RV-Archive.digest.vol-cn

February 21, 1997 - March 03, 1997



      
      Thanks
      
      John Top #5372
      (619) 549-3356
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
> > All the parts for a new O-360 for under $10,000!!!!!!! > > No flames here, I love the idea. But that means that if the certified parts can > be sold for $9500 and the assembled engine costs $19,300, then the cost to > assemble an engine at Lycoming is about $10,000. Where did they burn that much > money? > Bob Fritz Employee wages and insurence. If you assemble it, you don't have to pay yourself or taxes (yet). You also are not likely to drag yourself into court if you screw up the assembly. Chris ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
Date: Feb 21, 1997
Sorry, I don't beleive this under $10,000 stuff. I can cost you around 8,000 just for the parts for an overhaul and that means starting with a core which has the crank, rods, case, accessories, etc. The core for a O360 would be around 7,000. In the $8,000, that is using all Superior parts already. So 8,000 plus 7,000 for the core is 15,000 just to OH one. I doubt the 10K would have all the accessories and everything you need. There are lots of small expensive pieces like all the gears in the accessory case that normally don't have a problem on an OH. You start adding up these small pieces and you get quite a price tag. They might come up with an engine for about 20K, but not 10K. I mean a complete engine, not just a subset of parts. Herman > > Hi Bob, > > All the parts for a new O-360 for under $10,000!!!!!!! > > No flames here, I love the idea. But that means that if the certified parts can > be sold for $9500 and the assembled engine costs $19,300, then the cost to > assemble an engine at Lycoming is about $10,000. Where did they burn that much > money? > > > Cheers, > > > Bob Fritz > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Mailer-Daemon(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Mailer-Daemon)
Subject: Re: gear leg air leak; ATC designator
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to: =BF=0Fda (1017) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Mailer-Daemon(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Mailer-Daemon)
Subject: Re: GYROS AND AEROBATICS
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to: =BF=0Fda (1017) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Mailer-Daemon(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Mailer-Daemon)
Subject: Re: -6a wing attach question
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to: =BF=0Fda (1017) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Mailer-Daemon(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Mailer-Daemon)
Subject: Re: Fuel lube
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to: =BF=0Fda (1017) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Mailer-Daemon(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Mailer-Daemon)
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to: =BF=0Fda (1017) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michael Angiulo <mikeang(at)MICROSOFT.com>
Subject: Superior O-360
Date: Feb 21, 1997
I would think that a large part of the additional 10K it takes to get a new certified engine goes into product liability trust and certification/testing costs. The company's exposure to litigation is much larger (and lasts longer) with a certified engine than with a crate full of parts. I'm totally excited about the possibility of assembling my own engine with supervision. I think it would be fun, I'd learn a lot and save a fortune. Anyone know if this is a reality or just a fantasy? ---------- From: Robert Fritz [SMTP:CompuServe.COM!75303.1623(at)matronics.com] Sent: Friday, February 21, 1997 8:08 AM To: INTERNET:rv-list(at)matronics.com Subject: Re: RV-List: Superior O-360 <75303.1623(at)CompuServe.COM> Hi Bob, All the parts for a new O-360 for under $10,000!!!!!!! No flames here, I love the idea. But that means that if the certified parts can be sold for $9500 and the assembled engine costs $19,300, then the cost to assemble an engine at Lycoming is about $10,000. Where did they burn that much money? Cheers, Bob Fritz ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Mailer-Daemon(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Mailer-Daemon)
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to: =BF=0Fda (1017) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Mailer-Daemon(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Mailer-Daemon)
Subject: Re: RV4 parts For Sale
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to: =BF=0Fda (1017) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Mailer-Daemon(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Mailer-Daemon)
Subject: Re: lightweight filler
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to: =BF=0Fda (1017) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Mailer-Daemon(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Mailer-Daemon)
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to: =BF=0Fda (1017) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Mailer-Daemon(at)KTEH.pbs.org (Mailer-Daemon)
Subject: Re: -6a wing attach question
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to: =BF=0Fda (1017) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: "Ray Murphy, Jr." <murphy(at)mail.coos.or.us>
Subject: RUDDER BLOCKS
Sorry, I incorrectly stated that the rudder blocks were built using .030 riveted to angle. The correct thickness is .045. He used those winged Dzusus fasteners so that he can remove them when he takes taller friends flying. Nancy & Ray Murphy, Jr. murphy(at)mail.coos.or.us RV-6A empennage North Bend, Oregon 541-756-7230 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: "Ray Murphy, Jr." <murphy(at)mail.coos.or.us>
Subject: Rudder Petal Blocks
Greetings all, Awhile back I mentioned that RV6 builder Cliff Goldman (6'2") and his wife (5'2") both fly the RV6. I was finally able to connect with him on how he installed the blocks on her rudder petals. He used temporary foam blocks to allow her the opportunity to get the right feel for how big the rudder should be. They are installed with two winged type Dzus fastners on the upper portion of each petal. Using two pieces of al angle he riveted them to a piece of .030 to get the extention length. He then fastened another piece of .030 to the front angle to give her a steady foot plate. A similar arrangement was used on the bottom to rest against to bottom of the rudder petal. The bottom is free floating. _________top || || rudder petal| |front plate | | | | ||_______|| Sorry, but as you can see drawing in Eudora is not easy and I'm not the artistic type. Nancy & Ray Murphy, Jr. murphy(at)mail.coos.or.us RV-6A empennage North Bend, Oregon 541-756-7230 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: "Ray Murphy, Jr." <murphy(at)mail.coos.or.us>
Subject: RUDDER BLOCKS
Sorry, I incorrectly stated that the rudder blocks were built using .030 riveted to angle. The correct thickness is .045. He used those winged Dzusus fasteners so that he can remove them when he takes taller friends flying. Nancy & Ray Murphy, Jr. murphy(at)mail.coos.or.us RV-6A empennage North Bend, Oregon 541-756-7230 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Craig Hiers <CRAIG-RV-4.@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
Robert Fritz wrote: > > > Hi Bob, > > All the parts for a new O-360 for under $10,000!!!!!!! > > No flames here, I love the idea. But that means that if the certified parts can > be sold for $9500 and the assembled engine costs $19,300, then the cost to > assemble an engine at Lycoming is about $10,000. Where did they burn that much > money? > > Cheers, > > Bob Fritz Bob 100$ went to the guy who built the motor, $9,900 went to the lawyers, and liability insurance. Craig Hiers RV-4 N143CH Tallahassee, FL. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: lottmc(at)datastar.net (Michael C. Lott)
Subject: question
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 18:05:08 -0600 From: "MICHAEL C. LOTT" <lottmc(at)datastar.net> Subject: Address? Can anyone tell me the address for donating some money for the rv-list upkeep? I had it, but I print so much of this stuff I can never find what I'm looking for..Thanks! Also, Does anyone know the percentage you deduct for inefficiency when figuring speeds with different props? I read where one guy with a -4 and 0-320 was running a 68x68 wood prop at 190 mph. The way I figure it, at 100% efficiency, he would have to be turning 2950 RPM. Is that correct? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 1997
From: Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz>
Subject: glue-on stiffeners
Hi all, I just had a thought regarding the guy (can't recall his name) who's glueing on the control-surface stiffeners... If you're aiming to do the same thing with the ailerons (as I seem to recall), you'd better ask Vans for undrilled aileron skins & stiffeners. The RV-6 ones are all predrilled. Frank. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- frankv(at)pec.co.nzZ (without the anti-email-spam Z, of course) http://www.pec.co.nz/~frankv/ Frank van der Hulst, Software Engineer, Cardax, PEC(NZ) Ltd, Marton "Knowledge=Power=Energy=Matter=Mass; A good bookshop is just a genteel Black Hole that knows how to read". Terry Pratchett, "Guards! Guards!" -------------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Bob Reiff <Reiff(at)execpc.com>
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
Herman Dierks wrote: > I doubt the 10K would have all the accessories and everything you need. > There are lots of small expensive pieces like all the gears in the accessory > case that normally don't have a problem on an OH. You start adding up > these small pieces and you get quite a price tag. Superior says ALL parts would be included except sump, accessory case, and rods. Only time will tell if this is fact or hype. > They might come up with an engine for about 20K, but not 10K. On the other hand, they know their market for this kit is homebuilders, particularly RV's, and they know we can buy a brand new Lyc. for $19,300. Why would they waste their time developing a $20,000 kit that won't sell? Bob Reiff ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Feb 21, 1997
Subject: Re: -6a wing attach question
> However, I can't see why the attach pieces on the flap should interfere. > You mention moving the whole flap outboard, how can you do that without > interfering with the aileron? The out board bracket of the aileron is in > a fixed position due to the end wing rib so unless the end rib is too far > inboard I don't see how the aileron/flap could be too far inboard. Maybe > your aileron is too wide? I had the same problem today -- my flap bracket (that attaches to the flap pushrod) hit the side of the fuselage. I had to move the flap outboard 1/8". I did this by removing the flaps's piano hinge, installing a new piece of hinge, and then rearanging the spacer washers on the aileron to preserve about 1/4" space between the aileron and the flap. The factory had warned me about this during construction, so I'd installed the flap a little further outboard than called for in the plans. Not enough, I guess. Tim --------------------- Tim Lewis RV-6AQ #60023 timrv6a(at)earthlink.net ----------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 21, 1997
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
<< All the parts for a new O-360 for under $10,000!!!!!!! No flames here, I love the idea. But that means that if the certified parts can be sold for $9500 and the assembled engine costs $19,300, then the cost to assemble an engine at Lycoming is about $10,000. Where did they burn that much money? >> Overhead, profit and miscellaneous. -GV ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Robert Fritz <75303.1623(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
OhpleaseOhpleaseOhplease!!! I Wanna believe in a $10K Lycoming......I really do. So, trying to account for the cost of parts for an overhaul on a certified engine vs. the parts to build a non-certified engine. Let's see, the end result in the first case is FAA certified lawyer bait vs. the second case closer to "hey, buddy, you built it yerself just like the airplane, buzz off!" Possible? How 'bout having the guys who're planing on offering this chimera come on-line and straighten us out!! Cheers Bob having-trouble-with-the-physical Fritz p.s. My wife sez I should build an RV-6 even if I never get the ticket and just go flying with a buddy. Is she trying to keep me out of the bars? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JamesCone(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 1997
Subject: Strobes
I neglected to use my Whelan stobes for over 4 years while I sold my Sea Hawker, which they came out of, and built my RV-6A. The first time I turned them on, they worked like a charm! Jim Cone, RV-6A flying jamescone(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Terry" <dyer(at)ticnet.com>
Subject: Boeing salvage
Date: Feb 22, 1997
I will be in Seattle next week and would like to go to Boeing salvage. I would appreciate information such as hours and directions. Thanks, Terry RV-6A 294RV Terry ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 21, 1997
From: Bob Haan <bobh(at)cdac.com>
Subject: Problem with fuse center bottom skin
Situation:- 6A. Have the fuse F677 left center bottom skin (under the seat and baggage ribs) drilled and clecoed. I am positioning the F676 right center bottom skin (the narrower one.) At final assembly, it is screwed into platenuts in the wing bottom skins and root rib between the main and rear spars. In checking the distance this skin extends out past the fuselage, it is 5/16 short. Plans 31 shows 23 5/15 from the center line of the fuse to the outside edge of this skin. It is only 23 inches. Per the plans this skin, F676, is 22 inches wide and it is. Question:- Is there enough tolerance in the extension of this bottom skin that although 5/16 short it can still be attached to the platenuts in the bottom of the wing between the main and rear spars? Bob Haan bobh(at)cdac.com Portland, OR 503-636-3550 RV6A drilling the fuselage skins ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 1997
From: Blake Harral <bharral(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Lycoming Oil System
Disclaimers First: This is a somewhat lengthy post. If you are not interested in the details of the Lycoming oil system - read no futher. I do not _know_ exactly how the Lycoming oiling system works so please consider the following to be conjecture as a basis for futher discussions. I have torn down and rebuilt an IO-360 for use in my RV-4, and in the process, spent some time looking at the engine guts as wells as several generations of Lycoming manuals. BTW, older Lyc docs can be worthwile additions to the later ones. My old docs are have more information (particularly on superscedures) and better pictures. They are also a great help in identifying parts from the 'older' engines that we budget-minded homebuilders often use. I am curious about several aspects of the lubrication system in the Lycoming O-320 and O-360 series engines. For the purposes of discussion let's assume the engine is fitted with the Lycoming Oil Filter adapter that incorporates the Vernatherm. The Vernatherm (sp?) appears to serve both as a thermostat and oil cooler bypass valve. The Lycoming manuals indicate that the spring/plunger arrangement that serves as the oil cooler bypass valve on non-vernatherm engines is not required (or desired) with Vernatherm equipped engines Is this correct? It believe that the original purpose of the oil cooler bypass valve was to ensure oil supply in the event that the oil cooler became clogged. After studying the accessory, a friend and I came to the conclusion that the original bypass valve was aptly named, that is, it does not prevent oil from going to or returning from the oil cooler, but merely provides an alternative (probably lower resistance) path. My conjecture is that the Vernatherm operates as follows: It bypasses the oil cooler whenever the cooler is clogged or when the oil temperature is too low. It appears to me that unless the oil cooler is truly clogged, _some_ oil will flow through the cooler even when the oil temp is too low. This could account for installation of oil cooler airflow restrictions in an attempt to raise oil temps on vernatherm-equipped engines. Presumably, an oil filter is at least as likely to clog as an oil cooler. Does the vernatherm bypass the oil filter also, resulting in little/no oil filtration when the oil is cold? Same story if the engine has an oil screen instead of an oil filter? On a related matter, I can tell by inspection that the pipe thread connection in the lower center of the accessory case is located right at the outlet of the oil pump. There is little doubt that this is a pressure port and my Lycoming manual labels this as the 'to oil cooler' port. There is a similar pipe thread fitting in the upper left of the accessory case that my manual identifies as the 'from oil cooler port'. My present intent is to hook my oil cooler up this way. For Vernatherm-equipped engines, there is another port that could possibly be used. Vernatherm engines have a simple straight-thread plug (not pipe thread) in the place that used to contain the spring and plunger that made up the bypass valve (as stated above, I believe this bypass function is now integral to the vernatherm). From looking at the drawings of this spring/plunger arrangement, I come to the conclusion that this must be a pressure port, and thus an alternative the the 'to oil cooler' port mentioned above. However, this requires that the simple plug be replaced with a very special (and rumoured expensive) straight thread/AN flare fitting. There is a local RV-6 pilot flying with a new engine from Van's with this setup and he is quite satisfied. I should add for completeness that a veteran IA whose opinion I respect believes that some Cessna installations used this port to _return_ oil from the oil cooler, but I have not been able to substantiate this, nor can I make any sense of it. I would like to know the flow rate of oil through the O-320 and O-360. Anybody know or have a good way to estimate? One last interesting note: My IA friend tells me to expect higher oil temps because my engine is equipped with piston cooling oil squirts. These are little nozzles mounted inside the crankase. They open at 40 PSI and squirt a jet of Oil to the underside of the piston, thus cooling the piston and heating the oil. Interested in any repsonses, including futher conjectures if identified as such :) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: McManD(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 1997
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
Long before I thought I would be one of those kooks that builds in his basement something that he has to take walls to get out. Or something that would cost more than first class, bi-monthly airfares to just about any where. I went to a FAA hosted seminar at Syracuse's Hancock airport. I believe it was fall of 1992 or 3?. Lots of neat experimental builder type questions floating around. (gosh how I thought those nuts even looked wacky! Building your own plane geezzzz...who they kidding??? Now wished I paid more attention.) The guest speakers included Senchrich Props and the Lycoming factory. Prop stuff was neat. But.............. During the Lycoming talk, this fella had discussed on how he had taken the stand, under oath in defense of lawsuits over Lycoming engine changes through out the years, in what some might consider ambulance chasing. He discussed factory reluctancy in pursuit of electronic ignition, for they'd have to, or be placed to defend, in suit statements like ..... "So you've made this change for greater benefits Hmmm, then noticing the lack of same in older designs, why didn't you update all engines out in the field for this now known "safety defect" that Lycomng has put out in Mag ignitions?". Note: This talk was prior to the passage of 17 year product liability laws, effect now??? He frankly stated that Lycoming has documented $4,000 per engine in product liability costs. That comment stuck with me! He also discussed the "infamous" 0320H2AD". (mine is already on site). Many of those comments stuck with me, cause I thought wouldn't a "Skyhawk" just be the greatest...Oh was I dreaming.... Almost afraid to sign this one. But here goes: David McManmon Cicero NY McManD(at)aol.com A kook (wife and employer probably agree) with a RV6 wing in cellar, 2nd in with numerous other stuff, in plane storage facility, AKA; the guest room, and a fuselage with dash panel fitting in garage. Cars out in snow. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jim Sears <sears(at)searnet.com>
