" aft
of the spar all the way to the rear spar. Even with the template closed
(bolted at both ends) there's 1/8 to 1/4" gap between the template and the
top side of the rear spar.
I'm using the template that I cut from the shipping crate. I cut it and
sanded it so that I can just barely see the remains of the original marking.
My wing is a quickbuild wing.
I'm worried about the implications of these gaps between the template and the
wing. Pretty clearly, my inboard section of wing is shaped a bit different
than the outboard section. In addition, I'm concerned that the vertical
position of the flap brace (which I have not yet drilled to the rear spar due
to these concerns) may be in error, since the template fits so poorly. That
would distort the shape of the wing.
The best plan I can come up with is to drill the flap brace to the rear spar
after forcing the template to conform to the lower curvature of the wing aft
of the spar as best I can. Any other ideas?
Is the poor fit of my wing to the template a common occurance? Any other
ideas/comments?
Thanks,
Tim Lewis
RV-6AQ #60023
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rwoodard(at)lawyernet.com |
| Subject: | RV-8 Wings (Chatter) |
RV>By the way I just finished unpacking the RV8 wing kit. It rules!!
>>stuff cut<<
RV>-Mike
It rules??? Is that a good or a bad thing? Are you from California?
Just poking fun...
Rod
RWoodard(at)lawyernet.com
RV-8, #80033
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rwoodard(at)lawyernet.com |
| Subject: | Re: strange e-mail (chatter) |
RV>*Chuckle* I hope you guys are better at building airplanes than you are
RV>at art history. Michelangelo is one name. Michelangelo Buonarotti
RV>painted the Sistine Chapel but prefered sculpture.
Art history??? I thought he was a mutant Ninja Turtle!
Rod Woodard
RWoodard(at)lawyernet.com
RV-8, #80033
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | chester razer <crazer(at)egyptian.net> |
| Subject: | RV6A Main Gear Fairings |
Will someone give me a dimension on the height of the rear
access plate cutout on the main wheel fairings. If I
understand sketch 78A correctly the rectangular cutout
starts 3.5 inches forward of the rear of the wheel opening
and extends 5.5 inches forward. It seems like the height of
the cut should be at mid axle but I thought I'd ask before
cutting.
--
Chet Razer
crazer(at)egyptian.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ahefley(at)zapcom.net (Andy Hefley) |
| Subject: | Continental IO-360 |
Has anyone got experience putting a Continental IO-360 in any of the RV series
hopfully a 6 ? If so I would be grateful to know about it.
Thanks
Andy
PS I am building an RV-6 presently and am just exploring the engine options.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RButc69912(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: info. from the valley |
Do you know if their meetings are scheduled? I would be interested in
visiting them, if they are...
Ron Butcher...Turlock, Cal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Allan W. Mojzisik" <prober(at)iwaynet.net> |
| Subject: | strange e-mail (chatter) |
------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC375.C3FC4360
Roy,
I meant to say that Michael Angiulo from the Rv-List could tell you =
that it was Michelangelo Buonarotti who painted the ceiling and also =
sculpted the Pieta.;-)
Al (Man it's getting deep in here) N162NV Res.
*Chuckle* I hope you guys are better at building airplanes than you are =
at art history. Michelangelo is one name. Michelangelo Buonarotti=20
painted the Sistine Chapel but prefered sculpture.
I know I shouldn't "chit-chat" on the list, but I couldn't resist this=20
one! :)
Roy
RV-8 #80096
starting control surfaces
Allan W. Mojzisik wrote:
Chris,
With all due respect the "Sistine Chapel" ceiling was painted by Michael =
Angelo and I would be more impressed with your knowledge of history if =
you knew who .............
From: Chris Ruble
I have noticed occasionally some peoples messages are appended with =
some quotes about painting the ceiling, I forget, and some other =
pseudo-philosophical crap. I've seen the exact same quotes several =
times but have no idea where they originated. I believe the "painting =
the ceiling" thing is a quote from a satuirday morning cartoon called =
Animainiacs". It's in reference to that guy that painted pictures on =
the sealing of the Cystine Chapel. I think his name was Leonardo =
daVinci, or something like that. He was a pseudo-philosopher in his =
time, and spent his non- painting years dreaming of flying and other =
such nonsense. Chris
------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC375.C3FC4360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------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC375.C3FC4360--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Angiulo <mikeang(at)MICROSOFT.com> |
| Subject: | strange e-mail (chatter) |
You know I was going to pop up and add to this chatter but I'm too busy
fondling my new prepunched aileron stiffeners!
-Michael Angiulo
RV8 #80047 - fluting wing ribs
-----Original Message-----
From: Allan W. Mojzisik [SMTP:iwaynet.net!prober(at)matronics.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 1996 4:41 PM
Subject: RE: RV-List: strange e-mail (chatter)
Roy,
I meant to say that Michael Angiulo from the Rv-List could tell you that
it was Michelangelo Buonarotti who painted the ceiling and also sculpted
the Pieta.;-)
Al (Man it's getting deep in here) N162NV Res.
*Chuckle* I hope you guys are better at building airplanes than you are
at art history. Michelangelo is one name. Michelangelo Buonarotti
painted the Sistine Chapel but prefered sculpture.
I know I shouldn't "chit-chat" on the list, but I couldn't resist this
one! :)
Roy
RV-8 #80096
starting control surfaces
Allan W. Mojzisik wrote:
Chris,
With all due respect the "Sistine Chapel" ceiling was painted by Michael
Angelo and I would be more impressed with your knowledge of history if you
knew who .............
From: Chris Ruble
I have noticed occasionally some peoples messages are appended with some
quotes about painting the ceiling, I forget, and some other
pseudo-philosophical crap. I've seen the exact same quotes several times
but have no idea where they originated. I believe the "painting the
ceiling" thing is a quote from a satuirday morning cartoon called
Animainiacs". It's in reference to that guy that painted pictures on the
sealing of the Cystine Chapel. I think his name was Leonardo daVinci, or
something like that. He was a pseudo-philosopher in his time, and spent
his non- painting years dreaming of flying and other such nonsense.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Insulating Garage Doors |
Would you hurry up and finish those frigging garage doors!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Hitchings" <wbgroup(at)lantic.co.za> |
| Subject: | Re: HELICOPTER ENGINES |
Hi to All
I'v been offered a Lycoming 0-360 (exact species unknown) that has been
used in a helicopter. Does anyone know whether there is anything peculiar
about 0-360's that were used in helicopters? Are they readily usable in
fixed-wing aircraft? Is there anything I should be looking out for?
Thanks for the help.
Brian Hitchings
South Africa
RV-6A empennage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dieck(at)apexcomm.net (Robert Dieck) |
>Arrrrggggghhh. That's the sound of embarrassment.
>
>On the tile question, I'll have to go with;
>
> Giovannino de' Dolci
>
>
>
>
> Chris
I think the tile was done by Mike & Larry from "WEBE TILE CO."
Robert/Tammie Dieck
dieck(at)apexcomm.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bennett(at)healey.com.au |
| Subject: | ALERT - Electric flap problem |
If your electric flap actuator weldment WD-613 EF is like mine, the
8" dimension from centre of the torque tube to centre of the actuator
rod end bearing is actually in excess of 8 1/8". This causes the the
actuator arm to foul the EF 601 forward seat brace channel. You can
grind off some of the clevis on the end of the actuating arm,
reducing edge clearance, but even so the rod end itself fouls the EF
601 channel.
The fix is to move the bottom end of the EF 601 channel forward half
an inch where it attaches to the floor. The 9 1/2" dimension should
be 10". There is plenty of material for the side panels to
accommodate this.
Ignore this at your peril. I've just had to rework the weldment.
Peter Bennett
Sydney Australia
RV6 attaching empennage.
Judith Bennett
Elanora Heights Primary School
Sydney Australia
http://www.zip.com.au/~elanora
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bennett(at)healey.com.au |
Tim,
Forget the template.Make sure there is a smooth transition top and
bottom from main skin to flap at inboard and outboard ends. This will
get you the best fit. I cannot claim credit for originating this
suggestion. It came from Bill Benedict when he visited my project.
Peter Bennett
Sydney Australia
RV6 attaching empennage to fuselage
> From: aol.com!TimRV6A(at)matronics.com
> Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 15:48:45 -0400
> To: 76455.1602(at)compuserve.com, rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: Template
> Reply-to: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> I'm fitting my flap to the wing (second wing), and I noticed quite a bit of
> gap between the wing template and the wing itself. The problem is ONLY on
> the section of the wing where the fuel tank comprises the leading edge. On
> the outboard half of the wing, the template fits the wing pretty well.
>
> On the inboard half of the wing, on the lower side of the wing, the gap
> between the template and the wing is about 1/4" at the main spar. Forward of
> the spar the gap closes. Aft of the spar, the gap gradually closes a bit
> forward of the aft spar. I can warp the template to fit the curvature of
> the bottom portion of the wing by pressing very hard on the template, forcing
> the gap closed. As soon as I release the pressure, the gap is back.
>
> On the top of the wing the gap starts at the spar and grows to about 1/4" aft
> of the spar all the way to the rear spar. Even with the template closed
> (bolted at both ends) there's 1/8 to 1/4" gap between the template and the
> top side of the rear spar.
>
> I'm using the template that I cut from the shipping crate. I cut it and
> sanded it so that I can just barely see the remains of the original marking.
> My wing is a quickbuild wing.
>
> I'm worried about the implications of these gaps between the template and the
> wing. Pretty clearly, my inboard section of wing is shaped a bit different
> than the outboard section. In addition, I'm concerned that the vertical
> position of the flap brace (which I have not yet drilled to the rear spar due
> to these concerns) may be in error, since the template fits so poorly. That
> would distort the shape of the wing.
>
> The best plan I can come up with is to drill the flap brace to the rear spar
> after forcing the template to conform to the lower curvature of the wing aft
> of the spar as best I can. Any other ideas?
>
> Is the poor fit of my wing to the template a common occurance? Any other
> ideas/comments?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tim Lewis
> RV-6AQ #60023
>
>
Judith Bennett
Elanora Heights Primary School
Sydney Australia
http://www.zip.com.au/~elanora
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)navix.net> |
| Subject: | Garage Doors/ PRIMERS |
>Would you hurry up and finish those frigging garage doors!!
Perhaps you would like to hear about a new kind of PRIMER for aluminum? :)
heh heh heh.....
Hey, this isn't all a joke. Stoddard Hamilton (Glasairs & Glastars)
recommends a water based PRIMER called DEFT for the Glastar. I was going to
save this tidbit for sometime when things got real slow on the list or a
thread was being ridden to death.
Well---maybe this is the time.
It's a water based primer: 2 parts base, 1 part catylist and 4.5 parts of
water. It's a real pain to mix. The base component is as thick as honey
from a frig which makes it very hard to get out of the can and measured.
There is an exact mixing sequence that they recommend. You mix the base and
cat. which takes a while. It's almost like trying to mix oil and water.
Once you get the base/cat mixed, you blend in water which works fine. The
product sprays fine. It seems that it takes longer to dry, I suppose
because of the water base. It cleans up with water but you'd better do it
quickly. I had a heck of a time cleaning it off my glass measuring cup. I
think this stuff will really adhear well. I'm just not sure it's worth all
of the headaches.
Bob (the devil made me do it) Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)krvn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Phillips <billphil(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
Saturday Flight Tests at the Old Men's Airplane Building Project
Tom and I flew better than any eagle ever did yesterday. It was a cold
day here in Las Vegas with isolated snow showers all over the
mountains. The wind was out of the north at about 20 and we were sort
of flipping a coin as to whether or not to fly. I=92m sure glad we did. =
I had the nicest airplane ride I=92ve had in a year. We filled her full
of fuel and headed out for the Charleston mountain range, skirting
around lots of isolated snow-virga. The sun was shinning through about
20% of the sky and at certain angles there were beautiful defractive and
refractive effects that produced brilliant colors. We were between
layers at one point as a shaft of light seemed to beam between the
fluffy layers looking like something out of Ben Hur. Looking straight
ahead about half the time I saw billions of snowflakes coming directly
into the nose kind of like on Star-Trek when the Enterprise goes from
idle into warp-drive. You can let your mind wander and pretend that you
are rocketing through the center of a Galaxy, passing millions of stars
each second on some great mission to the other side of the universe. =
We climbed to 6,000 MSL and collected some data, then to 8000, then
9000 then we played around at 10,000. The climb was a good solid 1200
to 1300 fpm almost all the way up. Tom doesn=92t want me to publish the
data yet, but it=92s so good no one will believe it. I can=92t help myse=
lf
but tell you a little about it since neither he or I has seen
performance like this before. All wrapped up in a nut-shell, at 9000
MSL the airplane trued out at 201 miles an hour in level flight at 21
inches manifold pressure fully loaded/GPS verified. This little Chevy
Vortec, running at 3800 rpm with a Holly carburetor went over 200 mph
for real. It's hard to believe that a little airplane can do that with
the wheels hanging out in the wind. If Van had a retract version I=92ll
bet this Chevy engine would drive it over 230. We went all the way
north to the Nevada Test Site (Mercury, NV) then dropped down low to
get warm. Coming home we ran right at 18-19 inches at 3500 MSL along
I-95 at about 300 AGL. The GPS was reading out right at 185 mph and we
were truing 160. Tom looked over at me as we were blowing by the
highway traffic, smiled and said, "Hey Billy-Bob we=92re doin=92 over 100=
mph faster than they are, and some of them are Vortecs!". Since the
weather was so marginal I didn=92t hear any traffic at all at the airport=
from about 20 miles north on. The winds had picked up and most sane
people were on the ground or out-a-here. So, I decided to try something
fun. I just blew into the pattern downwind at about 180 mph and 19
inches. When even with the midpoint of runway 30 I brought the power to
flight idle=85just like that! Try that with an air-cooled engine. The
OAT was about 45 degrees. I wouldn=92t do that one in my P-210. A coupl=
e
times of that and I=92d be replacing things. In the RV-6a the engine
didn=92t know the difference. It just stayed at 190 degrees happy as a
clam. Since I was only indicating about 150 when I pulled her back (had
a big tail wind), energy bled to 120 indicated with time to spare and I
threw out a notch of flap. I was tight-in and turned base a bit too
soon just to see what would happen=85..of course I have a 5000 foot runwa=
y
and 20 knots of headwind, so who cares if I=92m a little high. I
immediately popped full flaps on base and held 100 indicated. Turning
final I was good and high so I crammed full right rudder and rolled her
into a left slip. I wasn=92t watching but Tom said the VSI was negative
2500 fpm. I straightened her out over the numbers at about 50 feet and
landed short enough to make the first turn-off. WHAT A MACHINE!
At this point in my experimentation with this little airplane I=92m
tremendously impressed with the aerodynamic part of the machine itself
and it=92s versatility as much as I am the auto conversion. Sure it=92s
nice to have a good solid inexpensive engine in this but the way this
little airplane flies is much more than I ever expected. Many of you
might remember early on in my posts that we felt we would be happy if
the thing performed even 80% as well as a 180 Lycoming because it costs
about 1/3 as much. I sort of felt we would have to live with degraded
performance in some way. But now I=92m beginning to think the machine ha=
s
advantages over the air-cooled engines for a bunch of reasons. The
other day I was at 8000 MSL and decided I wanted to be on the deck. I
just simply pulled the power all the way out and pushed the nose over. =
At an indicated of about 180 I was coming out of the sky like an anvil, =
you know, like 3000 fpm, with no thermal shock to the power-plant. No
matter what I do, even long low power descents, that engine stays
rock-solid on 190 degrees. There are lots of advantages to that. =
When we got back to the tree-house (hangar C-6) yesterday it was late
but we couldn=92t bring ourselves to go home. It was just Tom and me. W=
e
pulled up a couple chairs and sat in front of the RV-6a just looking at
it. It was completely still, no noise, no movement, it was just still. =
Every once in a while we=92d hear a little pop or click as the engine
slowly cooled under the cowling. I looked at Tom and said, "Hard to
believe we just went over 200 in that baby with those wheels hanging out
in the wind." Tom looked over at me and replied, "I don=92t think I=92ve=
had a better airplane ride in 10 years. I can=92t seem to connect up wit=
h
being back here on Earth right now. I would love to be able to explain
what we just did and what we just saw in the clouds to my wife but it=92s=
one of those things you can=92t explain to anyone. It=92s an experience =
so
apart and so different from normal everyday life that there is no way to
explain it to anyone without sounding like you need to call in the
little men in white jackets."
Today we decided to re-pitch the Warp-Drive prop from 20 degrees to 18
and run the same tests in flight. Then we=92re going to pitch it up to 2=
2
degrees and do it again. When we analyze these data we might get a
better idea of where we want to be to even improve the performance
further. In fact, we're just now at a point where we can start to
experiment and optimize things without major changes. =
Best Wishes,
Bill Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Angiulo <mikeang(at)MICROSOFT.com> |
| Subject: | Garage Doors/ PRIMERS |
Funny you should mention this but DEFT is the kind of primer I used on my
entire tail kit. It turns out that the Stits epoxy primer contains nasty
chemicals which are environmentally insensitive so the govt requires
commercial outfits to use these "water" based alternatives. My IA friend
who works for Alaska gets me this stuff from their store. It mixes much
better with alcohol than water, you are right it is a pain to mix though.
The end result however, is a really heavy duty coat that can't be
scratched through to metal with a single pass of a key. It also doesn't
smell quite so bad (I do use a respirator) so I like it better than the
Stits. In fact I'm off to the shop this morning to spray a batch in my
custom non-explosion proof fan shroud.
OK, fine, if your message was flame bait I bit...
-Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Skinner [SMTP:navix.net!BSkinner(at)matronics.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 1996 7:16 AM
Subject: RV-List: Garage Doors/ PRIMERS
>Would you hurry up and finish those frigging garage doors!!
Perhaps you would like to hear about a new kind of PRIMER for aluminum? :)
heh heh heh.....
Hey, this isn't all a joke. Stoddard Hamilton (Glasairs & Glastars)
recommends a water based PRIMER called DEFT for the Glastar. I was going
to
save this tidbit for sometime when things got real slow on the list or a
thread was being ridden to death.
Well---maybe this is the time.
It's a water based primer: 2 parts base, 1 part catylist and 4.5 parts
of
water. It's a real pain to mix. The base component is as thick as honey
from a frig which makes it very hard to get out of the can and measured.
There is an exact mixing sequence that they recommend. You mix the base
and
cat. which takes a while. It's almost like trying to mix oil and water.
Once you get the base/cat mixed, you blend in water which works fine. The
product sprays fine. It seems that it takes longer to dry, I suppose
because of the water base. It cleans up with water but you'd better do it
quickly. I had a heck of a time cleaning it off my glass measuring cup.
I
think this stuff will really adhear well. I'm just not sure it's worth
all
of the headaches.
Bob (the devil made me do it) Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)krvn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Patrick Kelley <patk(at)mail.ic.net> |
| Subject: | Re: strange e-mail (humor) |
Roy Burkhead wrote:
>
> *Chuckle* I hope you guys are better at building airplanes than you are
> at art history. Michelangelo is one name. Michelangelo Buonarotti
> painted the Sistine Chapel but prefered sculpture.
He still lives on and still prefers sculpture, though he uses metal
now. Thank heavens for Richard MichaelVangelo... :) (I couldn't resist
either.)
PatK - RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "r.acker" <r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com> |
Listers:
If anybody has pictures, drawings, text, or whatever may be of benefit to RV
builders/wannabes/lurkers I will be glad to post it to my web page.
Rob Acker / RV-6Q
r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rob_acker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "r.acker" <r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
> Tom and I flew better than any eagle ever did yesterday. It was a cold
NICE story Bill! How much you gonna' sell the firewall forward for?
Rob Acker / RV-6Q
r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rob_acker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | twood <woodfam(at)aloha.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
Bill,
Please don't take this wrong but I think you need to throttle back a
little or you may very well get yourself killed and/or wreck your new toy.
Flying
"along I-95 at about 300 AGL" with "weather was so marginal" or "between
layers"=20
on a test flight are not very safe practices. At a minimum, tests flights
should be done only in strictly VFR conditions. I don't know you and you
may have the experience and skill to survive this type of flying. I would
suggest to you that the majority of pilots don't (not in the long run
anyway). I am sure that you would not want your posts to influence someone
else to stretch the envelope beyond what is safe. I have say that it
appears that you have been flying this experimental aircraft during its
initial testing period in a wreckless fashion.
I will leave comments concerning your pattern work to those with RV
experience but the thought of a 2500 fpm descent on a short final seems
unwise at best.
I am not yet a builder and all of my time has been military. I
would be very interested in the opinions of other builders/GA pilots and
possibly the RV factory on this subject.
T. Wood
>Saturday Flight Tests at the Old Men's Airplane Building Project
> Tom and I flew better than any eagle ever did yesterday. It was a cold
>day here in Las Vegas with isolated snow showers all over the
>mountains. The wind was out of the north at about 20 and we were sort
>of flipping a coin as to whether or not to fly. I=92m sure glad we did.=20
>I had the nicest airplane ride I=92ve had in a year. We filled her full
>of fuel and headed out for the Charleston mountain range, skirting
>around lots of isolated snow-virga. The sun was shinning through about
>20% of the sky and at certain angles there were beautiful defractive and
>refractive effects that produced brilliant colors. We were between
>layers at one point as a shaft of light seemed to beam between the
>fluffy layers looking like something out of Ben Hur. Looking straight
>ahead about half the time I saw billions of snowflakes coming directly
>into the nose kind of like on Star-Trek when the Enterprise goes from
>idle into warp-drive. You can let your mind wander and pretend that you
>are rocketing through the center of a Galaxy, passing millions of stars
>each second on some great mission to the other side of the universe.=20
>
> We climbed to 6,000 MSL and collected some data, then to 8000, then
>9000 then we played around at 10,000. The climb was a good solid 1200
>to 1300 fpm almost all the way up. Tom doesn=92t want me to publish the
>data yet, but it=92s so good no one will believe it. I can=92t help myself
>but tell you a little about it since neither he or I has seen
>performance like this before. All wrapped up in a nut-shell, at 9000
>MSL the airplane trued out at 201 miles an hour in level flight at 21
>inches manifold pressure fully loaded/GPS verified. This little Chevy
>Vortec, running at 3800 rpm with a Holly carburetor went over 200 mph
>for real. It's hard to believe that a little airplane can do that with
>the wheels hanging out in the wind. If Van had a retract version I=92ll
>bet this Chevy engine would drive it over 230. We went all the way
>north to the Nevada Test Site (Mercury, NV) then dropped down low to
>get warm. Coming home we ran right at 18-19 inches at 3500 MSL along
>I-95 at about 300 AGL. The GPS was reading out right at 185 mph and we
>were truing 160. Tom looked over at me as we were blowing by the
>highway traffic, smiled and said, "Hey Billy-Bob we=92re doin=92 over 100
>mph faster than they are, and some of them are Vortecs!". Since the
>weather was so marginal I didn=92t hear any traffic at all at the airport
>from about 20 miles north on. The winds had picked up and most sane
>people were on the ground or out-a-here. So, I decided to try something
>fun. I just blew into the pattern downwind at about 180 mph and 19
>inches. When even with the midpoint of runway 30 I brought the power to
>flight idle=85just like that! Try that with an air-cooled engine. The
>OAT was about 45 degrees. I wouldn=92t do that one in my P-210. A couple
>times of that and I=92d be replacing things. In the RV-6a the engine
>didn=92t know the difference. It just stayed at 190 degrees happy as a
>clam. Since I was only indicating about 150 when I pulled her back (had
>a big tail wind), energy bled to 120 indicated with time to spare and I
>threw out a notch of flap. I was tight-in and turned base a bit too
>soon just to see what would happen=85..of course I have a 5000 foot runway
>and 20 knots of headwind, so who cares if I=92m a little high. I
>immediately popped full flaps on base and held 100 indicated. Turning
>final I was good and high so I crammed full right rudder and rolled her
>into a left slip. I wasn=92t watching but Tom said the VSI was negative
>2500 fpm. I straightened her out over the numbers at about 50 feet and
>landed short enough to make the first turn-off. WHAT A MACHINE!
>
> At this point in my experimentation with this little airplane I=92m
>tremendously impressed with the aerodynamic part of the machine itself
>and it=92s versatility as much as I am the auto conversion. Sure it=92s
>nice to have a good solid inexpensive engine in this but the way this
>little airplane flies is much more than I ever expected. Many of you
>might remember early on in my posts that we felt we would be happy if
>the thing performed even 80% as well as a 180 Lycoming because it costs
>about 1/3 as much. I sort of felt we would have to live with degraded
>performance in some way. But now I=92m beginning to think the machine has
>advantages over the air-cooled engines for a bunch of reasons. The
>other day I was at 8000 MSL and decided I wanted to be on the deck. I
>just simply pulled the power all the way out and pushed the nose over.=20
>At an indicated of about 180 I was coming out of the sky like an anvil,=20
>you know, like 3000 fpm, with no thermal shock to the power-plant. No
>matter what I do, even long low power descents, that engine stays
>rock-solid on 190 degrees. There are lots of advantages to that.=20
>
> When we got back to the tree-house (hangar C-6) yesterday it was late
>but we couldn=92t bring ourselves to go home. It was just Tom and me. We
>pulled up a couple chairs and sat in front of the RV-6a just looking at
>it. It was completely still, no noise, no movement, it was just still.=20
>Every once in a while we=92d hear a little pop or click as the engine
>slowly cooled under the cowling. I looked at Tom and said, "Hard to
>believe we just went over 200 in that baby with those wheels hanging out
>in the wind." Tom looked over at me and replied, "I don=92t think I=92ve
>had a better airplane ride in 10 years. I can=92t seem to connect up with
>being back here on Earth right now. I would love to be able to explain
>what we just did and what we just saw in the clouds to my wife but it=92s
>one of those things you can=92t explain to anyone. It=92s an experience so
>apart and so different from normal everyday life that there is no way to
>explain it to anyone without sounding like you need to call in the
>little men in white jackets."
>
> Today we decided to re-pitch the Warp-Drive prop from 20 degrees to 18
>and run the same tests in flight. Then we=92re going to pitch it up to 22
>degrees and do it again. When we analyze these data we might get a
>better idea of where we want to be to even improve the performance
>further. In fact, we're just now at a point where we can start to
>experiment and optimize things without major changes. =20
>
>Best Wishes,
>
>Bill Phillips
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan <daruit(at)span.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: canopy base sealing |
Hi folks!
I'm in the process of fitting the canopy (-4) to the frame and trimming
the */&*!? skirts.
Has anybody used a sealant like RTV when riveting or screwing the */&*!?
skirts to the canopy and frame?
Thanks from good ol'Europe...
RV-4 HB-YES
Dan Ruiters
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael Gamble" <Micky_G(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | info. from the valley |
This is pure speculation on my part, having never been there, but as I
understand it every Saturday quite a few people are there. Several RVs are
being built there. There is a large hanger at the field where all the RVers
meet. That is about all I can tell you there is someone who is building that
is on the list maybe they will jump in.
Mick
----------
From: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com on behalf of
aol.com!RButc69912(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 1996 2:50 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: info. from the valley
Do you know if their meetings are scheduled? I would be interested in
visiting them, if they are...
Ron Butcher...Turlock, Cal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Louise Coats <lcoats(at)wave.co.nz> |
Just a quick note to mention another RV has successfully put some air under
its wings 27/10/96. Sam Chartres RV6 - the first RV6 type to be started in
New Zealand, had a long incubation. This brings the total to 3 RV6's
flying in New Zealand now.
Louise
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | chester razer <crazer(at)egyptian.net> |
If you're tired of hurting your hands when cutting short
lengths of small dia. tubing to be used for spacers (you'll
do several during the course of building your RV) simply
chuck up the tubing in your variable speed electric or
battery drill and use it to turn the tubing while your other
hand tightens the cutting wheel of your tubing cutter.
--
Chet Razer
crazer(at)egyptian.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Mumert" <sdm(at)softnc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Garage Doors/ PRIMERS |
Hi Bob:
Check out Deft's home page. They also have a one coat (direct to metal -
no primer) polyurethane top coat system. http://www.deftfinishes.com/
After having etched and alodined the first batch of parts for my tail kit I
can tell you I am
interested in a more streamlined process. From now on I think I will scrub
and Variprime.
I wanted to be sure the non-alclad parts were well protected.
Dave Mumert
Pr***** the tail kit.
SDM(at)softnc.com
----------
> From: Bob Skinner <navix.net!BSkinner(at)matronics.com>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: Garage Doors/ PRIMERS
> Date: Sunday, October 27, 1996 8:16 AM
>
> >Would you hurry up and finish those frigging garage doors!!
>
> Perhaps you would like to hear about a new kind of PRIMER for aluminum?
:)
>
> heh heh heh.....
>
>
> Hey, this isn't all a joke. Stoddard Hamilton (Glasairs & Glastars)
> recommends a water based PRIMER called DEFT for the Glastar. I was going
to
> save this tidbit for sometime when things got real slow on the list or a
> thread was being ridden to death.
> Well---maybe this is the time.
> It's a water based primer: 2 parts base, 1 part catylist and 4.5 parts
of
> water. It's a real pain to mix. The base component is as thick as honey
> from a frig which makes it very hard to get out of the can and measured.
> There is an exact mixing sequence that they recommend. You mix the base
and
> cat. which takes a while. It's almost like trying to mix oil and water.
> Once you get the base/cat mixed, you blend in water which works fine.
The
> product sprays fine. It seems that it takes longer to dry, I suppose
> because of the water base. It cleans up with water but you'd better do
it
> quickly. I had a heck of a time cleaning it off my glass measuring cup.
I
> think this stuff will really adhear well. I'm just not sure it's worth
all
> of the headaches.
>
> Bob (the devil made me do it) Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)krvn.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Continental IO-360 |
<< Has anyone got experience putting a Continental IO-360 in any of the RV
series
hopfully a 6 ? If so I would be grateful to know about it.
Thanks
Andy
PS I am building an RV-6 presently and am just exploring the engine options.
>>
Try talking to Mark Fredrick - mlfred(at)aol.com
He seems to know how to put IO-540's in RV-6's, so he might know about
smaller six cylinder engines.
Jim Ayers
LOM M332A Ivoprop N47RV Maroon Marauder
LesDrag(at)aol.com
Thousand Oaks, Ca. USA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
twood wrote:
>
> Bill,
> Please don't take this wrong but I think you need to throttle back a
> little or you may very well get yourself killed and/or wreck your new toy.
> Flying
>
> "along I-95 at about 300 AGL" with "weather was so marginal" or "between
> layers"
>
> on a test flight are not very safe practices. At a minimum, tests flights
> should be done only in strictly VFR conditions. I don't know you and you
> may have the experience and skill to survive this type of flying. I would
> suggest to you that the majority of pilots don't (not in the long run
> anyway). I am sure that you would not want your posts to influence someone
> else to stretch the envelope beyond what is safe. I have say that it
> appears that you have been flying this experimental aircraft during its
> initial testing period in a wreckless fashion.
>
> I will leave comments concerning your pattern work to those with RV
> experience but the thought of a 2500 fpm descent on a short final seems
> unwise at best.
>
> I am not yet a builder and all of my time has been military. I
> would be very interested in the opinions of other builders/GA pilots and
> possibly the RV factory on this subject.
>
> T. Wood
>
**Bills story sniped**
Mr Wood
I'am ah well ah well just at a loss of words over your post, and people
that know me know that is rare.
First I did not read anything in Bill's post that was dangerous, this
is by far not his first flight on this airplane.
I read a description from a man that really enjoyed the flight he was
just on, I did not read that he was at 300 ft. agl because he had to
be because of weather,also flying between layers can mean anything from
solid to scattered I don't think he said what the lower layer was
second 2500 ft per min descents are very easy to do in a RV,
third you said all your time was in the military, what did you fly and
how much. You said you were not yet a builder I would hope that you
choose to build a RV and find out for yourself what a fantastic
airplane they are.
PLEASE Bill keep up the great posts I find them very informative
and interesting and also I have seen a a whole lot of caution being
used in your testing program, good luck.
Jerry
--
--
Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS over 800 hrs. :-) Hillsboro, OR
jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DougPage(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Easier Way to access Instruments? |
I am worried about the difficulty of installing and accessing instruments in
the 6A with sliding canopy. Has anybody figured out a way to make them
easily accessible?