Subject: Re: Lycoming Oil System
Date: Feb 22, 1997
For those of you who are interested in more information on the Lycoming's oiling problems, there is a very good discussion on one of the web pages at the Grumman Gang site. The address for the discussions: http://gtravis.ucs.indiana.edu/Engines/Marvel/ We Grumman owners have had our share of problems with Lyc. engines. It kinda makes one want to look at alternative engines. In fact, I would if I could be sure it would hold up. Jim Sears RV-6A (building fuse jig) AA5A Cheetah N26276 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: bstobbe(at)juno.com
Subject: Re: Problem with fuse center bottom skin
Date: Feb 22, 1997
>>Question:- Is there enough tolerance in the extension of this bottom skin that although 5/16 short it can still be attached to the platenuts in the bottom of the wing between the main and rear spars?<< Bob, I haven't gotten to this point yet but I may have an answer for you. How about measuring from a known point (like one of the attach holes in the spar) to your inboard rib flange, and then comparing that to a measurement from the same hole in F604 to the edge of the skin? You could also measure from the edge of the rear spar attach clevis to the rib, and then compare that to a measurement from the inside of the clevis on F605 to the edge of the skin. This would be a worst case measurement since it sounds like most people have to trim a bit off this clevis to eliminate forward sweep, and that will bring the rib even closer to the fuselage. Bruce Stobbe RV-6 inside fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
From: bstobbe(at)juno.com
Subject: Chatter: VFR GPS direct-to clrnc
Date: Feb 22, 1997
Fred, I think the gotcha here is that ATC doesn't care what equipment you have on board when they give you a clearance because, if you accept it, it's your responsibility to have the equipment necessary to be able to execute it legally and safely. On the other hand, who wants to refuse a direct-to clearance, especially here along the upper East Coast? Also, as your flight progresses from one sector to another, I don't believe that the comments portion of your flight plan gets passed along with you, but I could be mistaken (I remember reading somewhere that some of the information gets left behind, but I can't remember exactly which info it is). Even though I have to file as a /A I routinely get asked if I am RNAV equipped. I often wonder if this is ATC's way of saying "hey, a white lie here can shave some miles off your route, so let me tempt you a little with a question we both know the answer to". Like you I started putting "Loran equipped" in the comments box of all my flight plans even though my aircraft type box states "PA34/A" to see if I would get offered more direct-to clearances (not that I would accept them, mind you ;>). Result: it didn't make any difference so now I leave it off. Bruce Stobbe RV-6 fly-by-july (probably of '98 tho :>( ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Noflamepls(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 1997
Subject: 3d CAD drawings
Not much of a CAD 3d designer here, but utilizer in many programs extensively in project managment in manufacturing of products. I for one think a 3D parametrically created solids model of the RV6 for one is way over due and owed, this due to its success and continued support of builders sales and refferals, certianly a more simpilier CAD design should be comlpeted. For example as the fuel tank drawing has been updtaed and done. I think the factory should support and underwrite this, to be professionally done, not a hobby/read customer supplied item. These constant discussions on the RV list re:fit and interference problems have gone on to long. If attention were paid, needed changes would get ironed out much easier and more accurately. In CAD ie: 3d solids, revisions then would note the effect across all the parts and assemblies, further issues could be found rather easily. Van's you listening? I mean really how much would you spend to have a budding Pro-E or ACAD Mechanical Desk top, designer take your current plans, digitize and place them into a data base. Iron out the fit issues, modify some problem areas and then you'd need to replace any tooling/parts that are out of tolerance. My perception is that CAD is being utilized in the RV8. I don't know if something like a solids modeling is being used for design build and reviews. I anxiously await to purchase the completed preview plans for the RV8 and to see if my perception of if this CAD and CNC machined tools? now being utilized? (again factory comments?) with implementation of same boosts the quality of the kits/assembly and finally the instruction package. I seem to see this already. Just listen to the raves RV listers of 8's have. One first time local RV8 builder was hours from box to skin fitting on his tail HS, flooring us "old" RV builders out here. Gosh the RV8 sounds great!!! But what about 6's and 4's? I didn't intend this to PO folks but as I re-read it, I'm sure it will. The folks at Van's do a great job and do in fact offer a great plane kit. But nobody would claim it to be perfect. Please Van's don't let a Glasstar steel your future! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 1997
From: catbird(at)taylortel.com (TTC Carroll A. Bird)
Subject: Re: Strobes
The first time I turned > them on, they worked like a charm! > > Jim Cone, RV-6A flying > jamescone(at)aol.com I got my strobe/clearance kit in Feb. 96. After reading this thread, I decided that I had better see if they still worked. I hooked them to a battery (12 Volt) and a battery charger and let them flash for about an hour,(till they were about to drive me crazy). I could not see any thing wrong with them. Carroll Bird RV-4 #3919 Buffalo Gap, TX ________________________________________________________________________________
From: UFOBUCK(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 1997
Subject: Re: Navaid Devices
<< would be interested in hearing how others have mounted the Navaid >Devices Auto-pilot S-2 servo under the seat. Did you mount it to the >ribs?, belly skin?,with or without a doubler etc. > >Chris Brooks > BrooksRV6(at)webtv.net >> Chris : You should contact BillAkin(at)aol.com about installing the Navaid autopilot. Akin has one of the outstanding RV6A in Texas; an airplane with about 800 problem free hours. His Navaid is not installed on the bottom of the belly skin but on brackets riveted or bolted to the seat ribs. It is a great autopilot especially when hooked up to the GPS. BClary N75TX flying. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: rvbildr(at)juno.com
Subject: Re: Boeing salvage
Date: Feb 22, 1997
Terry, You'll love it at Boeing Surplus Sales. Take along an extra suitcase,etc. to haul supplies in. They are open from 1100-1800 on Tues thru Fri and 0900-1600 on Sat. Their address is: 20651 85thS. phone 206-773-9684 Take Orilla Rd from I-5 near Seatac and go southeast for a few miles. When you almost reach the ridge turn left on 85thS and it's on your left a couple of blocks down. Have fun and allow plenty of time for shopping. Unless your wife,etc is a very patient person, don't take her along. Leave her at the mall near Seatac. Mal rvbildr(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Cafgef(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 1997
Subject: Re: Strobes - fact and fiction
<< Sure. This is a piece of hagar-lore that has been fertilized too much. Strobe light systems in airplanes and cameras are brothers >> Thanks Bob, I've wondered about that for more years than I care to mention. I am not going to bother to run my strobes once a month any more. next time as part of defying gravity ala RV 6-A Gene Francis cafgef(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 1997
From: Bob Reiff <Reiff(at)execpc.com>
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
Robert Fritz wrote: > How 'bout having the guys who're planing on offering this chimera come on-line > and straighten us out!! I suggested exactly that when I talked to them. I told Gary Greenwood at Superior that I think a lot of RV builders would like to know more about it, and that I think there will be a lot of interest in this kit IF they keep the price down to the figure he stated. I told him about this list, which he was unaware of, and he asked for the address, which I provided. So...they may be listening as we speak. I also gave you folks his phone number and E-mail address, hoping that he would receive some "encouragement" from RV builders. Bob Reiff ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV4131rb(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 1997
Subject: Re: Lycoming Oil System
Blake, WOW, when you want to know something you go all out. If an oil filter adapter is being installed (and I know better than to say this is fact this time) the bypass spring and ball are removed and cap is reinstalled. If you look inside of the oil filter adapter housing you will see a check ball and spring arangement built inside. This should be the bypass in the event of a clogged filter. I belive most of what your saying about the vernatherm is true as far as leakage and temperature. Ryan ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
From: ebundy(at)juno.com (Ed Bundy)
Date: Feb 22, 1997
> Sorry, I don't believe this under $10,000 stuff. > It can cost you around 8,000 just for the parts for an overhaul and > that means starting with a core which has the crank, rods, case, > accessories, etc. > They might come up with an engine for about 20K, but not 10K. > I mean a complete engine, not just a subset of parts. I agree with you Herman. I think we, as builders are very susceptible to overly optimistic claims from manufacturers *especially* when it comes to aircraft engines. Engines are outrageously expensive when compared with the cost of the airframe. One thing we have to remember is that we are doing the VAST majority of the labor on the airframe. The engine, even if we build it up ourselves, has a lot of labor into it in the form of pre-fabbed parts. (pistons, rings, castings, certification, insurance, etc...) I'm not defending these costs, but by comparison, the airframe is raw materials. Look at how many people have touted their particular auto conversion as being the death of the "big two" for experimentals. I've seen wild claims for these things for 20 years now, with very little progress so far. (Please hold the flames; this is MY opinion, and I haven't seen anything *I* would feel comfortable with in my bird) I know, the Chevy V6 is looking good, but I'll reserve my judgement until there are some real longevity numbers. I for one hope that auto conversions DO start replacing LyCon's in large numbers, but I'll believe it when I see it. I certainly think that an aircraft engine CAN be made for less money than is currently available, but I don't think it will ever be completely palatable. I would love to see a $10k engine but I think the Superior engine price (all up and ready to go) will probably end up within spitting distance of a new engine from Van's. Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 ebundy(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 1997
Subject: Re: Lycoming Oil System
Blake- Based on my investigation of the same subject on the Lyc O-320 and O-360, your post is correct on all counts. I too have called and talked with many "experts" concerning this issue (Lycoming, Sacramento Sky Ranch, Van's, RV builders and various EAA Technical Counselors). I also have an acquaintance who uses the small bypass plunger port and the -6 hoses to go to the oil cooler and claims to have no problems on an O-360 c/s. He bought the engine as a rebuilt and the small fitting was already installed even though it also had a Spin-on oil filter with vernatherm. This small port is actually the opposite end of the same oil gallery as the high flow port but I believe that the preferred way (best flow) is to use the 3/8" NPT high ports coming straight out of the rear of the engines and -8 hoses. Use steel or Stainless Steel AN816-8 fittings. If you have the Spin-on oil filter, you will need to use a 45 degree end fitting on the hose which attaches to the lower "oil out to cooler" port fitting. I used AN823-8D fittings in the ports on the Van's Niagara oil cooler which is mounted on the rear baffle behind #4. Hoses are -8 Aeroquip AQP with firesleeve and they route nicely thru the area. However, there may be some forgiveness here because everyone I know runs cooler in the RV, being that they cruise much faster than the Cessnas and Pipers. I believe that our RVs are most like Mooneys and would use their engine plumbing and installation as a more of a guideline than I would a Cessna or Piper. Your description of the Vernatherm is accurate and most people who want to get their oil temperatures up further in cold weather will use an oil cooler blockoff rear door controllable by a locking cable. E-mail me direct if you still need additional info. Regards, Gary VanRemortel vanremog(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 1997
From: Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: 3d CAD drawings
> > Not much of a CAD 3d designer here, but utilizer in many programs extensively > in project managment in manufacturing of products. > > I for one think a 3D parametrically created solids model of the RV6 for one > is way over due and owed, Why do you think it is owed? You get more than your moneies worth now, if you want Van's to do all of this fancy stuff for you it would defeat his purpose and that is to provide a good airplane kit at a very resonable price... > I didn't intend this to PO folks but as I re-read it, I'm sure it will. The > folks at Van's do a great job and do in fact offer a great plane kit. But > nobody would claim it to be perfect. Actually it depends on how you describe perfect, it is a perfect airplane for me. I have never looked up and seen 5 or 6 Lancairs or Glasairs or any other homebuilt for that matter flying over in a group as I did the RV's today, Van's must be doing something right. > Please Van's don't let a Glasstar steel your future! Ha ha, have you compared prices of a GlaStar and a RV? I've talked to a lot of potential builders that won't build a GlaStar because of the big ugly elevator that had to be put on due to a design screwup. Why didn't you sign your name?? -- -- Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS First flight July 14, 1989 :-) Hillsboro, OR jsflyrv(at)ix.netcom.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 1997
From: Dr John Cocker <jcocker(at)medhumor.com>
Subject: Re: Navaid Devices
Michael, I think it was $900, I am not sure as I try to forget prices ASAP, otherwise I would find building is not cost effective - it might save money to just go and buy a Lear Jet. Offsetting the cost of the unit, is the fact that you do not need to buy a Turn and Bank, as they are included. A really cost effective unit is a Avmix - which allows a precise scientific adjustment for mixture, and should pay for itself in fuel savings. It is in the Aircraft Spruce Catalog. John (Only a finite number of jobs to do before painting) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 1997
From: Mark LaBoyteaux <tailspin(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Problem with fuse center bottom skin
Bob Haan wrote: > > > Situation:- > > 6A. Have the fuse F677 left center bottom skin (under the seat and baggage > ribs) drilled and clecoed. I am positioning the F676 right center bottom > skin (the narrower one.) At final assembly, it is screwed into platenuts in > the wing bottom skins and root rib between the main and rear spars. In > checking the distance this skin extends out past the fuselage, it is 5/16 > short. Plans 31 shows 23 5/15 from the center line of the fuse to the > outside edge of this skin. It is only 23 inches. Per the plans this skin, > F676, is 22 inches wide and it is. > > Question:- Is there enough tolerance in the extension of this bottom skin > that although 5/16 short it can still be attached to the platenuts in the > bottom of the wing between the main and rear spars? > Bob Haan > bobh(at)cdac.com > Portland, OR > 503-636-3550 > RV6A drilling the fuselage skins Bob, Since I just drilled the bottom skins to my wings this week, I went out and measured mine. My right bottom skin overhangs the fuselage side by 2 1/4". The centerline of the screw holes that I drilled to mate the skin to the wing are 11/16" from the edge at the aft end and 5/8" from the edge at the front. Now, one thing I missed while building the wings, was to leave out every other rivet on the inboard rib bottom for the platenuts. So before I mated the wings to the fuse, I had to drill out these rivets. After I had the wing aligned, and the rear spar bolted in place, I had to take a 12" long 1/16" drill and back drill these holes from the top, and then finish drill them from the bottom. I'll be able to install the plate nuts after I remove the wings for transport to the airport. I know I'm not the only builder to fall for this one, another builder called me last week with the same problem. Hope this helps. Mark LaBoyteaux RV-6A N106RV tailspin(at)ix.netcom.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 1997
From: lottmc(at)datastar.net (Michael C. Lott)
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
aol.com!McManD(at)matronics.com wrote: > > > Long before I thought I would be one of those kooks that builds in his > basement something that he has to take walls to get out. Or something that > would cost more than first class, bi-monthly airfares to just about any > where. > > I went to a FAA hosted seminar at Syracuse's Hancock airport. I believe it > was fall of 1992 or 3?. Lots of neat experimental builder type questions > floating around. (gosh how I thought those nuts even looked wacky! > Building your own plane geezzzz...who they kidding??? Now wished I paid > more attention.) > > The guest speakers included Senchrich Props and the Lycoming factory. Prop > stuff was neat. But.............. > > During the Lycoming talk, this fella had discussed on how he had taken the > stand, under oath in defense of lawsuits over Lycoming engine changes through > out the years, in what some might consider ambulance chasing. He discussed > factory reluctancy in pursuit of electronic ignition, for they'd have to, or > be placed to defend, in suit statements like ..... "So you've made this > change for greater benefits Hmmm, then noticing the lack of same in older > designs, why didn't you update all engines out in the field for this now > known "safety defect" that Lycomng has put out in Mag ignitions?". Note: > This talk was prior to the passage of 17 year product liability laws, effect > now??? > > He frankly stated that Lycoming has documented $4,000 per engine in product > liability costs. That comment stuck with me! > > He also discussed the "infamous" 0320H2AD". (mine is already on site). Many > of those comments stuck with me, cause I thought wouldn't a "Skyhawk" just be > the greatest...Oh was I dreaming.... > > Almost afraid to sign this one. But here goes: > David McManmon Cicero NY McManD(at)aol.com > A kook (wife and employer probably agree) with a RV6 wing in cellar, 2nd in > with numerous other stuff, in plane storage facility, AKA; the guest room, > and a fuselage with dash panel fitting in garage. Cars out in snow. What did he say about the H2AD? Mine is on it's way here now. I always like to here good news, which this has got to be. HA! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 1997
From: lottmc(at)datastar.net (Michael C. Lott)
Subject: efficiency
Does anyone know the formula for figuring what prop and pitch to use on a new plane? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 1997
From: "P. D. Danclovic" <pauldan(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Avery yokes