Removable panel in the top skin, leaving the windscreen removable? Removable
panel in the side skins? Mounting instruments on the cockpit side of the
panel with platenuts so they could be removed back toward the pilot? There
must be a way. Please help! Doug Page (installing the sliding
canopy)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.su.OZ.AU> |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
>twood wrote:
>>
>> Bill,
>> Please don't take this wrong but I think you need to throttle back a
>> little or you may very well get yourself killed and/or wreck your new toy.
>> Flying
>>
>> "along I-95 at about 300 AGL" with "weather was so marginal" or "between
>> layers"
>>
>> on a test flight are not very safe practices. At a minimum, tests flights
>> should be done only in strictly VFR conditions. I don't know you and you
>> may have the experience and skill to survive this type of flying. I would
>> suggest to you that the majority of pilots don't (not in the long run
>> anyway). I am sure that you would not want your posts to influence someone
>> else to stretch the envelope beyond what is safe. I have say that it
>> appears that you have been flying this experimental aircraft during its
>> initial testing period in a wreckless fashion.
>>
>> I will leave comments concerning your pattern work to those with RV
>> experience but the thought of a 2500 fpm descent on a short final seems
>> unwise at best.
>>
>> I am not yet a builder and all of my time has been military. I
>> would be very interested in the opinions of other builders/GA pilots and
>> possibly the RV factory on this subject.
>>
>> T. Wood
>>
>**Bills story sniped**
>
>Mr Wood
>I'am ah well ah well just at a loss of words over your post, and people
>that know me know that is rare.
>First I did not read anything in Bill's post that was dangerous, this
>is by far not his first flight on this airplane.
>I read a description from a man that really enjoyed the flight he was
>just on, I did not read that he was at 300 ft. agl because he had to
>be because of weather,also flying between layers can mean anything from
>solid to scattered I don't think he said what the lower layer was
>second 2500 ft per min descents are very easy to do in a RV,
>third you said all your time was in the military, what did you fly and
>how much. You said you were not yet a builder I would hope that you
>choose to build a RV and find out for yourself what a fantastic
>airplane they are.
>
>PLEASE Bill keep up the great posts I find them very informative
>and interesting and also I have seen a a whole lot of caution being
>used in your testing program, good luck.
>
>Jerry
Bill,
Ditto..... I thought it was a lovely piece of writing and it didn't make my
hairs raise, I used to tow gliders and I always thought crossed controls to
50' above the numbers was a standard approach (it always gives them hiccups
on my IFR renewals though).
"wreckless" of course is exactly how all test flying should be.
Cheers,
Leo Davies
leo(at)icn.su.oz.au
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM> |
>If you're tired of hurting your hands when cutting short
>lengths of small dia. tubing to be used for spacers (you'll
>do several during the course of building your RV) simply
>chuck up the tubing in your variable speed electric or
>battery drill and use it to turn the tubing while your other
>hand tightens the cutting wheel of your tubing cutter.
>--
>Chet Razer
>crazer(at)egyptian.net
You can also use a three-corner file to score tubing
while spinning it in a drill motor. After scoring thin
wall tubing, it will snap off very nicely leaving a
minimal burr which can be smoothed by touching the
end of the spacer to a sanding disk while the cutoff
piece is spun with the drill motor.
Regards,
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========oOOo=(_)=oOOo==========
| |
| Go ahead, make my day . . . |
| Show me where I'm wrong. |
=================================
72770.552(at)compuserve.com
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
I ha d the same experience. The advice from Van's was to use thin wood
strips clampled above and below the wing to capture the flaps and ailerons in
position for drilling. To work properly, the strips are about 7 ft long or
so, and are clamped together very close to the trailing edge of the control
surface and again well ahead of the leading edge. The strips make contact
with the wing aft of the main spar, and for a short distance forward of that
point, well enough to ensure the smooth transition you need.
Bill Boyd
SportAV8R(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | canopy frame reinforcement |
Any -6A tip-up builders care to comment on the need for fiberglass and foam
reinforcement of the canopy frame if the lift struts are employed??
Decisions, decisions...
Bill Boyd
SportAV8R(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)navix.net> |
| Subject: | Garage Doors/ PRIMERS |
>Funny you should mention this but DEFT is the kind of primer I used on my
>entire tail kit. It turns out that the Stits epoxy primer contains nasty
>chemicals which are environmentally insensitive so the govt requires
>commercial outfits to use these "water" based alternatives. My IA friend
>who works for Alaska gets me this stuff from their store. It mixes much
>better with alcohol than water, you are right it is a pain to mix though.
> The end result however, is a really heavy duty coat that can't be
>scratched through to metal with a single pass of a key. It also doesn't
>smell quite so bad (I do use a respirator) so I like it better than the
>Stits. In fact I'm off to the shop this morning to spray a batch in my
>custom non-explosion proof fan shroud.
>
>OK, fine, if your message was flame bait I bit...
>
>-Mike
Mike: One man's "bait" could be anothers' "big fish". :) The post was
partly in jest but could be of interest to some. Hopefully the post won't
result in a "full blown" primer discussion, again. The newbies won't get
the joke and the old hands will be after me with pitchforks.
Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)krvn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RAINPOOF(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
To T. Wood
Evidently you have never flown an RV or your military time was all been
behind a desk.
The Saturday flight of the OMABP is pretty much the norm for this airplane.
The hours have been flown off the test period on the engine and the airframe
has been proven many thousands of hours ago.
J.E.
RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Garage Doors/ PRIMERS |
That would truly make my day!!!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.su.OZ.AU> |
| Subject: | Re: Easier Way to access Instruments? |
>I am worried about the difficulty of installing and accessing instruments in
>the 6A with sliding canopy. Has anybody figured out a way to make them
>easily accessible?
>Removable panel in the top skin, leaving the windscreen removable? Removable
>panel in the side skins? Mounting instruments on the cockpit side of the
>panel with platenuts so they could be removed back toward the pilot? There
>must be a way. Please help! Doug Page (installing the sliding
>canopy)
Doug,
I have mounted my panel with nutplates (lots of them) so that the whole
thing can be pulled out. It might be a little tedious for small operations
but should make the first up wiring job much easier. I was going to ask Bob
Nuckolds about some sort of plug(s) to disconnect all the electrics but I
sense he will dissaprove, he is big on keeping the number of connections down.
Leo Davies
leo(at)icn.su.oz.au
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Easier Way to access Instruments? |
<< I am worried about the difficulty of installing and accessing instruments
in
the 6A with sliding canopy. Has anybody figured out a way to make them
easily accessible?
Removable panel in the top skin, leaving the windscreen removable?
Removable
panel in the side skins? Mounting instruments on the cockpit side of the
panel with platenuts so they could be removed back toward the pilot? There
must be a way. >>
Doug-
I've heard of some builders who make a base frame (with cutouts) of their
Van's designed panels and then mounted mini-panels to them, the theory being
that each mini-panel can be removed with several instruments attached.
Perhaps the flight instruments could be on one mini-panel, the engine
instruments on another. The radio stack could be completely free standing as
a removable module.
Gary VanRemortel
vanremog(at)aol.com
(I used to have a handle on life, but it fell off)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | twood <woodfam(at)aloha.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
>twood wrote:
>>
>> Bill,
>> Please don't take this wrong but I think you need to throttle back a
>> little or you may very well get yourself killed and/or wreck your new toy.
>> Flying
>>
>> "along I-95 at about 300 AGL" with "weather was so marginal" or "between
>> layers"
>>
>> on a test flight are not very safe practices. At a minimum, tests flights
>> should be done only in strictly VFR conditions. I don't know you and you
>> may have the experience and skill to survive this type of flying. I would
>> suggest to you that the majority of pilots don't (not in the long run
>> anyway). I am sure that you would not want your posts to influence someone
>> else to stretch the envelope beyond what is safe. I have say that it
>> appears that you have been flying this experimental aircraft during its
>> initial testing period in a wreckless fashion.
>>
>> I will leave comments concerning your pattern work to those with RV
>> experience but the thought of a 2500 fpm descent on a short final seems
>> unwise at best.
>>
>> I am not yet a builder and all of my time has been military. I
>> would be very interested in the opinions of other builders/GA pilots and
>> possibly the RV factory on this subject.
>>
>> T. Wood
>>
>**Bills story sniped**
>
>Mr Wood
>I'am ah well ah well just at a loss of words over your post, and people
>that know me know that is rare.
>First I did not read anything in Bill's post that was dangerous, this
>is by far not his first flight on this airplane.
>I read a description from a man that really enjoyed the flight he was
>just on, I did not read that he was at 300 ft. agl because he had to
>be because of weather,also flying between layers can mean anything from
>solid to scattered I don't think he said what the lower layer was
>second 2500 ft per min descents are very easy to do in a RV,
>third you said all your time was in the military, what did you fly and
>how much. You said you were not yet a builder I would hope that you
>choose to build a RV and find out for yourself what a fantastic
>airplane they are.
>
>PLEASE Bill keep up the great posts I find them very informative
>and interesting and also I have seen a a whole lot of caution being
>used in your testing program, good luck.
>
>Jerry
>--
>--
>Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS over 800 hrs. :-) Hillsboro, OR
>jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com
>
>
Jerry,
Although I had hoped to get a few more opinions before I responded
on this subject, since you have questioned my experience, I thought I would
answer your question and add a little about what motivated me to write my
original post:
I have been a Naval Aviator for over 18 years. I have a little over
2400 hours, mostly H-53 hours, but with a couple hundred T-28 hours. I have
a special instrument rating and have been an Instructor Pilot, NATOPS
Standardization Pilot, Post Maintenance Check Pilot and Instrument Check
pilot for many years. I have more shipboard landings than I ever wanted and
have worked as a squadron safety officer. Let me hasten to add that I don't
think any of this makes me qualified to comment on the flight
characteristics or test requirements of an RV or any other experimental
aircraft. I know that many of you have far more experience in all aspects of
aviation than I will ever have.
However, over the years, Naval Aviation being what it is, I have
known, or known of, many pilots, friends, and shipmates that have died in
aircraft accidents. In my opinion, these accidents fall in three general
catagories:
1. Mechanical failure: relatively rare.
2. Pilot error: pilot made a mistake and/or lost situational awareness.
3. Pilot knowingly breaks safety rules and flies in a reckless manner.
The tragedy of category 3 is that others often know of a pilot's reckless
behavior or attitude but say nothing until after an accident. It does no
good to bring up the subject after an accident.
It appeared to me, that Bill was operating outside the boundaries of
what most pilots would consider prudent for a test flight. I pointed it out
to possibly prevent an accident, either his or someone else influenced by
his letter. As a fellow pilot, I think that it is our responsibility to do
this. Whether I was right or wrong, at least the issue is brought out and
looked at. Hopefully everyone benefits from an open exchange.
It may very well be that my standard for safe flying practices is
different than what the GA community accepts. If this group thinks that
Bill's flight account represents a prudent test flight, I will take that at
face value and offer Bill an apology, wish him good luck and congratulations
on what is obviously an exceptional RV.
Terray Wood
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Louise Coats <lcoats(at)wave.co.nz> |
| Subject: | Tilt up canopy reinforcement |
Bill,
Hi from way down under the world. Re your querry about reinforcement of
the canopy with the use of gas struts. Our RV6 has over 135hr on the tach
now and there was no additional reinforcement to the canopy frame during
construction. Van's plans were followed with the fiberglass lay up to
"weld" the plexi glass to the canopy deck and this keeps things quite firm.
We have, however, used a different type of gas strut and put it in a
different place so it does not interfer with feet being swung into the
cockpit. If you can lay your hands on the June 95 Rvator page two there is
a picture of the gas strut set up. The canopy can withstand being up when
the engine is started and run but I have not had the urge to taxi around
with the canopy right up though I have seen an RV being taxied thus!
Louise
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Maldwyn Price <mal(at)dial.pipex.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
As a sub -100 hour pilot and RV6a wannabe, I for one thank you for
reminding me. However much I enjoyed reading the piece. :-)
Thanks to both writers.
Mal Price
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bcos(at)ix.netcom.com (William Costello ) |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
You wrote:
>
>>twood wrote:
>>>
>>> Bill,
>>> Please don't take this wrong but I think you need to throttle
back a
>>> little or you may very well get yourself killed and/or wreck your new
toy.
>>First I did not read anything in Bill's post that was dangerous, this
>>is by far not his first flight on this airplane.
>>Jerry
>Jerry,
>
> 1. Mechanical failure: relatively rare.
> 2. Pilot error: pilot made a mistake and/or lost situational
awareness.
> 3. Pilot knowingly breaks safety rules and flies in a reckless
manner.
>
>The tragedy of category 3 is that others often know of a pilot's reckless
>behavior or attitude but say nothing until after an accident. It does no
>good to bring up the subject after an accident.
> It appeared to me, that Bill was operating outside the boundaries of
>what most pilots would consider prudent for a test flight. I pointed it out
>to possibly prevent an accident, either his or someone else influenced by
>his letter. As a fellow pilot, I think that it is our responsibility to do
>this. Whether I was right or wrong, at least the issue is brought out and
>looked at. Hopefully everyone benefits from an open exchange.
>Terray Wood
>
>
Hi Folks,
Sorry the above is so chopped up, but I wanted to indicate some of the
thread. I think this is a very worthwhile thread in that it is
bringing out a discussion of something of great importance to all of
us -- safe flying of our RV's. (Much better than talking about weird
transmissions.)
I want to thank all the above contributors for their ideas and hope
that no one takes offense (as it seems no one has).
I am certainly looking for a less expensive, safe and reliable
alternative power plant if one becomes available. I am also looking
for ideas on how to remain a safe pilot to enjoy the RV for many
years and I think the above conversations are about the people and
testing and practices that speak directly to those things.
Thanks guys and best regards,
Bill Costello
bcos(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bcos(at)ix.netcom.com (William Costello ) |
| Subject: | Re: First flight |
You wrote:
>
>Just a quick note to mention another RV has successfully put some air under
>its wings 27/10/96. Sam Chartres RV6 - the first RV6 type to be started in
>New Zealand, had a long incubation. This brings the total to 3 RV6's
>flying in New Zealand now.
>Louise
>
>
A big congratulations to Sam! And to think he has to fly the plane
upside down all the time! :,) Thanks for the note, Louise. When will
your bird fly?
Best regards,
Bill Costello
bcos(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: canopy frame reinforcement |
| From: | wstucklen1(at)juno.com (Frederic W Stucklen) |
Bill,
I laid foam and fiberglass reinforcement on my tiltup. Very little
weight penalty, and a lot more rigid, especially on windy days.
Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
wstucklen1(at)juno.com
writes:
>Any -6A tip-up builders care to comment on the need for fiberglass and
foam
>reinforcement of the canopy frame if the lift struts are employed??
>
>Decisions, decisions...
>
>Bill Boyd
>SportAV8R(at)aol.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Chatter; strange e-mail |
>
> *Chuckle* I hope you guys are better at building airplanes than you are
> at art history. Michelangelo is one name. Michelangelo Buonarotti
> painted the Sistine Chapel but prefered sculpture.
>
> I know I shouldn't "chit-chat" on the list, but I couldn't resist this
> one! :)
>
> Roy
> RV-8 #80096
> starting control surfaces
>
It's been 15 years since I took any art-history clases. It's been 15
minutes since I worked on an airplane. I think this shows that I have
my priorities strait even if I can't remember ancient history ;-)
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Easier Way to access Instruments? |
>Removable panel in the top skin, leaving the windscreen removable?
Removable
>panel in the side skins? Mounting instruments on the cockpit side of the
>panel with platenuts so they could be removed back toward the pilot? There
>must be a way. Please help! Doug Page (installing the sliding
>canopy)
I'll sell you a panel to hold the standard six inst., all machined, for $40
plus shipping. I can't see any other way...
Check six!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: canopy base sealing |
>I'm in the process of fitting the canopy (-4) to the frame and trimming
>the */&*!? skirts.
Pro-seal is more fun
>Has anybody used a sealant like RTV when riveting or screwing the */&*!?
>skirts to the canopy and frame?
I and others have carried the fiberglass all the way around the base of the
glass, overlapping the glass about 1/4", to effect a seal. On a -6 canopy, I
use acrylic/silicone/paintable caulk under the lip of the alum, again simply
to seal things up
>
>Thanks from good ol'Europe...
>RV-4 HB-YES
>Dan Ruiters
check six!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Continental IO-360 |
>< Has anyone got experience putting a Continental IO-360 in any of the RV
>series
> hopfully a 6 ? If so I would be grateful to know about it.
> Thanks
> Andy
> PS I am building an RV-6 presently and am just exploring the engine
options.
> >>
>Try talking to Mark Fredrick - mlfred(at)aol.com
>He seems to know how to put IO-540's in RV-6's, so he might know about
>smaller six cylinder engines.
>
>Jim Ayers
Whoa, Jim!
The -6 Rocket is still a dream for me. My 540 is in a 'modified' -4.However,
I think the IO-360 Cont is a v good powerplant, but maybe a bit heavy for a
std -6. I've seen the battery moved to the rear of the baggage compt in some
IO-360 Lyc & c/s prop installations to fix the CG- maybe this would work for
the Cont, too.
IMHO, the IO-360 was the right engine for the -8, with the correct primer, of
course. ;-)
Check six!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
>Evidently you have never flown an RV or your military time was all been
>behind a desk.
>The Saturday flight of the OMABP is pretty much the norm for this airplane.
>The hours have been flown off the test period on the engine and the airframe
>has been proven many thousands of hours ago.
Fellas:
I don't think we need to start flaming people over this.
Most of us know these birds fly wonderfully, and that's exactly we are
building them. BUT! 300 AGL IN MARGINAL WEATHER, ESPECIALLY SNOW, IS NO WAY
TO STAY ALIVE! VFR into IMC kills way too many pilots, and their passengers.I
wasn't there, viz coulda been the required 1 mi, but... I want to see this
project end happily.
Please, Bill, be careful.
Check six, if you can see it!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gretzw(at)tcplink.nrel.gov |
Hello Builders,
As requested, my address and phone number for ordering heated pitot
tube mounting brackets; Warren Gretz, 3664 E. Lake Dr., Littleton, CO,
80121 Phone, evenings and weekends (303) 770-3811
If any one is interested in receiveing a flyer on the heated pitot
tube brackets I sell, I will gladly send one to you if you contact me.
Warren Gretz
RV-6 N25WG
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Re[2]: RV-List: Heated Pitot??
Date: 10/25/96 6:45 PM
Mr. Gretz,
Could you please publish your address/phone number on the list again--I'd
like to order one of your mounting kits.
Thank you,
Mike Vaccaro
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E Steffens" <resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com> |
| Subject: | Re: canopy frame reinforcement |
I used gas struts placed vertically like very similar to the setup in the last
(June ?) RVator. The struts are about 18" closed and 30" open. Got them at the
local Autozone. The top end attaches to the canopy frame the same way and place
as the struts that Van sends with the finish kit. The bottom of the strut
attaches approximately vertically down to a small bracket bolted to a fuselage
brace angle. The strut arm goes up to the canopy through a slot in the canopy
deck on the fuselage. I did not do any bracing of the canopy frame. The struts
have alot of force and the canopy will not quite stay closed under its own
weight. Either the top handle or the bottom locks need to be engaged to hole the
canopy shut. Don't know if this will be a problem. If the gas struts were just
slightly less strong, the canopy would rest closed and a light push start it
moving open. I made the front canopy fairing from 3003-.032 aluminum which
seemed alot easier than fiberglass. (Formed it in two pieces welded at the
center. Took about four hours). This week I'll make a band out of aluminum
around the back end of the canopy that will lap over the fixed plexi of the
baggage bay.
Dick Steffens (assembling the engine) resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Gesele <scottg(at)villagenet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: canopy frame reinforcement |
>Any -6A tip-up builders care to comment on the need for fiberglass and foam
>reinforcement of the canopy frame if the lift struts are employed??
>
>Decisions, decisions...
>
>Bill Boyd
>SportAV8R(at)aol.com
>
>
Bill,
My frame was a heck of a lot more rigid after the fiberglass was added. I
haven't heard anything negative about adding the "box". The weight penalty
is minimal. Looking back at RV pictures from Oshkosh, the fiberglass box
also looks neater, IMHO.
Hope this helps.
Scott Gesele N506RV
scottg(at)villagenet.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E Steffens" <resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HELICOPTER ENGINES |
Brian,
I'm assembling my engine to go my RV-6. It is (was) a HIO-360-B1A from a Hughes
heliocopter (military). I've completely overhauled it with lots of new parts.
The engine will work fine in an airplane, but some helicopter engines have the
fuel injection servo mounted on the back of the oil sump. This will not work
with -6A (nose gear in the way). On the -6 there is tube on the motor mount tube
that crosses behind the engine about 5 inches behind the sump where the servo
bolts on. You either have to get an elbow in that space to turn the servo up or
down or get another sump with a different servo connection. This might mean also
getting different intake tubes to the cylinders. If you have access to a machine
shop, it might be possible to fabricate another servo mount in the original
sump. I should have my engine together and on the plane in a couple of weeks. I
will then see how I am going to solve the rear facing fuel injection servo. The
Air Flow people in Spartenberg, SC make elbows and I will first try to use one
of their elbows to turn the servo up and bring the air in from NACA ducts in the
sides of the lower cowl. (No scoop in the bottom of the cowl). If that doesn't
work I might use a down elbow and go underneath the sump and forward to a scoop
just under the prop. Then there is always another sump.
Dick Steffens resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dean Spencer <dspencer(at)kiva.net> |
Where do I look for some information on the Jeff Rose electronic
ignition system? And how pricey is it?
Scott
N4ZW
Trying to decide whether to get two new slicks or repair and keep one
bendix plus electronic ign.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AveryTools(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: HELICOPTER ENGINES |
If the engine is from a Hughes helicopter it is probably a HIO-360-BiA model
and is rated at 185 HP at 2900 RPM by Lycoming. The engine is a high
compression (8.5 to 1) but could be de-tuned. The oil sump may be a rear
intake sump and may need to be changed to work on an RV. The HIO-360-B!A
engines have a heavy-duty crankshaft & rods (which is a plus). The
crankshaft may be a hollow crank & could be used for a C/S prop (check the
front of the crank to see if it has a plug). I'm overhauling & planning to
use one of these engines in my RV-4.
Bob Avery
________________________________________________________________________________
I'm not trying to restart this thread, nor trying to preach, nor
saying I agree or disagree with the poster's conclusion or advice.
Just a thought so each person can make their own decision.
>From rec.woodworking:
> My fellow woodworkers,
>
> I though I would post this as a safety reminder to all
> of you that spray solvent based finishes.
>
> Last week a shop in my area was spraying cabinets with
> solvent-based lacquer when the motor in the exhaust fan
> shorted and started a fire. The fire spread very quickly
> to a 55 gal drum of lacquer and BOOM! The workmen barely
> got out alive! Also, the shop was completely destroyed.
>
> I don't know what kind of exhaust fan they were using, but
> it obviously did not have an explosion proof motor. PLEASE
> make sure that your exhaust fan has an explosion proof motor!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don Karl karl@dg-rtp.dg.com (919)248-5915
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bcos(at)ix.netcom.com (William Costello ) |
| Subject: | Out of commission |
Hi Folks,
Not sure why anyone would need to, but if you need to reach me in
the next "5 to 10 days" you'll have to do so at
773-445-1246
or 800-325-7544
cause my video board is going south (hope it lasts long enough to
finish this) and it will take this long to get it fixed. :(
Best regards,
Bill Costello
bcos(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HELICOPTER ENGINES |
You really need the dash numbers that come after to the O-360-???
to know what model it is.
I may be wrong, but what I have heard is that the Helicopter engines
sometimes have different pistons for a higher compression ratio.
I know on the IO-360 (the 200 hp angle valve engine), there is
a 10:1 piston used in the helicopters. I think some of them also
have a slightly different cam grind to shift the torque curve.
If it was mounted vertical in the helicopter, then it may have
other mods.
If you OH the engine, you can change the cam and pistons to standard.
You may have to change or remove the data plate however.
You may also have to install an anti-torque rotor on the tail of
your RV.
Herman
dierks(at)austin.ibm.com
> Hi to All
>
> I'v been offered a Lycoming 0-360 (exact species unknown) that has been
> used in a helicopter. Does anyone know whether there is anything peculiar
> about 0-360's that were used in helicopters? Are they readily usable in
> fixed-wing aircraft? Is there anything I should be looking out for?
>
> Thanks for the help.
>
>
> Brian Hitchings
> South Africa
> RV-6A empennage
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "vern" <vern(at)ldd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: canopy frame reinforcement |
----------
> From: aol.com!SportAV8R(at)matronics.com
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: canopy frame reinforcement
> Date: Sunday, October 27, 1996 9:18 PM
>
I didn't feel that I needed to reinforce the frame any, but I did
fiberglass the canopy itself to the frame, both inside and outside, across
the front where the canopy meets the frame. That may have stiffened up my
canopy more than others, but I am satisified with mine.
Vern Lemasters
vern(at)ldd.net
> Any -6A tip-up builders care to comment on the need for fiberglass and
foam
> reinforcement of the canopy frame if the lift struts are employed??
>
> Decisions, decisions...
>
> Bill Boyd
> SportAV8R(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)navix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: canopy frame reinforcement |
>Any -6A tip-up builders care to comment on the need for fiberglass and foam
>reinforcement of the canopy frame if the lift struts are employed??
>
>Decisions, decisions...
>
>Bill Boyd
>SportAV8R(at)aol.com
Bill,
How about some input from us "plain, 'ol six guys?"
It makes a big difference in the "twisty-ness" of the canopy and I would
sure put in the reinforcement. When you open or close your canopy, I would
think you would want it as rigid as possible. It would seem that the plexi
would be less likely to crack if the whole canopy structure were rigid.
With any luck, you'll be able to taxi around with your canopy up on hot
days. I do with mine. Of course, I have to look out the side.)
Put the foam in. Then, you'll not only have the best looking canopy
option, but a rigid one, as well:)
Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)krvn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KennyCobb(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: info. from the valley |
The Bakersfield Bunch ( EAA Chapter 71 ) meets the second Wed of
every month at Bakersfield Muni. airport in the large hanger across from the
cafe. Attitude adjustment at 7:00pm meeting at 7:30pm. All visitors welcomed.
Ken Crabtree
kennycobb(at)aol.com
Bakersfield, Ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John E Musser <jemusser(at)tenet.edu> |
| Subject: | RV-List-Rivet Guns |
I'll probably get abused for asking something in the archives, but I
haven't found the answer, yet...
I am building up my tools in preparation of the empennage kit delivery.
I've been given a "new in box" Chicago Pneumatic CP-9315 riveter. Is it
usable? A free good tool sure beats a bad one, but I don't want to spend
the money on another if this will work!
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mikel(at)dimensional.com |
| Subject: | Re: canopy base sealing |
>Hi folks!
>
>I'm in the process of fitting the canopy (-4) to the frame and trimming
>the */&*!? skirts.
>Has anybody used a sealant like RTV when riveting or screwing the */&*!?
>skirts to the canopy and frame?
>
>Thanks from good ol'Europe...
>RV-4 HB-YES
>Dan Ruiters
>
Dan: Ah, yes, the joy of installing the canopy skirts. First of all, resign
yourself to the fact that, no matter how many times you fit and file and fit
and file when you clamp them on for the final time, they will not fit as
well as any of the temporary fittings.
With that in mind, YES, there should be some sealant between the skirts and
the plexiglass as this is an area exposed to rain etc. and will leak if not
sealed. I also ran a fine line of sealant between the glass and frame to act
as a cushion. I used a thin line of clear RTV but tried it out on a scrap
piece of the glass first to make sure there would be no reaction between the
RTV and the glass. Worked fine.
Best of luck; go slowly and with a smile on your face.
Micheal RV-4 232SQ
mikel(at)dimensional.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: ALERT - Electric flap problem |
I ran into the same problem with the electric flap actuator. My
solution was to buy some new parts -- the floor-to-forward channel
angle (don't remember the p/n) and the two side panels, and move the
bottom attach point of the front channel further forward. Of course
it's easier for me to go get new parts than people in Australia....
At any rate, one thing that affects this is the orientation of the
center bearing block. The plans are not clear at all on whether the
thin side of the block goes down or up. They do show the _side_
blocks with the thin side down -- but the side blocks don't have a
thin or thick side -- they're symetrical! Anyway, the orientation of
the center block determines the height of the bar off the floor, as
well as the location of the two side blocks. If you install it
_thick_ side down it will move the bar up and reduce the clearance
between the actuator arm and the front channel. Unfortunately,
installing the blocks _thin_ side down results in the bolt holes in
the side blocks interfering with the baggage floor on the other side
of the bulkhead, but that can be dealt with by notching the baggage
floor. I think that Vans told me it was supposed to be thin side down
anyway, and that's what I did.
Randall Henderson, RV-6
randall(at)edt.com
http://www.edt.com/homewing
>
> If your electric flap actuator weldment WD-613 EF is like mine, the
> 8" dimension from centre of the torque tube to centre of the actuator
> rod end bearing is actually in excess of 8 1/8". This causes the the
> actuator arm to foul the EF 601 forward seat brace channel. You can
> grind off some of the clevis on the end of the actuating arm,
> reducing edge clearance, but even so the rod end itself fouls the EF
> 601 channel.
>
> The fix is to move the bottom end of the EF 601 channel forward half
> an inch where it attaches to the floor. The 9 1/2" dimension should
> be 10". There is plenty of material for the side panels to
> accommodate this.
>
> Ignore this at your peril. I've just had to rework the weldment.
>
> Peter Bennett
> Sydney Australia
> RV6 attaching empennage.
> Judith Bennett
> Elanora Heights Primary School
>
> Sydney Australia
>
> http://www.zip.com.au/~elanora
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | csanchez(at)BayNetworks.com (Cheryl Sanchez) |
| Subject: | Re: Easier Way to access Instruments? |
>
>I am worried about the difficulty of installing and accessing instruments in
>the 6A with sliding canopy. Has anybody figured out a way to make them
>easily accessible?
>Removable panel in the top skin, leaving the windscreen removable? Removable
>panel in the side skins? Mounting instruments on the cockpit side of the
>panel with platenuts so they could be removed back toward the pilot? There
>must be a way. Please help! Doug Page (installing the sliding
>canopy)
>
I am making the instrument panel on my 6A removable. I did this
by putting nut plates in the 3/4x3/4 angle that holds the panel to the
upper fuselage skin. The angle is riveted to the top skin and the panel
screws into the angle with #6 screws. I machine countersunk the panel for
the screws and used the black screws. Since the panel is also black they
do blend well. It's a bit more work but I think it is worth it.
Cheryl Sanchez
csanchez(at)world.std.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | chester razer <crazer(at)egyptian.net> |
| Subject: | Re: canopy frame reinforcement |
aol.com!SportAV8R(at)matronics.com wrote:
>
> Any -6A tip-up builders care to comment on the need for fiberglass and foam
> reinforcement of the canopy frame if the lift struts are employed??
>
> Decisions, decisions...
>
> Bill Boyd
> SportAV8R(at)aol.com
Bill, A friend of mine filled his entire w616 weldment
channel with bondo. He's not flying the 6 yet but initially
he seemed to think it stiffened up the assembly fairly well.
I've also seen a couple of pieces of .032 pop riveted to the
underside of the 616 weldment (sort of opposite the C602
skin). this builder stated that really stiffened up the
frame and I think it would be much lighter than the bondo.
I'm a week or two from making the decision but I'm leaning
toward the latter of the two ideas.
--
Chet Razer
crazer(at)egyptian.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bcos(at)ix.netcom.com (William Costello ) |
Hi Folks,
Sorry to clutter up the mail (most of you are probably thinking, who
the hell is this guy anyway), but I had a false alarm. Turns out the
problem is with my monitor and not the video card, so I can use my old
monitor while waiting for a new one (extended warranty).
Sorry to have to add that this is the 4th monitor I have had in about
14 months. Too bad, but I doubt I'll get a Packard Bell the next time
around. Don't like to bad-mouth companies too fast, but 3 bad monitors
is a bit much.