I already have an Avery hand squeezer with the standard 1 1/2" yoke and a pneumatic squeezer with the same yoke and would like to know if I was only going to buy 1 more yoke, which would be more useful? 2 1/2" standard 2 1/2" no-hole nose longeron yoke thanks in advance. P. D. Danclovic pauldan(at)mindspring.com RV-8.....just really getting started ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6AIR(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 22, 1997
Subject: Re: Problem with fuse center bottom skin
I had this same problem on my 6 and had to trim and splice in a 2" strip. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 1997
From: Bill Benedict <billb(at)europa.com>
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
>I agree with you Herman. I think we, as builders are very susceptible to >overly optimistic claims from manufacturers *especially* when it comes to >aircraft engines. Engines are outrageously expensive when compared with >the cost of the airframe. One thing we have to remember is that we are >doing the VAST majority of the labor on the airframe. The engine, even >if we build it up ourselves, has a lot of labor into it in the form of >pre-fabbed parts. (pistons, rings, castings, certification, insurance, >etc...) I'm not defending these costs, but by comparison, the airframe is >raw materials. > >Look at how many people have touted their particular auto conversion as >being the death of the "big two" for experimentals. I've seen wild >claims for these things for 20 years now, with very little progress so >far. (Please hold the flames; this is MY opinion, and I haven't seen >anything *I* would feel comfortable with in my bird) I know, the Chevy >V6 is looking good, but I'll reserve my judgement until there are some >real longevity numbers. I for one hope that auto conversions DO start >replacing LyCon's in large numbers, but I'll believe it when I see it. > >I certainly think that an aircraft engine CAN be made for less money than >is currently available, but I don't think it will ever be completely >palatable. > >I would love to see a $10k engine but I think the Superior engine price >(all up and ready to go) will probably end up within spitting distance >of a new engine from Van's. > >Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 >ebundy(at)juno.com Ed, When I read this I was expecting to see Van's name at the end (just kidding, he doesn't e-mail). Everything is true by my observations. Conversions have been around for a while, even many on RV's. But once they start flying, we do not hear a lot from them. Yes they fly, but the performance from their horses do not match up with the performance from the Lyc horses. Maybe Chev and Buick use ponies. I personally think the time is near for an effective auto conversion and unless these guys put them in aircraft and debug them we will never find out. The Superior engine for under 10K is missing a lot of expensive parts. Once these (I believe the carb, mags, starter, alt, etc) parts are added along with the other items identified, the price will be within spitting distance, as you stated. I know that if I go to the auto parts store and buy parts to assemble an engine for my automobile, it will cost a lot more than going to an engine assembly shop and buying the complete assembly, so why is this box of parts going to cost less than an assembled engine? If you want to build an airplane to fly, install an aircraft engine. If you want to build an airplane as a project, put an auto conversion on, and you will have something to tinker with. My hat is off to those people with conversions, but I hope everyone will read Ed's message again. Bill Bill N894RV with over 400 hours behind a O-320, Over 1000 RV flying hours. RV-4-180 soon. These opinions are mine and do not necessarily represent the opinions or position of my employer. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Fulkerson" <mfulker(at)caverns.com>
Subject: Lycoming Oil System
Date: Feb 22, 1997
Help/Advice: I have just had an O-360 A4A engine overhauled that required the crank to be reground. After assembly by a reputable engine shop (local) the plug on the front of the hollow shaft crank "blew out"- after approximately 1 hour of ground run time - during take-off. This "blow-out" was repeated approximately five tach hours later. Reviewing Tony Bingelis on Engines indicated that a hole needs to be punched in the back seal approximately six inches back of the front seal. Two mechanics that worked on it said not necessary. Question?? What is necessary? Mike Fulkerson --- mfulker(at)caverns.com Carlsbad,NM PA28-180 RV-6A- gleam ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 1997
From: John Top <jjtop(at)cts.com>
Subject: Re: 3d CAD drawings
>Ha ha, have you compared prices of a GlaStar and a RV? >I've talked to a lot of potential builders that won't build a GlaStar >because of the big ugly elevator that had to be put on due to a design >screwup. Jerry: Be nice. Check out http://www.insync.net/~sidl/floats.html John Top #5372 (619) 549-3356 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 22, 1997
From: "Eric O. Caldwell" <cirenewo(at)nexus.flash.net>
Subject: HVLP Paint Systems
First off I would like to introduce myself. My name is Eric Caldwell and I am located in Arlington, Texas. I am employed by a major tactical aircraft manufacturer in the Engineering Test Laboratory. In my job I have, I'm not making this up, fired a 4 pound chicken at over 650 mph into a canopy. The canopy survied, the chicken didn't. I have spent the last 1-1/2 years looking into experimental airplanes and settled on a RV-6A as the best comprimise of performance, range, cost, and reliability for my needs. I have received my empennage kit and have collected most of the tools I will require to build the airplane. I still have to construct a shed to store all the yard tools so I can have room in the garage for my new hobby. I am taking the high end approach to building by purchasing the best tools I can get for the best price. I have visited Bob Avery's establishment and have spent quite a few bucks there. I have personally met Bob and his wife and I am impressed with their commitment to the home builder. Now if I can just get my pneumatic rivet squeezer off back order. Enough about me. My question deals with HVLP paint systems. I have looked in the archives and read what I could find on these sprayers. I am considering two systems, one from Binks and one from Croix. If anyone has any experience with either systems and specific models I would appreciate your input. I would also appreciate any information on who carries these systems, besides AS&S, and who sells them at a low price. If you would like to contact me direct I can be reached at cirenewo(at)flash.net Thanks in advance for your help. Eric O. Caldwell RV-6A Getting Started Arlington, Texas ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 23, 1997
Subject: Re: Bendix/King KT 76A Retrofit
I got some interesting info off the Kitfox (yes, my slow plane is a rag wing) list the other day and thought I'd pass it along, because it was news to me. I have not seen the actual article in question and cannot vouch for the accuracy, so take it as informed rumour until confirmed. The February 97 issue of Aviation Consumer had an article regarding a problem with KT 76A Transponders having S/Ns from 93000 thru 109999. Apparently an internal resistor network is subject to deterioration and may cause the transponder to transmit incorrect altitudes and/or squawk codes. The corrective action is to remove and replace with a pair of glass encapsulated components. AlliedSignal will reportedly pick up the tab to the tune of 2.5 labor hours and compliance by July 1, 1997 is required. Your local Bendix/King dealer should be aware of the situation. FYI, I bought mine thru Van's about 18 months ago and it is affected. I will call my local avionics shop on Monday to get the full story. Gary VanRemortel vanremog(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 1997
From: "L. Coats" <lcoats(at)wave.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Engine options
> > >Are there any fliers out there with a HIO-360C1A under the cowl of > >their RV? I am interested to hear of compatibility problems with the > >standard engine mount, rear facing air intake etc. This engine has > >come out of a Enstrom F28A and the flange end on the crank-shaft is > >heavy walled (1 inch centre bore). > >L. Coats ZK-RVL RV6 flying :-) 169.9hr > > I am using a HIO-360-B1A in my RV-6. I got it as a core and rebuilt > it. Had to get a new crank shaft so I got one that has provision for a > constant speed (I'm using a fixed pitch wood prop) and with a thicker > prop flange without lightening holes. I also put in a new camshaft....... > Dear Richard, Many thanks for the detailed reply. My apologises for the slowness in replying. You have indicated that there is quite a bit of work involved but there should be a way around the problems. I wonder if there are not so many of these engines put into planes with the lack of response to the original posting. I have passed your posting to a builder in the U.K. who has been offered a HIO-360C1A so your post has gone half way around the world again! Louise Coats L. Coats ZK-RVL RV6 flying :-) 169.9hr ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Russ Werner" <russ(at)maui.net>
Date: Feb 22, 1997
Subject: Re: HVLP Paint Systems
> > Enough about me. My question deals with HVLP paint systems. I have > looked in the archives and read what I could find on these sprayers. I > am considering two systems, one from Binks and one from Croix. If > anyone has any experience with either systems and specific models I > would appreciate your input. I would also appreciate any information on > who carries these systems, besides AS&S, and who sells them at a low > price. > Eric, Check out http://www1.usa1.com/~stephenb/2002.html for an interesting page on another HVLP option. I haven't tried it, but it looks quality. Aloha, Russ Werner Maui Hawaii USA mailto:russ(at)maui.net sends to me mailto:RV-List(at)matronics.com sends to the RV List ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jim Sears <sears(at)searnet.com>
Subject: Re: Problem with fuse center bottom skin
Date: Feb 23, 1997
> Now, one thing I missed while building the wings, was to leave out >every other rivet on the inboard rib bottom for the platenuts. So >before I mated the wings to the fuse, I had to drill out these rivets. When I was ready to rivet the inboard ribs, I sent a note to Van's and asked about which ones to leave out. Their answer was that it was easier to add the rivets to every hole and drill them out later. That way, you could be flexible with it. The hole was going to be bigger, anyway. No big deal. I took their suggestion and riveted every one. Jim Sears RV-6A #22220 (About to start on fuse) AA5A Cheetah N26276 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bseckstein(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 23, 1997
Subject: Re: HVLP Paint Systems
<< I am considering two systems, one from Binks and one from Croix. If anyone has any experience with either systems and specific models I would appreciate your input. I would also appreciate any information on who carries these systems, besides AS&S, and who sells them at a low price. >> One of the best sources of mail order wood workers tools is a place in Minnesota called 'Tools on Sale'. They carry Croix HVLP and they are cheaper than ACS. Also, they pay the freight. The price you see is what you pay. When I was building my house they got most of my tool $'s. I usually get my phoned in order in 5 - 8 days. They have specials very often and they advertise them in Fine Homebuilding and Fine Woodworking magazines. You can find other discounters in these magazines as well. Their phone number is 800-328-0457. They will only send you a catalog if you ask for it. While we're on the subject of tools, has anyone purchased the Grizzly $199.00 Horiz./Vert. band saw? Brian Eckstein 6A - priming ailerons parts today ________________________________________________________________________________
From: rudy.albachten(at)amd.com (Rudy Albachten)
Subject: Fuel Tank Boo-Boo
Date: Feb 23, 1997
Well, I missed something on the plans, and now I'm looking for advice. I had something sitting on the fuel tank plans, and it covered up the note about different rivets and spacing for the end ribs where they rivet to the baffle. So... instead of 3/4" spaced AN427AD3 rivets I have already drilled for 1" spaced 1/8" rivets. Would you just use 8 AN470AD4 rivets? Add 7 more AN427AD3 rivets (1/2" spacing)? Any other suggestion? Call Van's? I'll be out of town till next Friday. The first thing I'll do when I get back is look for your suggestions. Thanks!!!! - Rudy Albachten rudy.albachten(at)amd.com (RV-6A - Building gas tanks) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 1997
From: "les williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)msn.com>
Subject: Fuel Tank Boo-Boo
Rudy, I would dimple the 1/8" holes for AN426-AD4 rivets and add the extra AN426-AD3 rivets in between them. Les Williams RV-6AQB #60027 ---------- From: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com on behalf of Rudy Albachten Sent: Sunday, February 23, 1997 7:00 AM Subject: RV-List: Fuel Tank Boo-Boo Well, I missed something on the plans, and now I'm looking for advice. I had something sitting on the fuel tank plans, and it covered up the note about different rivets and spacing for the end ribs where they rivet to the baffle. So... instead of 3/4" spaced AN427AD3 rivets I have already drilled for 1" spaced 1/8" rivets. Would you just use 8 AN470AD4 rivets? Add 7 more AN427AD3 rivets (1/2" spacing)? Any other suggestion? Call Van's? I'll be out of town till next Friday. The first thing I'll do when I get back is look for your suggestions. Thanks!!!! - Rudy Albachten rudy.albachten(at)amd.com (RV-6A - Building gas tanks) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 1997
From: "les williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)msn.com>
Subject: Lycoming Oil System
Mike, If you have a constant speed prop, the inner plug should not have a hole in it. If you have a fixed pitch, there should be a hole in it to allow oil to get to the front bearing. If it is a fixed pitch, does your engine have a governor pump and steel line running to the front bearing housing? What do the two mechanics say about it? Who installed the plug(s)? ---------- From: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com on behalf of Mike Fulkerson Sent: Saturday, February 22, 1997 5:53 PM Subject: RV-List: Lycoming Oil System Help/Advice: I have just had an O-360 A4A engine overhauled that required the crank to be reground. After assembly by a reputable engine shop (local) the plug on the front of the hollow shaft crank "blew out"- after approximately 1 hour of ground run time - during take-off. This "blow-out" was repeated approximately five tach hours later. Reviewing Tony Bingelis on Engines indicated that a hole needs to be punched in the back seal approximately six inches back of the front seal. Two mechanics that worked on it said not necessary. Question?? What is necessary? Mike Fulkerson --- mfulker(at)caverns.com Carlsbad,NM PA28-180 RV-6A- gleam ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 1997
From: bcos(at)ix.netcom.com (William Costello )
Subject: Re: Fuel Tank Boo-Boo
You wrote: > >Well, I missed something on the plans, and now I'm >looking for advice. I had something sitting on the >fuel tank plans, and it covered up the note about >different rivets and spacing for the end ribs where >they rivet to the baffle. So... instead of 3/4" spaced >AN427AD3 rivets I have already drilled for 1" spaced >1/8" rivets. > > Thanks!!!! > - Rudy Albachten > rudy.albachten(at)amd.com Hi Rudy, I would definitely call Van's on this one. I hate to re-design things without okay. And if you do, please let us know what the word is. Best regards, Bill Costello -- Bill Costello | bcos(at)ix.netcom.com | Building RV-6 | Reserv N97WC Want an extra hour and a half of energy per day with Super Blue Green products? Email for info or call 800-325-7544 Chicago ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 1997
From: Bob Haan <bobh(at)cdac.com>
Subject: Re: Avery yokes
> > I already have an Avery hand squeezer with the standard 1 1/2" yoke >and a pneumatic squeezer with the same yoke and would like to know >if I was only going to buy 1 more yoke, which would be more useful? >2 1/2" standard >2 1/2" no-hole nose >longeron yoke Very definitely the longeron yoke is the most useful. If ordering a second yoke, the 4" standard. Bob Haan bobh(at)cdac.com Portland, OR 503-636-3550 RV6A drilling the fuselage skins ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 1997
From: Bill Benedict <billb(at)europa.com>
Subject: Re: Lycoming Oil System
> >Help/Advice: I have just had an O-360 A4A engine overhauled that required >the crank to be reground. After assembly by a reputable engine shop >(local) the plug on the front of the hollow shaft crank "blew out"- after >approximately 1 hour of ground run time - during take-off. This >"blow-out" was repeated approximately five tach hours later. Reviewing >Tony Bingelis on Engines indicated that a hole needs to be punched in the >back seal approximately six inches back of the front seal. Two mechanics >that worked on it said not necessary. Question?? What is necessary? > >Mike Fulkerson --- mfulker(at)caverns.com >Carlsbad,NM PA28-180 >RV-6A- gleam Mike, The answer seems obvious. About 3-4 years ago the RVator had an article about these two plugs. I will send you a copy of Lyc's instructions about these plugs if you are in Van's data base (sorry, I don't remember everyones name. We have about 4500 people actively building). In a nut shell it goes like this: The hallow crank has a plug internally about 5-6 inches behind the crank flange. In a constant speed prop application, the oil pressure that changes the pitch of the prop is injected into the crank forward of this plug. The plug will not allow the oil to go aft in the crank, so it moves forward into the prop where it does its thing (rotates the blade to the desired pitch). In a fixed pitch application, this plug must be pierced (not drilled)or totally removed because oil from the front bearing lubrication port will also find its way into this hollow crank. With the oil pressure these engines run, the buildup will cause the front plug to blow out and pump all the engine oil overboard in a short time. You can guess the rest of the story! The hollow crank has drains behind this plug, allowing the oil that gets into the crank to drain out. Care must be taken when working within the crank, because there is a tube running across the inside of the crank from side to side. The plug must be fished past this tube when replacing the plug for C/S applications. Looks like an impossible task, but it can be done. Vans carries two plugs for the crank. PN: EA 61510 ($11.00) is the plug that fits down inside the crank and is needed when converting from a fixed pitch to a constant speed application. PN: EA STD1211 PLUG ($2.00) is the plug on the front of the crank and is used to seal the crank after the internal plug is pierced. This is the plug that keeps getting blown out from oil pressure. Bill Bill N894RV with over 400 hours behind a O-320, Over 1000 RV flying hours. RV-4-180 soon. These opinions are mine and do not necessarily represent the opinions or position of my employer. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Lycoming Oil System
From: ebundy(at)juno.com (Ed Bundy)
Date: Feb 23, 1997
the plug on the front of the hollow shaft crank "blew out"- >after >approximately 1 hour of ground run time - during take-off. This >"blow-out" was repeated approximately five tach hours later. >Reviewing >Tony Bingelis on Engines indicated that a hole needs to be punched in >the >back seal approximately six inches back of the front seal. Two >mechanics >that worked on it said not necessary. Question?? What is necessary? Lycoming strongly recommends that the governor pad and line to the front of the engine case be removed when using a f/p prop. If you don't need this stuff, it can't break and dump all of your oil overboard. The rear seal is also supposed to be punched, or even completely removed so that (as you may have guessed) pressure won't build up and blow the front seal. The only reasons for that plug are so that: A) Lycoming can test a hollow crank engine with a test club and B) to keep FOD out of the hollow crank when running a f/p prop. It is not designed to hold any pressure for any significant length of time. The rep. that I spoke with at Lycoming says that it's very unusual for that seal to go more than 5 hours without blowing if the rear seal isn't relieved. In fact, once in a while they blow one during the 1hour test period on a new engine. Be sure to pierce, not drill, a 3/16"-1/4" hole in the rear seal, and don't damage the oil transfer tube on the inside of the crank. Lycoming has an S.I. for the complete details. Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 ebundy(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Lycoming Oil System