Best regards,
Bill Costello
bcos(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Johnson <rvgasj(at)popmail.mcs.net> |
| Subject: | Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: |
I am having a bad case of second thoughts about building the RV from a
financial perspective (but not from a building perspective). I haven't had
these thoughts up to this point because I have been purchasing one sub-kit
at a time. Each sub-kit purchase was easy to swallow because it was $3500
or so. In the past 14 months I have built the tail, wing, and fuselage
kits. However, I am now ready for the finishing kit and all the goodies to
complete the plane. Totaling these goodies: new 180 HP Lycoming from Vans,
instruments, radio, oil cooler, muffler, propeller, etc. , I realize I will
need to fork out about $35,000. This is a rather large sum for me, and has
caused me to reflect on the soundness of this investment. I could get a
used Mooney with close to the performance of an RV for slightly more than
what it would take me to finish this RV. Although the fun of flying an RV (
I have 10 hours as PIC in one ) is significantly better than a Mooney, the
Mooney can carry 4 people, and is more stable as an IFR platform. I think
the Mooney may be easier to sell too. I have noticed that many RV builders
only keep their planes a short time and sell them, and then go build another
RV. I have enjoyed the challenge of building, and enjoy looking at the plane
I have built. I am just getting cold feet when it comes to forking over the
rest of the dough for the goodies.
I was also surprised to find out that AVEMCO insurance quoted me about $2000
for RV insurance ( and I have over 1000 hours and am IFR rated with no
accidents ). Which incidentally is about the same cost for insurance on a
Mooney or Bonanza. I guess I assumed that a fixed pitch prop and
non-retractable landing gear would make it more equivalent to a cherokee.
And to add insult to injury, I have to pay 7% sales tax for engine, RV6A
kit, instruments etc that I have ordered outside Illinois which is a rather
sizable sum in itself or I will not be able to register my airplane.
Has anybody had second thoughts like this before ? I would like to
especially hear from those who have completed their planes and have comments
either way. In any event, my two teenagers will probably kill me if I don't
complete it, since they have bucked 1000's of rivets !
Thanks for your advice
Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank Smidler <smidler(at)dcwi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Easier Way to access Instruments? |
aol.com!DougPage(at)matronics.com wrote:
>
> I am worried about the difficulty of installing and accessing instruments in
> the 6A with sliding canopy. Has anybody figured out a way to make them
> easily accessible?
> Removable panel in the top skin, leaving the windscreen removable? Removable
> panel in the side skins? Mounting instruments on the cockpit side of the
> panel with platenuts so they could be removed back toward the pilot? There
> must be a way. Please help! Doug Page (installing the sliding
> canopy)
Doug,
I am also at that stage and after much deliberation I have decided to
cut off the left and right sides of the pannel 3 to 4" inboard and rivet
them permanently in place. This will leave the center section that will
be easily installed using screws on 3 to 4 inch centers. I plan to use
a 1" wide splice strip where the panel meets the outboard pcs and will
bend it at the bottom to follow the flange so that one screw will go in
from the bottom to insure stiffness. I plan to use a bracket screwed to
the bottom of the panel for my controls which can be detached. This
should allow me to easily pull the whole instrument panel out with all
the gages, radios and wiring intact.
Best of Luck
Frank Smidler
N96FS (reserved)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Roy Burkhead" <snaproll(at)peaka.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Garage Doors/ PRIMERS |
I have had very good results with Dexter Aerospace two-part primer. I
clean each part with Alumiprep, rinse with water, and shoot 'em. The
Dexter mixes equal parts by volume, shoots very easily, and is a very
good protetion I understand. I ordered mine from Aircraft Spruce.
Roy
RV-8 #80096
Dave Mumert wrote:
>
> Hi Bob:
>
> Check out Deft's home page. They also have a one coat (direct to metal -
> no primer) polyurethane top coat system. http://www.deftfinishes.com/
>
> After having etched and alodined the first batch of parts for my tail kit I
> can tell you I am
> interested in a more streamlined process. From now on I think I will scrub
> and Variprime.
> I wanted to be sure the non-alclad parts were well protected.
>
> Dave Mumert
> Pr***** the tail kit.
> SDM(at)softnc.com
>
> ----------
> > From: Bob Skinner <navix.net!BSkinner(at)matronics.com>
> > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: RV-List: Garage Doors/ PRIMERS
> > Date: Sunday, October 27, 1996 8:16 AM
> >
> > >Would you hurry up and finish those frigging garage doors!!
> >
> > Perhaps you would like to hear about a new kind of PRIMER for aluminum?
> :)
> >
> > heh heh heh.....
> >
> >
> > Hey, this isn't all a joke. Stoddard Hamilton (Glasairs & Glastars)
> > recommends a water based PRIMER called DEFT for the Glastar. I was going
> to
> > save this tidbit for sometime when things got real slow on the list or a
> > thread was being ridden to death.
> > Well---maybe this is the time.
> > It's a water based primer: 2 parts base, 1 part catylist and 4.5 parts
> of
> > water. It's a real pain to mix. The base component is as thick as honey
> > from a frig which makes it very hard to get out of the can and measured.
> > There is an exact mixing sequence that they recommend. You mix the base
> and
> > cat. which takes a while. It's almost like trying to mix oil and water.
> > Once you get the base/cat mixed, you blend in water which works fine.
> The
> > product sprays fine. It seems that it takes longer to dry, I suppose
> > because of the water base. It cleans up with water but you'd better do
> it
> > quickly. I had a heck of a time cleaning it off my glass measuring cup.
> I
> > think this stuff will really adhear well. I'm just not sure it's worth
> all
> > of the headaches.
> >
> > Bob (the devil made me do it) Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)krvn.com
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dean Spencer <dspencer(at)kiva.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
In my opinion, these accidents fall in three general
> catagories:
>
> 1. Mechanical failure: relatively rare.
> 2. Pilot error: pilot made a mistake and/or lost situational awareness.
> 3. Pilot knowingly breaks safety rules and flies in a reckless manner.
>
> The tragedy of category 3 is that others often know of a pilot's reckless
> behavior or attitude but say nothing until after an accident. It does no
> good to bring up the subject after an accident.
> It appeared to me, that Bill was operating outside the boundaries of
> what most pilots would consider prudent for a test flight. I pointed it out
> to possibly prevent an accident, either his or someone else influenced by
> his letter. As a fellow pilot, I think that it is our responsibility to do
> this. Whether I was right or wrong, at least the issue is brought out and
> looked at. Hopefully everyone benefits from an open exchange.
> It may very well be that my standard for safe flying practices is
> different than what the GA community accepts. If this group thinks that
> Bill's flight account represents a prudent test flight, I will take that at
> face value and offer Bill an apology, wish him good luck and congratulations
> on what is obviously an exceptional RV.
>
> Terray Wood
Well, I'm gonna jump in here and say that first off I really enjoyed
reading the flight test reports (and am quite interested in the engine
installation, etc.) and identify with the writer in his amazement with
the flying qualities of the rv's. My first ten or so hours of time in
the -4 was characterized mostly by a lot of large stick movements, and
large grins. I truly had to fight off the urge to do aerobatics in the
pattern. I really don't think many of us in general aviation have flown
airplanes that handle like the RV's and as a result for the first number
of hours we feel like self-made fighter pilots. I fly rv's much
differently now, mostly because I realize that the stuff I did during
the first 10 hours could very well have gotten me killed. I think that a
balance between the careful and the fun is in order. What Terray has to
say makes a lot of sense. Let's not fly ourselves into the ground
wearing our RV grins.
Scott
N4ZW
I've flown Cubs and I've flown Learjets(for a few dozen hours anyway),
and the more I fly the more I realize how much I have to learn. I also
have close to 2000 glider tows - about an even mix at each end of the
towrope. For what little it's worth.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JamesCone(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Props-chatter |
Dan Morris wrote about Ivo Prop and makes the point that I was trying to
make. IVO Prop people lie about the problems that they are having with their
props. Any new product has some problems during development and I don't have
any problem with that. What I do object to is the deliberate falsification
being provided by Ivo Prop. If they are willing to lie about the problems
with their props, what else are they willing to do to make a buck? On the
basis of my conversations with Ivo about the problems with his props, I would
not buy anything from the man, especially if my life could be jeopardized in
the process!!! The man is a liar. He cannot be trusted to tell the truth.
I did not mean to suggest that Jim Ayers should not provide information
about the development of Ivo Props. Quite the contrary, I too am very
interested in a cheaper variable pitch prop. I just meant to warn
prospective buyers of Ivo Props about what I consider to be unacceptable
behavior by Ivo. You be the judge, but don't say that you wern't warned and
make sure that your insurance is paid up so that your survivors can take some
comfort from the proceeds.
Jim Cone
jamescone(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MiDiBu <midibu(at)hsv.mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Easier Way to access Instruments? |
Hello Doug,
>>I am worried about the difficulty of installing and accessing instruments in
>>the 6A with sliding canopy. Has anybody figured out a way to make them
>>easily accessible?
>>Removable panel in the top skin, leaving the windscreen removable? Removable
>>panel in the side skins?
This would be great! However, from my experience doing panel work on my
Mooney, I would not advise it. On a Mooney, there is a removable panel
forward of the windshield that will allow you a pretty nice access to the
back of the instrument panel. On a few things, it is necessary to open this
panel. The problem is that it is next to impossible to seal it against
water when you close it. It seals easily against water coming against it
when you're flying in rain because of the way the skins overlap, but
horrible to protect the insides when the plane is parked. I theory, there
is a channel that will draw water away and out of the cockpit, but it takes
a long time to get all of the sealant lined up and squished down to really work.
>>Mounting instruments on the cockpit side of the
>>panel with platenuts so they could be removed back toward the pilot? There
>>must be a way. Please help! Doug Page (installing the sliding
>>canopy)
>
>
>Doug,
>
>I have mounted my panel with nutplates (lots of them) so that the whole
>thing can be pulled out.
>Leo Davies
>leo(at)icn.su.oz.au
>
>
I agree. I've spent many hours flat on my back in the Mooney working under
the panel. I'm a big guy, and this is really not fun. Especially here in
Alabama in the summer time when you have both hands up under the panel and
our fist sized mosquitoes get the message out amoung the their community
that they have a real feast. "He can't even swat!", you hear them say.
What I dream of is a panel that pulls out like a 19" equipment rack with the
whole thing on sliders. This has all kinds of problems for an airplane,
though. Weight and complexity. And especially, the slack that you have to
leave for the wiring and pitot/static lines to follow the panel out.
My plan, though, is to start out with a basic VFR panel and gradually
upgrade it to a panel that would make a 747 pilot blush. I presently do
much better electronics and instrumentation work, than metal work. I feel
that the extra labor in designing a panel that will be accessible will be
well worth it in the long run.
Since, I assume, that the panel is also a structural element, I would get
some real engineering advise about the configuration of removable parts.
If you're sure that the panel that you're installing is what you want in a
final product, why not just keep it simple? You'll only be going under it
to make repairs, which won't be necessary all THAT often.
To keep my ideas in context, though, I also share Gordon Baxter's dream of
an alternator belt that will stretch around the prop when you have to
install a new one.
Please keep us informed about your ideas.
Mike Weller RV 80187 (under construction)
midibu(at)hsv.mindspring.com (preferred) or mike.weller(at)msfc.nasa.gov
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John E Musser <jemusser(at)tenet.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Easier Way to access Instruments? |
I posted a message about noon today, that as of 10 p.m. hasn't managed to
find the list.
I'm preparing to receive my empennage kit for an RV-6A. In making my
shopping list for tools, a friend at work has given me a Chicago
pneumatic riveter. I have the part number at the office, but it is
called a riveter (as opposed to an air hammer), and was something like
an ??-813. Do I dare try to use it? I've ordered a batch of scrap and
various sized rivets to do a test project, so I;ll find out soon, but I'm
trying to get an order off to Avery.
Mostly, I intend to buy a pneumatic squeezer if this will suffice as a
riveter. I think the origin of the riveter was from Grainger.
John
BTW, I replied to a post rather than a new compose to see if this manages
to make it through. Sorry about the thread creap.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JamesCone(at)aol.com |
I painted my Sea Hawk with a DeVilbiss gravity feed gun and just fininished
painting my RV with a Graco/Croix HVLP. The difference was night and day.
The HVLP was so much easier to control and there was almost no overspray.
There was no worry about moisture in the air to the gun. The air is
filtered. I used less than half the paint for my RV, even though the RV is
larger than the Sea Hawk. In fact, the savings in material will almost pay
for the HVLP system in just one paint job. I used SW wash primer reduced
200% like Van's does and used less than a quart of primer (plus the two
quarts of reducer) for the whole plane. Boy did it go on nice with the HVLP.
My RV looked just like the quick build at Oshkosh, a light gray/green color;
no runs, no drips, no errors. I'll never go back to regular paint guns
again.
Jim Cone
jamescone(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John E Musser <jemusser(at)tenet.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-List-Rivet Guns |
Sorry about the repeat, but I found the original posting in my "dead
letter box" I don't know why...
On Mon, 28 Oct 1996, John E Musser wrote:
> I'll probably get abused for asking something in the archives, but I
> haven't found the answer, yet...
>
> I am building up my tools in preparation of the empennage kit delivery.
> I've been given a "new in box" Chicago Pneumatic CP-9315 riveter. Is it
> usable? A free good tool sure beats a bad one, but I don't want to spend
> the money on another if this will work!
>
> John
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)navix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while |
building an RV:
>I am having a bad case of second thoughts about building the RV from a
>financial perspective (but not from a building perspective).
>
> Totaling these goodies: new 180 HP Lycoming from Vans,
>instruments, radio, oil cooler, muffler, propeller, etc. , I realize I will
>need to fork out about $35,000. This is a rather large sum for me, and has
>caused me to reflect on the soundness of this investment. I could get a
>used Mooney with close to the performance of an RV for slightly more than
>what it would take me to finish this RV. Although the fun of flying an RV (
>I have 10 hours as PIC in one ) is significantly better than a Mooney, the
>Mooney can carry 4 people, and is more stable as an IFR platform. I think
>the Mooney may be easier to sell too. I have noticed that many RV builders
>only keep their planes a short time and sell them, and then go build another
>RV. I have enjoyed the challenge of building, and enjoy looking at the plane
>I have built. I am just getting cold feet when it comes to forking over the
>rest of the dough for the goodies.
>Stuff snipped**
Scott,
For the money you will have invested, with the RV, you will have
everything NEW. In addition, you will have an airplane that you will know
every nook and cranny of and you will be able to work on it yourself. This
will save you a lot on operation costs, especially when you compare the the
care and maintainence of a fixed gear, RV-6 with a fixed pitch(?) prop with
a certified aircraft with a constant speed and retract. Also, the Mooney
has to be one of the highest cost, labor intensive small singles made.
Several mechanics I've talked to won't work on them. I help the local
mechanic when he gets behind and awhile back, helped him work on a Mooney.
I told him I was busy the next time he needed help. I'd describe a Mooney
as "a house full of furniture, crammed into one room."
Enough of the dollars and cents. Let's talk pride of ownership and
"class". Every time my wife and I go flying, I look at her and say with a
grin "we're flying in an airplane we built outselves." There is a very
small part of the world's population who can say that. When you land at
other airports, people will gather around and look at your RV. If you land
in a Mooney, nobody will even look or if they do will just think, "Boy, I'll
bet he's putting a couple of his mechanics kids through college."
Think of how cool your teenagers will feel when you guys fly somewhere
together in an airplane that you've built together. There is also the
fellowship of your fellow RVers when you go to fly-ins, etc. Of course, I
suppose Mooney guys get together too, to compare declining bank balances:)
Gee, I'm gonna quit, now. I'll let someone else address insurance and
taxes. If I haven't convinced you by now, there's probably no hope.
Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)krvn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack & Diane Mahler & Joy <jax(at)brett.reno.nv.us> |
A fellow RV'r, Dave Seashore, last week completed his FAA inspection of
his RV-4 at the Stead Airport Reno, Nv. This past sunday was the first
day available for his first flight. At about 0800 in the morning of a
clear, sunny and crisp day. Dave fired up the Lycoming 0-360 with a
Hartzel constant speed prop. He taxied to runway 26. Performed the
necessary preflight runup and check. Pulled onto the runway and was
off. He reports: before reaching the other end of the 8000+ runway, he
was driving through the 7000 ft level (Stead is 5046'). He leveled off
at 9000' and remained in flight for about 1 hr, with an indicated
air speed at 9000 ft of 165 kn, before beginning the task of returning.
Due to the new 0 time engine, he tipped the nose downward rather than
reducing power. His indicated air speed was red line at 180 kn. He
returned to the airport and landed with (in his words) a 3 point
landing. More on his progress later, with N-numbers etc.
Jax Mahler
in the wing construction of my RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dougb(at)mail.diac.com (Doug Bloomberg) |
| Subject: | Re: Easier Way to access Instruments? |
At 7:49 PM 10/27/96, aol.com!DougPage(at)matronics.com wrote:
>I am worried about the difficulty of installing and accessing instruments in
>the 6A with sliding canopy. Has anybody figured out a way to make them
>easily accessible?
>Removable panel in the top skin, leaving the windscreen removable? Removable
>panel in the side skins? Mounting instruments on the cockpit side of the
>panel with platenuts so they could be removed back toward the pilot? There
>must be a way. Please help! Doug Page (installing the sliding
>canopy)
Howdy,
A fellow here used plate nuts on the mounting points for his instrument
panel. Remove 8 screws and the panel comes out. Course ya have to plan for
this with longer wiring and ways to disconnect vacuum, tach etc.
Doug
RV-6A in the womb.
Doug Bloomberg
Denver, CO
dougb(at)mail.diac.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DMCooke <dmcooke(at)rand.nidlink.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: |
Scott Johnson wrote:
>
> I am having a bad case of second thoughts about building the RV from a
> financial perspective
Hi Scott,
I believe building an experimental airplane is a different matter than
getting form A to B in Mooney or Bonanza style. If it is transportation
you are looking for get the Mooney. If it is the joy of building and
flying your own workmanship then finish the RV.
By the way, you do not have to buy a new 180 HP Lycoming or new
instruments, radio, etc. In 1987 a friend of mine built an RV-4 for just
over $16,000. He built the complete new airframe and put in a used
engine, instruments, radios, etc. He found it challenging to get what he
needed at the best price and do some fixing up himself. His plane is
strictly VFR but that is how he likes to fly. He also likes to race his
friends in their Bonanzas. He gets there first every time. Last week he
finished painting his newly completed Lancair IV.
Happy building and happy flying. :-)
Dave Cooke
dmcooke(at)rand.nidlink.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com (Finn Lassen ) |
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: |
You wrote:
>
>kits. However, I am now ready for the finishing kit and all the
goodies to
>complete the plane. Totaling these goodies: new 180 HP Lycoming from
Vans,
>instruments, radio, oil cooler, muffler, propeller, etc. , I realize I
will
>need to fork out about $35,000. This is a rather large sum for me, a
Sounds like you might be a candidate for an alternative engine set-up.
I don't think it cost more than $5,000 for Tracy Crook to buy and
install his 13B Mazda rotary. (Ross reduction gear $2,850, engine
~1,200. Engine overhaul kit ~$600, carburators $100, Tracy's ignition
computer $300 plus various fittings, etc.).
You could start out small (cheap) and then invest more in avionics and
engine as your finances permit and meanwhile be flying.
Just a thought.
Finn
finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: |
Scott Johnson wrote:
> ***snip***
> Totaling these goodies: new 180 HP Lycoming from Vans,
> instruments, radio, oil cooler, muffler, propeller, etc. , I realize I will
> need to fork out about $35,000. This is a rather large sum for me, and has
> caused me to reflect on the soundness of this investment. I could get a
> used Mooney with close to the performance of an RV for slightly more than
> what it would take me to finish this RV. Although the fun of flying an RV (
> I have 10 hours as PIC in one ) is significantly better than a Mooney, the
> Mooney can carry 4 people, and is more stable as an IFR platform. I think
> the Mooney may be easier to sell too. I have noticed that many RV builders
> only keep their planes a short time and sell them, and then go build another
> RV.
>
***snip**
> Thanks for your advice
>
> Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.com
Hi Scott
There is cheaper ways to finish your RV if a big investment is a
problem. when I built my RV-6 I was on a shoe string budget. It
started with a O-320 150hp E2D that had 1700 hrs on it from a Cessna
that was upgraded to a 180hp I also had basic instruments, one com
radio, and a used wood prop. Total cost to build was about $22.000.
I flew the 150hp engine for 300 hrs and sold it and found a 180hp
with 1140 hours on it and have now put another 500hrs on this engine.
As time went on I have added another com, auto pilot, GPS,lots of
instruments, transponder, etc. till I now have a airplane the way I
want it. Granted it is nice to have it all done on the first flight
but it has also been fun adding to my airplane "I BUILT" over the
years. You must know a different type of RV people than I do becasuse
since I have been flying my RV for almost 8 years I know very few
that have sold their RV's and as you know I live in RV country.(g)
As to Mooney cost and performence being about the same as a RV
we could debate what a RV does compared to a Mooney and what annuals
and upkeep cost for a Mooney vs RV.
Keep on building,
Jerry
--
Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS First flight July 14, 1989 :-) Hillsboro, OR
jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: |
Scott Johnson wrote:
> ***snip***
> Totaling these goodies: new 180 HP Lycoming from Vans,
> instruments, radio, oil cooler, muffler, propeller, etc. , I realize I will
> need to fork out about $35,000. This is a rather large sum for me, and has
> caused me to reflect on the soundness of this investment. I could get a
> used Mooney with close to the performance of an RV for slightly more than
> what it would take me to finish this RV. Although the fun of flying an RV (
> I have 10 hours as PIC in one ) is significantly better than a Mooney, the
> Mooney can carry 4 people, and is more stable as an IFR platform. I think
> the Mooney may be easier to sell too. I have noticed that many RV builders
> only keep their planes a short time and sell them, and then go build another
> RV.
>
***snip**
> Thanks for your advice
>
> Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.com
Hi Scott
There is cheaper ways to finish your RV if a big investment is a
problem. when I built my RV-6 I was on a shoe string budget. It
started with a O-320 150hp E2D that had 1700 hrs on it from a Cessna
that was upgraded to a 180hp I also had basic instruments, one com
radio, and a used wood prop. Total cost to build was about $22.000.
I flew the 150hp engine for 300 hrs and sold it and found a 180hp
with 1140 hours on it and have now put another 500hrs on this engine.
As time went on I have added another com, auto pilot, GPS,lots of
instruments, transponder, etc. till I now have a airplane the way I
want it. Granted it is nice to have it all done on the first flight
but it has also been fun adding to my airplane "I BUILT" over the
years. You must know a different type of RV people than I do becasuse
since I have been flying my RV for almost 8 years I know very few
that have sold their RV's and as you know I live in RV country.(g)
As to Mooney cost and performence being about the same as a RV
we could debate what a RV does compared to a Mooney and what annuals
and upkeep cost for a Mooney vs RV.
Keep on building,
Jerry
--
Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS First flight July 14, 1989 :-) Hillsboro, OR
jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fred Hollendorfer <phredyh(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HELICOPTER ENGINES |
Brian Hitchings wrote:
>
> Hi to All
>
> I'v been offered a Lycoming 0-360 (exact species unknown) that has been
> used in a helicopter. Does anyone know whether there is anything peculiar
> about 0-360's that were used in helicopters? Are they readily usable in
> fixed-wing aircraft? Is there anything I should be looking out for?
>
> Thanks for the help.
>
> Brian Hitchings
> South Africa
> RV-6A empennage
Brian,
I thought I heard that IO-360 helecopter engine had a few more horses..
Maybe because of the pistons ... Can't be sure....Fred>
--
FC Hollendorfer
RV-8 Garage & Tools
Denver, CO
phredyh(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Plew <plew(at)mail.pci.co.zw> |
Hi Guys,
Sorry to go off subject, but does anyone know of an OSPREY 2 builders forum?
I haven't checked with the designer yet, but will do if no response here.
Thanks in anticipation.
Brian Plew. (plew @mail.pci.co.zw) in Harare, Zimbabwe.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Jim Cone/Ivoprop Ultralight Prop - chatter |
<< Dan Morris wrote about Ivo Prop and makes the point that I was trying to
make. IVO Prop people lie about the problems that they are having with
their
props.
(a lot of stuff cut)
You be the judge, but don't say that you wern't warned and
make sure that your insurance is paid up so that your survivors can take
some
comfort from the proceeds.
Jim Cone
jamescone(at)aol.com
>>
Hi all,
This is getting a little too emotional for information based on hearsay
statements. And, unfortunately, I'm afraid I'll just add more to it.
Bob Truder, who lives in Minnesota, had an Ivoprop Ultralight prop lose a
blade in flight. What I have heard is that he had modified the airfoil at
the outer portion of the blade by adding more material (weight), had drilled
out the blade hub for bigger diameter bolts, and was running the prop on a
direct drive Subaru engine near the peak torque (highest impulse loading) of
the engine.
If someone suggested that you could make the RV stronger by reducing weight
with the removal of the main spar material, I think we could all figure out
that this shouldn't be done.
By drilling the blade hub for larger bolts, Bob Truder removed the fiberglass
roving that WAS laid-up around the bolt hole. That is, he removed the spar
from the prop blade at the root of the blade, or the most highly stressed
area.
According to Ivo, the Minnesota ultralight group like to modify their props.
If the prop fails, and their airplane is damaged, they try to get the prop
manufacturer to replace their airplane. And they don't mind using
misinformation to publishers like Jim Cone to try to achieve this.
I feel that when someone highly modifies a manufacturers product, it should
follow the existing FAA guidelines. Van built a Van's RV-3. I built a Ayers
Van's RV-3.
John Harmon built a highly modified RV-3 which is a Harmon Rocket.
By similarity, Bob Truder had a highly modified Ivoprop, which should have
been called a Truder prop.
I've talked directly with Bob Truder, and I've talked directly with Ivo. I
still just have hearsay statements too pass on to you on the original stated
issue.
Now if someone wants to talk about the Ivoprop MAGNUM prop, the electric
pitch drive, or the constant speed governor, that is something with which I
have direct experience.
Jim Ayers
LOM M332A Ivoprop MAGNUM prop RV-3 N47RV Maroon Marauder
LesDrag(at)aol.com
Thousand Oaks, Ca. USA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dieck(at)apexcomm.net (Robert Dieck) |
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: |
Also, the Mooney has to be one of the highest cost, labor intensive small
singles made.
>Several mechanics I've talked to won't work on them. I help the local
>mechanic when he gets behind and awhile back, helped him work on a Mooney.
>I told him I was busy the next time he needed help. I'd describe a Mooney
>as "a house full of furniture, crammed into one room."
> Enough of the dollars and cents. Let's talk pride of ownership and
>"class". Every time my wife and I go flying, I look at her and say with a
>grin "we're flying in an airplane we built outselves." There is a very
>small part of the world's population who can say that. When you land at
>other airports, people will gather around and look at your RV. If you land
>in a Mooney, nobody will even look or if they do will just think, "Boy, I'll
>bet he's putting a couple of his mechanics kids through college."
> Think of how cool your teenagers will feel when you guys fly somewhere
>together in an airplane that you've built together. There is also the
>fellowship of your fellow RVers when you go to fly-ins, etc. Of course, I
>suppose Mooney guys get together too, to compare declining bank balances:)
> Gee, I'm gonna quit, now. I'll let someone else address insurance and
>taxes. If I haven't convinced you by now, there's probably no hope.
>
>Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)krvn.com
>
>
>
Sorry to have to add my 2 cents, but having owned a Mooney 201
(M20J) for 10 year and almost 2000 hrs I must try to defend it.
Looking at new Mooneys and comparing them to any other spam can on
the market will prove that if anything they are under priced. If a cool 250K
is under priced!! When my Mooney was sold it was because of business reasons
(can you say appreciation).
Mooney 6 years ago could build a MKE (201) in 600 man hrs. My RV6a
would been done. Twice! True the olded models were are pigs to work on. The
cowl and belly skins each had a zillion screws, the 201 changed all that. I
performed almost all the service work and annuals for the last 4 years with
the help and advice of my cousin (A&P/IA) and yes they can be cramped and
several things are unique to Mooneys only, but they are well built with top
notch craftsmanship. If needed there are several shops that specialize in
Mooneys.
The Mooney people do get together thru MAPA and have an annual
homecoming at Kerrville after EAA's flyin. Most of the people are very nice
(When their with other Mooney people they have no one else to be arrogant
to). (GRIN)
I believe that the Mooney is the most solidly built, best value spam
can on the market. It isn't an RV, and can't match RV's for handling, speed,
climb & STOL, but all airplanes are a compromise and certified airplanes
have more compromises.
I loved my Mooney and almost cryed when it was sold. Working on the
Mooney gave me the confidence to try to build my own airplane. When I found
the RV's I was amazed how similar they are to the Mooneys, not in the
numbers but in the fact that the owners (builders) are such fanatics about
their airplanes!
N3751H M20J
now making its home in New Mexico (boo hoo)
Bob Dieck
RV6a fuse.
Robert/Tammie Dieck
dieck(at)apexcomm.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dean Spencer <dspencer(at)kiva.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: |
Scott Johnson wrote:
>
> I am having a bad case of second thoughts about building the RV from a
> financial perspective (but not from a building perspective). I haven't had
> these thoughts up to this point because I have been purchasing one sub-kit
> at a time. Each sub-kit purchase was easy to swallow because it was $3500
> or so. In the past 14 months I have built the tail, wing, and fuselage
> kits. However, I am now ready for the finishing kit and all the goodies to
> complete the plane. Totaling these goodies: new 180 HP Lycoming from Vans,
> instruments, radio, oil cooler, muffler, propeller, etc. , I realize I will
> need to fork out about $35,000. ....
So who said you had to buy a new engine? Or put more than basic VFR
instrumentation in the thing (you can always add more avionics later).
My COMPLETE budget for a -4 came to less than $28K. Old engines run just
fine with new parts in them. Wood props need some TLC, but they work.
I'd say I would definitely have cold feet if I were staring at figures
like you mention. Also learning where to find bargains helps.
Scott
N4ZW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV6junkie(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition |
Does anybody have a phone number for Jeff Rose. I would like information on
his EI system.
Gary Corde
RV-6 N211GC
"Jersey Lightning"
In the paint shop
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Boudro <dboudro(at)nmia.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: |
Aha, reality has set in! Scott, I agree with you about the financial aspects
of an RV. You can buy that Mooney for about the same price. I could list
all kinds of pros and cons but the decision comes down to your personal
preferences. I would not be flying unless I was flying my own AC (one I
built); it just wouldn't be the same for me. I'm so damn proud of myself
(ego?) every time I yell clear and that thing takes me off the ground; not
only that I FEEL confident enought in that machine to fly anywhere in the
US. If what you really want is to fly a good AC, get that Mooney. Hope
this helps.
Dan Boudro
RV-4 N9167Z
Albuquerque, NM
dboudro(at)nmia.com
On Mon, 28 Oct 1996, Scott Johnson wrote:
> I am having a bad case of second thoughts about building the RV from a
> financial perspective (but not from a building perspective). I haven't had
> these thoughts up to this point because I have been purchasing one sub-kit
> at a time. Each sub-kit purchase was easy to swallow because it was $3500
> or so. In the past 14 months I have built the tail, wing, and fuselage
> kits. However, I am now ready for the finishing kit and all the goodies to
> complete the plane. Totaling these goodies: new 180 HP Lycoming from Vans,
> instruments, radio, oil cooler, muffler, propeller, etc. , I realize I will
> need to fork out about $35,000. This is a rather large sum for me, and has
> caused me to reflect on the soundness of this investment. I could get a
> used Mooney with close to the performance of an RV for slightly more than
> what it would take me to finish this RV. Although the fun of flying an RV (
> I have 10 hours as PIC in one ) is significantly better than a Mooney, the
> Mooney can carry 4 people, and is more stable as an IFR platform. I think
> the Mooney may be easier to sell too. I have noticed that many RV builders
> only keep their planes a short time and sell them, and then go build another
> RV. I have enjoyed the challenge of building, and enjoy looking at the plane
> I have built. I am just getting cold feet when it comes to forking over the
> rest of the dough for the goodies.
>
> I was also surprised to find out that AVEMCO insurance quoted me about $2000
> for RV insurance ( and I have over 1000 hours and am IFR rated with no
> accidents ). Which incidentally is about the same cost for insurance on a
> Mooney or Bonanza. I guess I assumed that a fixed pitch prop and
> non-retractable landing gear would make it more equivalent to a cherokee.
>
> And to add insult to injury, I have to pay 7% sales tax for engine, RV6A
> kit, instruments etc that I have ordered outside Illinois which is a rather
> sizable sum in itself or I will not be able to register my airplane.