From: ebundy(at)juno.com (Ed Bundy)
Date: Feb 23, 1997
> oil from the front bearing >lubrication port will also find its way into this hollow crank. The hollow crank has >drains behind this plug, allowing the oil that gets into the crank to drain out. How does the oil get from the front bearing into the crank? I thought the reason for the hollow crank AD was because in f/p applications the interior of the crank doesn't get any oil and starts to corode. Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 ebundy(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Feb 23, 1997
Subject: Re: Avery yokes
> > I already have an Avery hand squeezer with the standard 1 1/2" yoke > >and a pneumatic squeezer with the same yoke and would like to know > >if I was only going to buy 1 more yoke, which would be more useful? > >2 1/2" standard > >2 1/2" no-hole nose > >longeron yoke I've found the 3" standard to be indespensible. In a couple of spots anything shorter wouldn't have reached. (Actually, I borrowed a 3" yoke, liked it, and bought my own). --------------------- Tim Lewis RV-6AQ #60023 timrv6a(at)earthlink.net ----------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Wiring
Date: Feb 18, 1997
I installed a polly tubing in the wings. This is what you can buy at your local HW store, and is white in color. You need it large enough to get the strobe wire (about 1/4 inch) plus the nav and landing light wire inside of it. I don't recall the size, probably 3/8 ID or so. You find a position where you want to run the wires and then drill the holes in the ribs with a unibit. You then slide in one long piece of the clear poly tubing from the outboard wing rib to about a foot or two past the root rib. When I install the wings, you drill a hole in the fuselage and run the tubing right into the fuselage. Now all you have to do is slide the wire inside this tubing in your wing. I think I found some tubing that just fit inside the 7/16 snap in bushings that Vans gives you and I used the busings in the holes and the slid the tubing inside of that. You may have to use a length of plain ol wire to pull the wire bundle thru the tub. With my landing wire +nav wire plus strobe wire it was a tight fit. My tubing was positioned behind the rear spar and I think closer to the top of the wing to clear the bellcrank area. Do this before you close the wing. Herman > > > >Very intresting thread,I dont have set of plans and always trying to visualize what this stuff looks like.Do the wires that go through ribs > and thing's get a little brackets with foam padding like I've seen > somewhere on another airplane?????. > David Price > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 1997
From: Bill Benedict <billb(at)europa.com>
Subject: Re: Lycoming Oil System
> > >> oil from the front bearing >>lubrication port will also find its way into this hollow crank. The >hollow crank has >drains behind this plug, allowing the oil that gets >into the crank to drain out. > >How does the oil get from the front bearing into the crank? I thought >the reason for the hollow crank AD was because in f/p applications the >interior of the crank doesn't get any oil and starts to corode. > >Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 >ebundy(at)juno.com Ed, I don't have the drawing here, so from memory (and that isn't too good) the oil is pumped through a lubricating hole in the bearing where it comes into contact with the crank. It then migrates down the crank to the hole in the crank where the C/S oil is injected into the center of the crank. This is all within the length of the bearing. In FP applications, when the plug is pulled, usually there is enough sludge in this cavity to make you gag. It has to be removed with a scraper just to get back to the rear plug. I think that bulletin (did it make it to AD?) was an over reaction to one possible incident in the UK. Bill Bill N894RV with over 400 hours behind a O-320, Over 1000 RV flying hours. RV-4-180 soon. These opinions are mine and do not necessarily represent the opinions or position of my employer. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 1997
From: "les williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)msn.com>
Subject: Lycoming Oil System
Ed, The oil does get to the forward part of the hollow crank, but in such small quantity that sludge tends to collect there. The sludge is what causes the corrosion. I inspected my 0-320 with less than 200 hrs on it and was amazed at how much had collected in that few hours. One thing that probably contributes to the sludge build-up is not running the engine at high enough temperature, which is something I now pay real close attention to. Les Williams RV-6AQB #60027 ---------- From: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com on behalf of Ed Bundy Sent: Sunday, February 23, 1997 10:53 AM Subject: Re: RV-List: Lycoming Oil System > oil from the front bearing >lubrication port will also find its way into this hollow crank. The hollow crank has >drains behind this plug, allowing the oil that gets into the crank to drain out. How does the oil get from the front bearing into the crank? I thought the reason for the hollow crank AD was because in f/p applications the interior of the crank doesn't get any oil and starts to corode. Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 ebundy(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: mikel(at)dimensional.com
Date: Feb 23, 1997
Subject: Re: Lycoming Oil System
>How does the oil get from the front bearing into the crank? I thought >the reason for the hollow crank AD was because in f/p applications the >interior of the crank doesn't get any oil and starts to corode. > In the hollow crank with a CS prop, the oil is constantly circulated through this area in order to run the prop. With a fixed pich prop, the oil still circulates through the area (which is why you PUNCH a hole in the back plug: to give the oil somewhere to go) but at a much slower rate....which allows muck and sludge and junk to accumulate. The byproducts of combustion are corrosive if not burned out of the oil (which is why we should go flying in the winter, among other reasons). Some of them inevitably remain (one of the reasons we drain our oil at 25 or so hours) and, if caught in the muck/sludge/junk, will begin to eat away at whatever they are resting up against...including a crankshaft. NOW: if this was General Motors, and a design flaw was discovered in their engines, and they required their engines to be torn down and an new crank installed, or inspected every 10,000 miles, what do you think the general public would do?? I believe the word would be freak-out. Just a thought.......... Michael RV-4 232 SQ mikel(at)dimensional.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bseckstein(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 23, 1997
Subject: Electric aileron trim installation
I'm a bit confused with the instructions that come with the electric aileron trim kit. The first instruction tells the installer to replace the inboard root reinforcement plate with the provided spar doubler. The drawing appears to show the trim being installed not on the inboard end, but instead on the outboard end of the aileron. What the ??? Any advice out there? Brian Eckstein 6a ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 1997
From: Dave Barnhart <barnhart(at)a.crl.com>
Subject: Re: Lycoming Oil System
Mike: You wrote: >Help/Advice: I have just had an O-360 A4A engine overhauled that required >the crank to be reground. After assembly by a reputable engine shop >(local) the plug on the front of the hollow shaft crank "blew out"- after >approximately 1 hour of ground run time - during take-off. This >"blow-out" was repeated approximately five tach hours later. Reviewing >Tony Bingelis on Engines indicated that a hole needs to be punched in the >back seal approximately six inches back of the front seal. Two mechanics >that worked on it said not necessary. Question?? What is necessary? Refer these two so-called mechanics to Lycoming Service Instruction 1435. I quote: "When changing from a constant speed to a fixed pitch propeller, it is necessary to pierce a 1/8" to 1/4" hole in (or remove) the plug behind the oil return tube, and install an expansion plug in the front of the crankshaft." Frankly, if it were me, I would be very concerned about the condition of my engine after two incidences of total loss of oil pressure - one at full power. I suggest that you talk to this "reputable engine shop" and ask them why they chose not to comply with SI 1435. If they are not willing to re-overhaul your engine at no expense to you(including parts), then I would sick my lawyer on them and make noises with the FAA. Best Regards, Dave Barnhart rv-6 sn 23744 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Engine options
Date: Feb 23, 1997
You two are taking about different engines. The -C1A is an angle valve engine, 200 HP (or maybe 205 if the helecoptor version). All the -Bxx engines are 180 HP and are the parallel valve engines. Any of the rear mounted engines can be converted to front or bottom injector. Some by simply machining the front pad and putting a plate on the rear pad or by changing the sump. Herman dierks(at)austin.ibm.com > > > > > > >Are there any fliers out there with a HIO-360C1A under the cowl of > > >their RV? I am interested to hear of compatibility problems with the > > >standard engine mount, rear facing air intake etc. This engine has > > >come out of a Enstrom F28A and the flange end on the crank-shaft is > > >heavy walled (1 inch centre bore). > > >L. Coats ZK-RVL RV6 flying :-) 169.9hr > > > > I am using a HIO-360-B1A in my RV-6. I got it as a core and rebuilt > > it. Had to get a new crank shaft so I got one that has provision for a > > constant speed (I'm using a fixed pitch wood prop) and with a thicker > > prop flange without lightening holes. I also put in a new camshaft....... > > > Dear Richard, > > Many thanks for the detailed reply. My apologises for the slowness in > replying. You have indicated that there is quite a bit of work involved but > there should be a way around the problems. I wonder if there are not so > many of these engines put into planes with the lack of response to the > original posting. I have passed your posting to a builder in the U.K. who > has been offered a HIO-360C1A so your post has gone half way around the > world again! > > Louise Coats > L. Coats ZK-RVL RV6 flying :-) 169.9hr > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: McManD(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 23, 1997
Subject: Re: 3d CAD drawings & Gyro pull out
Wow, interesting conversations here!. John, I like the float plane!!! Neat paint job. We got a Glasstar being build in SYR, he almost bought an RV, it was only a choice between one or the other. Between the two the're both tough to beat, (like an RV each have their good and bad points). It is going up real fast though. I'll add my $.02 re: CAD stuff for RV's But not fuel for flames, rather: Didn't do 3d, but did ACADr12 (r = revsion 12) a RV6 dash panel, with 4 flush, removable plates, holding sections of gages. This for service and future upgrades. And I'm just about done with the metal working portion of mine now. I'll probalbly update the drawing to my actual dimensions prior to permanent mounting of mine into plane. I also believe a blank plate could be used when gages are pulled to do that upside down stuff if one wants. Cause if I remember previous on list, spinning gages are what you want, not shut off vacum and go loop de loop. Plus caging is just to "Right" a gyro upon completion of aerobatics right?. So would be Sean Tuckers, intersted a ACADr12 .dwg file, your's for the asking, I'll attach a file to a e'mail to whom ever. As well as I have some inherited ACADr10 .dwg dash panel stuff that go into a great deal of detail, but 2d only. Right down to the lettering in the "Experimental ... passenger warning placard". Again ask and you shall receive. Advise what drawings (you must have ACAD at thet rev level or greater to read files.) specifically you want. Also have some hand drawn faxes which can be viewed in MS windows 95 fax viewer or the like, which I can attach per your request. These are of what a bunch of have made up in one form or similar, as the 5th crotch strap mount point to be used. Again ask. Email me at McManD(at)aol.com David McManmon RV6 Cicero NY, over 90% done, only 90% to go. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: on the sludge buildup in the crank
Date: Feb 23, 1997
I think it is due to two factors. One is that the crank acts like a mini centrifuge. The oil that gets in there is spun around and the heavy particles sling to the outside (which is against the wall of the inside of the crank). These particles are very compacted, which you will see if you clean one out. The sludge is dark grey and I think it contains a lot of lead (which gets into the oil from the fuel) and it is forced out of the oil at this point, along with carbon and other contaminates. I once had a Honda 305 cc motorcycle (Early 70's) and this engine had a small oil filter which was just a can that was spun around by a small chain drive and the oil went into this can and the centrifical force slung all the heavy particals to the outside of the can. The 'can' was made of aluminum and had a O ring and lid that sealed it. This was a very good oil filter but took some time to dissemble and clean. Anyway, I think the Lyc crank works in much the same way to trap sludge from the oil. The second reason is due to the small hole in the rear plug, that the oil velocity slows down when in the crank area and this causes it to 'dump' any suspended particles. This works just like water flowing from a narrow river into a larger lake, it slows and dumps out what ever it is carrying. I think the centrifuge is the main effect and the slowing of the oil a secondary effect. I just cleaned out the end of a crank over the week end for a friend on his RV6 with an O320 (160 HP) with fixed pitch prop as he wanted to comply with the 505 SB. I took an old hacksaw blade and used the smooth side. The crud is quite hard and very compacted to the wall of the crank. Once all the crud was physically scraped out, I flushed it with a strong spray of carb cleaner (the kind you buy in a spray can). They held the tail up and this let the carb cleaner run back out the front. Cleaned up the inside with some paper towls and more carb cleaner. In this engine, the inside was A OK. Oil temperature has a lot to do with sludge build up in the oil and this does leave a lot of water in the oil which will cause corrosion. This moisture will get traped in the crank as well. But even with hot oil, there will be a lot of crud that builds up in the end of the crank. FYI, one of the articles I read from a Jan 2x Pacific Coast Flyer (or one of those newspaper flying rags) said that Lycoming was working on a coating that could be used to coat the inside of the crank. They said it would be avail in about 6 to 8 weeks or so. Given the types of epoxies we have, this would be a good used for some epoxy paing coating. There is little chance this would ever come loose due to the centrifical force inside this cavity. It also said only 160 HP and higher engines would be affected by the AD (excluding 150 HP O320's and all O235's and 290's from the 505 SB and AD). Also pitts would be allowed now up to some limit unless cracks were found. Stay posted for a lot more in the news on the 505 SB and associated AD. To answer another question on how the oil gets into this area, there is a small tube that goes across this hole in the crank (you will see it once you pull out the front plug and look inside). This tube has a hole cut it it. This tube carries oil from the main bearing (that comes from the cases) and into this cavity. The hole punched into the plug at the rear of the crank cavity lets the oil flow back into the case. Herman dierks(at)austin.ibm.com > > Ed, > > The oil does get to the forward part of the hollow crank, but in such small > quantity that sludge tends to collect there. The sludge is what causes the > corrosion. I inspected my 0-320 with less than 200 hrs on it and was amazed > at how much had collected in that few hours. One thing that probably > contributes to the sludge build-up is not running the engine at high enough > temperature, which is something I now pay real close attention to. > > Les Williams > RV-6AQB #60027 > > ---------- > From: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com on behalf of Ed Bundy > Sent: Sunday, February 23, 1997 10:53 AM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: Lycoming Oil System > > > > > oil from the front bearing > >lubrication port will also find its way into this hollow crank. The > hollow crank has >drains behind this plug, allowing the oil that gets > into the crank to drain out. > > How does the oil get from the front bearing into the crank? I thought > the reason for the hollow crank AD was because in f/p applications the > interior of the crank doesn't get any oil and starts to corode. > > Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 > ebundy(at)juno.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BrooksRV6(at)webtv.net (Chris Brooks)
Date: Feb 23, 1997
Subject: Re: Electric aileron trim installation
Warning-this is lengthy Brian. The first instruction on my drawing reads "Replace aileron spar outboard root reinforcement plate with EAT-603 plate (6" length). Trim upper flange as shown." Drawing EAT-1 is a mess because Vans moved the tab from the aileron inboard to the outboard and did not update the dimensions on the drawing to reflect the change. *Drwg.16 shows inboard aileron L.E.rib edge distance as 1 5/16" and outboard L.E. rib edge distance as 3/4" *Drwg EAT1 section A-A shows the EAT-601A mount against the side of the L.E.rib (I put a nut-plate in the 601-A and secured it to the rib with a screw for more rigidity) If you trim the EAT-603 doubler back 1 7/8" as called for in Drwg.EAT-1 your EAT-601 mount will be located 9/16" from the L.E.rib and there will be a 9/16" gap in the doubler flange at the rib. My solution was to : *find the L.E.rib location on the spar *trim the doubler flange back just enough to clear the L.E.rib *make your cut-out in the doubler & spar so the EAT-601 mount rest against the L.E.rib *shorten your EAT 604 & EAT-605 dimensions to fit the opening. If you do this your EAT-606 acuator arms will have to be moved outboard on the piano hinge to align with the servo. Your access cover will also be about 9/16" narrower. I also added fairings from Avery's to cover the servo rod exits on my aileron & elevator, I think they added a nice touch. Chris Brooks BrooksRV6(at)webtv.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 1997
From: Greg Puckett <71155.2336(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: 3d CAD drawings & Gyro pull out
>I also believe a blank plate could be used when gages are pulled to do that >upside down stuff if one wants. Cause if I remember previous on list, >spinning gages are what you want, not shut off vacum and go loop de loop. I was also contemplating how to save my gyro's. Although the vacume shutoff valve would work, I think you would never want to shut off the vacume in flight. I remember an instrument overhaul guy telling me once that there is much more bearing wear in a gyro when the A/C is moving and the gyro is not turning at rated speed, he used to say to always wait to push your A/C back into the hangar until the gyro's had completely spun down unless you were pushing it absolutely staight back. I suppose you could just fly absolutely straight for several minutes and then yank & bank. The possibility also exists that this guy was full of #$@$. Has anyone else ever heard of this? Greg Puckett 80081 (spars are here, ribs drilled to them) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 1997