>
>
> Has anybody had second thoughts like this before ? I would like to
> especially hear from those who have completed their planes and have comments
> either way. In any event, my two teenagers will probably kill me if I don't
> complete it, since they have bucked 1000's of rivets !
>
> Thanks for your advice
>
> Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Stan Blanton <75472.372(at)CompuServe.COM> |
| Subject: | RV-6 Elevator pushrods |
RV Builders,
A fellow builder and I are trying to determine the length of the F689(fwd) and
F690(aft) elevator pushrods.
As recently noted on the list the F689 pushrod must have a hole cut in the F604
bulkhead to be installed. We hope to avoid this by installing F689 before the
fuselage skins are riveted in the jig. If the neutral positions for the control
column(15 degrees fwd.) and bellcrank(vert.) given in the manual are followed it
seems the bellcrank will almost run out of travel at full up elevator. Has
anyone adjusted the neutral position of the control column or sticks differently
(eg. sticks more vertical and/or bellcrank tilted slightly fwd.)? Has the length
of the F689 pushrod ended up near the plans dimension of 47.5 "? Perhaps a
mechanical engineer type could comment on ideal bellcrank pushrod relations.
On a related note how large a cutout in the F604 bulkhead flange have builders
had to make? It appears the entire flange will have to be trimmed off which
makes us a bit nervous. We can add a new flange for the seat rib but the F604 is
a different case.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)navix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition |
>Does anybody have a phone number for Jeff Rose. I would like information on
>his EI system.
>
>Gary Corde
>
>RV-6 N211GC
>"Jersey Lightning"
>In the paint shop
Gary, The number is: 423-622-8825. Let us know what you find out. Bob
Skinner
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)navix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: HELICOPTER ENGINES |
>Hi to All
>
>I'v been offered a Lycoming 0-360 (exact species unknown) that has been
>used in a helicopter. Does anyone know whether there is anything peculiar
>about 0-360's that were used in helicopters? Are they readily usable in
>fixed-wing aircraft? Is there anything I should be looking out for?
>
>Thanks for the help.
>
>
>Brian Hitchings
>South Africa
>RV-6A empennage
Brian, I talked to a friend (who just flew his RV-6) who has several years
in helios. Most of his experience is with turbines but as he remembered, the
HIO-360 had a rear facing injector which means you might need a different
sump. He thiks this engine was rated at 200 hp at 3200 rpms.
Your best bet would be to contact Lycoming and try to figure out what you
have. You might try 717-323-6181, a tect assistance Lycoming number. John
Schwaner, of Sacramento Sky Ranch, 75655.1276(at)compuserve.com might be able
to help you. You could also try to contact Greg Travis on the
rec.aviation.homebuilt newsgroup.
Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)krvn.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chuck Spaur <chuck(at)spaur.com> |
| Subject: | Denver-Boulder Area Builders? |
Hi,
Here in Boulder I've gotten the RV bug and was wondering if any builders
along the Front Range of CO would mind a visit to their project or a newbie
drooling over the completed RV (will bring my own towel!)
Thanks,
Chuck Spaur
chuck(at)spaur.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com> |
| Subject: | Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: (fwd) |
>
> I am having a bad case of second thoughts about building the RV from a
> financial perspective (but not from a building perspective). I haven't had
> these thoughts up to this point because I have been purchasing one sub-kit
> at a time. Each sub-kit purchase was easy to swallow because it was $3500
> or so. In the past 14 months I have built the tail, wing, and fuselage
(deleted most of the msg to keep this short, Herman)
> Thanks for your advice
>
> Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.com
>
This is a hard decision. This fact kept me from building for a long time.
The big differences I see are that you will have a new airplane with
new engine, prop, insturments/avionics. Most Mooney's you an afford
will be 20 to 30 yrs old. They have engines that have been majored
once or twice. May have had gear problems. Many have corrosion in the
steel tubing, etc. It will be high maintaince.
On the other side of the coin, the factory builts have appreciated
well over the years and will continue to do so. The RV's have done
OK, but probably have just tracked the parts costs.
Being able to only carry two people in the RV is a limitation.
This is one that gives me problems with 3 kids. You just have to
rotate on who gets to go. If you don't travel much with the whole
family, then the RV is probably better.
I find we don't travel that much due to the cost and the schedule
with all the kids activities. So, the RV is fine for quick one day
or so outings. It is fast so you can get there and back without
having to stay over.
Regarding insurance, you need to check around. Are you comparing equal
hull values? That is the biggest part of the insurance. I have
insured my RV4 for 40,000 and it costs abut $850/yr and that includes
1 million in liability. I got the best rate going through the Forest
agency as an IAC/EAA member. AVEMCO will be the highest. National
is not too bad, it is a stripped down Avemco policy. Forest agency
beat National and AVEMCO. Liability on a 4 place should be higher
than on a two place RV. Also, the retract on the Mooney should push up
the insurance costs. I am suprized the RV was as high.
Herman
dierks(at)austin.ibm.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gretzw(at)tcplink.nrel.gov |
I am re-sending this information. It did't work the first time.
Sorry, Warren
______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
Subject: Re[4]: RV-List: Heated Pitot??
Date: 10/28/96 7:53 AM
Hello Builders,
As requested, my address and phone number for ordering heated pitot
tube mounting brackets; Warren Gretz, 3664 E. Lake Dr., Littleton, CO,
80121 Phone, evenings and weekends (303) 770-3811
If any one is interested in receiveing a flyer on the heated pitot
tube brackets I sell, I will gladly send one to you if you contact me.
Warren Gretz
RV-6 N25WG
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Re[2]: RV-List: Heated Pitot??
Date: 10/25/96 6:45 PM
Mr. Gretz,
Could you please publish your address/phone number on the list again--I'd
like to order one of your mounting kits.
Thank you,
Mike Vaccaro
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | willsm(at)manta.nosc.mil (Mike Wills) |
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: |
Scott,
I dont know if you have been following the thread by Bill Phillips on the
Belted Air RV-6A/ Chevy V6. Ive seen this setup and it looks very nice. Some
of the work being done by others with the Mazda Rotary also looks very
promising to me.
I wont try and sell you on auto conversions as I have already had that
discussion with far too many others, but if you are open minded about such
things you might check it out.
For the do it yourself type Tracy Crook had a firewall forward cost of $5400.
Jess Meyers of Belted Air quoted a price of approx $8000 for his very
complete firewall forward package.
Mike Wills
RV-4 (wings)
willsm(at)manta.nosc.mil
Totaling these goodies: new 180 HP Lycoming from Vans,
>instruments, radio, oil cooler, muffler, propeller, etc. , I realize I will
>need to fork out about $35,000.
>Thanks for your advice
>
>Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.com
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Edward Cole <emcole(at)concentric.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: |
Scott Johnson wrote:
>
> I am having a bad case of second thoughts about building the RV from a
> financial perspective (but not from a building perspective). I haven't had
> these thoughts up to this point because I have been purchasing one sub-kit
> at a time. Each sub-kit purchase was easy to swallow because it was $3500
> or so. In the past 14 months I have built the tail, wing, and fuselage
> kits. However, I am now ready for the finishing kit and all the goodies to
> complete the plane. Totaling these goodies: new 180 HP Lycoming from Vans,
> instruments, radio, oil cooler, muffler, propeller, etc. , I realize I will
> need to fork out about $35,000. This is a rather large sum for me, and has
> caused me to reflect on the soundness of this investment. I could get a
> used Mooney with close to the performance of an RV for slightly more than
> what it would take me to finish this RV. Although the fun of flying an RV (
> I have 10 hours as PIC in one ) is significantly better than a Mooney, the
> Mooney can carry 4 people, and is more stable as an IFR platform. I think
> the Mooney may be easier to sell too. I have noticed that many RV builders
> only keep their planes a short time and sell them, and then go build another
> RV. I have enjoyed the challenge of building, and enjoy looking at the plane
> I have built. I am just getting cold feet when it comes to forking over the
> rest of the dough for the goodies.
>
> I was also surprised to find out that AVEMCO insurance quoted me about $2000
> for RV insurance ( and I have over 1000 hours and am IFR rated with no
> accidents ). Which incidentally is about the same cost for insurance on a
> Mooney or Bonanza. I guess I assumed that a fixed pitch prop and
> non-retractable landing gear would make it more equivalent to a cherokee.
>
> And to add insult to injury, I have to pay 7% sales tax for engine, RV6A
> kit, instruments etc that I have ordered outside Illinois which is a rather
> sizable sum in itself or I will not be able to register my airplane.
>
> Has anybody had second thoughts like this before ? I would like to
> especially hear from those who have completed their planes and have comments
> either way. In any event, my two teenagers will probably kill me if I don't
> complete it, since they have bucked 1000's of rivets !
>
> Thanks for your advice
>
> Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.comScott,
It seems like a lot of cash, and it is, but once you've spent it you have
a brand new zero time aircraft for $50k or less. Look at the price for a
brand new Cessna 172. Base cost around $145K. Your going to pay taxes,
insurance, tiedown, etc. on any aircraft. Maybe you should really take a
look at used radioes, instruments, and engines, and then upgrade as the
budget allows. You may even try financing thru one of the firms that loan
money to kitbuilders. (look in some of the flying mags for names).
Good Luck,
Ed Cole RV6A #24430
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KennyCobb(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | 1st annual Air Races At Fox Field ( chatter ) |
At the risk of being shot down for chatter I was wondering if
anyone on the list has any info on this event scheduled for the
1st - 3rd of Nov. at Lancaster, Ca ????
Ken Crabtree
KennyCobb(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition |
>Does anybody have a phone number for Jeff Rose. I would like information on
>his EI system.
>
>Gary Corde
>
>RV-6 N211GC
>"Jersey Lightning"
>In the paint shop
>
Gary,
Jeff Rose at ElectroAir - phone number is 423 622-8825. I just talked to
Jeff about his CD ignition since a friend of mine has one installed on his
T-18 and is very satisfied. I plan to install his system on my 6A soon. He
has over 700 systems in the field now and the price is very attractive.
Dale,
hanging on the accessories.
--
Registered ICC User
check out http://www.usefulware.com/icc.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while |
building an RV:
>I am having a bad case of second thoughts about building the RV from a
>financial perspective (but not from a building perspective). I haven't had
>these thoughts up to this point because I have been purchasing one sub-kit
>at a time. Each sub-kit purchase was easy to swallow because it was $3500
>or so. In the past 14 months I have built the tail, wing, and fuselage
>kits. However, I am now ready for the finishing kit and all the goodies to
>complete the plane. Totaling these goodies: new 180 HP Lycoming from Vans,
>instruments, radio, oil cooler, muffler, propeller, etc. , I realize I will
>need to fork out about $35,000.
I've been looking at this for a while too, although since I'm still on the
emp it's still in the reasonably remote distance for me.
You do have alternatives: you don't need a brand new Lycoming. Think about a
2nd-hand engine, with maybe 1000 hours on it... that should give you 10
years before needing an overhaul. Or perhaps think about an auto-engine
installation, but much cheaper. Check out rec.aviation.homebuilt for guys
who have done this already. Ignore anything said by Paul Lamar.
I don't even need a radio; well, not immediately anyway. Or maybe a handheld
will do for a while. Instrument-wise, perhaps aim to start with a basic VFR
panel, and add the goodies (DG, AI, IFR stuff, etc) later.
>This is a rather large sum for me, and has
>caused me to reflect on the soundness of this investment.
It's a large sum for most people!
Owning an aircraft really isn't much of an investment money-wise, unless you
would otherwise be renting one.
>And to add insult to injury, I have to pay 7% sales tax for engine, RV6A
>kit, instruments etc that I have ordered outside Illinois which is a rather
>sizable sum in itself or I will not be able to register my airplane.
OK, your state requires you to pay tax on airplane stuff you "imported" into
the state before you can register. (BTW: consider yourself lucky: here in
NZ, we pay 12.5% on everything imported. And to rub in some salt, we pay it
on the importation freight too). This is another reason to spread out the
purchases; only buy and install the minimum instruments that you actually
need to get your registration. Later you can add extra instruments.
Similarly the engine: buy a cheap near-run-out engine (say 1800 hours),
install, register, and fly. A year or two down the track, when you're more
financial, rebuild it.
To avoid charges of 'inciting tax fraud or evasion' for saying the above,
I'll add that you're still liable to pay the sales tax on the extra bits you
add to your plane, and the engine rebuild, even after registration. Be sure
to tell the state about the extra items you purchase out-of-state, and keep
all the receipts. If you don't, the state won't know that you owe them that
extra money :-)
Hope this helps,
Frank.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
frankv(at)pec.co.nz | "Knowledge=Power=Energy=Matter=Mass;
Frank van der Hulst | A good bookshop is just a genteel
Software Engineer | Black Hole that knows how to read".
PEC(NZ) Ltd (Cardax), Marton | Terry Pratchett, "Guards! Guards!"
http://www.pec.co.nz/~frankv/ |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | david_fried(at)smtpgwy.dehavilland.ca |
| Subject: | canopy frame reinforcement |
I put the canopy frame together and test installed it on the fuselage
with the gas struts in place and without the bubble. Obviously it was
quite floppy. I noticed that the forward portion of the frame twisted
quite a bit, but only between the hinges. I figure that the structure
outboard is stiff enough so that I plan to add a stiffener only in the
centre area. That is if I bother. Since I installed the bubble I find
that the tip up canopy is quite rigid when the gas struts are fully
extended. Then again, it is still in the shop and has yet to be
exposed to wind or prop wash.
Filling the channel with bondo probably wont do anything but make it
heavier. I may try bridging the channel and the tube at the aft edge
with sheet aluminum if I can clear the instruments. If I'm clever,
this enclosed torsion box can be used as a plenum for a canopy
demister(two birds).
To close the canopy from outside the aircraft you just grab a corner
and pull down. For those who haven't tried it yet, you will find that
the frame twists and the strut closest to you compresses first. I you
pull out as well as down, the struts will compress together. No need
to rely on the stiffeners.
David Fried
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: RV-List: canopy frame reinforcement
Date: 10/28/96 03:30 PM
aol.com!SportAV8R(at)matronics.com wrote:
>
> Any -6A tip-up builders care to comment on the need for fiberglass and foam
> reinforcement of the canopy frame if the lift struts are employed??
>
> Decisions, decisions...
>
> Bill Boyd
> SportAV8R(at)aol.com
Bill, A friend of mine filled his entire w616 weldment
channel with bondo. He's not flying the 6 yet but initially
he seemed to think it stiffened up the assembly fairly well.
I've also seen a couple of pieces of .032 pop riveted to the
underside of the 616 weldment (sort of opposite the C602
skin). this builder stated that really stiffened up the
frame and I think it would be much lighter than the bondo.
I'm a week or two from making the decision but I'm leaning
toward the latter of the two ideas.
--
Chet Razer
crazer(at)egyptian.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV6A Main Gear Fairings |
>Will someone give me a dimension on the height of the rear
>access plate cutout on the main wheel fairings. If I
>understand sketch 78A correctly the rectangular cutout
>starts 3.5 inches forward of the rear of the wheel opening
>and extends 5.5 inches forward. It seems like the height of
>the cut should be at mid axle but I thought I'd ask before
>cutting.
>--
>Chet Razer
>crazer(at)egyptian.net
>
Chet,
I recently completed the wheel fairings on my 6A and the top of the
access hole ended up 6 to 7 inches above the ground when the fairing
is mounted on the wheel (about the height of the axel part of the gear leg).
If you get a little high, it only means the fairing will be a little easier
to install
over the wheel & brake assembly. If I were doing it again however, I'd install
the two side backup flanges onto the cover instead of the cutout opening so
the flanges don't interfer when pulling the fairing over the tire and brake.
dale(at)ecnet.com
--
Registered ICC User
check out http://www.usefulware.com/icc.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Chandler" <mauser(at)Claris.COM> |
| Subject: | Art History (chatter) |
> *Chuckle* I hope you guys are better at building airplanes than you
> are at art history. Michelangelo is one name. Michelangelo
> Buonarotti painted the Sistine Chapel but prefered sculpture.
Yes, but what kind of PRIMER did he use?
:-)
--
(Sorry Randall, no more room for the Yakko Warner quote)
Richard Chandler
RV-6: Garage bought, saving for tools and tail kit (Christmas?).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BestBillO(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
Bill, I enjoy reading your colorful descriptions and obvious delight
with the RV-6a handling qualities. I share them, even after 2+ years of
flying mine. The handling characteristics are simply delightful. I flew the
SR-71, F-4, and T-38 military aircraft for 20 years, but it's the RV that
generates that kind of sheer delight in flying that was "meant to be". Good
luck with the vortec engine.
Bill Orcutt, Wichita Falls, Texas
N911RV, RV-6A 200 hours, O-320, cs prop
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E Steffens" <resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HELICOPTER ENGINES |
Brian,
I'm assembling my engine to go my RV-6. It is (was) a HIO-360-B1A from
a Hughes heliocopter (military). I've completely overhauled it with
lots of new parts. The engine will work fine in an airplane, but some
helicopter engines have the fuel injection servo mounted on the back
of the oil sump. This will not work with -6A (nose gear in the way).
On the -6 there is tube on the motor mount tube that crosses behind
the engine about 5 inches behind the sump where the servo bolts on.
You either have to get an elbow in that space to turn the servo up or
down or get another sump with a different servo connection. This might
mean also getting different intake tubes to the cylinders. If you have
access to a machine shop, it might be possible to fabricate another
servo mount in the original sump. I should have my engine together and
on the plane in a couple of weeks. I will then see how I am going to
solve the rear facing fuel injection servo. The Air Flow people in
Spartenberg, SC make elbows and I will first try to use one of their
elbows to turn the servo up and bring the air in from NACA ducts in
the sides of the lower cowl. (No scoop in the bottom of the cowl). If
that doesn't work I might use a down elbow and go underneath the sump
and forward to a scoop just under the prop. Then there is always
another sump.
Dick Steffens resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E Steffens" <resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com> |
| Subject: | Re: canopy frame reinforcement |
I used gas struts placed vertically like very similar to the setup in
the last (June ?) RVator. The struts are about 18" closed and 30"
open. Got them at the local Autozone. The top end attaches to the
canopy frame the same way and place as the struts that Van sends with
the finish kit. The bottom of the strut attaches approximately
vertically down to a small bracket bolted to a fuselage brace angle.
The strut arm goes up to the canopy through a slot in the canopy deck
on the fuselage. I did not do any bracing of the canopy frame. The
struts have alot of force and the canopy will not quite stay closed
under its own weight. Either the top handle or the bottom locks need
to be engaged to hole the canopy shut. Don't know if this will be a
problem. If the gas struts were just slightly less strong, the canopy
would rest closed and a light push start it moving open. I made the
front canopy fairing from 3003-.032 aluminum which seemed alot easier
than fiberglass. (Formed it in two pieces welded at the center. Took
about four hours). This week I'll make a band out of aluminum around
the back end of the canopy that will lap over the fixed plexi of the
baggage bay.
Dick Steffens (assembling the engine) resteffe(at)dpcmail.dukepower.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David W.S. King" <KingD(at)direct.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: HELICOPTER ENGINES |
>>Hi to All
>>
>>I'v been offered a Lycoming 0-360 (exact species unknown) that has been
>>used in a helicopter. Does anyone know whether there is anything peculiar
>>about 0-360's that were used in helicopters? Are they readily usable in
>>fixed-wing aircraft? Is there anything I should be looking out for?
Besides the sump prev mentioned I seem to rem there is the odd model that
had problems with the cam and lifters. If I recall right it had something to
do with the surface hardening being faulty. Can't rem what surface tho,
was either the cam lobe,or the lifter face.
Prob best way to find out is to get in touch with lycoming and have the
serial numbers etc ready. Otherwise you may get a few more half rem'd
ditty's like this one ;-]
Cheers
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Jim Cone/Ivoprop Ultralight Prop - chatter |
<< Dan Morris wrote about Ivo Prop and makes the point that I was trying to
make. IVO Prop people lie about the problems that they are having with
their
props.
(a lot of stuff cut)
You be the judge, but don't say that you wern't warned and
make sure that your insurance is paid up so that your survivors can take
some
comfort from the proceeds.
Jim Cone
jamescone(at)aol.com
>>
Hi all,
This is getting a little too emotional for information based on hearsay
statements. And, unfortunately, I'm afraid I'll just add more to it.
Bob Truder, who lives in Minnesota, had an Ivoprop Ultralight prop lose a
blade in flight. What I have heard is that he had modified the airfoil at
the outer portion of the blade by adding more material (weight), had drilled
out the blade hub for bigger diameter bolts, and was running the prop on a
direct drive Subaru engine near the peak torque (highest impulse loading) of
the engine.
If someone suggested that you could make the RV stronger by reducing weight
with the removal of the main spar material, I think we could all figure out
that this shouldn't be done.
By drilling the blade hub for larger bolts, Bob Truder removed the fiberglass
roving that WAS laid-up around the bolt hole. That is, he removed the spar
from the prop blade at the root of the blade, or the most highly stressed
area.
According to Ivo, the Minnesota ultralight group like to modify their props.
If the prop fails, and their airplane is damaged, they try to get the prop
manufacturer to replace their airplane. And they don't mind using
misinformation to publishers like Jim Cone to try to achieve this.
I feel that when someone highly modifies a manufacturers product, it should
follow the existing FAA guidelines. Van built a Van's RV-3. I built a Ayers
Van's RV-3.
John Harmon built a highly modified RV-3 which is a Harmon Rocket.
By similarity, Bob Truder had a highly modified Ivoprop, which should have
been called a Truder prop.
I've talked directly with Bob Truder, and I've talked directly with Ivo. I
still just have hearsay statements too pass on to you on the original stated
issue.
Now if someone wants to talk about the Ivoprop MAGNUM prop, the electric
pitch drive, or the constant speed governor, that is something with which I
have direct experience.
Jim Ayers
LOM M332A Ivoprop MAGNUM prop RV-3 N47RV Maroon Marauder
LesDrag(at)aol.com
Thousand Oaks, Ca. USA
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition - Chatter |
<< Gary Corde
RV-6 N211GC
"Jersey Lightning"
In the paint shop >>
Are you painting it all white??
Or is it still illegal to make "Jersey White Lightning"???
Jim Ayers
LOM M332A Ivoprop RV-3 N47RV Maroon Marauder
LesDrag(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Edwin Dalrymple <edwind(at)onr.com> |
I am in the process of purchasing the RV6A from Rich Klee and would ask
that anyone who knows Rich and knows of or has seen his kit please email
me at usib2hf9(at)ibmmail.com
Thanks, Tom Dalrymple
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "r.acker" <r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 1st annual Air Races At Fox Field ( chatter ) |
> At the risk of being shot down for chatter I was wondering if
>anyone on the list has any info on this event scheduled for the
>1st - 3rd of Nov. at Lancaster, Ca ????
>
> Ken Crabtree
> KennyCobb(at)aol.com
Ratt tat tat tat tat tat...is this the Ken that attended the Chino
metal-benders class? Its my understanding there will be Formula One air
racing Sunday (qualifying and the usual static/flying events the other
days). Myself and a couple of other builders from my area will be driving
up Sunday.
Rob Acker
E-mail: r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com
RV-6Q project: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rob_acker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | joehine(at)mi.net (joehine) |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
Terry Woods wrote
>Jerry,
> Although I had hoped to get a few more opinions before I responded
>on this subject, since you have questioned my experience, I thought I would
>answer your question and add a little about what motivated me to write my
>original post:
> I have been a Naval Aviator for over 18 years. I have a little over
>2400 hours, mostly H-53 hours, but with a couple hundred T-28 hours. I have
>a special instrument rating and have been an Instructor Pilot, NATOPS
>Standardization Pilot, Post Maintenance Check Pilot and Instrument Check
>pilot for many years. I have more shipboard landings than I ever wanted and
>have worked as a squadron safety officer. Let me hasten to add that I don't
>think any of this makes me qualified to comment on the flight
>characteristics or test requirements of an RV or any other experimental
>aircraft. I know that many of you have far more experience in all aspects of
>aviation than I will ever have.
> However, over the years, Naval Aviation being what it is, I have
>known, or known of, many pilots, friends, and shipmates that have died in
>aircraft accidents. In my opinion, these accidents fall in three general
>catagories:
>
> 1. Mechanical failure: relatively rare.
> 2. Pilot error: pilot made a mistake and/or lost situational
awareness.
> 3. Pilot knowingly breaks safety rules and flies in a reckless manner.
>
>The tragedy of category 3 is that others often know of a pilot's reckless
>behavior or attitude but say nothing until after an accident. It does no
>good to bring up the subject after an accident.
> It appeared to me, that Bill was operating outside the boundaries of
>what most pilots would consider prudent for a test flight. I pointed it out
>to possibly prevent an accident, either his or someone else influenced by
>his letter. As a fellow pilot, I think that it is our responsibility to do
>this. Whether I was right or wrong, at least the issue is brought out and
>looked at. Hopefully everyone benefits from an open exchange.
> It may very well be that my standard for safe flying practices is
>different than what the GA community accepts. If this group thinks that
>Bill's flight account represents a prudent test flight, I will take that at
>face value and offer Bill an apology, wish him good luck and congratulations
>on what is obviously an exceptional RV.
>
>Terray Wood
>
Good Letter Terry, I think we call all take it in the spirit I think it was
ment, I agree completely that some of use are reluctant to say anything when
we see a dangerous situation. I know I have been guilty of this in the past
and I think it takes a bit of courage to speak out especially in a list like
this. This is not to say I didn't enjoy the original letter that started
all of this. It was a very happy, well done discription of what sounded
like a exceptional flight. Congradulations to you both.
joe
joehine(at)mi.net Comp. 9, Site 8, RR#4
506-452-1072 Home Fredericton, NB
506-452-3495 Work Canada, E3B 4X5
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark D Hiatt" <OttoPilot_MSN(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Buyers' Remorse. |
Scott, this probably happens to everyone at some stage of the
purchase/completion. For some folks it's bad enough that they'll turn around
and sell their kits, subassemblies, etc. Even at a loss. Others work through
it and become RV owners and pilots.
Some people get physically sick when buying a new home or a new car. Others
are amazed that they dropped $325 on a microwave oven, when that money could
better have been spent on X, Y or Z.
I think you're kind of comparing apples and oranges, though. You're comparing
a brand-new RV-6 with an umpty year old Mooney. You'll have pride of ownership
with both, but with the RV you'll know where ever rivet went. You'll remember
the three seat brackets you made, trying to get one right. You'll know the
time the neighbors came over and asked what the hell all the racket was all
about. You'll have *bloodstains* on your own brand new airplane.
If you buy a Mooney, you'll have a friend for life in Gordon Baxter. And
you'll have an airplane that you don't know all that much about, really. Is
there corrosion under here? What *is* under here? Did the guy who pounded all
of these rivets care as much about getting them in a straight line as you do
on your own airplane?
You can get a Mooney serviced at just about any little airport with a
windsock. But you can do all of the work on your own RV-6. What's that worth,
over time? How do the costs compare after, say, 300 hours? Four years? Six
years?
The cool thing about an RV is that you incur the costs over a spread out
period of time. The tail kit... the wing kit... etc. You're talking about a
brand-new zero-time Lycoming from Van's (a choice I think is wise) as against
what with your Nixon -era Mooney? How many overhauls are on that engine-and
who did them? And how much did *they* care? Same again with the propeller...
the gear... etc.
I have seen exactly two people walk across the ramp to talk to a Mooney pilot,
and that was about twenty years ago, when the first 201s started coming out.
I've seen fly-ins and airshows when you couldn't even tell it *was* an RV in
the middle of the little crowd.
Lots of people fly into Oshkosh in Mooneys. They park waaaay over there (and
grumble about it). The RV folks get right up front! : )
Do the Mooney people have a mailing list as good as this one?
In the end, it's your decision to make and you alone will have to make it.
You'll have to decide whether it's 'worth it' in terms of cost, including
money, time, space, hours you could have been golfing, fishing or whatever.
But I can't think of a better bargain, overall, than an RV-6a I've built with
my own two hands. If I need to take three or more people with me I can always
rent a Mooney, or a Commanche, or a 206 or something. When it's just me,
though, I want to fly an RV. My RV.
Mark D Hiatt
OttoPilot_MSN(at)msn.com
Aviation Forum Manager,
The Microsoft Network.
----------
From: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com on behalf of Scott Johnson
Sent: Monday, October 28, 1996 6:26 PM
Subject: RV-List: Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV:
I am having a bad case of second thoughts about building the RV from a
financial perspective (but not from a building perspective).
Has anybody had second thoughts like this before ?
Thanks for your advice
Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard Chandler" <mauser(at)Claris.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: |
(fwd)
I had similar qualms about buying a house. I tried not to think about it and
just let the process swim along, but every once in a while, I'd lay awake at
night and think "Good god! What am I doing?" (I've tried to avoid debt all my
life, which actually stood me in good stead at the Mortgage office).
Now I've got a house, and I'm converting the garage into a shop like I've
wanted since I got out of College. Mostly this is in preparation for building
an airplane. Aside from the mortgage, I'm another $4k in debt for all the
tools, do-dads, and major appliances I had to get for the house. But you
know, I don't regret it in the slightest. I'm enjoying what I'm doing. And
enjoyment is the reason you want money in the first place. It's not an end
unto itself. If I die broke and happy then I'll be far richer than if I pass
on a million dollar estate (Which the government would take most of anyway).
Yeah, a new engine and fully loaded panel is a considerable chunk of change,
but think about what you're going to get out of it. Which will you be more
proud of: An unfinished airplane in the garage and $35,000 in the bank, or a
completed flying airplane you built yourself, and your family on the ground
watching, cheering you on, and squabbling over who gets to ride with you first
once your hours are flown off?
If you've got a house, and a marriage, and teenaged kids, you've already
knocked off some of the biggest challenges in life, finishing an airplane
should be no sweat at all.
--
(Sorry Randall, no more room for the Yakko Warner quote)
Richard Chandler
RV-6: Garage bought, saving for tools and tail kit (Christmas?).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: RV-List-Rivet Guns |
No one has responded to this yet, so although I don't know for sure,
I'd say you got lucky. The guns Avery sells are less expensive
"clones" of the Chicago Pneumatic. If you have the real McCoy then
you're probably in great shape!
One thing you should check is the 'x' rating -- is it a 2x, 3x, or
what? Most of us are using 2x or 3x (higher is harder hitting). If
you have more than that you may have to be more careful (i.e. turn
down the pressure on your compressor or something) or you might have a
harder time keeping from denting the skins or overdriving the rivets.
On the other hand, if its a 4x or greater, you can probably use it to
drive the wing spar rivets.
Check the archives for more opinions on 2x vs 3x and also advice
on using a rivet gun to buck wing spar rivets.
Randall Henderson, RV-6
randall(at)edt.com
http://www.edt.com/homewing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bobh(at)cdac.com (Bob Haan) |
| Subject: | RV6 Baggage Compartment Ribs |
There have been many messages that the RV6 Baggage Compartment Ribs are not
the correct size in length and width and the angle of the end flanges is
incorrect.
I called Van's to ask if this has been fixed. The response was that they
were never able to confirm a problem so, no, the ribs have not been
changed.
Their recommendation was: (1) Install the Baggage Compartment Ribs without
adjusting length, rebending flanges, etc. This was not necessary. (2) It
was ok to move the Baggage Compartment Ribs 1/4 inch laterally in or out to
help the fit. (3) If this resulted in the 606 bulkhead not being exactly
verticle or straight or square, these would not cause any problems. (4)
What counts is the smooth fit of the skins, so position and drill the
Baggage Compartment Ribs so the skin looks right.
Did any of you do this? How did it turn out? What did you do?
By the way, I don't mean to imply that Van's was not helpful. They spent a
lot of time answering this question and were very sincere.
Since this appears to be historically a difficult area in the construction
of the fuselage, I was interested in and would be helped by comments from
the RV List.
Bob Haan
Portland, OR
RV6A fuse - mounting bulkheads
bobh(at)cdac.com
Evenings 503-636-3550
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Allan W. Mojzisik" <prober(at)iwaynet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-List-Rivet Guns |
------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC5E0.94E4F640
John , On my 2 Chic. Pneu. rivet guns they both have the word "AERO"on
the barrels with the rest of the CP info. One has 2X indicating it's size and
the other has S-Cyl on the barrel indicating it's too darn big to use on
anything less than the B-1 it was originally used on! I did find a CP model
CP-9315 in my 1996 Grainger catalog but it is listed as a "Hammer for
powerful general purpose application including chipping, trimming, riveting,
cutting, trimming, and peening." Since you only want to commit one of
those acts on your RV, I would suggest you contact Avery for a single
purpose riveter. Nuff said......... Al N162NV Res.