From: Stephen Jackson Soule <ssoule(at)vbimail.champlain.edu>
Subject: Re: Fuel Tank Boo-Boo
I would accept the holes as drilled and do an extra-nice job with the Pro-Seal. I would also call Van's and run it by them. Steve Soule (Left wing done right wing in the jig.) ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Chatter: VFR GPS direct-to clrnc
From: wstucklen1(at)juno.com (Frederic W Stucklen)
Date: Feb 24, 1997
> >Fred, I think the gotcha here is that ATC doesn't care what equipment >you have on board when they give you a clearance because, if you accept it, it's >your responsibility to have the equipment necessary to be able to execute >it legally and safely. I agree with you here. A couple of times, wnen given a "direct" 've suggested back the heading. Sometimes they amend the clearance to "Heading xxx, direct when able". That keeps it leagal. The other thing to remember is that, when off airways and in the area of VORS (like most places on the East Coast) as long as one has DME, you can leagaly go direct by manually performing the RNAV functions with the VOR's. This obvoiusly is a lot of math in the cockpit, something I don't believe in, but it works. *** SNIP **** > Even though I >have to file as a /A I routinely get asked if I am RNAV equipped. I >often wonder if this is ATC's way of saying "hey, >a white lie here can shave some miles off your route, so let me tempt you >a little with a question we both know the answer to". Like you I >started putting "Loran equipped" in the comments box of all my flight >plans even though my aircraft type box states "PA34/A" to see if I >would get offered more direct-to clearances (not that I would accept >them, mind you ;>). Result: it didn't make any difference so now I leave >it off. I do find putting "VFR GPS" in the remarks box results in being offered the "direct" routings. This has happened more often while flying in the midwest, and least often here on the upper East coast. I get it most often traffic is light and it's VFR at or above MVA at the destination end. Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV wstucklen1(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: engines
From: lm4(at)juno.com (Larry Mac Donald)
Date: Feb 24, 1997
Hi folks, This stuff about engines is fascinating. I like to learn about the technologies and you people seem to have a wealth of information on these airplane subjects. I wont be able, however, to pop for a ten K + engine so I hope I can get away with next best. Except I don't know what that is. I'm told that the 94 Buick has a supercharged engine, and that the s-10 Chevy has a 4.3 liter engine that would crank up at least 180hp. Can any of you set me straight on what I should be looking for in the area of cost, performance, Hp., accessories etc., that I might stick to the front of an R/V. Larry lm4(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Timothy J. Etherington" <tjetheri(at)cca.rockwell.com>
Date: Feb 24, 1997
Subject: Re: 3d CAD drawings
From: Cafgef(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 24, 1997
Subject: Re: HVLP Paint Systems
<< fired a 4 pound chicken at over 650 mph into a canopy. The canopy survied, the chicken didn't. >> At lockheed, way back when I worked there, the chicken had its head dipped into liquid nitrogen to kill it before firing it via air canon at a C-130 windshield. I had to mention that before someone deceided that there was some gross treatment of chickens involved. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: John Walsh <jwalsh(at)ftp.com>
Subject: Engines
Date: Feb 24, 1997
Avweb has an interview with the president of Lycoming. After reading that,= I guesstimated product liablity cost at $4k/engine. A recent note indicat= es that Lycoming has come out and said $4k/engine. Let's for a moment pret= end that the parts that make up a Lycoming are not airplane engine parts bu= t just machined parts. What do you think they cost?? I would guess $3k ma= x!! I'd say Lycoming is doing very well $$ wise for such a small market. = Also note that the president said the same thing. They are very healthy fi= nancially. So, let's look at the Superior "clone". No liability tail. No certificati= on costs ( it's a clone the cert is going to be trivial). No development c= osts to speak of ( it's a clone). This leads me to conclude... $10K IS TOO= DAMNED MUCH!!!! (1/2g). Lastly, someone asked what's the next best option to a $10k+ Lycoming. The= answer is a loan to buy the $10k+ Lycoming (IMHO). =20 John ( who will almost certainly get in line for a Superior engine) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ernesto Sanchez" <es12043(at)utech.net>
Subject: Re: engines
Date: Feb 24, 1997
I get a newsletter named "Contact!". It's about experimental aircraft using Alternative motors. They also have a great book that deals with different installations and different motors. Lately, there has been allot of RV articles. Contact ! 2900 East Weymouth Tucson, AZ 85716-1249 Phone # 520.881.2232 I highly recommend it! Ernesto Sanchez es12043(at)utech.net ---------- > From: Larry Mac Donald <juno.com!lm4(at)matronics.com> > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: engines > Date: Monday, February 24, 1997 6:31 AM > > > Hi folks, > This stuff about engines is fascinating. I like to learn about the > technologies and you people seem to have a wealth of information on these > airplane subjects. I wont be able, however, to pop for a ten K + > engine so I hope I can get away with next best. Except I don't know what > that is. I'm told that the 94 Buick has a supercharged engine, and that > the s-10 Chevy has a 4.3 liter engine that would crank up at least 180hp. > Can any of you set me straight on what I should be looking for in the > area of cost, performance, Hp., accessories etc., that I might stick to > the front of an R/V. > Larry lm4(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: rust47rg(at)one.net
Date: Feb 24, 1997
Subject: Re: 3d CAD drawings & Gyro pull out
> >>I also believe a blank plate could be used when gages are pulled to do that >>upside down stuff if one wants. Cause if I remember previous on list, >>spinning gages are what you want, not shut off vacum and go loop de loop. > >I was also contemplating how to save my gyro's. Although the vacume shutoff >valve would work, I think you would never want to shut off the vacume in flight. >I remember an instrument overhaul guy telling me once that there is much more >bearing wear in a gyro when the A/C is moving and the gyro is not turning at >rated speed, he used to say to always wait to push your A/C back into the hangar >until the gyro's had completely spun down unless you were pushing it absolutely >staight back. I suppose you could just fly absolutely straight for several >minutes and then yank & bank. The possibility also exists that this guy was full >of #$@$. Has anyone else ever heard of this? > > > > Greg Puckett 80081 (spars are here, ribs >drilled to them) > Gary: I believe Herman already touched on this, but I'll do it again. There is no cheap way to do aerobatics with gyros, period. If you disable the vacuum they just flop around and tear themselves apart. The cheapest way is build a removable sub panel. Some competition planes use removable panels for ferry flights between events. Regards: Rusty Gossard N47RG RV-4 Flying since 8-94 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)magic.ca (J.Ken Hitchmough)
Date: Feb 24, 1997
Subject: Van's Sun 'n Fun banquet
Does someone please have the date, time etc for Van's banquet at Sun 'n fun= . Also, a contact for registering would be good too. Thanks Ken RV6A Flying This message sent using the FirstClass SMTP/NNTP Gateway for Mac OS. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: MikeT(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 24, 1997
Subject: Boeing Surplus
Their hours are Tues-Fri 11-6, Sat 9-4 and phone is 206-393-4060. They are just South of Kent, Wa on the East side of the Kent Auburn valley about 8 miles south of the Renton airport and 4 miles north of the Auburn airport. Give them a call for the address and driving directions. I'm told they usually put "new" stuff out early in the week so you might plan to visit then. If you need more info let me know. MikeT RV-6 lh wing about ready for skin ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 1997
From: Don McNamara <mcnamara(at)sbt.infi.net>
Subject: RV-8 jig
To All RV-8-ers Who Have Wing Kits: What is the necessary spacing between jig uprights? Initially, the empennage kit said something like 109" for the HS, but subsequent references seemed to indicate that more is required for the wing jig. --Don mcnamara(at)sbt.infi.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Lauritsen" <clevtool(at)tdsi.net>
Subject: Re: chicken chatter
Date: Feb 24, 1997
I am from Iowa but I did not grow up on the farm, from what I hear chickens don't ever fly more than a few yards. Are we really in danger of hitting them in airplanes! Are you the guys that supply McD's with the nuggets? :) ---------- > From: aol.com!Cafgef(at)matronics.com > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: HVLP Paint Systems > Date: Monday, February 24, 1997 9:38 AM > > > > << fired a 4 pound chicken at over 650 mph > into a canopy. The canopy survied, the chicken didn't. > >> > At lockheed, way back when I worked there, the chicken had its head dipped > into liquid nitrogen to kill it before firing it via air canon at a C-130 > windshield. I had to mention that before someone deceided that there was > some gross treatment of chickens involved. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)magic.ca (J.Ken Hitchmough)
Date: Feb 24, 1997
Subject: Re: chicken chatter
Then there was the Irish AIrcraft company that just couldn't get their cano= py to resist the chicken. They kept making the canopy thicker and thicker, = but still the chicken would shatter it. Then someone suggested they should try defrosting the chicken before they f= ired it. Ken RV6A (half Irish) < I am from Iowa but I did not grow up on the farm, from what I hear chickens= don't ever fly more than a few yards. Are we really in danger of hitting them in airplanes=21 Are you the guys that supply McD's with the nuggets? = 20 :) ---------- > From: aol.com=21Cafgef=40matronics.com > To: rv-list=40matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: HVLP Paint Systems > Date: Monday, February 24, 1997 9:38 AM >=20 > =3D=3D> RV-List message posted by: Cafgef=40aol.com >=20 >=20 > <<<< fired a 4 pound chicken at over 650 mph > into a canopy. The canopy survied, the chicken didn't. > >> > At lockheed, way back when I worked there, the chicken had its head dipped > into liquid nitrogen to kill it before firing it via air canon at a C-130= > windshield. I had to mention that before someone deceided that there was= > some gross treatment of chickens involved. =20 This message sent using the FirstClass SMTP/NNTP Gateway for Mac OS. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 1997
From: halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne)
Subject: I picked up my Quick Build kit at the factory
I picked up my RV6AQ at Van's in North Plains on Valentine's Day. So I guess we name it Valentine! My wife has changed from thinking I'm crazy for buying another plane that is more work than the Debonair, to willing to help a bit. PICKING IT UP AT THE FACTORY: What fun! Van's is a really nice group of people in a typical little Pacific Northwest mill town. I asked them where we could get lunch and they suggested Portland or Seattle. Actually, the tavern restaurant on Main has decent sandwiches. We jetted to PDX and cabbed to North Plains for $20 more than the estimated $35 and rented a U-Haul 24 foot van. A real big rig that loves gas. $175 for five days and more than enough mileage to get home. Oh, and $56 for insurance. Before leaving I bought insurance for the kit for $255 a year. Van's people packed the truck - perfectly! It isn't often that you get work done and it is totally without flaw. California I-5 is as bumpy as any logging road but the kit didn't suffer at all. We did, though. I'm sure the 600 pounds of kit never flexed the springs. We could have avoided that and probably made enough to cover rental if we had bought three or four slings of plywood and sold it down here. WHAT THE BUSINESS LOOKS LIKE: It has a tiny sign - the oval jacket patch enlarged to a foot long. My impression is that it is a thriving business with happy employees. Mostly, they are in the design and packaging business. I think we got distracted and missed the actual "make things" building. QB fuselages are up on the top row and other stuff below. Mountains of Lycomings - no wonder Van thinks they are so great. They have a new sheet metal punch - stick in a floppy with the layout and it cuts out the parts for you. INVENTORY YOUR KIT!: Easier said than done! The packing list is in what us software engineers call "heap sort", basically thrown on the heap. Gross parts are easy like here are two wings, three wheels, two nose gear inner tubes (?) etc. Some parts are unmarked, however, especially the steel. The thing that looks like a tomahawk is the rollover bar support - must be as there's nothing else left. The real killer is the baggies. 96 zillion small brown paper bags each with a number like Q605 or 902-1 packed in no order. The list tells what is in each so just pick up a bag and search thru the 10 page unsorted list. Open bag and see if the contents shown on the list are there. This one contains "misc hardware". The next one contains " " - oops no entry. Doing inventory helps you learn what is in your airplane. How, I asked myself, does one find the part while building?? One bag, for example, has four screws in it. Truss head, 3/16 by one inch, drilled. I don't really know the AN... I'll see a callout on the drawing, look in my little mechanic bible for what it looks like, and start going thru baggies.? I went out and bought six plastic divided boxes. I've had some little drawer cabinets for a long time - they're almost worse than brown baggies. Van's must know, at some point, what goes into the bags. Maybe they could print a list for us - sorted. I suspect they would save money by buying boxes like I got and packing the tiny parts in them. It would save a lot of stapling and unstapling time! All the components look like top quality to me. So far, I'm quite impressed. The construction that has been done looks very fine. From now on, I am in awe of all you who have built all this with your own hands! I almost feel guilty doing the quickbuild. ENGINES: I got the kit without the motor mount. I like what I see about the Chevy V-6, especially if I use the aluminum block and heads. Then it would probably weigh less than a Lycoming. It would certainly cost less than a new Lycoming but the all aluminum option would not be as cheap as a patched up junkyard Lycoming. I'm an engineer by training and profession and licensed in the State of Washington - though fees aren't paid up. I am open minded about this. I want a powerplant that is reliable and reasonable in cost. Durability is not a high order requirement as I will probably not fly more than 200 hours a year. If I can go all year on one low priced engine, that would be ok. If I wasn't confidant that I could work out development problems, I've overhauled and prepared for racing over 200 engines of all types, I would not undertake a non-standard engine installation. It will be an experiment and a big project in itself. INSTRUMENTS: My Valentine will be a platform for testing and showing off a computer and software related product. It will involve instruments, human factors, navigation, human factors, flying skill and human factors. I'll be looking for input from this exciting forum! Developing the technology for the airplanes that today's Young Eagles will fly has been left up to us. Hal Kempthorne halk(at)sybase.com Santa Clara, CA. (SJC) Debonair N6134V A zillion RV-6AQ parts in the "hangar" we call home. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 1997
From: Edward Cole <emcole(at)concentric.net>
Subject: Videos
I'm looking for the Orndorff videos for the fuselage and finish kit. Anybody have one for sale? You can respond personally to address below. Thanks, Ed Cole RV6A Wings emcole(at)concentric.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 1997
From: halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne)
Subject: Re: engines
Larry writes: >Can any of you set me straight on what I should be looking for in the >area of cost, performance, Hp., accessories etc., that I might stick to >the front of an R/V. Richard Van Grunsven, the brilliant engineer who designed this fine machine suggests a Lycoming in the 150 to 180 hp range (200 for the RV8). I don't believe you will have a real great engine for under $10,000. That will buy a decent overhaul but you still need a core. I guess $10K would buy a core and a good top and accessories overhaul. You can probably get that Chevy V6 for around $10K. No, not the 500hp job, the 220 hp one. The modified racing engine only had a TBO of ten hours which you might find unacceptable anyway. With enough money, you can make this engine *LIGHTER* than the Lycoming 180 with constant speed prop. I understand that Belted Air Power of Las Vegas is selling the package with everything but the Chevy long block for about $8K. The long block is about $1600. Twist their arms and I'll bet they'll give you very good support. Without someone like BAP to guide you, I believe that you would need significant skill, time, and money to install a non-standard powerplant. You might, however, discover the true meaning of experimental, learn, and have fun. Hal Kempthorne halk(at)sybase.com Santa Clara, CA. (SJC) Debonair N6134V A zillion RV-6AQ parts in the "hangar" we call home. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: John Morrissey <John.Morrissey(at)its.csiro.au>
Subject: Re: chicken chatter
This one had us rolling around the office laughing :-) >> From: aol.com!Cafgef(at)matronics.com >> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >> Subject: Re: RV-List: HVLP Paint Systems >> Date: Monday, February 24, 1997 9:38 AM >> >> >> >> << fired a 4 pound chicken at over 650 mph >> into a canopy. The canopy survied, the chicken didn't. >> >> >> At lockheed, way back when I worked there, the chicken had its head >dipped >> into liquid nitrogen to kill it before firing it via air canon at a C-130 >> windshield. I had to mention that before someone deceided that there was >> some gross treatment of chickens involved. > I'm not sure which one I'd prefer if I was a chicken - being fired out of a cannon while I was still alive or having my head dipped in liquid nitrogen. I'd reckon the chook would have a pretty startled look on its face no matter what method of dispatch was used. :-) Happy RV'ing!! John Morrissey > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Morrissey CSIRO ITS Data Communications Manager Phone:- 06 2766811 Fax:- 06 2766617 Mobile:- 018 628804 Email:- John.Morrissey(at)its.csiro.au CSIRO ---- AUSTRALIA'S SCIENCE, AUSTRALIA'S FUTURE! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz>
Subject: Re: chicken chatter
Hi Ken, Something funny with your mailer... I get 2 copies of your messages to the RVlist, and a message saying that there are faulty attachments. Do you have MIME enabled or something? Frank. >Then there was the Irish AIrcraft company that just couldn't get their cano= py to resist the chicken. They kept making the canopy thicker and thicker, = but still the chicken would shatter it. > >Then someone suggested they should try defrosting the chicken before they f= ired it. > >Ken RV6A (half Irish) > > > > > > > >I am from Iowa but I did not grow up on the farm, from what I hear chickens= > >don't ever fly more than a few yards. Are we really in danger of hitting >them in airplanes=21 Are you the guys that supply McD's with the nuggets? = 20 >:) > >---------- >> From: aol.com=21Cafgef=40matronics.com >> To: rv-list=40matronics.com >> Subject: Re: RV-List: HVLP Paint Systems >> Date: Monday, February 24, 1997 9:38 AM >>=20 >> =3D=3D> RV-List message posted by: Cafgef=40aol.com >>=20 >>=20 >> << fired a 4 pound chicken at over 650 mph >> into a canopy. The canopy survied, the chicken didn't. >> >> >> At lockheed, way back when I worked there, the chicken had its head >dipped >> into liquid nitrogen to kill it before firing it via air canon at a C-130= > >> windshield. I had to mention that before someone deceided that there was= > >> some gross treatment of chickens involved. =20 > >This message sent using the FirstClass SMTP/NNTP Gateway for Mac OS. > > -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- frankv(at)pec.co.nzZ (without the anti-email-spam Z, of course) http://www.pec.co.nz/~frankv/ Frank van der Hulst, Software Engineer, Cardax, PEC(NZ) Ltd, Marton "Knowledge=Power=Energy=Matter=Mass; A good bookshop is just a genteel Black Hole that knows how to read". Terry Pratchett, "Guards! Guards!" -------------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz>