28 Oct 1996, John E Musser wrote:
> I'll probably get abused for asking something in the archives, but I
> haven't found the answer, yet...
> I am building up my tools in preparation of the empennage kit delivery.
> I've been given a "new in box" Chicago Pneumatic CP-9315 riveter. Is it
> usable? A free good tool sure beats a bad one, but I don't want to spend
> the money on another if this will work!
> John
------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC5E0.94E4F640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------ =_NextPart_000_01BBC5E0.94E4F640--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Greg Bordelon <greg(at)brokersys.com> |
| Subject: | Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: |
Scott Johnson[SMTP:popmail.mcs.net!rvgasj(at)matronics.com] wrote:
>
>Has anybody had second thoughts like this before ? I would like to
>especially hear from those who have completed their planes and have
comments
>either way. In any event, my two teenagers will probably kill me if I
don't
>complete it, since they have bucked 1000's of rivets !
>
>Thanks for your advice
>
>Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.com
>
>
Scott,
Everyone else seemed to address the cost issues but I have a different view
for you. It sounds as though your teenagers have participated in the
project. Did you make any promises while building with the teenagers
like.......I'm going to teach you guys this fly in the RV........ or
.........we're going to fly to Oshkosh (or where ever) and have a blast.
I am a kid of a flying family. My grandfather use to work on light aircraft
for a living and we had our own grass field airport. When I was an young
teenager my grandfather bought a basket case Piper Vagabond. He told me
this was going to be my airplane and my uncle was going to teach me how to
fly in it. He and I worked together on it for a year and a half. I spent
two of my summer vacations working on it. The project was nearly complete
when I had to return to school from summer vacation. When I went out to
the airport on the following weekend to work on the airplane, my
grandfather said he didn't want to work on the airplane. This went on for
several weekends. Finally my dad told me grandfather had sold the airplane
because he needed the money and didn't have the heart to tell me. Needless
to say I was heartbroken and angry. My Grandfather died a few years later
without us ever clearing the air.
Then there was the summer my brother and I helped my dad build a sailboat.
We finished the whole thing with the exception of the sails. My dad never
bought the sails, so I've never been sailing. Then we built a
car..........which never saw the highway.
Don't give your teenagers just broken promises. They're spending their time
with you on something positive. They could be off doing something negative
like drugs. If you decide the RV project is more than your budget can
handle, ask your kids for their opinions, let them be part of the decision
process. By doing so, you will have kept them involved and extinguished any
ill feelings that may develop later.
I finally learned to fly at age 27. Now at age 32, I'm the proud owner of
my second airplane and I'm building an RV6..........slowly.
Just a different view........
+++++++++++++++++++
Greg Bordelon
greg(at)brokersys.com
someday.....my other plane is gonna be an RV :-}
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tom Martin <fairlea(at)execulink.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition |
>Does anybody have a phone number for Jeff Rose. I would like information on
>his EI system.
>
>Gary Corde
>
>RV-6 N211GC
>"Jersey Lightning"
>In the paint shop
>
>
I just talked to Jeff Rose. His phone number is 423-622-8825. His system
looks good and he has an new unit that mounts in the mag hole. This should
really make installation easy
Tom Martin
RV-4
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Template response from Van's |
Thanks for all the responses to my request for help on my wing template gap
problem. Here's Van's response, for anyone who is interested.
Tim Lewis
TimRV6A(at)aol.com
> Subj: Re: Template
> Date: 96-10-28 11:43:29 EST
> From: 76455.1602(at)CompuServe.COM (Vangrunsven)
> To: TimRV6A(at)aol.com (INTERNET:TimRV6A(at)aol.com)
>
> Tim, the template is put on the crate just to get you the idea of making
one,
> it
> often fits very poorly and is only to be used as a general guide. Often
> times
> the shape of the wing varies a little especially in the root area as
opposed
> to
> the outboard end due to the thicker skins used in the fuel tanks... the
> forces
> required to pull the skins on with the thicker skins versus the thinner
ones
> outboard always makes the difference occur... variations of 1/4" over the
> twelve
> foot span have no impact....
>
> The take home message of the template is not just to make it fit but to
get
> you
> to think about the airfoil shape when putting the ailerons and flaps on...
> the
> most important thing is to make the airplane symmetric left to right...
i.e.
> if
> the left aileron is the same height at its spar with respect to the rear
> spar of
> the wing inboard to outboard and the the right aileron is the same with
> respect
> toe the left then great... the same for the flaps.. they don't have to be
> the
> same as the aileron but they should be the same with respect to each
other.
> Left wing right wing symmetry is the key. This can be achieved with any
> template as long as when you put it on the wing, you can remove it and
> replace
> it and still be in the same place...
>
>
> Make any sense? tom
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Elon Ormsby <ormsby1(at)popsicle.llnl.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: 1st annual Air Races At Fox Field ( chatter ) |
> At the risk of being shot down for chatter I was wondering if
>anyone on the list has any info on this event scheduled for the
>1st - 3rd of Nov. at Lancaster, Ca ????
> Ken Crabtree
> KennyCobb(at)aol.com
--------------------------------------------
Admission $5.00
Seniors Free
Kids 17 and younger (with adult) free
-------------------------
Formula one air Racing (Nemesis is supposed to be there)
Fly in Experimental
Antique & Classic Aircraft
Addition Information 805/940-1709
Enjoy!
-Elon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark LaBoyteaux <tailspin(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Seats by Knight Interiors |
I called a company called Knight Aircraft Interiors and had them send
me some information on thier seats. I was wondering if anyone on the
list has purchased thier seats or knows anyone else that has?
Mark LaBoyteaux
RV-6a working on sliding canopy
tailspin(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RVs and Parts For Sale |
Guys and Gals,
I'm forwarding these posts from AOL for your information and/or amusement.
Note that I am not the seller. Contact the individual E-mail accounts.
Thanks.
RV-6 engine mount $400 from wildfelr(at)aol.com
RV-6A slider O-360 c/s 290 TTAE $75K from RVator1(at)aol.com, John 972-298-3903.
-N1GV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com (Finn Lassen ) |
| Subject: | Source for alu c-channel? |
I'm looking for a source of 1/8" T6 (or T3) C-channel for reinforcement
of my RV-3 wing spars. Needs to be 6" up to 6.25" wide, with 1/2" to
3/4" sides. I've looked in the Wicks, Spruce, Airparts and Wag Aero
catalogs, but didn't find any. Does any of you know of a source for
this? (I'll probably only need some 6 to 8 feet).
1/2" - 3/4"
___
|
|
|
|
| 6" - 6.25"
|
|
|
|
---
Finn
finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | PAUL_ROSALES(at)prodigy.com (MR PAUL A ROSALES) |
From: GJGP22B(at)prodigy.com
Subject: RV-List: Fox Field Air Race Schedule online
-- [ From: Paul A. Rosales * EMC.Ver #2.5.1 ] --
For All interested: I recently updated the Fox Field National Air
Races/EAA Fly-in Homepage (my first homepage, at www.av.qnet.
com/~prosales) to include the Daily Schedule of Events. I'll be working
the registration booth so stop by and say hi if you can make it! We
have an RV display in the Barnes Aviation Hanger that includes my
empennage and wings, Charlie O'Loughlin's RV-6 fuselage (just out of the
jig), and Dave Burdett's almost completed RV-3-Rocket!
Paul Rosales
RV-6A N628PV wings @ 90% complete (doing flaps)
PS. Fly-ins are $5.00/aircraft! Drive-ins are $5.00/person
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charles L. Cotton" <clcotton(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while |
building an RV:
Bob Skinner wrote:
>
> > Also, the Mooney has to be one of the highest cost, labor intensive
small singles made.
OK, its time for a MAPA member and admitted "Mooneyiac" to
respond to this assault on "God, mom & apple pie!" If Bob is comparing
the Mooney TLS (turbo) with TKS known-ice, heated prop, air
conditioning, radar, etc. with a spam-can C-150, I might reluctantly
agree. If you compare apples to apples (single engine RG's), Mooneys
represent the best value avialable on the used plane market. (ABS
members, remember, I already admitted by bias.) Look at the aircraft
Bluebook and track the appreciation of virtually all Mooney models for
the last several years. Nothing matches their sustained climb in value.
Maintenance is not cheap, but LEGAL owner-assisted work including
annuals and mods. not only reduce costs, it lets you learn more about
your plane. Remember, when you have to buy a mag. for your Lycoming,
you'll pay the same thing as the Mooney owner. Yes, you'll also pay a
mechanic, but if you have the heart of a builder, then you can
install it on a Mooney with proper A&P sign-off, without increaseing
the cost as much as you may fear. ". . . highest cost, labor intensive
small singles made;" not by a long shot!
> Several mechanics I've talked to won't work on them.
If a mechanic is not a Mooney mechanic, don't use him/her! But then,
this goes for a Bonanza, Commander, or any other plane doesn't it? How
many mechanics are experienced with homebuilts? This won't matter to
the builder, but its a big concern to any prospective buyer of your
plane. (At least two Mooney specialty shops in Texas have rates of
$35/hr., which is cheaper than most folks who work on lesser chariots.)
> Enough of the dollars and cents. Let's talk pride of ownership and
> "class". Every time my wife and I go flying, I look at her and say
>with a grin "we're flying in an airplane we built outselves." There is
>a very small part of the world's population who can say that. When you
>land at other airports, people will gather around and look at your RV.
Bob's absolutely right! I am building and am looking forward to
joining that relatively small fraternity. It should be a feeling of
pride and accomplishement hard to match.
> If you land in a Mooney, nobody will even look or if they do will just think,
"Boy, I'll bet he's putting a couple of his mechanics kids
through college."
Bob, there goes my blood pressure again!
> Of course, I suppose Mooney guys get together too, to compare declining bank
balances.
No, to wait on everyone else and watch Blue Book values climb!
Obviously, I'm just playing with Bob a bit. I have read his posts to
this list, and he is one of the most knowledgeable contributors you can
read. I think the best advice I've heard about building came from
several sources. If you are building to fly, don't; just buy the
Mooney. If you enjoy building, as you obviously do, then you probably
have the stamina to complete the project. I'm not speaking from the
vantage point of an old salt that has completed a project, but as one
who is asking himself questions very similar to yours. My problem is
time; not nearly enough of it. I can either build or fly, but not both.
(Work can sure get in the way of play, can't it?) For me, the Mooney
will probably get the time, at least for now. This is not an easy
decision for me, and I'm sure its not for you.
Good luck with your decision. If you finish the project, I'm sure
you'll enjoy it. If you get that Mooney, you, and three other people
(gotcha Bob), will LOVE it.
Regards,
Chas.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Royce Craven <roycec(at)ozemail.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: F604 <-> F605 Distance |
Dick ,
I ended up making a jig from a piece of solid angle a piece of 6 x 1.5 x
1/4" scrap (from the fuse. kit) and 3/8" threaded rod.
After drilling a 3/8" hole in both the angle and the scrap and threading the
rod through, and putting nuts either side of the angle and scrap, I clamped
the 1st angle to the aft of the main spar.
I made up a slot from 2 more pieces of angle and clamped this to either side
of the rear spar mounting area on the wing.
The nuts on the rod were adjusted till the 1/4" scrap sat snugly in the slot
at the rear spar.
I tightened the nuts on the rod and applied thread inspection stuff.
By clamping the angle to the extended part of the "dummy" spar on the fuse.
and making sure that the rod was straight the 1/4" scrap would sit in the
slot in the F-605 giving the correct inter-spar distance.
In my case the other wing was exactly the same size. Spooky huh? :-)
Best of luck
Royce
roycec(at)ozemail.com.au
>I was talking to John at Van's the other day about suggestions he might have
>regarding proven ways to be sure to get the exact distance between the Front
>and rear Spar replicated to the F604 and F605. I haven't seen his suggestion
>mentioned on the list so thought I'd share it and also see if anyone has done
>it this way. His suggestion was to make two jigs, one for each wing. The
>first step is to leave your 'dummy' spar extend several inches on each side
>of the F604. Then make a jig by clamping an angle to the aft side of the main
>spar, another angle to the forward side of the rear spar mount, making sure
>the distances from the angle to the rib are the same on both spars. The
>angles are then connected by drilling though the angle into a wooden brace,
>and bolting together. By removing the jig from the wing and clamping to the
>aft side of the 'dummy' spar, the rear angle should align perfectly with the
>rear support. Some scrap aluminim can be clamped to the rear jig angle and
>it should fit perfectly into the mounting slot. This sounds very logical (to
>me anyway) so I plan to try it. Has anyone else done it this way? Any
>additional hints??
>
>Dick Flunker - Getting there..
>(RFLUNKER2AOL.COM)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Maynard, Bryon" <maynardb(at)snowmass.ksc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | RV6 Baggage Compartment Ribs |
I had the problem you are refering to. I talk to Van about also. All I
did was mount the Ribs(625 rib) in such that the 606 bulkhead remained
straight and the bottom center skin make a contact to the ribs smoothly.
Looks good. Try not to get locked into Van's drawings. Be flexible.
>----------
>From: cdac.com!bobh(at)matronics.com[SMTP:cdac.com!bobh(at)matronics.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 1996 8:38 PM
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: RV6 Baggage Compartment Ribs
>
>There have been many messages that the RV6 Baggage Compartment Ribs are not
>the correct size in length and width and the angle of the end flanges is
>incorrect.
>
>I called Van's to ask if this has been fixed. The response was that they
>were never able to confirm a problem so, no, the ribs have not been
>changed.
>
>Their recommendation was: (1) Install the Baggage Compartment Ribs without
>adjusting length, rebending flanges, etc. This was not necessary. (2) It
>was ok to move the Baggage Compartment Ribs 1/4 inch laterally in or out to
>help the fit. (3) If this resulted in the 606 bulkhead not being exactly
>verticle or straight or square, these would not cause any problems. (4)
>What counts is the smooth fit of the skins, so position and drill the
>Baggage Compartment Ribs so the skin looks right.
>
>Did any of you do this? How did it turn out? What did you do?
>
>By the way, I don't mean to imply that Van's was not helpful. They spent a
>lot of time answering this question and were very sincere.
>
>Since this appears to be historically a difficult area in the construction
>of the fuselage, I was interested in and would be helped by comments from
>the RV List.
>
>Bob Haan
>Portland, OR
>RV6A fuse - mounting bulkheads
>bobh(at)cdac.com
>Evenings 503-636-3550
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rdunn(at)ionet.net (Ronald M. Dunn) |
Would all you -8 guys that have already received your wing kit send my
PRIVATE email. (I'd like to know who to call on for help......mine was
shipped Tuesday)
Thanks
Ron
Ron Dunn (RV-8 #80078)
rdunn(at)ionet.net
Broken Arrow, OK
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while |
building an RV:
<3276D066.1408(at)worldnet.att.net>
| From: | wstucklen1(at)juno.com (Frederic W Stucklen) |
Chas,
I built my RV-6A so that I could get my IFR rating. KNOWING that
completing the building process would result in the rating, srove me to
finish. I now have 800+ hours in just over 3 years. If that's not
building to fly, what is?
Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
wstucklen1(at)juno.com
writes:
***SNIP***
> Obviously, I'm just playing with Bob a bit. I have read his posts to
>this list, and he is one of the most knowledgeable contributors you can
>read. I think the best advice I've heard about building came from
>several sources. If you are building to fly, don't; just buy the
>Mooney. If you enjoy building, as you obviously do, then you probably
>have the stamina to complete the project.
***SNIP***
>Regards,
>Chas.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Has anyone experienced the following while |
building an RV: (fwd)
| From: | wstucklen1(at)juno.com (Frederic W Stucklen) |
Listers:
I've got a similar problem. I'd love to start another RV, but have a
"teenager" whose applying to MIT! Certainly can't do both (maybe not even
MIT)....
Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
wstucklen1(at)juno.com
writes:
>I had similar qualms about buying a house. I tried not to think about
it and
>just let the process swim along, but every once in a while, I'd lay
awake at
>night and think "Good god! What am I doing?" (I've tried to avoid debt
all my
>life, which actually stood me in good stead at the Mortgage office).
****SNIP****
> If you've got a house, and a marriage, and teenaged kids, you've
already
>knocked off some of the biggest challenges in life, finishing an
airplane
>should be no sweat at all.
>--
>(Sorry Randall, no more room for the Yakko Warner quote)
>Richard Chandler
>RV-6: Garage bought, saving for tools and tail kit (Christmas?).
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Yablon <brian(at)lanart.com> |
| Subject: | Elevator spar damage? |
Hi Folks,
Last night, while riveting the E603/604 tip ribs to the elevator spar,
my gun slipped and skidaddled down the spar, leaving about 5 healthy
dings in the spar web. $#*&@#!
Using a small ball peen hammer and a bucking bar as a back-up plate, I
was able to flatten the dings (more or less), so the damage now
appears to be entirely cosmetic--a few smileys.
My intuition tells me that, struturally, it's fine, and I'm inclined
to forget the incident and move on. What do you think? Is this ok?
Do I need to rivet a backup plate over the area? Replace the spar?
-Brian Yablon brian(at)lanart.com
Framingham, MA
RV6A #24751
Left Elevator; trim tab coming soon...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terence Gannon" <Terence_Gannon(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Fitting Electric Trim Tab Access Cover |
Folks - I spent most of last night trying to finish off the EET-601 and the
associated access plate for the electric trim tab servo, prior to sending them
off for paint. I think that I've got it right, but here are some
observations, and I invite comments, recommendations or whatever feedback
you've got!
a) There appears to be some confusion over the screws that should be used to
attach the access plate. I received the flush head #6, while it appears as
though others on the list have received panhead attach screws. What have
other Listers received in their kit?
b) The arrangement of the flange and the access plate necessitate dimpling
VERY close to the edge of the access plate and the EET-601...basically 5/16"
from the free edge, and with a very big dimple. A #6 dimple very nearly comes
to the edge of the attachment plate. As a matter of fact, I was just about
sure that when I tried to dimple, that it would break through to the edge, but
much to my surprise, it produced near perfect dimples. Are these eventually
going to crack out? (PS. Of course, I now see why a panhead would be a better
alternative, if not a little less aerodynamic)
c) The nutplates supplied with the EET are not the type that accommodate a
dimple. To get around this, I also dimpled the #40 holes that attach the
nutplate. By removing a small amount off the center, #6 dimple, and by
bending the mounting lugs of the nutplate slightly, I can get a pretty tight
fit between the lugs and the underying dimples.
d) There are two of the seven nutplates where there is simple not enough room
to get both mounting lugs properly rivet. My plan here is to grind most of
one ear off the nutplate, and just using one attach rivet.
Anyway, folks, that's it for now. Any thoughts or comments, to me personally,
or to the list in general would be very much appreciated!
Cheers...
Terry in Calgary
S/N 24414
"Empennage"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Cost of Building an RV (chatter) |
Scott-
I hear that there are good investments to be made in Arkansas. Didn't Bill
and Hillary make almost $100K on that $1K. It must have been legal, they're
both lawyers. But then, anyone who could sleep with a lawyer is capable of
anything, right?
So get out there, pony up the bucks, quit yer whinin' and you too can earn a
great flight like Bill's ;^)
Gary VanRemortel
vanremog(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Osgood <Rick(at)ccc.henn.tec.mn.us> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator spar damage? |
Brian Yablon wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> Last night, while riveting the E603/604 tip ribs to the elevator spar,
> my gun slipped and skidaddled down the spar, leaving about 5 healthy
> dings in the spar web. $#*&@#!
>
> Using a small ball peen hammer and a bucking bar as a back-up plate, I
> was able to flatten the dings (more or less), so the damage now
> appears to be entirely cosmetic--a few smileys.
>
> My intuition tells me that, struturally, it's fine, and I'm inclined
> to forget the incident and move on. What do you think? Is this ok?
> Do I need to rivet a backup plate over the area? Replace the spar?
>
> -Brian Yablon brian(at)lanart.com
> Framingham, MA
> RV6A #24751
> Left Elevator; trim tab coming soon...
Been there, done that.... If there are no cuts in the metal I would not
worry to much. Dings can be filled later.
Rick
--
Rick(at)ccc.henn.tec.mn.us
________________________________________________________________________________
I noticed in this month's SA a product called "The Eyeball". They are
used instead of gromets (sp) or whatever else to pass wiring, cables etc
thru the firewall. They look like stainless.
Is anyone using these and if so for what applications?
don mack
donmack@super-highway
RV-6A (working on firewall)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RELOSVCS!WESTREG!EHENSON(at)cldwell.attmail.com (Henson, Eric) |
| Subject: | Elevator spar damage? |
Brian, I'm not an aerospace engineer, but, doesnt the spar in this case just
provide shape. I think the stresses are transferred via Mr. Monocoque's
principle. IMHO it should be fine.
Cosmetically, I would judge the effects as follows:
1. Will it show up on radar?
2. If answer #1 was no it will be hard to see at 7,500 feet @ 195 MPH.
3. I have the same little smiley on my HS, I figure I can disguise it at
airshows by putting one of those lil' bobbing dogs on the instr. panel to
distract the onlookers. :-)
It's amazing how hard we are on ourselves when we build OUR planes. If my
boss was as anal, nitpicking, and unpleasable as I am on myself,
..................................
Squish those rivets and move on.
Eric Henson
Dana Point, Ca
(for the benefit of the humorically challenged; put the lighters down)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Brian Wrote<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hi Folks,
Last night, while riveting the E603/604 tip ribs to the elevator spar,
my gun slipped and skidaddled down the spar, leaving about 5 healthy
dings in the spar web. $#*&@#!
Using a small ball peen hammer and a bucking bar as a back-up plate, I
was able to flatten the dings (more or less), so the damage now
appears to be entirely cosmetic--a few smileys.
My intuition tells me that, struturally, it's fine, and I'm inclined
to forget the incident and move on. What do you think? Is this ok?
Do I need to rivet a backup plate over the area? Replace the spar?
-Brian Yablon brian(at)lanart.com
Framingham, MA
RV6A #24751
Left Elevator; trim tab coming soon...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | csanchez(at)BayNetworks.com (Cheryl Sanchez) |
| Subject: | Re: Source for alu c-channel? |
>
>I'm looking for a source of 1/8" T6 (or T3) C-channel for reinforcement
>of my RV-3 wing spars. Needs to be 6" up to 6.25" wide, with 1/2" to
>3/4" sides. I've looked in the Wicks, Spruce, Airparts and Wag Aero
>catalogs, but didn't find any. Does any of you know of a source for
>this? (I'll probably only need some 6 to 8 feet).
>
> 1/2" - 3/4"
> ___
>|
>|
>|
>|
>| 6" - 6.25"
>|
>|
>|
>|
> ---
>
>Finn
>
>finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com
>
I received a letter from Van's the other day saying that they
are now ready to start shipping "fix" kits for the type II RV-3 wing
spars.
It sounds like you are taking on your own design effort here.
The problem with the current spar design is that the spar cap strips
are buckling. I believe they are buckling in the forward direction. I
also understand that the solution is to attach angle reinforcements
to the spar caps. There has been no mention that the web of the spar
needs the kind of increase you are proposing.
Unless a design change has been analyzed it may cause problems.
In this case, where your "C" channel ends could result in a stress
point that could actually make the wing weaker at that point. There
are numerous cases of this sort of fix breaking things. But if you
have had your mod analyzed by an aeronautical engineer then this would
not likely be an issue.
Cheryl Sanchez
csanchez(at)world.std.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 Baggage Compartment Ribs |
Hey I was just wondering, what are all you Mooney guys using to prime
your garage doors with?
Just kidding. Actually I wanted to respond to the query about the
baggage compartment ribs. First of all, just let me say that this isn't
a big deal. It seems that the ribs are off sometimes for some unknown
reason, but the fixes aren't that difficult or time consuming. But
while its true the outer skin is the main concern, you don't want a
wobbly baggage compartment floor either. If mine was off by 1/8" or
less I wouldn't have worried about it, but it was more like 1/4".
I jigged up my fuselage very carefully and checked and double checked
the bulkhead alignment, but for reasons unknown, my two outboard
baggage compartment ribs on each side were off by as much as 1/4" in
height, and something less than that in length. On the outboard ones,
I cut the top flange off and riveted a piece of angle on to make a new
flange. I also rebent one of the end flanges I think. I would have had
to move the rib too much to correct for the problem. A buddy of mine
had the same problem, but his fix was to split the rib web diagonally
and rivet it back together with a splice plate. I wish I'd though of
this, as it allowed him adjust both the height and length of the rib
with only one cut, and no rebending of flanges.
The next inboard rib was too high at the aft end. I just moved that
end in by about 1 1/2 inches, and rebent the end flange. I know that
changing the location of the rib is not "as designed", but structurally
I could see no reason it would cause a problem, and in fact the ribs
are now closer to being spaced evenly than they would have otherwise
been.
Both Bill Benedict and Andy Hanna were over at my place after I made
the changes, they were very interested in knowing how mine had turned
out. But they were disappointed that I had already done the mods as they
were hoping to measure the ribs and the stations before the stuff was
installed and see if they could figure out what the problem was.
Randall Henderson, RV-6
randall(at)edt.com
http://www.edt.com/homewing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dann_Parks(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Dann Parks) |
| Subject: | Re: MS FLIGHT SIMULATOR |
I just downloaded Curt Reimer's RV6 and 6a for FlightSim/Flightshop and it's
great! Both planes are modeled very well and painted like the Van's
prototypes. I only have about :30 behind an RV stick, but the flight dynamics
seem to be fairly accurate too -- very agile and with a high sink rate when
slow, flaps down and power off. You need to change the prop from 84" to 72"
diameter in FS5. You can even try out different engine power and prop types.
Curt says he will provide the design files, so I plan on using his model to
test different paint designs and be able to see how they look while flying.
Amazing!
For those of you who haven't experienced them, these home desktop simulators
(like FS5 and Flight Unlimited) are quite incredible. I was away from flying
for 8 years, but flew a lot of sims (not just the shoot-em-up jets, but
cross-country navigation and IFR procedures too) and felt I was a better
pilot for it when I returned to the real thing. The FAA is just now looking
at them as serious training tools.
And it's a way to fly your RV while you're building it!
The RV's are located at:
http://www.iup.edu/flight-sim/files/uploads
...and thanks to Curt
Dann Parks
dann_parks(at)kteh.pbs.org
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV6junkie(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition - Chatter |
<< Are you painting it all white??
Or is it still illegal to make "Jersey White Lightning"???
Jim Ayers >>
No, I'm painting it BRIGHT yellow but you did connect with the correct
reference. The name isn't set in stone as of yet because it hasn't been
painted on the aircraft. I was wondering if anybody would get the reference.
Since you did, I'm going with it.
Thanks,
Gary Corde
RV-6 N21GC
"Jersey Lightning"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hoatsons(at)aol.com |
Yellow RV-6A - $48,000
with O-320 engine, 165 hours SMOH,
fixed pitch prop (68 X 65) from Preformance Propellers,
loran, gps, dual radios, dual nav with glide slope,
sliding canopy,
shown in "Sport Aviation" July 1996 page 120 upper left hand corner,
Total Time on Aircraft 165 hours.
Respond to : hoatsons(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cost of Building an RV (chatter) |
Garry, what balls you have. ;-) I would never talk politics on the list.
However, if I were do so, I would add that they have received much more than $100K
in the last few weeks from people that have taken an oath of poverty. Go figure.
Clinton 96 = Gore 97
Chris
>
> I hear that there are good investments to be made in Arkansas. Didn't Bill
> and Hillary make almost $100K on that $1K. It must have been legal, they're
> both lawyers. But then, anyone who could sleep with a lawyer is capable of
> anything, right?
>
> So get out there, pony up the bucks, quit yer whinin' and you too can earn a
> great flight like Bill's ;^)
>
> Gary VanRemortel
> vanremog(at)aol.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Source for alu c-channel? |
<< I'm looking for a source of 1/8" T6 (or T3) C-channel for reinforcement
of my RV-3 wing spars. Needs to be 6" up to 6.25" wide, with 1/2" to
3/4" sides. I've looked in the Wicks, Spruce, Airparts and Wag Aero
catalogs, but didn't find any. Does any of you know of a source for
this? (I'll probably only need some 6 to 8 feet). >>
Finn-
I believe you will have difficulty finding this channel configuration in a
structural extrusion. I've looked thru my catalogs and found nothing very
close (closest was 6061-T6 in 6"H x 1.92"W x .20"THK from Lusk Metals,
800-521-1692).
I believe you will have better luck having .125" sheet formed in a break to
the required dimensions. Leave generous radii for best columnar strength.
Regards,
Gary VanRemortel
vanremog(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.su.OZ.AU> |
| Subject: | Re: Elevator spar damage? |
Brian,
You can drill holes in the spar to lighten if if you wish so small areas of
thinning are not a problem. The problem is if the spar is no longer straight
or if there are crack sources at the site of damage. Get out the 180 grit
and sand till the surface is smooth, then the 240, then the 400, then the
600. Be obsessive about any deep marks.
l
Leo Davies
leo(at)icn.su.oz.au
>
>Hi Folks,
>
>Last night, while riveting the E603/604 tip ribs to the elevator spar,
>my gun slipped and skidaddled down the spar, leaving about 5 healthy
>dings in the spar web. $#*&@#!
>
>Using a small ball peen hammer and a bucking bar as a back-up plate, I
>was able to flatten the dings (more or less), so the damage now
>appears to be entirely cosmetic--a few smileys.
>
>My intuition tells me that, struturally, it's fine, and I'm inclined
>to forget the incident and move on. What do you think? Is this ok?
>Do I need to rivet a backup plate over the area? Replace the spar?
>
>-Brian Yablon brian(at)lanart.com
> Framingham, MA
> RV6A #24751
> Left Elevator; trim tab coming soon...
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Timothy J. Etherington" <tjetheri(at)cca.rockwell.com> |
I am having second thought about the manual trim and I am looking for advice on
the electric trim.
How are builders that are doing electric trim handling trim indication in the
cockpit or for those flying with electric trim, how do you determine during
preflight that trim is neutral? Do you just look back at the trim tab?
For the other question, I have pan head screws for the trim tab cover. I
thought of finding flush screws but thought that trying to countersink would
remove too much metal and I didn't see a good way to do anything to the
nutplates if I dimpled.
I will be in Portland on Monday and I hope to visit the RV factory. If anyone
else would like to share their project, I will be traveling with my wife and we
would be interested to see some other RV's. Neither of us has flown in a RV yet
so we hope to do that during our visit to Van's.
Thanks.
Tim Etherington
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fitting Electric Trim Tab Access Cover |
| From: | Brian Yablon <brian(at)lanart.com> |
In message , "Terence Gannon" writes:
> a) There appears to be some confusion over the screws that
> should be used to attach the access plate. I received the
> flush head #6...
I got flush head #6 screws too.
> b) The arrangement of the flange and the access plate
> necessitate dimpling VERY close to the edge of the access plate
> and the EET-601...basically 5/16"
I took one look at the EET-601 and just assumed the only way to do it
was to machine countersink the access plate for the screws, and leave
the flange alone. I knew this wouldn't leave much meat in the access
plate, but I couldn't see how to rivet the nutplates onto the backside
of the flange with a #6 dimple keeping the nutplate up in the air.
What I did was this: I didn't dimple or countersink flange. Since the
rivet holes for the nutplates seemed a little too close to the edge to
countersink for AN426 rivets, I elected to use 3/32" NAS1097 rivets
instead. These have a much smaller head than the AN rivets. Just a
touch of machine countersinking allowed these heads to lie flush. Mine
came out prefectly.
Just after I finished riveting the EET-601 to the elevator skin, a
thread appeared on the list that implied the right way to install the
trim stuff was to dimple the access cover for the screws and machine
countersink the flange to accept the dimple. (This is a few months
back. You may want to check the archives.) This should at least
serve to alleviate your fears about the dimples in the cover cracking
out.
To me, this sounds like the best solution. In fact, since I haven't
touched the cover yet, I might still attempt this--if I can figure out
how to machine countersink the EET-601 with the nutplates already
intalled.
-Brian Yablon brian(at)lanart.com
Framingham, MA
RV6A #24751
Left elevator in process; trim tab coming up...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Moore <bobmoore(at)wwd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MS FLIGHT SIMULATOR |
Dann Parks wrote:
> For those of you who haven't experienced them, these home desktop simulators
> (like FS5 and Flight Unlimited) are quite incredible.
I supose that Computer People can call them anything they want -- (FS5) but
Airplane People in the FAA say that if it doesn't move and have an enclosed
cockpit, it's a "Ground Training Device". Ref. FAR 61
Bob Moore
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com (Finn Lassen ) |
| Subject: | Re: Source for alu c-channel? |
Dear Cheryl,
Your point on the fix/break is well taken. The reason I'm looking at
my own mods here is that I have the Type I spars (1/8" spar bars and
rivets) for which there is no current fix. After reading and
re-reading Van's letters, and sleepless nights trying to visualize the
forces acting on the spar causing the compression buckling, and
shearing of rivets when reinforced with angles, I came to the
conclusion that adding 1/8" plates on the opposite side to the existing
1/8" spar plate of the spar strips, thus forming a sort of box-like
spar, would be a solution. Using 1/8" c-channel would give an added
safeguard against buckling:
Original spar:
_
|||||| |
|||||| |
| |
| | <---- add c-channel
| |
| |
|||||| |
|||||| |_
I have e-mailed Van for more detailed test data but not gotten any yet.
Finn
finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com
You wrote:
>
>>
>>I'm looking for a source of 1/8" T6 (or T3) C-channel for
reinforcement
>>of my RV-3 wing spars. Needs to be 6" up to 6.25" wide, with 1/2" to
>>3/4" sides. I've looked in the Wicks, Spruce, Airparts and Wag Aero
>>catalogs, but didn't find any. Does any of you know of a source for
>>this? (I'll probably only need some 6 to 8 feet).
>>
>> 1/2" - 3/4"
>> ___
>>|
>>|
>>|
>>|
>>| 6" - 6.25"
>>|
>>|
>>|
>>|
>> ---
>>
>>Finn
>>
>>finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com
>>
>
> I received a letter from Van's the other day saying that they
>are now ready to start shipping "fix" kits for the type II RV-3 wing
>spars.
>
> It sounds like you are taking on your own design effort here.
>The problem with the current spar design is that the spar cap strips
>are buckling. I believe they are buckling in the forward direction. I
>also understand that the solution is to attach angle reinforcements
>to the spar caps. There has been no mention that the web of the spar
>needs the kind of increase you are proposing.
>
> Unless a design change has been analyzed it may cause problems.
>In this case, where your "C" channel ends could result in a stress
>point that could actually make the wing weaker at that point. There
>are numerous cases of this sort of fix breaking things. But if you
>have had your mod analyzed by an aeronautical engineer then this would
>not likely be an issue.
>
>Cheryl Sanchez
>csanchez(at)world.std.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | chester razer <crazer(at)egyptian.net> |
I just thought I'd throw in my comments about the wing
templates that have been discussed lately. I read the
plans, Watched Georges video, and hung my ailerons and with
the utmost precision while my wings were still in the jig.
One day after I had finished my wings and had one of them
laying on a quilt on my roll-away work bench out in the
driveway I looked at my aileron, flap and wing alignment as
I would be seeing them for the rest of the life of my
airplane and was not at all happy. Needless to say I
purchased new hinge brackets and re hung the ailerons.
Point: on my next RV, I'll hang the ailerons after the wing
is out of the jig, just seems like fitting errors are easier
for me to see and adjust.
--
Chet Razer
crazer(at)egyptian.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Curt Reimer <Curt_Reimer(at)MBnet.MB.CA> |
| Subject: | Re: MS FLIGHT SIMULATOR |
On Wed, 30 Oct 1996, Dann Parks wrote:
> The RV's are located at:
> http://www.iup.edu/flight-sim/files/uploads
> ...and thanks to Curt
You're welcome. BTW, those www.iup.edu files might be the original
version. If anyone would like version 2, just email me. The new version
fixes a yaw-roll coupling problem that was rather unrealistic. Also, the
files I have for email include the .AFX and .PCX files so you can design a
custom paint job.
The 84" prop diameter was chosen to get the proper climb & airspeeds, so
experiment at your own risk!
You will need MS Flight Sim 5 or 5.1 and Flight Shop to fly these
airplanes.
Curt Reimer
reimer(at)mbnet.mb.ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dougb(at)mail.diac.com (Doug Bloomberg) |
| Subject: | Re: Denver-Boulder Area Builders? |
>Hi,
>Here in Boulder I've gotten the RV bug and was wondering if any builders
>along the Front Range of CO would mind a visit to their project or a newbie
>drooling over the completed RV (will bring my own towel!)
>
>Thanks,
>Chuck Spaur
>chuck(at)spaur.com
Howdy Chuck,
There are only 120+ Rv builders/flyers here in the Denver area, I don't
know if can find any in the area. Actully Bould airport is the only airport
without an RV. Guess they aren't PC.
On the 23 of Nov the local RVators are meeting at JeffCo at 10AM. Call
Denis Walsh 756-6543 he's publisher of the Rocky Mountain RVators
newsletter, and he is putting out an issue tomorrow Thursday. It should
have directions.
Also EAA chapter 43 meets the 2nd sat at 7PM at Colorado Aerotech. Several
of us attend.
Also don't do anything childish like drooling, you'll never get a ride that
way...
Doug
Doug Bloomberg
Denver, CO
dougb(at)mail.diac.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dougb(at)mail.diac.com (Doug Bloomberg) |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition Mag Trigger? |
At 11:08 PM 10/29/96, Tom Martin wrote:
>>Does anybody have a phone number for Jeff Rose. I would like information on
>>his EI system.
>>
>>Gary Corde
>>
>>RV-6 N211GC
>>"Jersey Lightning"
>>In the paint shop
>>
>>
>I just talked to Jeff Rose. His phone number is 423-622-8825. His system
>looks good and he has an new unit that mounts in the mag hole. This should
>really make installation easy
>
>Tom Martin
>RV-4
Howdy,
Just thinking! A big advantage of electronic ignition is the accuracy of
the timing due to the crank trigger. Now putting the trigger on the mag
position and all it's gears and lash seems a backwards step to me, to just
save a little time. Particullary after 3000 hours of building.
Doug
Doug Bloomberg
Denver, CO
dougb(at)mail.diac.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Forest Agency phone number |
My kit is currently insured by Avemco while it is under construction. I've
seen several posts talking about less expensive insurance available from the
Forest agency. I didn't find a phone number in the archives. Would someone
please post it? Does the Forest agency insure the first flight like Avemco
does? Any comments on quality of coverage and/or responsiveness to claims?
Thanks,
Tim Lewis
RV-6AQ #60023
TimRV6A(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Hitchings" <wbgroup(at)lantic.co.za> |
| Subject: | Re: HELICOPTER ENGINES |
Dick
Thanks for the info. re the helicopter engine. Please keep us updated on
your progress.
Good Luck
Regards
Brian
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Greg Young" <gyoung(at)Net1.Net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fitting Electric Trim Tab Access Cover |
Terry,
Sounds like you did the same as I and followed the drawing... I had just
enough room to dimple the cover plate. I also dimpled the EET-601 for both
the screw and rivets. The nutplate kind of sits on top of the 3 dimples.
Looks weird from the back side, but doesn't rotate and the screws and
access plate are flush on the outside where it counts. With 7 screws it
ain't goin' nowhere no how.
BTW the edge distance was addressed in the archives. Wish I had looked it
up before cutting... sigh!
Greg Young
gyoung(at)net1.net
Citabria N90AV
RV-6 s/n 23070 - sealing left tank
----------
> b) The arrangement of the flange and the access plate necessitate
dimpling
> VERY close to the edge of the access plate and the EET-601...basically
5/16"
> from the free edge, and with a very big dimple. A #6 dimple very nearly
comes
> to the edge of the attachment plate. As a matter of fact, I was just
about
> sure that when I tried to dimple, that it would break through to the
edge, but
> much to my surprise, it produced near perfect dimples. Are these
eventually
> going to crack out? (PS. Of course, I now see why a panhead would be a
better
> alternative, if not a little less aerodynamic)
> c) The nutplates supplied with the EET are not the type that accommodate
a
> dimple. To get around this, I also dimpled the #40 holes that attach the
> nutplate. By removing a small amount off the center, #6 dimple, and by
> bending the mounting lugs of the nutplate slightly, I can get a pretty
tight
> fit between the lugs and the underying dimples.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Elon Ormsby <ormsby1(at)popsicle.llnl.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition Mag Trigger? |
I just talked to Jeff Rose. His phone number is 423-622-8825. His system
>>looks good and he has an new unit that mounts in the mag hole. This should
>>really make installation easy
>>
>>Tom Martin
----------------------------
>Just thinking! A big advantage of electronic ignition is the accuracy of
>the timing due to the crank trigger. Now putting the trigger on the mag
>position and all it's gears and lash seems a backwards step to me, to just
>save a little time. Particullary after 3000 hours of building.
Doug Bloomberg
--------------------------
Good point Doug, but it may not be as important as getting the computerized
ADVANCE that comes with the electronic systems. Yes, there is error built
into the drive train BUT even a crank triggered system has error. Remember,
the crank pins are never perfectly indexed so none of the pistons are
arriving at TDC when they should be. No aftermarket electronic system takes
this into account (probably because the effect is negligible) and only 0.1%
of racers match the crank trigger to the actual crank pin index.
Even with all of the drive train slop (as you correctly suggest) AND uneven
crank indexing, you may be off only 1 or 2 degrees. Compare that to the
ability to optimize the computer advance as much as 15 - 25 degrees for
optimum conditions and that may be reason enough to make the conversion.
However, all that being said I'm still NOT a proponent of electronic
ignitions systems for aircraft. Some of the claims are outlandish and there
is no definitive data. The systems are a transplant from smog motors that
run so lean a spark gap of .065" is needed to even start the burn - they
need a flamethrower CDI. The principal reason autos went "electronic" was
in 1972 the EPA statutorily mandated emissions components must last 50,000
miles(it is now 70Kmi). None of which applies to any aircraft. Don't get me
wrong, its wonderful technology its just not legally required for our
applications and no one has produced data to justify the expense.
BTW folks, Cessna is NOT (yes, NOT) going to offer electronic ignition on
any 172,182,206 (at least not this year). You heard it first on the good
old RV list!
-Elon
ormsby1@popsicle/llnl.gov
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bennett(at)healey.com.au |
| Subject: | Re: Electric trim |
Tim,
Van's elevator electric trim kit includes (I think) the MAC position indicator
driven from a variable resistor in the servo. I got mine from Van's.
Can't recall if it was optional.
If you are referring to the aileron trim, I expect the arrangement is
similar.
Peter Bennett
Sydney Australia
RV6 fitting empennage to fus.
> From: "Timothy J. Etherington" <cca.rockwell.com!tjetheri(at)matronics.com>
> Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 13:50:37 -0800
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: Electric trim
> Reply-to: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> I am having second thought about the manual trim and I am looking for advice
on
> the electric trim.
>
> How are builders that are doing electric trim handling trim indication in the
> cockpit or for those flying with electric trim, how do you determine during
> preflight that trim is neutral? Do you just look back at the trim tab?
>
> For the other question, I have pan head screws for the trim tab cover. I
> thought of finding flush screws but thought that trying to countersink would
> remove too much metal and I didn't see a good way to do anything to the
> nutplates if I dimpled.
>
> I will be in Portland on Monday and I hope to visit the RV factory. If anyone
> else would like to share their project, I will be traveling with my wife and
we
> would be interested to see some other RV's. Neither of us has flown in a RV yet
> so we hope to do that during our visit to Van's.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Tim Etherington
>
>
Judith Bennett
Elanora Heights Primary School
Sydney Australia
http://www.zip.com.au/~elanora
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bennett(at)healey.com.au |
| Subject: | Re: "The Eyeball" |
I was thinking of using them to soak up the excess in my bank account
Peter Bennett
Sydney Australia
RV6 attaching empennage to fus
> Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 11:04:29 -0600
> From: Don Mack <super-highway.net!donmack(at)matronics.com>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: "The Eyeball"
> Reply-to: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> I noticed in this month's SA a product called "The Eyeball". They are
> used instead of gromets (sp) or whatever else to pass wiring, cables etc
> thru the firewall. They look like stainless.
>
> Is anyone using these and if so for what applications?
>
>
> don mack
> donmack@super-highway
> RV-6A (working on firewall)
>
>
Judith Bennett
Elanora Heights Primary School
Sydney Australia
http://www.zip.com.au/~elanora
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark D Hiatt" <OttoPilot_MSN(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Microsoft Flight Simuator RV-6A Model. |
I'm embarrassed to say this, but I haven't used Flight Simulator since the
5.00 release. I bought the 5.1CD version but had troubles getting it to
install and never quite got around to fixing them.
Just in time for your holiday gift giving, Microsoft will be releasing a new
Win95 version of Flight Simulator in the next two or three weeks. I've only
seen prerelease beta copies under very optimized environments and wasn't able
to ask a lot of questions about it. But I would be very interested in hearing
if/how Flight Shop airplanes operate under the new version-and especially
including the RV-6s available. I'm wondering whether to buy a copy or to throw
another doo-dad on the Avery pile, myself. I'm really hoping that it won't
obsolete books like the 13Mike series, Alfred Poor's excellent Simulator book
and of course all of those airplanes out there, now.
Would whoever gets a copy first please post a PIREP for the rest of us?
Thanks!
Mark D Hiatt
OttoPilot_MSN(at)msn.com
Aviation Forum Manager,
The Microsoft Network.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM> |
| Subject: | Electronic ignition Mag Trigger? |
>However, all that being said I'm still NOT a proponent of electronic
>ignitions systems for aircraft. Some of the claims are outlandish and there
>is no definitive data.
There's LOTS of data . . . available from any lab that can run engines
in test cells for whatever purpose. At very low manifold pressures (idle
and at full throttle and altitude) flame fronts slow down . . so much in
fact that with standard magento timing, the fire is still burning when
the exhaust valves open . . wasted energy.
Anyone who has seen Klaus demonstrate the sounds from his Vari-Eze exhausts
at idle can appreicate the fact that as ignition timing advanced, the engine
ran faster and quieter . . . .
>>The systems are a transplant from smog motors that run so lean a spark
>>gap of .065" is needed to even start the burn - they need a flamethrower CDI.
I'm aware of no production engine using CDI (high-voltage charge on
a capacitor) in their electronic igntion architectures. In fact,
CDI sparks, while HOT are also SHORT. The better solution came in the
form of inductive engergy storage . . . not terribly unlike the old
coil, points, condenser (Kettering) system. The spark is adequate in
energy but LONGER to get a better probability of igniting the charge on
EVERY stroke (see other post concerning inconsistant igntion requirements).
>>The principal reason autos went "electronic" was
>>in 1972 the EPA statutorily mandated emissions components must last 50,000
>>miles(it is now 70Kmi). None of which applies to any aircraft. Don't get me
>>wrong, its wonderful technology its just not legally required for our
>>applications and no one has produced data to justify the expense.
While there's no mandate for extended component life on airplanes,
how about my own requirements? I'd much rather mount a system on
my airplane that I can fix, with off the shelf automotive parts -AND-
enjoy both performance increases and longer component life (70K miles
divided by 35 mph is 2,000 hrs . . . oh that magentos could be depended
upon to run that long!).
>>BTW folks, Cessna is NOT (yes, NOT) going to offer electronic ignition on
>>any 172,182,206 (at least not this year). You heard it first on the good
>>old RV list!
Yes . . . Cessna is firmly commited to building a few brand new, 40-year
old airplanes. The cost of "certifying" anything worthwhile makes the
change very un-worthwhile . . . especially when you KNOW that the factory
will never again see a 10,000 airplane year. There's a market
for a few new airplanes of any design era . . . the fleet is going DOWN
by 7,000 or so airplanes per year. About half get scrapped or wrecked,
the other half get exported. So, 1,000 new airplanes is a pretty doable
goal for sales . . . but don't look to BCP&M for anything that really
looks to the future of personally owned airplanes.
Regards,
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========oOOo=(_)=oOOo==========
| |
| Go ahead, make my day . . . |
| Show me where I'm wrong. |
=================================
72770.552(at)compuserve.com
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition Mag Trigger? |
>>Just thinking! A big advantage of electronic ignition is the accuracy of
>>the timing due to the crank trigger. Now putting the trigger on the mag
>>position and all it's gears and lash seems a backwards step to me, to just
>>save a little time. Particullary after 3000 hours of building.
No, the big advantage of electronic ignition is being able to advance the
timing from the conservative, full power, marginal octane, sea-level
settings prescribed for magnetos. There's much ado made for "accuracy"
of timing when in fact, the manner in which the flame ignites and
propogates on a stroke-by-stroke basis in each cylinder is VERY
inconsistant.
Backlash happens in gears with reversing loads . . . magneto gears
generally always run in one direction . . . last time I checked.
Putting crank sensors behind the prop leaves sensors more exposed and
subject to damage . . . picking up engine timing information from
the vacated magneto hole sounds like a very good idea to me.
Regards,
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========oOOo=(_)=oOOo==========
| |
| Go ahead, make my day . . . |
| Show me where I'm wrong. |
=================================
72770.552(at)compuserve.com
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Gesele <scottg(at)villagenet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Forest Agency phone number |
>My kit is currently insured by Avemco while it is under construction. I've
>seen several posts talking about less expensive insurance available from the
>Forest agency. I didn't find a phone number in the archives. Would someone
>please post it? Does the Forest agency insure the first flight like Avemco
>does? Any comments on quality of coverage and/or responsiveness to claims?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Tim Lewis
>RV-6AQ #60023
>TimRV6A(at)aol.com
>
>
A quickbuilder already looking into insuring the finished product? It IS
true, you just throw the kit up in the air and it lands as a finished plane :)
-Scott Gesele N506RV
(3 1/2 years and just beginning to see a glimmer of light at the end of the
tunnel)
scottg(at)villagenet.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "r.acker" <r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Microsoft Flight Simuator RV-6A Model. |
At 11:40 AM 10/31/96 UT, you wrote:
>
>to ask a lot of questions about it. But I would be very interested in hearing
>if/how Flight Shop airplanes operate under the new version-and especially
>including the RV-6s available. I'm wondering whether to buy a copy or to throw
>
>Mark D Hiatt
Flightshop will NOT be compatible with FS6.0. The "plan" on a converter to
allow such, but then again for years MS has been telling us windows 3.x/95
is a true multitasking OS .
Rob Acker
E-mail: r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com
RV-6Q project: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rob_acker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV6junkie(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: ElectroAir EI System |
<< Just thinking! A big advantage of electronic ignition is the accuracy of
the timing due to the crank trigger. Now putting the trigger on the mag
position and all it's gears and lash seems a backwards step to me, to just
save a little time. Particullary after 3000 hours of building.
Doug >>
You may be right. I would think that it would be safer then those spinning
magnets on the flywheel. The hall effect pick-ups require a very close
tolerance. Does anybody else have an opinion (that's a loaded question on
this list)?
After speeking to Mr. Rose yesterday I felt comportable with his system. He
has sold over 700 units in the past six years. Van has been flying behind
one of his systems in his RV-4 (according to Jeff).
>From what I could learn in my first conversation, the system replaces one
mag. To install, you remove the gear from the mag and place the gear on the
EI "mag". Place number one cylinder @TDC and install the EI mag. There is a
alignment hole for timing. Install the new wiring harness, attach the
control box to the firewall, connect the wires to and from, attach the MP
line and you're done. Should take about 1 to 2 hours.
The system puts-out 47,000 volts (ouch) and has automatic dwell adjustment.
The system can advance the timing up to 42 degrees based on RPM and MP. The
computer looks at where the spark is occuring and corrects the next
explosion. Therefore it self corrects for the "drive-train-slop".
Price.........$785. Not to good, not to bad IMHO. Sounds good to me. What
do you think?
BTW Elon, IMO EI has advantages if you consider fuel burn alone. It is
common to realize fuel savings in the order of 8 to 12 percent. A $800
dollar EI system would pay for itself in 400 hours. Mr. Rose has dyno'ed one
of his EI systems and reports a 5 hp increase when doing a back-to-back
comparison over a mag only system. The 25 degree BTDC fixed point that our
mags are timed for provide good timing in the 2000 to 2200 RPM range. If
that's where you run your engine, mags are fine. I tend to run 2500 to 2700
RPM all the time, so I think that I could take full advantage of a EI system.
Cessna didn't go with the Slick Lazer EI system because it sucks.
Gary Corde
RV-6 N211GC
"Jersey Lightning"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fred New <fred(at)ics.ee> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition Mag Trigger? |
On 31 Oct 1996, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> Backlash happens in gears with reversing loads . . . magneto gears
> generally always run in one direction . . . last time I checked.
> Putting crank sensors behind the prop leaves sensors more exposed and
> subject to damage . . . picking up engine timing information from
> the vacated magneto hole sounds like a very good idea to me.
I agree with almost everything you've said about the advantages of
electronic ignition. It's another thing on my must-have list.
The one thing I disagree with is what you've said about backlash. Maybe a
more descriptive term would be "bucking" which happens a lot on the
(manual transmission) buses here as they reach a speed where there is no
load on the motor. I can hear the gears chatter as they try to decide
which end of the drive train is going faster. Of course there is a lot of
play and torsional bouncing in a bus' drive train. I wouldn't expect
enough of those things in an airplane engine to make much difference.=20
What I'm curious about in ignitions is pressurization. Some airplanes,
probably the turbocharged ones, have pressurized mags. This is to keep
the electricity from arcing as the air gets thinner with altitude. Do we
RVers need to worry about such things with electronic ignition?=20
--
Fred New, future RV-6Aer, feelers out for finding a garage
IC Systems | Mustam=E4e tee 12 | EE0006 Tallinn | Eston=
ia
Internet--fred(at)ics.ee voice--(372) 656-5477 fax--(372) 656-5476
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russ Werner" <russ(at)maui.net> |
| Subject: | Re: info. from the valley |
> Do you know if their meetings are scheduled? I would be interested in
> visiting them, if they are...
> Ron Butcher...Turlock, Cal
>
>
Ron,
I looked in late to the thread, but if you are looking for the
RV/Rocket guys in Bakersfield, the next meeting of the "Bakersfield
Bunch", EAA Chapter 71 in Bakersfield is Wednesday Nov 13 at 7PM.
They meet at the EAA hangar at the secondary field at Bakersfield
(can't remember the name).
Aloha, Russ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russ Werner" <russ(at)maui.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
RE:
> Bill,
> Please don't take this wrong but I think you need to throttle back a
> little or you may very well get yourself killed and/or wreck your new toy.
> Flying
>
> "along I-95 at about 300 AGL" with "weather was so marginal" or "between
> layers"
>
> on a test flight are not very safe practices. At a minimum, tests flights
> should be done only in strictly VFR conditions. I don't know you and you
> may have the experience and skill to survive this type of flying. I would
> suggest to you that the majority of pilots don't (not in the long run
> anyway). I am sure that you would not want your posts to influence someone
> else to stretch the envelope beyond what is safe. I have say that it
> appears that you have been flying this experimental aircraft during its
> initial testing period in a wreckless fashion.
>
> I will leave comments concerning your pattern work to those with RV
> experience but the thought of a 2500 fpm descent on a short final seems
> unwise at best.
>
> I am not yet a builder and all of my time has been military. I
> would be very interested in the opinions of other builders/GA pilots and
> possibly the RV factory on this subject.
>
> T. Wood
Hey T. Wood,
Chill out and welcome to general aviation! High sink slips on short
final aren't all that unusual in performance general aviation planes,
nor is flying about at 300 feet. Unlike the Navy where nearly
everything about every flight is planned to the nth degree, we in
small planes have some freedoms that Navy pilots will never get (and
Navy pilots have a few we don't get!). As to marginal VFR, it is a
relative term and who are you to judge based on the limited
information you had concerning their flight.
Sounded like a great flight to me. Wreckless? Hardly. Just my opinions, but
you asked!
Russ
russ(at)maui.net
Citabria N88303
RV4 N?????
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Electronic Ignition |
| From: | wstucklen1(at)juno.com (Frederic W Stucklen) |
Phone call to Jeff on 10/30/96 resulted in the following data. (Sorry if
I got a little wordy):
The electronic ignition system mounts into the right mag hole, using
the gear off the mag. Timing is achieved by setting the engine on #1 TDC
and, with the gear train of the unit fixed with a pop rivet nail, it's
inserted into the mag hole. This results in an much simplified
installation process. The coils are mounted on the firewall or onto the
motor mount with odell clamps and 3/4" angle alum brackets. Standard
spark plugs ( BY series aviation) are used, but must be gapped to .030".
High quality resistive auto ignition leads are used that the installer
trims to length and terminates. Spark plug end terminations are provided.
This results in an much simplified installation process when compared
to putting sensors out on the flywheel.
The control unit is also mounted to the firewall. While there are user
adjustable timing knobs, Jeff recommends that you stay with the factory
pre-set timing. Leads from the box include power (+12VDC), and tach
output (12Volt square wave), as well as manifold pressure input.
Care must be taken when hooking the Tach output up to the unit as
some electronic tachs do not isolate the magneto "P" lead voltages from
the tach inputs very well. Some mags will output pulses that are in
excess of 300 Volts and Jeff's unit will not withstand this voltage
level. In most cases (as with the Electronics International units) a
resistor in the tach input lead may have to be adjusted to sense the 12
Volt Square wave output from the electronic ignition.
Using the standard ignition switch with the unit is not possible
without the use of a relay. normal ignition switches open the "P" lead
from a grounded condition when the ignition switch is turn "ON". The
electronic ignition requires that the same "ON" position be at +12VDC.
Also, the shorting strap on your ignition switch that grounds the right
mag "P" lead when the switch is in the "START" position, will have to be
removed.
For the technical people out there, here some information on how the
timing is achieved. Engine timing is achieved by the summation of two
curves, one based upon RPM, and one based upon manifold pressure. The RPM
curve starts out at 0* at engine OFF, and goes up to 20* at IDLE, then up
to 25* at 2500 RPM, then up to 35* at 3000 RPM. The manifold pressure
curve adds 2* for every inch of manifold pressure below 24".
The summation of these curves results in a starting firing angle of
0*, and an idle firing angle of 37* at sea level. The firing angle at
11,000 MSL would be somewhere around 43*.
Jeff stated that the user should get between 12%-15% fuels savings
with his unit, and that the engine idle would be much better. An approx 5
HP increase should also be achievable.
Cost is $785.00 plus shipping.......
Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
wstucklen1(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "r.acker" <r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Forest Agency phone number |
>
>A quickbuilder already looking into insuring the finished product? It IS
>true, you just throw the kit up in the air and it lands as a finished plane :)
>
>-Scott Gesele N506RV
I think Tim meant replacing his Avemco builder's insurance, *before* its a
finished product.
Rob Acker
E-mail: r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com
RV-6Q project: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rob_acker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dann_Parks(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Dann Parks) |
| Subject: | Re: Microsoft Flight Simuator RV-6A Model. |
>>Just in time for your holiday gift giving, Microsoft will be releasing a new
>>Win95 version of Flight Simulator in the next two or three weeks.
Microsoft IS releasing a WIN95 version of FS in November. I saw it demoed at
the AOPA convention and wasn't too impressed. Not a lot of improvements in
terrain modeling and the additional planes are already available. What I'm
waiting for is the release of Sierra Pilot Pro early next year. Sierra bought
Sub Logic (the original developers of FS) and is a adding USGS terrain
mapping for the entire U.S. and supposedly thousands of airports. It should
be possible to rehearse cross-countries into new areas and get a pretty good
idea what the trip and the approach will look like -- and what to look out
for. They're also suppose to be adding multi-player support so maybe a
"virtual" RV fly-in is in the future. Seriously though, these are powerful
tools for training (along with textbooks, videos, magazine articles, hanger
flying and, or course, flight instructors). Not too many years ago this kind
of stuff cost millions and was only available to commercial and military
pilots. Take advantage of it.
Dann Parks
dann_parks(at)kteh.pbs.org
...starting a 6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Schmidt/UB Networks <Mike_Schmidt(at)UB.com> |
| Subject: | RV-6 Elevator pushrods |
>RV Builders,
>A fellow builder and I are trying to determine the length of the F689(fwd) and
>F690(aft) elevator pushrods.
>As recently noted on the list the F689 pushrod must have a hole cut in the F604
>bulkhead to be installed. We hope to avoid this by installing F689 before the
>fuselage skins are riveted in the jig. If the neutral positions for the control
>column(15 degrees fwd.) and bellcrank(vert.) given in the manual are followed
it
>seems the bellcrank will almost run out of travel at full up elevator. Has
>anyone adjusted the neutral position of the control column or sticks
differently
>(eg. sticks more vertical and/or bellcrank tilted slightly fwd.)? Has the
length
>of the F689 pushrod ended up near the plans dimension of 47.5 "? Perhaps a
>mechanical engineer type could comment on ideal bellcrank pushrod relations.
>On a related note how large a cutout in the F604 bulkhead flange have builders
>had to make? It appears the entire flange will have to be trimmed off which
>makes us a bit nervous. We can add a new flange for the seat rib but the F604
is
>a different case.
I plan to have a cut out in the bottom of F607 bulkhead to accommodate
installation and removal of the push pull tube. This cut out should have a
doubler similar to that in F605 and F606. My reccomendation would be not to
modify the F604 bulkhead. Hope this helps.
regards,
Mike Schmidt RV6 fusalage
mschmidt @ ub.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.su.OZ.AU> |
Dear List,
I am contemplating an S-TEC single axis autopilot. Anyone have experience
with these systems and in particular with fitting them to a 6/6A.
Leo Davies
leo(at)icn.su.oz.au
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition Mag Trigger? |
<< What I'm curious about in ignitions is pressurization. Some airplanes,
probably the turbocharged ones, have pressurized mags. This is to keep
the electricity from arcing as the air gets thinner with altitude. Do we
RVers need to worry about such things with electronic ignition?
--
Fred New, future RV-6Aer, feelers out for finding a garage
IC Systems | Mustame tee 12 | EE0006 Tallinn | Estonia
Internet--fred(at)ics.ee voice--(372) 656-5477 fax--(372) 656-5476
>>
Hi all,
I talked with Klaus Savier, Lightning Speed, about this. The high altitude
problem for the magneto is the result of arcing in the distributor as the
thinner air provides less insulating qualities. The aftermarket electronic
ignition systems do not have distributors. Just the Lazer EI
(magneto/electronic) TSO'd ignition system has retained a distributor.
Jim Ayers
LOM M332A Ivoprop RV-3 N47RV Maroon Marauder
LesDrag(at)aol.com
Thousand Oaks, Ca. USA
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: ElectroAir EI System |
<< After speeking to Mr. Rose yesterday I felt comportable with his system.
He
has sold over 700 units in the past six years. Van has been flying behind
one of his systems in his RV-4 (according to Jeff).
(stuff cut)
Gary Corde
RV-6 N211GC
"Jersey Lightning"
>>
Hi all,
According to Klaus Savier, Van removed Jeff Rose's electronic ignition
system, and installed the Lightning Speed ignition system. And Van now cares
the Lightning Speed ignition system in his Options Catalog.
In talking to Klaus, it occured to me that the saying about "a cheap tool can
be the most expensive tool you buy" may also apply to a cheap electronic
ignition.
Jim Ayers
LOM M332A Ivoprop RV-3 N47RV Maroon Marauder
LesDrag(at)aol.com
Thousand Oaks, Ca. USA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dean Spencer <dspencer(at)kiva.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic Ignition |
Frederic W Stucklen wrote:
>
> Phone call to Jeff on 10/30/96 resulted in the following data. (Sorry if
> I got a little wordy):
>
> The electronic ignition system ....
> Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
> wstucklen1(at)juno.com
Thanks for relaying the info Fred.
Scott
N4ZW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Edward Cole <emcole(at)concentric.net> |
I'll probably get shot at for suggesting this, but I think it would be
handy to know where we RV builders/flyers are located. My purpose is not
to intrude on anyone's privacy, but to be able to visit or contact those
close to us, or when traveling, who to contact in a particular area. Some
of us might be neighbors, and not even know it! There used to be a list,
but I don't know if it has been updated with all the new listers.