Subject: Re: I picked up my Quick Build kit at the factory
>The real >killer is the baggies. >I've had some little drawer cabinets >for a long time - they're almost worse than brown baggies. Van's must know, at >some point, what goes into the bags. Maybe they could print a list for us - >sorted. I suspect they would save money by buying boxes like I got and packing >the tiny parts in them. It would save a lot of stapling and unstapling time! I wonder whether Vans might like to give us the option of having all the 'baggie' parts in some sort of labelled, plastic drawer cabinet or similar. It would be worth a few extra dollars to me. >I almost feel guilty doing the quickbuild. And so you should :-) >INSTRUMENTS: > >My Valentine will be a platform for testing and showing off a computer and >software related product. It will involve instruments, human factors, >navigation, human factors, flying skill and human factors. I'll be looking for >input from this exciting forum! Hey, this is one of the aims for my RV-6. Like you, I'm a software engineer too. I'd love to share/swap ideas and tricks/traps. It'll be a while before I get near the point of having much to offer though. In the meantime, you might like to join the Glass-Panel list and/or visit the Aero Computer page at http://www.evansville.net/~newtech/ Frank (building elevators & ailerons) -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- frankv(at)pec.co.nzZ (without the anti-email-spam Z, of course) http://www.pec.co.nz/~frankv/ Frank van der Hulst, Software Engineer, Cardax, PEC(NZ) Ltd, Marton "Knowledge=Power=Energy=Matter=Mass; A good bookshop is just a genteel Black Hole that knows how to read". Terry Pratchett, "Guards! Guards!" -------------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 1997
From: lottmc(at)datastar.net (Michael C. Lott)
Subject: Re: HVLP Paint Systems
aol.com!Cafgef(at)matronics.com wrote: > > > > << fired a 4 pound chicken at over 650 mph > into a canopy. The canopy survied, the chicken didn't. > >> > At lockheed, way back when I worked there, the chicken had its head dipped > into liquid nitrogen to kill it before firing it via air canon at a C-130 > windshield. I had to mention that before someone deceided that there was > some gross treatment of chickens involved. If I ever have to be executed, that's the way I want to go. (Dip my head in nitrogen) Ha. I still like my chicken fried!! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 23, 1997
From: Bob Reiff <Reiff(at)execpc.com>
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
> How about giving us that e-mail address for Gary Greenwood at Superior one more > time. I sure as heck will inquire! Several people E-mailed me for this, so I'll re-post: Phone: 800-487-4884 E-mail: sapi(at)airmail.net Bob Reiff ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michael Angiulo <mikeang(at)MICROSOFT.com>
Subject: RV-8 jig
Date: Feb 24, 1997
The 109" is as long as you really want to go. The problem is that you have to "stand off" the support brackets on the outboard wing tip by an inch or two to clear the overhang of the top skin. If your braces are farther apart than 109" you might not get enough meat on the lower spar support at the inboard end. The standoffs only need to be angle that's a couple inches wide. The drawings in the plans wouldn't suggest this for a second. I built my jig and totally leveled the wing to find the top skin didn't fit. That was a real head scratcher. I had to take the whole wing off just to move the arms out an inch. -Mike ---------- From: Don McNamara [SMTP:sbt.infi.net!mcnamara(at)matronics.com] Sent: Monday, February 24, 1997 9:31 AM Subject: RV-List: RV-8 jig To All RV-8-ers Who Have Wing Kits: What is the necessary spacing between jig uprights? Initially, the empennage kit said something like 109" for the HS, but subsequent references seemed to indicate that more is required for the wing jig. --Don mcnamara(at)sbt.infi.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 1997
From: Craig Hiers <CRAIG-RV-4.@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Van's Sun 'n Fun banquet
J.Ken Hitchmough wrote: > > Hitchmough) > Does someone please have the date, time etc for Van's banquet at Sun > 'n fun. Also, a contact for registering would be good too. > > Thanks > > Ken > > RV6A Flying > > This message sent using the FirstClass SMTP/NNTP Gateway for Mac OS. Ken I talked with John at vans last week, and he said it should be on tuesday april 8. I have to make vacation plans well in advance so I wanted to know too. Van's was still not taking reservations at that time, but they should by now. Craig Hiers Tallahassee,FL. Driving to Sun-N-Fun for the last time ( I hope ) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ron Caldwell" <rlcaldwell@utah-inter.net>
Subject: Jigging Fuse Bulkhead Measurements
Date: Feb 24, 1997
I have clamped my RV6A firewall, bulkheads, and longerons into a Steven Frey Metal Jig. I've begun checking the centering, height, and spacing between measurements of the bulkheads. My firewall is exactly plumbed, centered, and at the prescibed height. When I check the height of the F-604 bulkhead, it measures 24.50 inches. DWG 23 indicates it should be 25.16. I could move the f-604 up to the 25.16 but then the outside support of the F-604 would not be able to attach to the longeron. Can anyone tell me what I'm do wrong and how precise should these heights measurements be. Also my F607 and f-608 bulkheads are too low. The longeron has been fitted into the slots of the bulkheads but I suspect that you cut the slot out even further to bring the bulkhead up to the prescribed height. Thanks in advance for any guidance. Ron Caldwell RV6A - N655RV Reserved rlcaldwell@utah-inter.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 1997
From: Brian McShurley <bmcshurley(at)www.sfgate.com>
Subject: Re: Boeing Surplus
aol.com!MikeT(at)matronics.com wrote: > > > Their hours are Tues-Fri 11-6, Sat 9-4 and phone is 206-393-4060. They are > just South of Kent, Wa on the East side of the Kent Auburn valley about 8 > miles south of the Renton airport and 4 miles north of the Auburn airport. > Give them a call for the address and driving directions. I'm told they > usually put "new" stuff out early in the week so you might plan to visit > then. If you need more info let me know. > MikeT RV-6 lh wing about ready for skin My father visited them last week and picked up some ods and ends. Note....They do not sell any AN hardware or fittings. They are required to return these to the manufacturer as a result of the bogus air parts situation of a year ago. But were able to pick up some good (one was new, just needed a setscrew) microstop countersinks, and some long drills. Drills are something like $1 a pound for the standard length. Stepped drills on the order of $5 a pound. He said there is lots to see (buy), and lots of junk to avoid.... Caveat Emptor....(let the buyer beware) Brian McShurley bmcshurley(at)www.sfgate.com S-51D Mustang, N514BM ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Feb 24, 1997
Subject: Prop Governors - new, overhauled, "experimental"
Folks, I'm looking for recommendations on buying a prop governor (I've ordered an O-360 and C/S prop from Van's). My options are: 1. New Woodward governor from Van's, $1200 2. Overhauled (yellow tagged), nearly $1200 (I hear) -- pointless 3. "Experimental" (non yellow tagged) $450-$700 I know some folks on the list have found experimental governors for somewhere around $500. I've talked to an overhauler who indicated that he could put together a servicable governor for around $650-$700. He indicated that a fairly recent (2 yrs) service bulletin (not an AD, a service bulletin) from Woodward has required that most governors in for overhaul have the drive gear spline and pilot spool replaced due to wear limits. This gentleman's opinion is that Woodward is pursuing their agenda (parts sales?), and safety of flight isn't impacted by keeping a drive gear and spline that have some excess wear. I don't mind paying for new/yellow tagged if safety or reliability requires it, but I'm interested in saving the bucks if possible and safe. What's the experience of the folks on the list who know governors? What have you experienced? Thanks, Tim --------------------- Tim Lewis RV-6AQ #60023 timrv6a(at)earthlink.net ----------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 1997
From: wmills(at)southwind.net (William H. Mills)
Subject: Re: Performance Equations
> > I'm trying to come up with a spread sheet to calculate aircraft >performance characteristics. I need formulas to compute density altitude >and CAS, given Altitude, OTA, Baraometer, etc. Does anybody have these >in a practical form? > >Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV >wstucklen1(at)juno.com Fred (and fellow Listers): Sorry about the "staleness" of this post, but I sent it once before and it disappeared into cyberspace or something, never did see it show up. Also please forgive the *very* long post...and relatively heavy-duty math. These will give you what you want and more... Note, these are good only below the tropopause (36,089 ft); if anybody REALLY thinks they'll be operating up there, I CAN give those equations also.... Some definitions: * Multiply ^ Raise to the power of sqrt Take the square root of (no negative numbers!) PALT Pressure Altitude, ft DALT Density Altitude, ft ELEV Field elevation, ft OATC Outside air temperature, degrees C OATF Outside air temperature, degrees F ISA International Standard Atmosphere (15C/59F, 29.92 in. Hg/14.695972 psia at sea level) DISAC Temperature variation from ISA, degrees C DISAF Temperature variation from ISA, degrees F KIAS Indicated airspeed, knots (airspeed on indicator, corrected for instrument error) KCAS Calibrated airspeed, knots (IAS corrected for position error (unique to your aircraft) KEAS Equivalent airspeed, knots (Mach * 661.48 corrected for pressure variation from sea level ISA) KTAS True Airspeed, knots (Mach * 661.48 corrected for temperature variation from sea level ISA) 661.48 Speed of sound at sea level ISA, knots Mach Ratio of true airspeed to speed of sound at sea level ISA INHG Altimeter setting or barometric pressure, in Hg delta Ratio of atmospheric pressure at condition to sea level ISA pressure theta Ratio of atmospheric temperature (absolute) at condition to sea level ISA temperature (absolute) You can get pressure altitude one of two ways: by setting your altimeter to 29.92 and reading the resulting altitude, or (if you're on the ground and not in your airplane, for instance) taking the local altimeter setting (or barometer reading) and the local field elevation and applying this equation (taken from the chart in the Density Altitude AC): PALT = ELEV + 27954.29 - (933.94 * INHG) Next, given PALT and OAT (either degrees F or C): delta = (1 - (6.87535*10^-6 * PALT))^5.2561 theta = (OATC + 273.15) / 288.15 = (OATF + 459.67) / 518.67 DALT = (1 - ((delta / theta)^(1/4.2561))) / 6.87535*10^-6 DISAC = (theta - (1 - (6.87535*10^-6 * PALT))) * 288.15 DISAF = (theta - (1 - (6.87535*10^-6 * PALT))) *518.67 You have now defined the atmospheric properties for your flight condition. For the airspeeds: If you know your position correction, you should take IAS and compute CAS using that correction. If you don't know it, you can approximate CAS by using IAS until you define that correction. If you know CAS, you can compute EAS, TAS, and Mach accurately; if you don't know CAS, there will be some error in this until you establish the position correction. Given KCAS: Mach = sqrt(((((((1 + (0.2 * ((KCAS / 661.48)^2)))^3.5) - 1) * (1 / delta) + 1)^(1/3.5)) - 1) * 5) note: there are 7 open parenthesis there! KEAS = 661.48 * Mach * sqrt(delta) KTAS = 661.48 * Mach * sqrt(theta) Now, if you know Ground Speed (in knots), heading and course, and the wind at your flight condition, you can figure KTAS courtesy of the ol' E6B (or electronic equivalent). Once KTAS is known, you can back-calculate to get KCAS (incidentally, this is one way the pros use to get their airspeed calibration (run several IAS over a known course and use GS to get TAS (note: helps to have VERY LIGHT winds!)); the other alternative is a pitot/static boom with a trailing cone): Mach = KTAS / (661.48 * sqrt(theta)) KCAS = sqrt((((((((1 + (0.2 * Mach^2))^3.5) - 1) * delta) + 1)^(1 / 3.5)) -1) * 5 * (661.48^2)) note: there are 8 open parenthesis there! Good luck on the spreadsheets! Bill Mills STILL RV-8 Dreaming A36 (Flying Club) Flying Wichita ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BrooksRV6(at)webtv.net (Chris Brooks)
Date: Feb 24, 1997
Subject: Re: Jigging Fuse Bulkhead Measurements
Ron, the outside support of the F-604 does not attach to the longeron, it attaches to the F-604F that rivets to the longeron. see Drwg.31, Detail"A" upper left hand corner. If you enlarge the longeron slot in the bulkhead to align the bottoms you may unalign the tops. My F-607 was a little short on the top and bottom so I relocated it 3/8" aft. Chris Brooks BrooksRV6(at)webtv.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 24, 1997
From: Blake Harral <bharral(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Prop Governors - new, overhauled, "experimental"
Tim Lewis wrote: > > > Folks, > > I'm looking for recommendations on buying a prop governor (I've > ordered an O-360 and C/S prop from Van's). My options are: > 1. New Woodward governor from Van's, $1200 > 2. Overhauled (yellow tagged), nearly $1200 (I hear) -- pointless > 3. "Experimental" (non yellow tagged) $450-$700 > If you do decide to by a used governor, consider getting a Woodward with the rear housing held on by screws, rather than a V-band clamp. This will allow you to use Van's governor bracket (or make a screw-attached bracket yourself). The governor end of your prop cable housing should be attached to the engine/governor assembly so as to avoid changes in prop RPM as the engine moves around on its mounts. You will find that the control arm of rear-mounted governors is so far aft, that the only reasonable bracket mounting point is the rear cover of the governor itself. Hence my recommendation to obtain one with screws that can be used to mount a bracket. I had a Woodward with the V-Band clamp, but found a overhaul shop who agreed to an overhaul/exchange for the other type. The person at the shop that I spoke to seemed knowledgable and easy to deal with. I am expecting the governor back in a week or so. If things look OK, maybe I'll give the outfit a plug on the list. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JRoss10612(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 25, 1997
Subject: Re: RV-8 jig
Don: On my RV-8 wing jigs I used an inside dimension of 112.25". If you study the jig drawing carefully, you will note that the root end of the mainspar will rest on an aluminum or steel angle, which is bolted to the jig vertical post. The wingtip end uses an angle that is bolted to the tip rib, which rests on top of the angle bolted to the jig vertical post. I used 1.5" wide aluminum angles, two of those equal 3", plus the rear spar width of 109" totaling 112", the .25" extra is for ease of removal from the jig. Bear in mind that no crosspiece is used in the wing jig, so you have to make changes to the empennage jig anyway. Will you be building both wings simultaneously? I have elected to do so, and have placed both wing jigs far enough away from the wall to permit easy access to both sides of each wing panel during construction. Of course I am fortunate enough to have a heated hangar to work in, with space not being a problem. Best, Jon Ross RV-80094 - Empennage complete, wing jigs complete, starting wings... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave and/or Diane Irwin" <dirwin(at)ibm.net>
Subject: RV-6 fuselage jig for sale
Date: Feb 25, 1997
I have a RV-6 welded steel fuselage jig for sale. It is made from steel angle and has been painted. It has built 2 RV-6's so far and can be picked up for $150 (Canadian). Please contact me for more information. Dave Irwin dirwin(at)ibm.net 519-433-2327 London, Ontario RV-6A 22607 (fuselage - cockpit floor) Grumman AA-1B ________________________________________________________________________________
From: J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)magic.ca (J.Ken Hitchmough)
Date: Feb 24, 1997
Subject: Re: chicken chatter
Frank van der Hulst,frankv=40pec.co.nz,Internet writes: Hi Ken, Something funny with your mailer... I get 2 copies of your messages to the RVlist, and a message saying that there are faulty attachments. Do you have= MIME enabled or something? Frank. Frank, does it happen with ALL my messages? Theres nothing (to my knowledge ) wrong with my mailer (although I did have= a crash while composing it and had to do it again)...could be something to= do with that. How did this message get through? Ken =20 This message sent using the FirstClass SMTP/NNTP Gateway for Mac OS. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Mark Crowley <mcrowley(at)nbn.com>
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
Robert Fritz wrote: > > > Hi Bob, > > All the parts for a new O-360 for under $10,000!!!!!!! > > No flames here, I love the idea. But that means that if the certified parts can > be sold for $9500 and the assembled engine costs $19,300, then the cost to > assemble an engine at Lycoming is about $10,000. Where did they burn that much > money? > > Cheers, > > Bob Fritz Unfortunately, that 10 grand probably goes to thier liability insurance! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Don Mack" <donmack(at)flash.net>
Subject: Re: Jigging Fuse Bulkhead Measurements
Date: Feb 25, 1997
Check that your accounting for the metal plates on the frey jig. I belive that you have to at either 1/8 or 1/4" to account for the plate that is not sitting on the same line as the longeron Don Mack RV-6A donmack(at)flash.net http://www.flash.net/~donmack/ ---------- > From: Ron Caldwell <utah-inter.net!rlcaldwell(at)matronics.com> > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: Jigging Fuse Bulkhead Measurements > Date: Monday, February 24, 1997 9:17 PM > > > I have clamped my RV6A firewall, bulkheads, and longerons into a Steven > Frey Metal Jig. I've begun checking the centering, height, and spacing > between measurements of the bulkheads. My firewall is exactly plumbed, > centered, and at the prescibed height. When I check the height of the > F-604 bulkhead, it measures 24.50 inches. DWG 23 indicates it should be > 25.16. I could move the f-604 up to the 25.16 but then the outside support > of the F-604 would not be able to attach to the longeron. Can anyone tell > me what I'm do wrong and how precise should these heights measurements be. > Also my F607 and f-608 bulkheads are too low. The longeron has been fitted > into the slots of the bulkheads but I suspect that you cut the slot out > even further to bring the bulkhead up to the prescribed height. Thanks in > advance for any guidance. > > Ron Caldwell > RV6A - N655RV Reserved > rlcaldwell@utah-inter.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Engines
From: ebundy(at)juno.com (Ed Bundy)
Date: Feb 25, 1997
>So, let's look at the Superior "clone". No liability tail. Why not? Granted, there *shouldn't* be one, but then there shouldn't be one for a 15 year old airplane either. Sure, you (probably) can't sue for assembly-related failures, but what happens if a wrist pin or crankshaft fails? Every single part in that engine is going to have a liability trail just as if it rolled off of Lycoming's line as a complete engine. As long as there are airplanes there are going to be lawyers waiting for something to break... Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 ebundy(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: rvbildr(at)juno.com