I was thinking only name, city , state, email address (optional)
Ed Cole
Cupertino, CA.
emcole(at)concentric.net
Thanks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: Cost of Building an RV (a/c owning cost) |
The economics of aircraft ownership: (If you are already sold, press delete!)
I worked out this little memonic to help me remember what the costs consist of:
Fixed Costs:
M Money cost - what you pay in interest or could have gotten by investing
the cash you put out.
A Annual inspection (don't include fix stuff costs here)
D Decline in value - or increase!!
H Hangar or tiedown
I Insurance and license fees
T Taxes - remember to subtract gains if you have tax benefits
Variable Costs:
F Fuel and oil
E Engine overhaul reserves
M Maintenance - fixing stuff during year or at annual
P Prop Overhaul Reserves
I Instrument servicing & overhaul
Now all you have to do is ask around and fill in the boxes. A short course in
cost accounting would be helpful. If you see something wrong here, let me know.
Now about the economics of the RV....
Annual reduction in % and $ costs of operating RV6AQ instead of Debonair
M 50% 3000 Your money costs may vary
A 50% 350 One every other year
D 150% -600 Deb gains in value with time.
H 0 0 No diff
I ? less Maybe same (certainly not $$AVEMCO$$)
T ? less Probably less
F 40% 2000 8gph vs 13 - Even less with autogas
E 50% 1000 10K@2000 hrs vs 15K@1500 hrs
M 90% 1800 Monster savings in airframe maint costs
P 90% 500 Fixed vs C/S
I 0 Probably savings here such as on fuel gauges
=============================
$8050 Annually (200 hrs)
Check actual numbers for your own - preferably with spreadsheet!
So how do you figure the value of your time? Hopefully, it is
LABOR_COST = VALUE_OF_MY_TIME - VALUE_OF_BUILDING_JOY = $0.00
Now comes a guy with Laser?? ignition system claiming up to 15% fuel reduction.
Auto engine (non rotary) should reduce costs by a large amount - purchase cost,
overhaul and repair costs, autogas and greater effieciency.
With all certificated a/c, parts costs are astronomical. Higher for Beech. I
have on my keychain a worn out bushing. It looks like a pencil eraser with a
hole thru it - like a 1/2 inch long piece of mild steel pipe 5/16 inch OD & 3/16
inch ID. There are four in the elevator hinges at $56.00 each. If it were
were for your RV, you could make one from some standard bushing stock,
5/16 by 3/16 at about $3.00 per foot! A 12 inch long, 3/4 inch diam tube,
smashed flat on each end with bearings (crude rod ends) - $1700.00 and so on.
$611 for a throttle cable actually made by Cablecraft and about $80 but no
official Beech papers.
I seek to escape this madness, probably by building an RV-6AQ and selling the
Debonair.
Hal Kempthorne
Debonair N6134V
halk(at)sybase.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rwoodard(at)lawyernet.com |
This is just barely related to rv-stuff...
I'm considering the purchase of one of those new digital cameras to
document the construction of my RV-8. Has anyone had any experience with
them. Does anyone have any pictures from a digital camera on their web
page that I might take a look at? One of the cameras I'm considering has
output suitable for a video recorder. I'm thinking that I could just
down load the images to tape and have a permanent record. I'd also be
able to share pictures via the net.... you know the whole "a picture is
worth a thousand words" thing....
Thanks in advance.
Rod Woodard
RWoodard(at)lawyernet.com
RV-8, #80033
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition Mag Trigger? |
Elon wrote:
> However, all that being said I'm still NOT a proponent of electronic
> ignitions systems for aircraft. Some of the claims are outlandish and there
> is no definitive data. The systems are a transplant from smog motors that
> run so lean a spark gap of .065" is needed to even start the burn - they
> need a flamethrower CDI. The principal reason autos went "electronic" was
> in 1972 the EPA statutorily mandated emissions components must last 50,000
> miles(it is now 70Kmi). None of which applies to any aircraft. Don't get me
> wrong, its wonderful technology its just not legally required for our
> applications and no one has produced data to justify the expense.
We wouldn't want to do anything experimental!
Is the RV the world's first Certificated Kit?
hal
halk(at)sybase.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dean Spencer <dspencer(at)kiva.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition Mag Trigger? |
Hal Kempthorne wrote:
>
> Elon wrote:
>
> > However, all that being said I'm still NOT a proponent of electronic
> > ignitions systems for aircraft. Some of the claims are outlandish and there
> > is no definitive data. The systems are a transplant from smog motors that
> > run so lean a spark gap of .065" is needed to even start the burn - they
> > need a flamethrower CDI. The principal reason autos went "electronic" was
> > in 1972 the EPA statutorily mandated emissions components must last 50,000
> > miles(it is now 70Kmi). None of which applies to any aircraft. Don't get me
> > wrong, its wonderful technology its just not legally required for our
> > applications and no one has produced data to justify the expense.
>
> We wouldn't want to do anything experimental!
>
> Is the RV the world's first Certificated Kit?
> hal
> halk(at)sybase.com
Will your mags vary the spark advance? Variable timing is as critical to
good engine performance/efficiency as a variable pitch prop is to
propulsion perpormance/efficiency. Mags are set at a 'compromise'
setting allowing the engine to both idle and run wide open -but not
optimum for either.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Scott
N4ZW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BPattonsoa(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Cost of Building an RV (Chatter) |
Keeping the Actual Costs of building and flying a RV, or any other airplane,
boat, glider, or fancy car....
Are you Crazy?
Must be a lot of single folks out there who havent figured it out. You know
the joke about the man on his deathbed telling his wife "For Gods Sake, don't
sell the tools (airplane, etc) for what I said they cost..
Bruce Patton
Just sent a check to Vans last month for that $8,000 motor/prop combination
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 wing kits |
DOES ANYBODY HAVE A LIST OF WHO IS BUILDING THE
RV-8? HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO GET THE WING KIT?
ARE THEY SHIPPING THE SPARS, IF NOT -- WHEN ARE THEY GOING TOO
THANKS
JOHN BUNN (RV - 8 # 80023)
JTB520(at)AOL.COM
INDIANAPOLIS, IN.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: trailing edge bender design |
I used Van's depiction of the 2X8 bending brake for the rudder and elevators
and the trailing edge bends came out perfect. I positioned the trailing edge
exactly 1/8" away from the hinge, clamped the rudder or elevator securely to
the bottom 2X8 and brought the top of the brake down in one smooth motion.
I also brought it all the way down and by doing this the leading edge gap
between the top and bottom came out nearly perfect.
I have seen the other method, but have not tried it so I cannot make a
comparison.....Good Luck
Empenage almost finished, wings due in three weeks....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dougb(at)mail.diac.com (Doug Bloomberg) |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition Mag Trigger? |
-->snip
>I agree with almost everything you've said about the advantages of
>electronic ignition. It's another thing on my must-have list.
>
e.
>
>What I'm curious about in ignitions is pressurization. Some airplanes,
>probably the turbocharged ones, have pressurized mags. This is to keep
>the electricity from arcing as the air gets thinner with altitude. Do we
>RVers need to worry about such things with electronic ignition?
>
>--
>Fred New, future RV-6Aer, feelers out for finding a garage
--| Date: | Oct 31, 1996 |
| From: | kightdm(at)carol.net (Danny Kight) |
| Subject: | ANR Headset Kit - It Works! |
Hey look Ma, no noise!
Just before Oshkosh this year, I saw an advertisement from a company called
Headsets, Inc. that claimed I could "Add ANR (Active Noise Reduction) to
your Headset for a Fraction of the Cost of a New Headset!" (The same ad is
in the October "Sport Aviation" on page 30.) They sell the electronic
circuitry that you install in your own headset.
I had borrowed a Telex ANR headset from a friend a couple of years ago, and
it really did cut down on the fatiguing low-frequency noise. It was a neat
gadget, but was also about $450, and way too expensive for me.
I had never heard anything (good or bad) about Headsets, Inc., but I called
the 800 number and got a free information package. It had some good color
photos of the kit, positive endorsements from "The Aviation Consumer",
"Kitplanes", and "Western Flyer" magazines, and some technical specs
including a frequency vs. attenuation chart. Most importantly, it had the
price: $159 plus $7 shipping and handling!
This sounded like a really good deal, which to my conservative mentality
usually means LOOK OUT, YOU ARE ABOUT TO GET RIPPED OFF!!! However, I was
feeling particularly bold one day, so I wrote them a check and crossed my
fingers. A couple of weeks later, a box arrived at the house. Inside was a
very good looking and complete kit with detailed instructions. It even had a
roll of solder. So far, so good. After reading the instructions a few
times, I took my trusty Flightcom 5DX headset to the workbench and started
disemboweling it, wondering if I was really doing the right thing.
The kit is very straightforward, but you need to be comfortable cutting,
stripping, and soldering the very tiny wires that are in a headset. You
will need a soldering iron with a fine point, or do like I did, and safety
wire a piece of 1/8" steel rod to your soldering gun tip. (For $50,
Headsets, Inc. will install the kit for you.) It took me about 3 hours to
put everything together, but I was not in a hurry.
The kit comes with a small battery box (for a 9v battery) with an on/off
toggle switch. When I plugged the power cord in and turned it on, it
actually worked! I had the radio on in the shop, and when I flipped the
switch, the bass notes in the music virtually disappeared. The system is
designed to counteract noise below 500 Hz. with a peak active attenuation of
15 dB at 200 Hz.
OK, it works on the ground, but what about in the air, where it really
counts? Yep, it works in real use. The Sonerai I fly has 4 short exhaust
stacks that exit the bottom of the cowl cheeks. It is a lot noisier than an
RV, and I usually wear earplugs under my headset, then turn the volume on
the radio all the way up so I can hear it. Not any more! I can leave the
earplugs out, and set the radio volume at a reasonable level.
How does it compare to other (more expensive) ANR headsets? To give it the
ultimate comparison, I borrowed a BOSE ANR headset ($1,000) from a very
trusting friend and took both sets to our EAA chapter meeting, along with a
tape recording of my lawn mower. Played at high volume, with your eyes
closed, it's easy to imagine you are in my plane! We all took turns
listening to the $1,000 BOSE headset, then to the $166 homebrew headset.
The overall consensus was: The BOSE set is slightly quieter when turned off
(passive attenuation only) and slightly more comfortable due to the extra
squishy ear seals, but when powered up, both units are about the same,
noisewise!
OK, is there anything negative about the kit? Maybe. My Flightcom headset
used to be stereo before I transmogrified it. Due to the way Flightcom
grounds the seperate stereo channels, I had to convert it into a mono unit.
This doesn't bother me, because I don't have a stereo in the plane. It may
be a drawback for the more pampered pilots. Also, they claim that you must
use gel-filled earseals. Dry or foam filled seals are not as airtight, and
won't give good results. I bought some gel-filled seals from Acousticom
(1-800-664-0534) for $12 a set.
Sorry, this has gotten way too long, but if anyone has any questions, I'll
be happy to ramble some more.
Danny Kight kightdm(at)carol.net
RV-6 first wing in the jig
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Hartmann <hartmann(at)sound.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Digital Cameras |
>
>I'm considering the purchase of one of those new digital cameras to
>document the construction of my RV-8. Has anyone had any experience with
>them. Does anyone have any pictures from a digital camera on their web
>page that I might take a look at? One of the cameras I'm considering has
I didn't use a digital camera for the pictures on my web page, but I have
considered one for documenting construction. The ability to blow-up, crop,
and annotate a digitized image then print for inclusion in the builder's log
is ideal. I've been doing it the old fashioned way by scanning photographs
taken with a 35mm camera then editing and printing. The quality offered by
the relatively inexpensive digital cameras seems adequate for our purpose,
and it would be great to save the extra step involved in scanning. Not to
mention that you could see right now if you got a decent image of the detail
you were trying to capture. Epson makes a digital camera with a built in
flash that is at the top of my list to Santa for this year. You will find
some samples of digital stil pictures from Kodak on their web page at
http://www.kodak.com. Epson used to have samples on their page at,
coincidently enough, http://www.epson.com.
You (and ALL other RV enthusiasts) should already be familiar with Jon
Johanson. On his *second* solo flight around the world in his RV-4 he
carried a tiny Kodak digital camera to document his adventure. Some of
those pictures are available at http://www.saaa.nasma.com/jonjoh/jon.html.
Well worth the look for everybody even remotely interested in RVs, flying,
adventure, modern day heroic role models, or worthy applications of modern
digital technology.
- Mike
hartmann(at)sound.net
http://www.sound.net/~hartmann
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kightdm(at)carol.net (Danny Kight) |
| Subject: | Has anyone experienced the following while building an RV: |
Greg Bordelon recently addressed the intangible benefits of building an
airplane with your kids...
>It sounds as though your teenagers have participated in the
>project. Did you make any promises while building with the teenagers
>like.......I'm going to teach you guys this fly in the RV........ or
>.........we're going to fly to Oshkosh (or where ever) and have a blast.
>
>Don't give your teenagers just broken promises. They're spending their time
>with you on something positive. They could be off doing something negative
>like drugs. If you decide the RV project is more than your budget can
>handle, ask your kids for their opinions, let them be part of the decision
>process. By doing so, you will have kept them involved and extinguished any
>ill feelings that may develop later.
I'm sorry Greg had those bad experiences. I was more fortunate. I built my
first airplane with my Dad while I was in high school. It was one of the
early ultralights, (a Nomad) and we took turns flying it. As I look back on
those days, I still have fond and vivid memories of the flights we made, but
the best memories are those of doing something I really loved WITH MY DAD.
Like Greg, I am flying my second plane (Sonerai), and building an RV-6
(first wing in the jig). I also have 4 kids and I involve them in the
project as much as possible. For me, the thrill of building and flying is
really intensified by sharing it with them, and I think they feel the same
way. Take Greg's advice, it is sound.
Danny Kight
kightdm(at)carol.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "r.acker" <r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Digital Cameras |
>This is just barely related to rv-stuff...
>
>I'm considering the purchase of one of those new digital cameras to
>document the construction of my RV-8. Has anyone had any experience with
>them. Does anyone have any pictures from a digital camera on their web
>
>Rod Woodard
>RWoodard(at)lawyernet.com
>RV-8, #80033
>
>
Rod,
I work for an outfit that makes a digital camera...please contact me e-mail
for details.
Rob Acker / RV-6Q
r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rob_acker
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mikel(at)dimensional.com |
| Subject: | Re: canopy base sealing |
>Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 11:01:21
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>From: mikel(at)dimensional.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: canopy base sealing
>
>>Hi folks!
>>
>>I'm in the process of fitting the canopy (-4) to the frame and trimming
>>the */&*!? skirts.
>>Has anybody used a sealant like RTV when riveting or screwing the */&*!?
>>skirts to the canopy and frame?
>>
>>Thanks from good ol'Europe...
>>RV-4 HB-YES
>>Dan Ruiters
>>
>
>Dan: Ah, yes, the joy of installing the canopy skirts. First of all,
resign yourself to the fact that, no matter how many times you fit and file
and fit and file when you clamp them on for the final time, they will not
fit as well as any of the temporary fittings.
>With that in mind, YES, there should be some sealant between the skirts and
the plexiglass as this is an area exposed to rain etc. and will leak if not
sealed. I also ran a fine line of sealant between the glass and frame to act
as a cushion. I used a thin line of clear RTV but tried it out on a scrap
piece of the glass first to make sure there would be no reaction between the
RTV and the glass. Worked fine.
>
>Best of luck; go slowly and with a smile on your face.
>
>Micheal RV-4 232SQ
>mikel(at)dimensional.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jpl(at)showpg.mn.org (Joe Larson) |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
> Chill out and welcome to general aviation! High sink slips on short
> final aren't all that unusual in performance general aviation planes,
> nor is flying about at 300 feet.
As I understand it, flying along the highway at 300 feet is in violation
of the FARs, guys. Except for takeoffs and landings, you're not supposed
to come within 500 feet of an occupied building or vehicle. Unless no
one was *on* the freeway, flight at 300 AGL would violate this FAR.
Furthermore, if this was through a yellow area of the sectionals, the
distance is 1000 feet.
Maybe I'm totally misunderstanding the FARs, but I don't think so.
-J
--
Joe Larson jpl(at)showpg.mn.org 612-591-1037
Showpage Software, Inc. http://www.wavefront.com/~showpg
14190 47th Ave N.
Plymouth, Mn 55446 Future RV-6A pilot.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | twood <woodfam(at)aloha.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
>RE:
>
>> Bill,
>> Please don't take this wrong but I think you need to throttle back a
>> little or you may very well get yourself killed and/or wreck your new toy.
>> Flying
>>
>> "along I-95 at about 300 AGL" with "weather was so marginal" or "between
>> layers"
>>
>> on a test flight are not very safe practices. At a minimum, tests flights
>> should be done only in strictly VFR conditions. I don't know you and you
>> may have the experience and skill to survive this type of flying. I would
>> suggest to you that the majority of pilots don't (not in the long run
>> anyway). I am sure that you would not want your posts to influence someone
>> else to stretch the envelope beyond what is safe. I have say that it
>> appears that you have been flying this experimental aircraft during its
>> initial testing period in a wreckless fashion.
>>
>> I will leave comments concerning your pattern work to those with RV
>> experience but the thought of a 2500 fpm descent on a short final seems
>> unwise at best.
>>
>> I am not yet a builder and all of my time has been military. I
>> would be very interested in the opinions of other builders/GA pilots and
>> possibly the RV factory on this subject.
>>
>> T. Wood
>
>Hey T. Wood,
>
>Chill out and welcome to general aviation! High sink slips on short
>final aren't all that unusual in performance general aviation planes,
>nor is flying about at 300 feet. Unlike the Navy where nearly
>everything about every flight is planned to the nth degree, we in
>small planes have some freedoms that Navy pilots will never get (and
>Navy pilots have a few we don't get!). As to marginal VFR, it is a
>relative term and who are you to judge based on the limited
>information you had concerning their flight.
>
>Sounded like a great flight to me. Wreckless? Hardly. Just my opinions,
but you asked!
>
>Russ
>russ(at)maui.net
>Citabria N88303
>RV4 N?????
>
>
Who am I? I'm the guy who tried to comfort the mother of a pilot that went
flying in "marginal VFR" weather and planted his aircraft and two other
human beings into the side a mountain. That mother was convinced that there
must have been some mechanical problem because she thought her son was a
"good" pilot. Wasn't much fun, but you are welcome to try it sometime if
you don't want to take my word for it.
Last time I checked, continued VFR flight into IMC conditions was second
only to running out of gas in causal factors for GA mishaps. I think that's
reason enough for caution.
Lets try not to resort to stereotypes here. Navy pilots have plenty of
freedom, but careful flight planning, especially for a test flight is
essential to flight safety and a mark of a professional pilot. OBTW, I made
no comment about, or have any knowledge of the quality of the flight
planning that was done prior to the subject flight.
There is another thread running right now, of a Kitfox which spun and
crashed after an engine out on the first flight. Many have commented that
the pilot made several serious headwork mistakes when planning this first
flight. We can't have it both ways. We can't glorify and condone reckless
behavior and then criticize it if it results in an accident.
I did ask for your opinion. We disagree, but I'm glad you wrote.
Terray
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Elon Ormsby <ormsby1(at)popsicle.llnl.gov> |
| Subject: | Electronic ignition (chat) |
Bob, as always I appreciate your response. First off, I have always been
wanting to know how do you make those nicely indented paragraphs when you
reply in e-mail? It makes it so easy to read but when I try it with spaces,
different e-mail systems cause a wrap-around and mess everything up. Since
I can't make things orderly like you I will tag your and my name to add
clarity to this response.
--------------------------
*Elon* However, all that being said I'm still NOT a proponent of electronic
ignitions systems for aircraft. Some of the claims are outlandish and there
is no definitive data.
*Bob* There's LOTS of data . . . available from any lab that can run engine
in test cells for whatever purpose.
*Elon* Please lead me in the right direction. Indicate a couple of the
reports you are referring to. Don't suggest a magazine article in the same
magazine that Klaus is advertising in the back. I don't want verbiage from
some self-serving magazine article with a journalism major touting the
claims of his advertiser. I have yet to see a good definitive engineering
report of test data done by a qualified, neutral, engineer with a focus on
quantifying the merits of the system. I am NOT baiting you - I would
seriously like to get my hands on a good "aviation related" test report.
----------------------------------
*Bob* At very low manifold pressures (idle and at full throttle and
altitude) flame fronts slow down . . so much in fact that with standard
magneto timing, the fire is still burning when the exhaust valves open . .
wasted energy.
*Elon* Totally agree. Computer controlled advance (or retard) is what gives
these systems the potential for better fuel efficiency. Re-read my post I
never said otherwise. Now show me the test cell report that gets a 15%-20%
fuel efficiency as some advertisements claim.
----------------------------------------
*Bob* Anyone who has seen Klaus demonstrate the sounds from his Vari-Eze
exhausts at idle can appreciate the fact that as ignition timing advanced,
the engine ran faster and quieter . . . .
*Elon* Totally irrelevant. My lawn mower (in fact any piston engine) will
demonstrate the SAME behavior at idle by varying the timing. I have never
disputed that. Are you suggesting its worth $700 - $3,600 to get an advance
mechanism? I would agree that if the "advance" can save $2,000 in fuel over
its life then it may be worth it. So show me a credible report. If Klaus
played this game to demonstrate the benefits of his system it doesn't
impress me.
--------------------------------
*Elon* The systems are a transplant from smog motors that run so lean a spark
gap of .065" is needed to even start the burn - they need a flamethrower CDI.
*Bob* I'm aware of no production engine using CDI (high-voltage charge of
a capacitor) in their electronic ignition architectures. In fact, CDI
sparks, while HOT are also SHORT...
*Elon* Geeze, can't I be a little descriptive! Ok, so it wasn't a
flamthrower. Actually, Kawasaki produced a CDI system on their 500cc three
cylinder, two-cycle motorcycle, from 69-75. My guess, total world-wide
production exceeded 50,000 units. They took a risk "experimenting" and
were so successfully that they laid the ground work for all of the copy-cat
electronic systems that came later. They used individual coils for each
cylinder and, of course, it being a two cycle, they fired each stroke. The
four cycle guys still use the same methodology and of course fire every
stroke (even on the EXHAUST stoke) it keeps things simpler. The claim is it
is designed that way to be CLEAN by firing the residual exhaust gasses! More
marketing swill!
However, my point was that an aviation cylinder is very different from a
liquid cooled auto. We already have TWO, magneto fired plugs - they have ONE
(rotaries and some others excepted). We are air cooled - they are liquid
cooled. We are gigantic in bore diameter - they are quite small. We run
reasonable mix ratios - they are computer controlled at 15:1 or GREATER! We
are low RPM, constant speed - they are higher RPM, variable speed. Of
course any auto would see impressive gains in efficiency when upgraded to an
electronic system. Transplanting it to an a/c engine and expecting the same
improvement in efficiency "may" have to be demonstrated. All of the
marketing hype says its true - so show me the data.
---------------------------
*Elon*...Don't get me wrong, its wonderful technology its just not legally
required for our applications and no one has produced data to justify the
expense.
*Bob* While there's no mandate for extended component life on airplanes,
how about my own requirements? I'd much rather mount a system on my
airplane that I can fix, with off the shelf automotive parts -AND- enjoy
both performance increases and longer component life (70K miles divided by
35 mph is 2,000 hrs . . . oh that magentos could be depended upon to run
that long!).
*Elon* Extended life is an important claim for electronic ignition. It is
absolutely proven in autos and too obvious to ignore. It should be just as
dependable in aircraft but show me an aircraft system that doesn't leave a
mag-like capability for fail-safe back-up. As the technology matures it will
become 100% electronic and 100% fail safe - it is not so today. At that
point it may also be less expensive and you bet I'll be an user.
Elon
ormsby1(at)popsicle.llnl.gov
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Elon Ormsby <ormsby1(at)popsicle.llnl.gov> |
| Subject: | Electronic ignition |
Elon wrote:
However, all that being said I'm still NOT a proponent of electronic
ignitions systems for aircraft. Some of the claims are outlandish and there
is no definitive data.
We wouldn't want to do anything experimental!
hal
-------------------------------
Hal, at my age, just getting up in the morning is an experiment! Thank God
each one is successful. I guess I should have said I'm am "neutral" on
electronic ignitions. Meaning I strongly support the good people willing to
experiment with them but I don't actively tell people they should be using
them. If costs or claims become more realistic I would be an advocate of
these systems.
Is the RV the world's first Certificated Kit?
With more than 5,000 kits sold I'll bet some people don't consider it
"experimental" but simply an excellent designed, safely engineered,
acrobatic stressed "strong" airplane. Quite the contrary to the word
"experimental" I would suggest that many buyers consider it "safer" than
many certified aircraft.
Elon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Elon Ormsby <ormsby1(at)popsicle.llnl.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition Mag Trigger? |
...Variable timing is as critical to good engine performance/efficiency as a
variable pitch prop is to propulsion performance/efficiency. Mags are set at
a 'compromise' setting allowing the engine to both idle and run wide open
-but not optimum for either.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Scott
------------------------------------------
You are absolutely right Scott. That is the major reason for going to the
new electronic systems - you get a computer controlled variable advance
capability. Go back and re-read my post. That is why I said:
(stuff snipped)"...the ability to optimize the computer advance as much as
15 - 25 degrees for optimum conditions ... may be reason enough to make the
conversion."
In fact, I suspect, that is the reason proponents are forecasting these
15%-20% increased fuel efficiencies.
Elon
ormsby1(at)llnl.gov
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ronald Vandervort <rvanderv(at)linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us> |
MD-42-BS pop rivets are called out for the trim tab horn that is
mounted on the inboard end of the tab per dwg 5a.
CS4-4 pop rivets are called out for the fibreglass tips on the
elevator and hor. stab. (countersunk)
As I am doing the trim tab horn on the underside of the tab
instead of at the end I would like to countersink the pop rivets using the
CS4-4 rather than use the non-countersunk MD-42-BS.
Looking thru the reference books that I have does not give me a
clue as to relative strengths of the aforementioned pop-rivets.
Thus my 2 part question;
1. Is it OK to use the CS4-4 in place of the MD-42-BS?
2. What is a good source for comparing specs on pop
rivets?
Thanks in advance for any responses.
Ron Vandervort, RV-6 Empenage finishing up, on to quickbuild
rvanderv(at)linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bennett(at)healey.com.au |
Er.... Country, Ed?
Peter Bennett
Sydney Australia
RV6 attaching empennage to fus
> Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 15:28:52 -0800
> From: Edward Cole <concentric.net!emcole(at)matronics.com>
> To: rv-list
> Subject: RV-List: Location
> Reply-to: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> I'll probably get shot at for suggesting this, but I think it would be
> handy to know where we RV builders/flyers are located. My purpose is not
> to intrude on anyone's privacy, but to be able to visit or contact those
> close to us, or when traveling, who to contact in a particular area. Some
> of us might be neighbors, and not even know it! There used to be a list,
> but I don't know if it has been updated with all the new listers.
> I was thinking only name, city , state, email address (optional)
> Ed Cole
> Cupertino, CA.
> emcole(at)concentric.net
>
> Thanks
>
>
Judith Bennett
Elanora Heights Primary School
Sydney Australia
http://www.zip.com.au/~elanora
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Elon Ormsby <ormsby1(at)popsicle.llnl.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: ElectroAir EI System |
>BTW Elon, IMO EI has advantages if you consider fuel burn alone. It is
>common to realize fuel savings in the order of 8 to 12 percent. A $800
>dollar EI system would pay for itself in 400 hours. Mr. Rose has dyno'ed one
>of his EI systems and reports a 5 hp increase when doing a back-to-back
>comparison over a mag only system.
>
>Gary Corde
>RV-6 N211GC
>"Jersey Lightning"
----------------------------------------
Gary, the numbers you indicate are great and I want to believe all of this
good data about 8,12,20% fuel efficiency but the trouble is - it is always
comes from the dyno of the GUY SELLING THE SYSTEM!
Elon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harold Sutphin <hsutphin(at)magicnet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Pop rivets-- |
I went ahead and used the AN426 Flush rivets when attaching the trim tab
horn. I figured that since I had to back rivet the lower spar to skin
rivets I could do the tab at the same time. I dimpled the horn and skin
for those rivets. Two of the rivets go thru the lower spar flange and
the horn. Its solid and looks good.
Harold
RV-6A//Wing kit//
Ronald Vandervort wrote:
>
> MD-42-BS pop rivets are called out for the trim tab horn that is
> mounted on the inboard end of the tab per dwg 5a.
> CS4-4 pop rivets are called out for the fibreglass tips on the
> elevator and hor. stab. (countersunk)
> As I am doing the trim tab horn on the underside of the tab
> instead of at the end I would like to countersink the pop rivets using the
> CS4-4 rather than use the non-countersunk MD-42-BS.
> Looking thru the reference books that I have does not give me a
> clue as to relative strengths of the aforementioned pop-rivets.
> Thus my 2 part question;
> 1. Is it OK to use the CS4-4 in place of the MD-42-BS?
> 2. What is a good source for comparing specs on pop
> rivets?
>
> Thanks in advance for any responses.
>
> Ron Vandervort, RV-6 Empenage finishing up, on to quickbuild
> rvanderv(at)linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harold Sutphin <hsutphin(at)magicnet.net> |
You should call Van's and ask for a list of builders in your surrounding
zip codes, they will be glad to send you the list.
Without encryption, I'm not sure many would like this type of list
broadcast as email.
Harold
RV-6A//Wing kit//
Edward Cole wrote:
>
> I'll probably get shot at for suggesting this, but I think it would be
> handy to know where we RV builders/flyers are located. My purpose is not
> to intrude on anyone's privacy, but to be able to visit or contact those
> close to us, or when traveling, who to contact in a particular area. Some
> of us might be neighbors, and not even know it! There used to be a list,
> but I don't know if it has been updated with all the new listers.
> I was thinking only name, city , state, email address (optional)
> Ed Cole
> Cupertino, CA.
> emcole(at)concentric.net
>
> Thanks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark D Hiatt" <OttoPilot_MSN(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Certificated Experimental? |
My wife and I had this discussion on the flightline at Oshkosh this summer.
She remarked that she was glad I had chosen an RV-6 because it didn't "look as
funny" as some of the other airplanes. It's not too big, not to small and most
importantly for her-not to *weird* looking! It's not a canard, there is no
see-through tubing girders, etc.-it looks like an airplane from the Airplane
Store.
At one time Van looked into certifying the RV-6. I'm sure many Listers will
remember the new lightplane standards that were trumpeted as saving general
aviation about a decade ago. Van and the RV-6A met most of the requirements,
but when push came to shove Van decided to play on this side of the court,
rather than spend the necessary money to put together a real factory, train
real airplane builders, and smooth out some of the construction challenges we
read about here every day and so on.
But the point is still important. I don't intend to stray from the plans much
at all with my airplane. Let someone else do all that math and fabrication.
One of the things that really drew me to the RV-6A was the sheer number of
them being built and flown all over. I figure that there is safety in numbers.
If the RV-6 flew like a dump truck, if it wasn't the value it is, if it wasn't
as capable as it is and very importantly if it was unsafe... there wouldn't be
so many on flightlines and in magazine spreads and mailing lists, etc.
Do I consider the RV-6A to be "Experimental?" No, not really. In the purest
sense of the word it is, sure. But I don't feel like I have anything to prove,
and I don't feel like I have any need to experiment. Poberezny The Elder tried
years ago to get a new "Custom-Built" designation into the FARs, so that
passengers wouldn't be immediately put off by seeing that big ol'
"EXPERIMENTAL" placard in the airplane they were about to go up in. I thought
it was a good idea then and I think it's a good idea, now. I'm working on a
kit-built airplane. I'm making a Custom-Built airplane. But I don't really
feel like it's an experiment of any kind.
Mark D Hiatt
OttoPilot_MSN(at)msn.com
Aviation Forum Manager,
The Microsoft Network
"Lincoln Nebraska's Largest Manufacturer of Personal Aircraft"
----------
From: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com on behalf of Elon Ormsby
Sent: Friday, November 01, 1996 1:59 AM
Subject: RV-List: Electronic ignition
Elon wrote:
Is the RV the world's first Certificated Kit?
With more than 5,000 kits sold I'll bet some people don't consider it
"experimental" but simply an excellent designed, safely engineered,
acrobatic stressed "strong" airplane. Quite the contrary to the word
"experimental" I would suggest that many buyers consider it "safer" than
many certified aircraft.
Elon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | OrndorffG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 wing kits |
John ,
Vans has started to ship a few RV8 wing kits without the spars, spars are
still a month or more away. for more info its best to call Vans ....George
Orndorff
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Digital Cameras |
| From: | wstucklen1(at)juno.com (Frederic W Stucklen) |
Hey Rod,
How quickly you forget! That's exactly what John Johanson was using
to put his pictures on his web site! Did you ever see the one's he took
of us at leadville?
Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
wstucklen1(at)juno.com
writes:
>This is just barely related to rv-stuff...
>
>I'm considering the purchase of one of those new digital cameras to
>document the construction of my RV-8. Has anyone had any experience with
>them. Does anyone have any pictures from a digital camera on their web
>page that I might take a look at? One of the cameras I'm considering has
>output suitable for a video recorder. I'm thinking that I could just
>down load the images to tape and have a permanent record. I'd also be
>able to share pictures via the net.... you know the whole "a picture is
>worth a thousand words" thing....
>
>Thanks in advance.
>
>Rod Woodard
>RWoodard(at)lawyernet.com
>RV-8, #80033
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dieck(at)apexcomm.net (Robert Dieck) |
| Subject: | Re: ElectroAir EI System |
>Cessna didn't go with the Slick Lazer EI system because it sucks.
>
>Gary Corde
>RV-6 N211GC
>"Jersey Lightning"
>
Come on be honest! What do you really think!!!
Robert/Tammie Dieck
dieck(at)apexcomm.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Patrick Kelley <patk(at)mail.ic.net> |
Edward Cole wrote:
>
> I'll probably get shot at for suggesting this, but I think it would be
> handy to know where we RV builders/flyers are located. My purpose is not
> to intrude on anyone's privacy, but to be able to visit or contact those
> close to us, or when traveling, who to contact in a particular area. Some
> of us might be neighbors, and not even know it! There used to be a list,
> but I don't know if it has been updated with all the new listers.
> I was thinking only name, city , state, email address (optional)
"Going to guns!...I got tone!...Firing guns!!!" :)
Seriously, I got a list from Van's just by asking for it. It's only as
up-to-date as the info they get from us, but it would have to be more
complete than the RV-list is capable of (how many are we now, 250?).
Contacting builders on that list is how I found out about both the
Michigan Wing of Van's Air Force and the RV-list. I'd rather you found
my address from Van's than by posting it on the Internet.
PatK - RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition Mag Trigger? |
<327958E0.141F(at)kiva.net>
| From: | wstucklen1(at)juno.com (Frederic W Stucklen) |
Tell that to somebody who uses one to cross 1400+ miles of water
non-stop, and RELIES on the fact that he get's a 15% fuel savings over
conventional mags. Jon Johanson wouldn't replace Klaus's unit now that
he's EXPERIENCED the difference. Before we criticize, maybe we had ought
to also...... Jon may indeed have actual test data to confirm the fuel
savings.
Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
wstucklen1(at)juno.com
writes:
>Hal Kempthorne wrote:
>>
>> Elon wrote:
>>
>> > However, all that being said I'm still NOT a proponent of
electronic
>> > ignitions systems for aircraft. Some of the claims are outlandish
and there
>> > is no definitive data. The systems are a transplant from smog motors
that
>> > run so lean a spark gap of .065" is needed to even start the burn -
they
>> > need a flamethrower CDI. The principal reason autos went
"electronic" was
>> > in 1972 the EPA statutorily mandated emissions components must last
50,000
>> > miles(it is now 70Kmi). None of which applies to any aircraft. Don't
get me
>> > wrong, its wonderful technology its just not legally required for
our
>> > applications and no one has produced data to justify the expense.
>> >> We wouldn't want to do anything experimental!
>>
>> Is the RV the world's first Certificated Kit?
>> hal
>> halk(at)sybase.com
>
>Will your mags vary the spark advance? Variable timing is as critical
>to
>good engine performance/efficiency as a variable pitch prop is to
>propulsion perpormance/efficiency. Mags are set at a 'compromise'
>setting allowing the engine to both idle and run wide open -but not
>optimum for either.
>
>Correct me if I'm wrong.
>
>Scott
>N4ZW
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | david_fried(at)smtpgwy.dehavilland.ca |
| Subject: | Ignition Questions |
Do you need to replace both mags or can one be left for redundancy?
If a mag can be retained, which, the standard or the one with the
impulse coupler?
Which plug is the better choice for conversion to the electronic
system, top or bottom?
I do mag checks during runup and shutdown. Has anybody tried this at
cruise power with one of these systems? Obviously only three of the
four possible combinations are of interest. The difference between the
fixed timing mag and the electronic device should be evident from this
simple test. Admittedly this delta is just part of the story if the
engine is relying on both plugs to generate full power.
On dual mag systems is there a power reduction with one mag off at
cruise power settings? If there is, then the second mag is not there
for redundancy only.
This thread has been enlightening and entertaining. For some of us it
may even be electrifying. Thanks for the input.
David Fried
dfried(at)dehavilland.ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM> |
>I am having second thought about the manual trim and I am looking for advice on
>the electric trim.
>How are builders that are doing electric trim handling trim indication in the
>cockpit or for those flying with electric trim, how do you determine during
>preflight that trim is neutral? Do you just look back at the trim tab?
Suggest you use MAC actuators from Menzimer for trim systems. These
devices have a built in potentiometer for driving a panel mounted
trim indicator. You can use either an analog meter -or- an LED
bar graph sort of device but in any case, knowing where the trim
tab is positioned shouldn't be a problem.
Regards,
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========oOOo=(_)=oOOo==========
| |
| Go ahead, make my day . . . |
| Show me where I'm wrong. |
=================================
72770.552(at)compuserve.com
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Davis" <jdavis1(at)ford.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Forest Agency phone number |
Does anyone have a contact at Forest?
--- Forwarded mail from rv-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 10:36:45 -0800
From: "r.acker" <r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Forest Agency phone number
>
>A quickbuilder already looking into insuring the finished product? It IS
>true, you just throw the kit up in the air and it lands as a finished plane :)
>
>-Scott Gesele N506RV
I think Tim meant replacing his Avemco builder's insurance, *before* its a
finished product.
Rob Acker
E-mail: r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com
RV-6Q project: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rob_acker
---End of forwarded mail from rv-list(at)matronics.com
--
Jeffrey S. Davis - Phone (313)845-5224
Senior Research Engineer
Advance Vehicle Technology
Ford Motor Company
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don McNamara <mcnamara(at)sbt.infi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ANR Headset Kit - It Works! |
Just for balance, here's another opinion:
I, too, bought the ANR kit and converted my trusty David Clark 10-20.
The result was good, and well worth the investment. Especially since
they sent me an upgraded component kit shortly after sending the first
kit, free of charge. Being somewhat electronically challenged, I gave
the "old" kit to a friend as payment for converting my DC--we both won.
Recently I bought an old Bose Series I headset from a friend who was
replacing his with the new Series II. I'm sorry, but there's just no
comparison. The ANR David Clark is now for my passenger!
If I'm going to invest $40-50K in building an airplane, I'm not going to
penny-pinch on a headset. I'd like to enjoy the flight.
Just my opinion.
--Don
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BestBillO(at)aol.com |
Leo Davies,
STEC @ Mineral Wells has recently completed an RV kit, based on an
RV-6, and it is my understanding that it is now available. However, it is
expensive. If you are only looking for a single axis system, the nav-aid
devices unit is quite satisfactory and about 1/3 the cost of the STEC.
Bill Orcutt, RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BestBillO(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: ANR Headset Kit - It Works! |
Dear List,
Just bought my first ANR headset: Telex ANR 200 for $378, and is
stereo or mono. Tremendous quality! Lightweight, and very effective! Not
as cheap as making my own, but ready to go. The real kicker is in flight - -
- what a wonderful engine sound that results. Makes my 160 hp "almost" sound
like a turbine!
Bill Orcutt, RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV6junkie(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition Mag Trigger? |
<< Some of the goodies are Knock detector, MAP (manifold pressure detector
used now by Jeff) Air mass sensor, several flow rate fuel injectors,
ability to have throttle body or multi port fuel injection, all computer
monitored and programable by the owner or other knowledgeable person. >>
Keep in mind when considering EFI for our engines (I have been doing my
homework) that our engines make too much mechanical noice for a knock sensor
to work. Additionally, if you operate your aircraft on 100LL, you can not
operate the EFI in "closed loop" mode because the lead in the fuel will
distroy the O2 sensor. This isn't a problem if all of the other sensors
(throttle posistion, MAP, air temp, water/oil temp and RPM) are all
functioning.
Gary Corde
RV-6 N211GC
Jersey Lightning
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | AB320FLYER(at)aol.com |
Jim,
I'm very interested in following your progress painting your RV. I have'nt
totally committed to painting the exterior myself, but I'm leaning that
direction. I am especially interested in your SW wash primer- acrylic enamel
experience, but also would appreciate some more information on your painting
rig. I have a one horse compressor which is entirely adequate for building
but definitely won't keep up with an HVLP. I guess the chioce would be a
bigger compressor or a turbine. Can you give me a little perspective here?
Joel Harding (RV-8, 8004, just received partial wing kit)
ab320flyer(at)aol.com
| Date: | Nov 01, 1996 |
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
> I'll probably get shot at for suggesting this, but I think it would be
> handy to know where we RV builders/flyers are located.
Yes, I'M going to shoot you -- for not specifying that replies
should be sent to someone (you for example) via PRIVATE email
to be posted later in a single email message.
I'm bracing for the flood!
Randall Henderson, RV-6
randall(at)edt.com
http://www.edt.com/homewing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russ Werner" <russ(at)maui.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
RE:
> As I understand it, flying along the highway at 300 feet is in violation
> of the FARs, guys. Except for takeoffs and landings, you're not supposed
> to come within 500 feet of an occupied building or vehicle. Unless no
> one was *on* the freeway, flight at 300 AGL would violate this FAR.
Flying along the freeway for me is 2000 feet away so I can fly at any
altitude I would like. You are correct, it is an FAR violation if you fly 300
feet over it. I spend as little of my light plane flying above 500
feet as possible. It is easy where I live.
Russ
Maui, Hawaii
russ(at)maui.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Edward Cole <emcole(at)concentric.net> |
healey.com.au!bennett(at)matronics.com wrote:
>
> Er.... Country, Ed?
>
> Peter Bennett
> Sydney Australia
> RV6 attaching empennage to fus
>
> > Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 15:28:52 -0800
> > From: Edward Cole <concentric.net!emcole(at)matronics.com>
> > To: rv-list
> > Subject: RV-List: Location
> > Reply-to: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>
> > I'll probably get shot at for suggesting this, but I think it would be
> > handy to know where we RV builders/flyers are located. My purpose is not
> > to intrude on anyone's privacy, but to be able to visit or contact those
> > close to us, or when traveling, who to contact in a particular area. Some
> > of us might be neighbors, and not even know it! There used to be a list,
> > but I don't know if it has been updated with all the new listers.
> > I was thinking only name, city , state, email address (optional)
> > Ed Cole
> > Cupertino, CA.
> > emcole(at)concentric.net
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> Judith Bennett
> Elanora Heights Primary School
>
> Sydney Australia
>
> http://www.zip.com.au/~elanoraSorry for my myopic view Peter. Of course, please include Country. I'd
love to get to Australia!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Edward Cole <emcole(at)concentric.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
Who am I? I'm the guy who tried to comfort the mother of a pilot that
went
(SNIP)
Lighten up you guys!!
I think you missed the whole point of the email!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | caummisa(at)arn.net (Richard Caummisar) |
Funny you should mention this, I was thinking the exact thing.
There is a short list at:
http://rv.austin.apple.com/jhovan/builders.html
but you can quickly see that there are far more builders than what's on the
list.
>I'll probably get shot at for suggesting this, but I think it would be
>handy to know where we RV builders/flyers are located. My purpose is not
>to intrude on anyone's privacy, but to be able to visit or contact those
>close to us, or when traveling, who to contact in a particular area. Some
>of us might be neighbors, and not even know it! There used to be a list,
>but I don't know if it has been updated with all the new listers.
>I was thinking only name, city , state, email address (optional)
>Ed Cole
>Cupertino, CA.
>emcole(at)concentric.net
>
>Thanks
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: ElectroAir EI System |
<< Actually the Rose system is still on the RV-4 and after a few problems
initially is running fine. I'm not sure where Klaus got his information. Ken
Scott put one of Klauses' systems on his RV-6 but we don't have one on any of
our airplanes at Van's. Take care.
Andy >>
I received this message from Andy Hanna today. I provided an incorrect
report in saying that Van had gone to the Lightning Speed electronic
ignition. Klaus may have confused Ken Scott's installation (RVator editor)
with the EI system going on one of Van's factory aircraft.
Jim Ayers
LOM M332A Ivoprop RV-3 N47RV Maroon Marauder
LesDrag(at)aol.com
Thousand Oaks, Ca. USA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dann_Parks(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Dann Parks) |
I got some information on the Navaid autopilot and it looks like a nice unit
on paper -- non-certified of course. What would be nice is a simple pressure
altitude hold companion to it. Their phone is (423) 267-3311. They also sent
along some photos of an RV6 installation provided to them by a builder
including diagrams and special brackets. I have no experience with the
product and am not promoting it, but I think low cost autopilots can be a
very valuable addition to the cockpit. Any reports from anyone flying the
unit...
Dann Parks
dann_parks(at)kteh.pbs.org
starting a 6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mmartin(at)perigee.net (Mitchell Martin) |
| Subject: | Re: ANR Headset Kit - It Works! |
Danny Kight wrote:
>
> Hey look Ma, no noise!
------snip--------
Is this really an ANR kit or just a good active high pass filter?
--
Regards, Mitch
Marshville, NC RV-6Q
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Martin Electronics Co. --- Communications Electronics and Computers
FCC Licenced and NABER Certified Technician ---- Amatuer Radio KA4OBE
mailto:mmartin@perigee.net -------- http://www.perigee.net/~mmartin
Finger mmartin(at)mail.perigee.net for PGP Public Key
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV6junkie(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Ignition Questions |
<< Do you need to replace both mags or can one be left for redundancy?>>
You keep one as a back-up.
<< If a mag can be retained, which, the standard or the one with the
impulse coupler?>>
I would keep the one with the IC just incase.
<< Which plug is the better choice for conversion to the electronic
system, top or bottom?>>
Doesn't matter, however, most seem to use the bottom for the EI because they
think the bottom mag arangement would foul.
<< I do mag checks during runup and shutdown. Has anybody tried this at
cruise power with one of these systems? Obviously only three of the
four possible combinations are of interest. The difference between the
fixed timing mag and the electronic device should be evident from this
simple test. Admittedly this delta is just part of the story if the
engine is relying on both plugs to generate full power. >>
>From what I have been told by people using EI systems, when tou turn off the
mag you will notice no change in RPM however, when you turn off the EI system
it's like you pulled the throttle WAY back.
Hope the above helps.
Gary Corde
RV-6 N211GC
Jersey Lightning
________________________________________________________________________________
>
> I got some information on the Navaid autopilot and it looks like a nice unit
> on paper -- non-certified of course. What would be nice is a simple pressure
> altitude hold companion to it. Their phone is (423) 267-3311. They also sent
> along some photos of an RV6 installation provided to them by a builder
> including diagrams and special brackets. I have no experience with the
> product and am not promoting it, but I think low cost autopilots can be a
> very valuable addition to the cockpit. Any reports from anyone flying the
> unit...
>
There are many reports about the navaid autopilot in the archives.
Many people like it.
dk
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don Karl karl@dg-rtp.dg.com (919)248-5915
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ANR Headset Kit - It Works! |
Don McNamara wrote:
>
> Just for balance, here's another opinion:
>
> I, too, bought the ANR kit and converted my trusty David Clark 10-20.
> The result was good, and well worth the investment. Especially since
> they sent me an upgraded component kit shortly after sending the first
> kit, free of charge. Being somewhat electronically challenged, I gave
> the "old" kit to a friend as payment for converting my DC--we both won.
>
> Recently I bought an old Bose Series I headset from a friend who was
> replacing his with the new Series II. I'm sorry, but there's just no
> comparison. The ANR David Clark is now for my passenger!
>
> If I'm going to invest $40-50K in building an airplane, I'm not going to
> penny-pinch on a headset. I'd like to enjoy the flight.
>
> Just my opinion.
>
> --Don
Another opinion
I to have tried the $1000.00 Bose and the $150.00 kit and also the
$450.00 Telex and find none are worth the money. I have found that
none are as comfortable as my Peltor 7004 head.
This is just my opinion from my experience using different headsets
while flight instructing. But if everybody liked the same thing
everybody in the world would be flying RV-6's right?(g)
--
Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS First flight July 14, 1989 :-) Hillsboro, OR
jerryflyrv(at)village.yvv.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | twood <woodfam(at)aloha.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
>Who am I? I'm the guy who tried to comfort the mother of a pilot that
>went
>(SNIP)
>Lighten up you guys!!
>I think you missed the whole point of the email!
>
>
Maybe I did. I thought his point was "Chill out": no big deal, great way to
conduct a flight. I also thought his second point was: What right do you
have to comment on the flight?
I disagree that that is a safe attitude. Sorry if I pounded the podium too
hard, but I am surprised that many (most?) of you don't find this attitude
risky.
Terray
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Edward Cole <emcole(at)concentric.net> |
Randall Henderson wrote:
>
> > I'll probably get shot at for suggesting this, but I think it would be
> > handy to know where we RV builders/flyers are located.
>
> Yes, I'M going to shoot you -- for not specifying that replies
> should be sent to someone (you for example) via PRIVATE email
> to be posted later in a single email message.
>
> I'm bracing for the flood!
>
> Randall Henderson, RV-6
> randall(at)edt.com
> http://www.edt.com/homewingRandall,
I was hoping we'd all benefit from this
ED
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: ElectroAir EI System |
Jim Ayers said:
[snip!]
I provided an incorrect
> report in saying that Van had gone to the Lightning Speed electronic
> ignition. Klaus may have confused Ken Scott's installation (RVator editor)
> with the EI system going on one of Van's factory aircraft.
I don't know all that much about EIs, but I did help Ken install the
Lightspeed in his RV-6. I would have to say that after doing that, I
would be leaning towards the other type. The installation involves
bolting a sensor to the engine block right behind the flywheel, such
that a magnet on the flywheel goes past it at every revolution with
very little clearance. Getting the sensor installed and in the right
place with the very tight tolerances behind the flywheel was tricky
and time consuming, and I'm still wondering how well it will stay
precisely in place with all the vibration up there. And drilling and
tapping the flywheel for the magnet -- well, not being an experienced
engine mechanic I find that kind of thing to be just a little scary.
Ken did have a machine shop do it, but for reasons I don't remember,
it ended up WRONG and Ken ended up having to drill another hole 180
degrees from the first.
Yes, Ken is the "Dummy" and I was his apprentice for this mission, but
I'm just not sure I'm all that comfortable with the degree to which
the installation depends on the ability of the installer (Dummy or
not) to get it in just exactly the right place, and fixed so it will
not move. Of course, if the sensor ever did get out of place, the
worst that would likely happen is that you would lose the EI and be
running on one mag.
Other than that, and some frustratring problems that turned out to be
a result of poorly crimped connections (not the manufacturer's as I
recall), the thing seems to work quite well. There's barely a
noticable RPM drop when you switch off the remaining mag, and the
engine seems to run smoother overall. Ken has the numbers for fuel
burn, I don't know what it really did for efficency. I didn't
fly the plane much myself before the EI (or the Sensenich metal prop)
was installed, so I don't have any real personal basis for comparison.
Unfortulately it's all MOOT for the time being, at least until Ken
rebuilds the aft end of his fuselage, puts a new tail on it, installs
new fairings, prop, spinner, one wing skin, and all the other stuff
that got mashed when a runaway Chevy Impala drove into it while it
was parked in a hangar in Medford... :-(
Randall Henderson, RV-6
randall(at)edt.com
http://www.edt.com/homewing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jbrick(at)wolfenet.com |
| Subject: | Re: Pop rivets-- |
Good question. I used MK319BS Monel rivets there and in most other places I
couldn't squeeze or buck. A long ago post from Jim Cone recommended these
because of appearance after the hole is filled with Microlight and epoxy
prior to painting. Grip length is short though. I assumed Monel would be
stronger but I don't know. There could be a corrosion problem
too...dissimilar metals.
John Brick
jbrick(at)wolfenet.com
> MD-42-BS pop rivets are called out for the trim tab horn that is
>mounted on the inboard end of the tab per dwg 5a.
> CS4-4 pop rivets are called out for the fibreglass tips on the
>elevator and hor. stab. (countersunk)
> As I am doing the trim tab horn on the underside of the tab
>instead of at the end I would like to countersink the pop rivets using the
>CS4-4 rather than use the non-countersunk MD-42-BS.
> Looking thru the reference books that I have does not give me a
>clue as to relative strengths of the aforementioned pop-rivets.
> Thus my 2 part question;
> 1. Is it OK to use the CS4-4 in place of the MD-42-BS?
> 2. What is a good source for comparing specs on pop
>rivets?
>
> Thanks in advance for any responses.
>
>Ron Vandervort, RV-6 Empenage finishing up, on to quickbuild
>rvanderv(at)linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com> |
| Subject: | Forest Agency phone number (fwd) |
The number for Forest agency is 1-800-536-2011.
Ask for Barb (I think last name is Kalan). Tell here Herman sent you :).
You may have to be an IAC member, I am not sure.
They also give discounts when you renew each year if you have no claims.
Have her compare some of the policy features. Many policies
limit the amount on any one person to say 100,000 while the total policy
may be 1 million liability. The policies they write do not limit
each person. The policies are written on some of the major insurance
underwriters. I think they just switched to a different underwriter
this last year. I don't have the policy here so I don't recall the
underwriter.
> From owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com Wed Oct 30 23:07:13 1996
> Errors-To: bounces(at)matronics.com
> From: aol.com!TimRV6A(at)matronics.com
> Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 20:05:34 -0500
> Message-Id: <961030200531_1415902318(at)emout09.mail.aol.com>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: Forest Agency phone number
> Sender: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Precedence: bulk
> Reply-To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>
> My kit is currently insured by Avemco while it is under construction. I've
> seen several posts talking about less expensive insurance available from the
> Forest agency. I didn't find a phone number in the archives. Would someone
> please post it? Does the Forest agency insure the first flight like Avemco
> does? Any comments on quality of coverage and/or responsiveness to claims?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tim Lewis
> RV-6AQ #60023
> TimRV6A(at)aol.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | GHLX34A(at)prodigy.com (MR GEORGE T KILISHEK) |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 wing kits |
I've received one of the early kits (without spars, matching bulkhead
and a few related pieces). I appears to be of high quality, and the
drawings seem to be better than those shipped with the empennage.
The manual is missing at least one drawing referred to in the text.
Delivery date for spars is a military secret: easier to get working
drawings of the Stealth bomber than an estimated delivery date for
spars.
Note: during a recent visit to Van's, I was told that the interior
dimensions given for the wing/empennage jig in Fig. 6-1PP of the
empennage manual is WRONG, and that IT WILL HAVE TO BE WIDENED for
the wing assembly. Unfortunately, there's not a word about this in
the manual that accompanies the wing kit.
George
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Moore <bobmoore(at)wwd.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
twood wrote:
> I disagree that that is a safe attitude. Sorry if I pounded the podium too
> hard, but I am surprised that many (most?) of you don't find this attitude
> risky.
Terray,
I spent most of my ten year stint in the Navy flying S-2s, P-2s, and P-3s,
most of it at 100'-200', doing 45 degree banked turns at night. I, now in
retirement, find 10'-20' quite comfortable in my homebuilt miniMAX with a
homebuilt 1/2 VW engine. What really gives one a lot of confidence is sitting
up there day after day with a 15 hour student trying to make trash out of a
Cessna 172. Different experiences give different perspectives to the task of
flying.
Personally,-- you couldn't get me in a helicopter for love nor money !!
Bob Moore
PANAM (retired)
20,000+
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dann_Parks(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Dann Parks) |
| Subject: | Re: Saturday Flight Tests at the OMABP |
>>I disagree that that is a safe attitude. Sorry if I pounded the podium too
>>hard, but I am surprised that many (most?) of you don't find this attitude
>>risky.
>>Terray
Well, I for one thought it WAS risky. If the flight had ended in disaster --
a lost engine, a forced landing, or worse -- we would all be discussing poor
judgment and how unprofessional the pilot was to do the test flight under
those circumstances, regardless of the pilots skill. In fact it would have
probably been a textbook case in what NOT to do. Just because the flight
turned out fine, doesn't change my mind. We all have to make our own
decisions, though.
Dann Parks
dann_parks@ kteh.pbs.org
starting 6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | James & Mary Mc Phee <bluegum(at)ihug.co.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: ElectroAir EI System |
>
><< After speeking to Mr. Rose yesterday I felt comportable with his system.
> He
> has sold over 700 units in the past six years. Van has been flying behind
> one of his systems in his RV-4 (according to Jeff).
>
>(stuff cut)
>
> Gary Corde
> RV-6 N211GC
> "Jersey Lightning"
> >>
>
>Hi all,
>
>I agree with Klaus and Jim yers, if you are going to fir a CDI on your RV,
fit the best. Jon Johanson documented the improvement when he changed to
Lightspeed, I fitted 1 to my RV-6 in New Zealand and took on the Agency for
it, recommended it to Van's and they bought and stock it. No harm to Jeff
Rose who's system is less expensive. Several weeks ago I gave the figures
on my H series engine and the mprovemnt since fitting the CDI.
Happy RVating
James Mc Phee RV-6 20334 ZK-MRV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MiDiBu <midibu(at)hsv.mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition |
>Is the RV the world's first Certificated Kit?
>
>With more than 5,000 kits sold I'll bet some people don't consider it
>"experimental" but simply an excellent designed, safely engineered,
>acrobatic stressed "strong" airplane. Quite the contrary to the word
>"experimental" I would suggest that many buyers consider it "safer" than
>many certified aircraft.
I'm sorry, but I lost track of who wrote this. Whoever, you are way off the
mark. And maybe I misunderstood your tone. When I finish my RV-8 design
and use some of the materials that I've bought from them, it will still be
registered as Experimental, and it will be a Weller RV-8.
It would be nice to have a flyin with 5000 RV designs.
Others need not apply,
Mike Weller RV 80187 (under construction)
midibu(at)hsv.mindspring.com (preferred) or mike.weller(at)msfc.nasa.gov
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dougb(at)mail.diac.com (Doug Bloomberg) |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition Mag Trigger? |
>
><< Some of the goodies are Knock detector, MAP (manifold pressure detector
> used now by Jeff) Air mass sensor, several flow rate fuel injectors,
> ability to have throttle body or multi port fuel injection, all computer
> monitored and programable by the owner or other knowledgeable person. >>
>
>Keep in mind when considering EFI for our engines (I have been doing my
>homework) that our engines make too much mechanical noice for a knock sensor
>to work. Additionally, if you operate your aircraft on 100LL, you can not
>operate the EFI in "closed loop" mode because the lead in the fuel will
>distroy the O2 sensor. This isn't a problem if all of the other sensors
>(throttle posistion, MAP, air temp, water/oil temp and RPM) are all
>functioning.
>
>Gary Corde
>RV-6 N211GC
>Jersey Lightning
In trying to keep messages brief, I didn't go the long theory route of
explaination of FI. You are right the the knock sensor is a problem, but I
think there is a workaround. Also several friends are using O2 sensors now
in their Lycomings to adjust mixture. They are getting 150 hours + per
sensor.
Now if the FI cuts .5 gal/hr from the burn rate that would save approx $110
in fuel costs, not to mention any expected performance gains.
Doug
Doug Bloomberg
Denver, CO
dougb(at)mail.diac.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Johnson <rvgasj(at)popmail.mcs.net> |
| Subject: | WARNING - This is a serious riveting mistake you may be making |
without knowing it !
If you are using a rivet length checker that is designed like this
(for example, AVERYS) :
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Correct Use To Determine Minimum length:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxx xxx ) Minimum driven height is .5 the rivet diameter,
a 40 rivet therefore must stick out at least
1.5/32 of an inch
If this gauge cannot slide over the finished rivet end,
then it meets minimum length criteria,
****************************************************************
**** THIS GAUGE DOES NOT WORK IN THE FOLLOWING CASE ************
****************************************************************
If you are checking rivets on dimpled skin, you cannot simply
assume that if you cannot pass the rivet checker over the rivet
it meets minimum length. This is because the rivet checkers arms
do not ride over the dimpled metal (the AVERY tool has to wide of
a cutout in it).
Therefore if you have a rivet
that just meets minimums by this method, you will find when you
account for the dimple that sticks out over the rivet shank, that
it will be considerably shorter than the required minimum. In
fact, we found that it was about 1/32 instead of the 1.5/32 for
the minimum ( 33% is significant, even though the measurement is small).
This mistake is easiest to make when you are using the rivet checker
to check rivets in non-dimpled skin along side of dimpled skin (
especially when its late and you are tired, or are having two teenagers
helping you).
I am curious if anybody has made the same error, I have never seen
it mentioned here before. Unfortunately, I didn't explain the procedure
properly to my sons, so am now drilling out about 200 rivets in the fuselage.
Well, as they say, better finding out now, than at FAA certification time !
Scott Johnson / Chicago
rvgasj(at)mcs.com
P.S. All are welcome to our rivet drilling out party !!!!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Electronic ignition |
| From: | wstucklen1(at)staff.juno.com (Frederic W Stucklen) |
Phone call to Jeff on 10/30/96 resulted in the following data. (Sorry if
I got a little wordy):
The electronic ignition system mounts into the right mag hole, using
the gear off the mag. Timing is achieved by setting the engine on #1 TDC
and, with the gear train of the unit fixed with a pop rivet nail, it's
inserted into the mag hole. This results in an much simplified
installation process. The coils are mounted on the firewall or onto the
motor mount with odell clamps and 3/4" angle alum brackets. Standard
spark plugs ( BY series aviation) are used, but must be gapped to .030".
High quality resistive auto ignition leads are used that the installer
trims to length and terminates. Spark plug end terminations are provided.
This results in an much simplified installation process when compared
to putting sensors out on the flywheel.
The control unit is also mounted to the firewall. While there are user
adjustable timing knobs, Jeff recommends that you stay with the factory
pre-set timing. Leads from the box include power (+12VDC), and tach
output (12Volt square wave), as well as manifold pressure input.
Care must be taken when hooking the Tach output up to the unit as
some electronic tachs do not isolate the magneto "P" lead voltages from
the tach inputs very well. Some mags will output pulses that are in
excess of 300 Volts and Jeff's unit will not withstand this voltage
level. In most cases (as with the Electronics International units) a
resistor in the tach input lead may have to be adjusted to sense the 12
Volt Square wave output from the electronic ignition.
Using the standard ignition switch with the unit is not possible
without the use of a relay. normal ignition switches open the "P" lead
from a grounded condition when the ignition switch is turn "ON". The
electronic ignition requires that the same "ON" position be at +12VDC.
Also, the shorting strap on your ignition switch that grounds the right
mag "P" lead when the switch is in the "START" position, will have to be
removed.
For the technical people out there, here some information on how the
timing is achieved. Engine timing is achieved by the summation of two
curves, one based upon RPM, and one based upon manifold pressure. The RPM
curve starts out at 0* at engine OFF, and goes up to 20* at IDLE, then up
to 25* at 2500 RPM, then up to 35* at 3000 RPM. The manifold pressure
curve adds 2* for every inch of manifold pressure above 24".
The summation of these curves results in a starting firing angle of
0*, and an idle firing angle of 37* at sea level. The firing angle at
11,000 MSL would be somewhere around 43*.
Jeff stated that the user should get between 12%-15% fuels savings
with his unit, and that the engine idle would be much better. An approx 5
HP increase should also be achievable.
Cost is $785.00 plus shipping.......
Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV
wstucklen1(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dieck(at)apexcomm.net (Robert Dieck) |
| Subject: | Re: ElectroAir EI System |
>new fairings, prop, spinner, one wing skin, and all the other stuff
>that got mashed when a runaway Chevy Impala drove into it while it
>was parked in a hangar in Medford... :-(
>
>Randall Henderson, RV-6
October 24, 1996 - November 02, 1996
RV-Archive.digest.vol-cb