Subject: Re: Jigging Fuse Bulkhead Measurements
Date: Feb 25, 1997
Ron, Did you construct the bulkheads according to S. Frey's suggested method? I recently did mine his way and used a Frey jig and the fell right into place with the proper height and width. Double check the width of your longerons at each station. You can also enlarge the notches for the longerons, if necessary. Mal ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Charlie & Tupper England <england(at)vicksburg.com>
Subject: Re: GYROS AND AEROBATICS
>Talked to an RV-4 driver the other day. Asked him how he prevents >damaging his gyros when doing aerobatics. His answer was that they >are damaged! >There must be a better way. Anybody installing/using "cageable" >gyros out there? How much more does this equipment cost? For what it's worth: I was in a partnership for ~1 1/2 years with an airline pilot who flys airshows on the weekends & acro several times a week for fun. We owned a big-engine Globe Swift (200 HP). I learned acro in this plane, he has put probably 200 hours or more of acro time on it, the plane has several thousand hours TT, and he flys it in hardball IFR traveling to/from work every week. It has what he calls a "non-tumbling gyro" horizon. I'm no expert, but apparently most horizons will "tumble" if taken much beyond normal attitudes. The other gyros are plain vanila. Obviously, acro is harder (it's also harder on your airframe), but this guy trusts the plane with his life in IFR on a regular basis, and I've never heard him mention replacing a gyro in the 10+ years he's owned the plane (vacuum pumps,yes. gyros, no). Charlie England RV-4, bought flying PS: Would you guys please edit quotes to the minimum required to show context? If I have to scroll through many more posts of 60 to 100 lines to get to something like "I agree" followed by a signature, I think I'll buy a boat. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Alan Carroll <carroll(at)geology.wisc.edu>
Subject: Franklin Engines
The recent RVator mentions the Franklin 6 cylinder, "220 hp" engine as a possible alternative to the Lycoming 200 hp IO-360 for the RV-8. It also suggests, however, that builder interest in this option is not sufficient to justify the the R&D expense of a new mount, cowling, etc. Given the large price differential between these engines I find this a rather surprising statement. My understanding is that the Franklin installation should weigh about the same as the Lycoming (330 lbs.), produce at least as much power (205-210 hp?), run more smoothly, and give you a certified aircraft engine for about $10K less than a new Lycoming. Am I missing something? At the least I'd like to know more about the reliability, real-world performance, and installation issues for this engine. I can find very few previous posts in the archives. Alan Carroll RV-8 #80177 (Empenage) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: chester razer <crazer(at)egyptian.net>
Subject: RST Audio Panel
Anybody got any information on RST's new #564 audio panel -- Chet Razer crazer(at)egyptian.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Giertz <snow(at)insync.net>
Subject: take off list
How do I take myself of the rv-list? Can you do it for me? Tom ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Cheryl Sanchez <csanchez(at)BayNetworks.COM>
Subject: Oil cooler hookup question
Hi, I am about to order the parts I need to do my oil cooler hookup and I'm not quite sure what to get. My engine is a new O-360 that I got from Van's. As I understand it, one of the connections to the engine, near the oil filter, needs a 45 degree fitting. My question is: is the 45 degree fitting the part that screws into the engine or the fitting that goes on the end of the Aeroquip hose? Thanks. Cheryl Sanchez csanchez(at)world.std.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Edward Cole <emcole(at)concentric.net>
Subject: Jig
Does anyone have an RV6 fuselage jig for sale within 200 miles of San Jose, CA. ? Please respond to me directly. Ed Cole emcole(at)concentric.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz>
Subject: Re: chicken chatter
Hi again, I received *3* copies of this message! The 'faulty attachment' message belongs to one of them... it's hard to tell which one. It's also possible that one of the messages is the faulty attachment (I told Eudora to convert it to text for me). Here's bits of the headers from the 3 messages that might be relevant: The quoted-printable version had some hex-encoded characters in it. Here's a bit of it: Frank van der Hulst,frankv=40pec.co.nz,Internet writes: Hi Ken, Something funny with your mailer... I get 2 copies of your messages to the RVlist, and a message saying that there are faulty attachments. Do you have= MIME enabled or something? HTH, Frank. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- frankv(at)pec.co.nzZ (without the anti-email-spam Z, of course) http://www.pec.co.nz/~frankv/ Frank van der Hulst, Software Engineer, Cardax, PEC(NZ) Ltd, Marton "Knowledge=Power=Energy=Matter=Mass; A good bookshop is just a genteel Black Hole that knows how to read". Terry Pratchett, "Guards! Guards!" -------------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Shelby1138(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 25, 1997
Subject: Re: Barnard Aircraft Components
Just a couple of comments on the BAC option. Ken has always been negative on the BAC option even before the pre-punched skins. I purchased the BAC kit and am glad I did. There has been virtually no problem with any of my alignments(ailerons, ribs, etc.). A friend here who purchased a second kit(his second RV) has been poor mouthing the pre-punched skins, because of the critical drilling of the spars( all done on the BAC Kit). The undrilled skins which is what I have, leave some room for adjustment. The quality of all the prefabricated pieces, many anodized, is another plus. I continue evaluated whether I would choose this much more expensive alternative and still believe it is money well spent. Shelby in Nashville. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Bob Haan <bobh(at)cdac.com>
Subject: Re: Jigging Fuse Bulkhead Measurements
>Did you construct the bulkheads according to S. Frey's suggested method? What is S. Frey's method? >I recently did mine his way and used a Frey jig and the fell right into >place with the proper height and width. What is a Frey jig? Bob Haan bobh(at)cdac.com Portland, OR 503-636-3550 RV6A 24461 drilling the fuselage skins ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Edward Cole <emcole(at)concentric.net>
Subject: Flaps
OK, wing experts--------- I'm close to attaching the flap to the left wing on my RV6A. Van's suggests attaching without the top skin attached to the flap, and Frank Justice's manual has you complete the flap before attachment. What are the pro's and con's of either method? I'm ready to finish skinning the flap so I need to decide now. Also any tips for hanging the ailerons and flaps would be appreciated. Is it easier to do with the wing hanging vertically or horizontally on a set of saw horse? Thanks in advance, Ed Cole RV6A Wings emcole(at)concentric.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: John Top <jjtop(at)cts.com>
Subject: Deft Primer
I have had a couple of inquiries about a source for Deft Primer in small quantities. Dan White has it available in both 2 Qt and 1 Gal quantities. 3131 SW Martin Downs Blvd Suite 374 Palm City FL 34990 (407) 223-8915 duba(at)gate.net John Top #5372 (619) 549-3356 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: ken hitchmough <j.ken_hitchmough(at)mail.magic.ca>
Subject: Re: Terra Transponder
> > ken hitchmough wrote: > > > > I've had a Terra transponder and encoder on order from Aircraft Spruce > > since before Christmas, having been given a January dlivery date of back > > ordered transponders. > > I'm now being told by Spruce that they won't get transponders until the > > end of March...another delay of two months. > > > > I'm wondering if this is a sign of something else! Anyone know why? > > An update. After several letters of advice I finally called Trimble. The story seems to be that they still have some back orders all the way to July of last year. There are something like about 300 transponders on back order plus other units too, with an expected lead time of over 9 weeks. Even though I had mine on order with Spruce end of December, it was suggested to me that I should forget March and it may even be April or May before I would see one. Everyone at Trimble seems upset at the situation and they seem to be doing their best to get back on track. The certification issue seems to have been solved, its now purely a manufacturing capacity issue. Pity really because I REALLY wanted the Terra. Due to an urgent need though, I've had to cancel my order and get something else. Thanks to all who responded. Ken ________________________________________________________________________________
From: mikel(at)dimensional.com
Date: Feb 25, 1997
Subject: Re: Franklin Engines
>My understanding is that the Franklin installation should weigh about the same as the Lycoming (330 lbs.), produce at least as much power (205-210 hp?), run more smoothly, and give you a certified aircraft engine for about $10K less than a new Lycoming. My thoughts, too. I have flown behind one of the old Franklins and it was one of the smoooothest engines I have flown with. Granted, that was a USA built one that was factory installed in the airplane. Who out there knows about these engines and why aren't more being used?? Michael RV4 232 SQ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: mikel(at)dimensional.com
Date: Feb 25, 1997
Subject: Re: EDIT your reply
>Would you guys please edit quotes to the minimum required to show context? >If I have to scroll through many more posts of 60 to 100 lines to get to >something like "I agree" followed by a signature, I think I'll buy a boat. > AMEN!!! It sure takes up a lot of archive memory for things to be repeated!!! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Bob Reiff <Reiff(at)execpc.com>
Subject: Superior O-360
I made a couple of phone calls and got some costs for the items excluded from Superior's alleged kit: New Used Accessory case $1290 350 Oil sump 1093 300 Conn rods (each) 250 95 Carb 3000 1300 (rebuilt) Fuel pump 157 ? Oil pump 252 ? Mags (no exchange) L 630 ? R 563 ? Ignition harness 146 Lightweight starter 375 Total 8506 Superior kit 9500 Grand total 18006 With a used accessory case and oil sump, and a rebuilt carb, the total price would be about $14,573 If you replace the carb with an Airflow Performance fuel injection and replace one mag with the Electroair electronic ignition the total would be about $16,000 The new Lycoming parts prices were obtained from Intermountain Sales, a major Lycoming parts distributor. The used prices were from Preferred Air Parts. I have no idea if these are the best prices or if the used parts are decent since I didn't spend time shopping around - I just wanted some quick & dirty info. For example, I suspect carbs are available for less than $3000. When I asked Van's if I can delete the carb from a new Lycoming, they said they would just keep it and give me an $800 credit. The big questions remain to be answered...will Superior actually sell the kit they say they will, and for what price? Bob Reiff ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Cheryl Sanchez <csanchez(at)BayNetworks.COM>
Subject: Turn coordinator/Radio noise
Hi, I am working on my instrument panel and today I noticed that when I power up my turn coordinator it generates a significant amount of radio noise. The radio is a handheld Icom ic-a20 that I purchased six or seven years ago. Is this normal? Do I have a bad turn coordinator? Should I use shielded wire for the power hookups? Thanks. Cheryl Sanchez csanchez(at)world.std.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Stan Blanton <75472.372(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Aeroquip hoses
RV Builders: Van's Aircraft shows Aeroquip 701 series hoses available. Can anyone explain the differences between these and the 601 or 666 series hoses I found in Wicks and Aircraft Spruce catalogs? Pros and cons? I checked the Aeroquip homepage but it had no listings or technical data, only info on finding a dealer or distributor. Thanks, Stan Blanton RV-6 Fuselage top skins Lubbock, TX 75472.372(at)compuserve.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Rick Osgood <rick(at)ccc.henn.tec.mn.us>
Subject: Re: RST Audio Panel
chester razer wrote: > > > Anybody got any information on RST's new #564 audio panel > -- > Chet Razer > crazer(at)egyptian.net No news yet... I am waiting for this unit. I should have it by the 2nd week of January. Wait a minute January has come and gone. Hey Jim where is my kit !!!! I'll let you know...... -- Rick Osgood Hennipen Technical College Eden Prairie, MN ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Terra Transponder
Hi Ken, This posting seems to be fine. Did you change something? Frank. > >An update. [snip] -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- frankv(at)pec.co.nzZ (without the anti-email-spam Z, of course) http://www.pec.co.nz/~frankv/ Frank van der Hulst, Software Engineer, Cardax, PEC(NZ) Ltd, Marton "Knowledge=Power=Energy=Matter=Mass; A good bookshop is just a genteel Black Hole that knows how to read". Terry Pratchett, "Guards! Guards!" -------------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Glenn & Judi <flyers@anet-chi.com>
Subject: O-360 Fuel Injection
Hi, We are just starting our RV-6 quickbuild. We plan on installing a Bendix Fuel Injector onto a factory new O-360 A1A. Here are some questions I have... 1) Where can the fuel injector be purchased? 2) How much will it cost? 3) What type of modifications to the fuel system will I need to make (pump type, etc.) 4) Should I consider using a different brand of fuel injector? Thank you in advance, Glenn & Judi Gordon ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BrooksRV6(at)webtv.net (Chris Brooks)
Date: Feb 25, 1997
Subject: Flaps
Ed ,if you have the prepunched flap skins there is no adjustment to the top skin so you may as well finish them. Some tips: Mount the aileron first; secure the aileron brackets to the aileron with clecoes and secure both hinges to aileon brackets with bolts and spacers. Drill the out board hinge to the rear spar with the hinge line 1 5/8" below the chord line (Drw16). Use the aieron itself to locate the position of the inboard hinge, and set it's hinge line 1 5/8" below the chord line. Put on female airfoil templates and adjust aileron brackets to aileron for final drilling for bolts. Install flap using female airfoil templates and fit to aileron. Chris Brooks BrooksRV6(at)webtv.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Stephen Jackson Soule <ssoule(at)vbimail.champlain.edu>
Subject: Re: Flaps
Hi Ed ... I installed the flap on my left wing following the Frank Justice instructions and found that (1) it was easy to lose track of where the flap brace was ending up and (2)it was hard to keep track of where the flap was ending up in relation to the aileron. I think I will use Van's method on the right wing. Steve Soule Huntington, Vermont (right wing in the jig) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: lsmith(at)coastalnet.com (Louis E. Smith Jr.)
Subject: Re: Bendix/King KT 76A Retrofit
> >The February 97 issue of Aviation Consumer had an article regarding a problem >with KT 76A Transponders having S/Ns from 93000 thru 109999. Apparently an >internal resistor network is subject to deterioration and may cause the >transponder to transmit incorrect altitudes and/or squawk codes. The >corrective action is to remove and replace with a pair of glass encapsulated >components. AlliedSignal will reportedly pick up the tab to the tune of 2.5 >labor hours and compliance by July 1, 1997 is required. Your local >Bendix/King dealer should be aware of the situation. > > Gary, I too have one of the KT 76A Transponders waiting to go in my plane. I checked and sure enough mine fell within the above serial numbers. I purchased my transponder this summer at Oshkosh. My local avionics dealer has the service bulletin. Everything you mentioned above is fact. Check the data tag on the unit. If it is marked as having a mod 7, your unit was caught at the factory and has already been repaired. My unit had the mod 7 already complyed with. Regards, Louis Smith lsmith(at)coastalnet.com Rocky Mount, NC RV-8 #80126 wings N801RV reserved RV-4 #2844 N102LS sold ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Franklin Engines
Date: Feb 25, 1997
Look at the last issue of Sport Aviation. There is an article on the CompMonster (or Comp something, Son of CompMonster ?). This is the 4 place all composite, looks kind of like a Cessna 182. Anyway, they said that they were going to use the Franklin 220 engine. I remember that they said the engine is imported without a fuel system (no carb or injector). They put a bendix FI on it and modified the cylinders (drilled holes in the intake ports) for the injectors. They said it was running fine. You might be able to talk to those folks on more details. Herman > > >My understanding is that the Franklin installation should weigh about the > same as the Lycoming (330 lbs.), produce at least as much power (205-210 > hp?), run more smoothly, and give you a certified aircraft engine for about > $10K less than a new Lycoming. > > > My thoughts, too. I have flown behind one of the old Franklins and it was > one of the smoooothest engines I have flown with. Granted, that was a USA > built one that was factory installed in the airplane. Who out there knows > about these engines and why aren't more being used?? > > Michael > RV4 232 SQ > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: SportAV8R(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 25, 1997
Subject: control cables, oil pressure fittings
I'm lashing up the controls to the O-320 and discover that the mixture control I got from Van has a wire dia. of .075 in., but the collet gizmo that grips the wire and terminates in a threaded (10-32?) rod end accepts only a .050 wire or smaller. Yipes! Should I make an adapter from rod stock and set-screws to couple two different sizes of wire, start over with a new cable, bug-nut the cable I have now, or somehow narrow that .075 wire down to .050 on the end? Can I do that without unaccepteble stress-risers? Second question: Confession--- despite having read NUMEROUS warnings not to do this, I installed my engine without first putting the oil-pressure fitting in! I've read all the archive data on this subject but am unclear on one point: Is there any fitting that will allow installation "as-is" without any disassembly? AN-823? AN-915? Weatherhead 45 deg street elbow? Why all the insistence that these fittings be steel or stainless?? Bill Boyd -- RV-6A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Superior O-360
Date: Feb 25, 1997
Good info. Bob, here are some other items that I wonder if they come in the 'kit' or if they would have to be added to your extra cost list? The gears that go into the acc. case, the lifters, the push rods, the intake tubes. (I expect the intake tube would be seperate if the kit does not contain the oil sump). I also expect you need the oil pump body if you have to buy the acc case and the oil pump. Those babies are about $350 new. Also the Superior Cylinders do not contain rocker arms or valve covers so that may be a missing item. What about the starter hub and ring gear? Those are about 225-150 used. There are other odd/ends like the inter-cylinder baffels and so on. Herman dierks(at)austin.ibm.com > > I made a couple of phone calls and got some costs for the items excluded > from Superior's alleged kit: > > New Used > Accessory case $1290 350 > Oil sump 1093 300 > Conn rods (each) 250 95 > Carb 3000 1300 (rebuilt) > Fuel pump 157 ? > Oil pump 252 ? > Mags (no exchange) > L 630 ? > R 563 ? > Ignition harness 146 > Lightweight starter 375 > > Total 8506 > > Superior kit 9500 > > Grand total 18006 > > (rest DELETED) > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: lsmith(at)coastalnet.com (Louis E. Smith Jr.)
Subject: Re: Prop Governors - new, overhauled, "experimental"
> >Folks, > >I'm looking for recommendations on buying a prop governor (I've >ordered an O-360 and C/S prop from Van's). My options are: >1. New Woodward governor from Van's, $1200 >2. Overhauled (yellow tagged), nearly $1200 (I hear) -- pointless >3. "Experimental" (non yellow tagged) $450-$700 > >I know some folks on the list have found experimental governors for >somewhere around $500. Tim, Try EMI Aircraft Accessories in Tulsa, 1-800-851-4392. I bought one overhauled less yellow tag for $325.00. Looks like a brand new unit! Regards, Louis Smith lsmith(at)coastalnet.com Rocky Mount, NC RV-8 #80126 N801RV reserved Wings in jig with skins being riveted on! RV-4 #2844 N102LS sold ________________________________________________________________________________
From: PresleyTL(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 25, 1997
Subject: rv-list:Brake Fluid
Any comments would be welcomed.I have been told 3 times that (Type A ) automatic transmission fluid is an acceptable substitute for aircraft brake fluid .Have others used this in the past? Thanks in advance. Tim Presley N64TX RV-4/160 First flight Aug '97(I HOPE) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: Re: Aeroquip hoses
The Sacramento sky Ranch home page has a bunch of stuff about aircraft hoses. I'm not certain the answer to your question can be found there, but it would be worth a try. The URL is: http://www.sierra.net/skyranch/ Links to this and other informative pages can be found on the Van's Air Force, Home Wing Home page: http://www.edt.com/homewing Randall Henderson, RV-6 randall(at)edt.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Kevin & Theresa Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca>
Subject: Re: Franklin Engines
> >The recent RVator mentions the Franklin 6 cylinder, "220 hp" engine as a >possible alternative to the Lycoming 200 hp IO-360 for the RV-8. It also >suggests, however, that builder interest in this option is not sufficient >to justify the the R&D expense of a new mount, cowling, etc. > <--snip--> >At the least I'd like to know more about the reliability, real-world >performance, and installation issues for this engine. I can find very few >previous posts in the archives. > I am also extremely interested in the Franklin option for the RV-8. I suggest that all interested parties let Van know of our interest. If enough interest is expressed maybe he will develope a Franklin option. Kevin Horton future RV-8 builder (lurking and gathering info, tools, etc) khorton(at)cyberus.ca Engineering Test Pilot Transport Canada Ottawa, Canada ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Mark Reisdorfer <73101.73(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Franklin Engines
RE: The Franklin Engine for RV's I have a friend building a Velocity and has installed the 220 Franklin. One thing to keep in mind however the price for the Franklin includes the motor only. You must add all the accessories, carb, mags, alt, vac pump etc.... We have run the engine recently and so far it looks great. He however benefited from the factory demonstrator being re-engined and the engine mount was available. His is not injected, does anyone know if these can have fuel injection? I also think this engine is heavier with all the goodies added than the Lyc. It also has quite a low TBO me thinks it is 1000 or 1200 hours. I too would be interested in the Franklin or the Cont. IO-360, as the six cylinder engines sure are smooth. His engine mount did not look too involved possibly a little help from all the knowledge available on the list a Lyc. IO360 mount could be modified to hold the Franklin. Mark Reisdorfer RV8 #80020 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Dave Barnhart <barnhart(at)a.crl.com>
Subject: Re: Prop Governors - new, overhauled, "experimental"
"Tim Lewis" wrote: >I'm looking for recommendations on buying a prop governor (I've >ordered an O-360 and C/S prop from Van's). My options are: >1. New Woodward governor from Van's, $1200 >2. Overhauled (yellow tagged), nearly $1200 (I hear) -- pointless >3. "Experimental" (non yellow tagged) $450-$700 I just went through this. (By the way, while $1200 for a new Woodward governor from Van's may seem expensive, some prop shops told me that was BELOW their cost.) Many of the governors in use today (Woodward, Garwin, Edo-Aire, McCauley) are based upon the same design, and in fact some/many of the parts are interchangable. For example, Woodward parts can be used to overhaul a Garwin governor. (Garwin and Edo-Aire are out of business). And it's also true that Woodward tends to issue service bullitens that entirely obsolete older governors. For example, an SB will require a change in a casting, but the price of the newer casting is so outrageous you are better off buying the newer model governor. I don't know if you have ever looked at a prop governor, but there is almost nothing that can go wrong with them. They are pretty simple devices. Here are the options *i* found available: 1. EMI will sell you a 'flushed and resealed' Garwin for $375 This is probably the most cost-effective route. 2. Warner Propeller (Tucson Arizona) put together an overhauled Garwin for me for $500. 3. Warner (and a lot of other prop shops) will sell you an overhauled, yellow-tagged McCauley or older Woodward for around $750. 4. Most prop shops will sell you an overhauled, yellow-tagged Woodward that is maybe one generation older that current for about $900-$1000. I spent a lot of time on the phone with Dennis Warner at Warner Propeller. He seemed more willing to spend time with me, more willing to share his knowledge, and also seemed more knowledgable than most. I have no connection with Warner Propeller, but Dennis Warner treated me right, and I can certainly recommend him. His phone number is 520-294-5671 This is an area that (in my humble opinion) it makes perfect sense to save a lot of money. Clearly there is no 'safety of flight' issue with any of these options. Our airplanes' status as 'experimental allows us to use parts that are perfectly airworthy except for paperwork (yellow tag). Best Regards, Dave Barnhart rv-6 sn 23744 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Dave Barnhart <barnhart(at)a.crl.com>
Subject: Re: Barnard Aircraft Components
>Just a couple of comments on the BAC option... It all boils down to this: which do you have more of: time or money? My RV-6 wing kit was one of the first out of the factory with the pre-punched skins. It made some things harder and some things easier. The pre-punched skins mean that a little more time must be spent getting the wing ribs positioned to match up with the pre-punched holes in the skins. On the other hand, the former heaaache of getting tank skins positioned properly is now a piece of cake. My philosphy is that there is a scale that looks something like this: Designer -------- Builder -------- Assembler Each time to move to the right on that scale, you spend a little less time and a little more money. Yes, the quality of the BAC stuff is higher than most of us can do, but that level of quality is not critical nor required in this area. Mere mortals *can* build good solid RV wings. All you are really doing is getting someone else to do some of the work for you. There is nothing wrong with that, but it needs to be understood from the outset. BEst Regards, Dave Barnhart rv-6 sn 23744 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Dave Barnhart <barnhart(at)a.crl.com>
Subject: Re: Flaps
emcole(at)concentric.net wrote: >I'm close to attaching the flap to the left wing on my RV6A. Van's >suggests attaching without the top skin attached to the flap, and Frank >Justice's manual has you complete the flap before attachment. What are >the pro's and con's of either method? I'm ready to finish skinning the >flap so I need to decide now. >Also any tips for hanging the ailerons and flaps would be appreciated. Is >it easier to do with the wing hanging vertically or horizontally on a set >of saw horse? There are pros and cons to doing it either way. I attached my flaps before fitting the top skin. This allows you to clamp the flp in place (clamp the flap brace to the wing's rear spar), get it all lined up, and then drill the flap brace to the rear spar. By 'get it all lined up', I mean: 1. The outboard end of the flap is perfectly aligned with the inboard end of the aileron. It should be aligned so that their bottom skins are even, and so that their trailing edges are aligned in the fore/aft direction. 2. The inboard end of the flap is positioned vertically properly. (The easiest way to do this is to make sure that the tooling holes in the inboard flap rib and the inboard main wing rib for a straight line. With the top flap skin off, you can drill the flap brace to the rear spar while the flap is clamped in this position. The only negative to doing it this way is that until the top skin is riveted to the flap, the flap can flex or twist. What I did was go ahead and drill the top skin to the flap, leave it off while getting the flap/flap brace positioned and clamped, then pulled the hinge pin to remove the flap, re-attached the top skin, and put the flap back in place to make sure that I had not introduced any twist in the flap. Best Regards, Dave Barnhart rv-6 sn 23744 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Dave Barnhart <barnhart(at)a.crl.com>
Subject: Re: Jigging Fuse Bulkhead Measurements
"Ron Caldwell" <rlcaldwell@utah-inter.net> wrote: >When I check the height of the >F-604 bulkhead, it measures 24.50 inches. DWG 23 indicates it should be >25.16. I could move the f-604 up to the 25.16 but then the outside support >of the F-604 would not be able to attach to the longeron. Can anyone tell >me what I'm do wrong and how precise should these heights measurements be. I'm pretty sure I know what the problem is because the same thing happened to me and it drove me nuts: The F604 bulkhead sits ON TOP OF the longerons in the jig, while all the others nestle down in them. The F604 bulkhead attaches to the longerons with a couple od splice plates. >Also my F607 and f-608 bulkheads are too low. The important thing about these bulkheads is that the line formed by the tops (aircraft top) of the centers of the F606, 607, and 608 bulkheads forms a straight line. When the aircraft is finished, that will be the top of the 'turtledeck' and will be very visible. You want that to be nice and straight. Conversly, no one looks at the bottom of the fuselage, so a little lck of straightness there is not important. Best Regards, Dave Barnhart rv-6 sn 23744 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Dave Barnhart <barnhart(at)a.crl.com>
Subject: Re: chicken chatter
Let me put my $.02 in here, as this is close to what I make my living at: >I received *3* copies of this message! The 'faulty attachment' message >belongs to one of them... it's hard to tell which one. It's also possible >that one of the messages is the faulty attachment (I told Eudora to convert >it to text for me). > >Here's bits of the headers from the 3 messages that might be relevant: > >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=us-ascii >Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-printable > >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=us-ascii > > >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=us-ascii Ken, if you could turn off "Rich Text" or something similar, maybe that would help. Some fancy email programs have an option similar to "strip rich text when sending". Not all your message come through with problems, Ken. Only once in a while. And the problem is not restricted to just your messages, either. (I finally got fed up with the "MIME Encoding Errors" and started tracking this problem a few days ago.) >The quoted-printable version had some hex-encoded characters in it. Here's a >bit of it: That's exactly what quoted-printable is supposed to do. MIME assumes that the only safe email transport channel is 7-bit ASCII. MIME-aware email programs will *encode* anything else (binary files or even 'extended-character-set ASCII') using 7-bit ASCII characters. an '=' at the end of a line indicates a soft line break, and a '=' followed by two hex digits represents the 8-bit octet specified by the two hex digits. I *think* the fact that we are seeing the quoted-printable is just a red herring. What happens to me is that Eudora will complain about a MIME encoding error in a message and ask me if I want it to re-fetch the mesage without doing any MIME decoding. So the Quoted-Printable shows up in the second copy of the message, as expected. So far, there is no consistency in where these messages are coming from. This one was from Ken Hitchmough, but most of Ken's messages are just fine, and not all of the faulty messages are from Ken. So far, the only common thread is that every one of the faulty messages is MIME-encoded. I'm going to track this over the next couple of weeks and see if I can come to any conclusions. (And Ken, please don't stop posting messages. It is VERY unlikely that this problem is caused by anything at your end.) Best Regards, Dave Barnhart rv-6 sn 23744 (MIME, S/MIME, PGP/MIME, and RFC 1847 expert in my other life) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Subject: Re: Franklin Engines
From: ab6a(at)juno.com (ALLAN E POMEROY)
Michael and Alan, I too, was somewhat interested in the Franklin engines after having flown in an airplane with one. It was a Stinson with the 165 hp Franklin. It is for sure a VERY SMOOTH running engine. For the RV-8 builders, the Franklin that is currently being offered from PZL may work out quite well if an engine mount can be built for it. For the builders like myself (-6A) and -6's, I might agree with Van's statement of it being too heavy (330 lbs). I don't know the weight of the IO-360 Lycoming that it's being compared with. I also don't know the weight of an O-320. The prices Van's quotes are pretty accurate for the PZL-Franklin. It is manufactured in Poland. The original Franklin engines were built in Liverpool NY, just outside of Syracuse. The only problem with the original engines, is that some parts are extremely difficult to find these days (or nights for that matter). Also keep in mind that the Lycoming Van is talking about is the IO-360. The PZL-Franklin will have a carb. According to Atlas Motors, the U.S. distributer for the PZL-Franklin engines, they will work with you for other things such as fuel injection and installations. Maybe other things too. Hope I haven't added any confusion to the idea of Franklin powered RV's. Allan Pomeroy CNY AB6A(at)juno.com H S Skeleton dimensional.com!mikel(at)matronics.com writes: > >>My understanding is that the Franklin installation should weigh about >the >same as the Lycoming (330 lbs.), produce at least as much power >(205-210 >hp?), run more smoothly, and give you a certified aircraft engine for >about >$10K less than a new Lycoming. > > >My thoughts, too. I have flown behind one of the old Franklins and it >was >one of the smoooothest engines I have flown with. Granted, that was a >USA >built one that was factory installed in the airplane. Who out there >knows >about these engines and why aren't more being used?? > >Michael >RV4 232 SQ > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: John Top <jjtop(at)cts.com>
Subject: Re: rv-list:Brake Fluid
> >Any comments would be welcomed.I have been told 3 times that (Type A ) >automatic transmission fluid is an acceptable substitute for aircraft brake >fluid .Have others used this in the past? Thanks in advance. Okay. You got my curiosity up. What is the advantage of using a substitute for brake fluid??? John Top Phone: (619) 549-3556 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: chester razer <crazer(at)egyptian.net>
Subject: Re: Flaps
Ed, I measured and eyeballed and hung my ailerons just like the book said. After I removed my wing from the jig and placed it horizontally on a roll away work bench I was not pleased with the fit. I reinstalled both of them with the wing horizontal on a table and will do the same if I build again -- Chet Razer crazer(at)egyptian.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 25, 1997
From: Elon Ormsby <elon.o(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: What have we become (Chatter)
My apologies in advance. This is pure Chatter. Respond directly (if you must) - no need to further abuse the list. Due to nausea I have abbreviated where possible. --------------------------------------------------------- Well, I just bought a new Sears Lawn Mower. There is one page of safety warnings. I guess it would be humorous if it wasnt such a sad and sobering look at the kind of litigious society we have become. You just know every bulleted item was the result of a law-suit. You are not going to believe this!!! Honest, these are pure quotes!! Reference: Craftsman Owners manual Mod. No. 917.386230, Page 2. TRAINING: *Never allow adults to use mower without proper instruction. *keep the area clear of...especially small children and pets. *Always have damage repaired before using mower. *The blade turns when the engine is running. PREPARATION: *clear the area of sticks/stones etc.. they can be thrown by the blade and cause injury. *Dress Properly. Do not operate mower when barefoot or wearing sandals. Wear only solid shoes with good traction when mowing. *clean off any spilled gasoline before starting *Mow only in daylight... OPERATION *Keep your mind...on your mower. Dont get distracted. *Do not put hands or feet under rotating parts. *Never direct discharge of material toward bystanders *Do not operate mower if it vibrates abnormally *Do not run indoors. Exhaust fumes are dangerous. WARNING: The engine exhaust from this product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm. I wonder why Lycoming and Continental dont try more innovative and good-for-the-consumer technologies. Elon elon.o(at)worldnet.att.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Subject: Re: Oil cooler hookup question
<< My question is: is the 45 degree fitting the part that screws into the engine or the fitting that goes on the end of the Aeroquip hose? >> Cheryl- I used straight S/S fittings out of the case for the outlet and the inlet and a 45 degree fitting on the hose end attached to the outlet. Works great and clears filter easily. -GV ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: Blake Harral <bharral(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Oil cooler hookup question
Cheryl Sanchez wrote: > > > Hi, > > I am about to order the parts I need to do my oil cooler > hookup and I'm not quite sure what to get. My engine is a new > O-360 that I got from Van's. As I understand it, one of the > connections to the engine, near the oil filter, needs a 45 degree > fitting. My question is: is the 45 degree fitting the part that > screws into the engine or the fitting that goes on the end of > the Aeroquip hose? > > Thanks. > > Cheryl Sanchez > csanchez(at)world.std.com I am going to use an AN823-8 fitting in the accessory case. This should allow a hose with a straight fitting to clear the oil filter. Where angled fittings are necessary, I am trying to have the angle fittings in the crankcase or accessory, rather than in the hoses. These angled pipe thread - to - AN 37 deg flare fittings are cheaper than the angled hose fittings. Also, hoses with angled fittings must be custom 'clocked' for your particular installation in order to avoid twists in the installed hose. Of course, there will always be a few cases where the angled hose fitting is the best solution. Regards, Blake Harral ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: Blake Harral <bharral(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: O-360 Fuel Injection
Glenn & Judi wrote: > > > Hi, > We are just starting our RV-6 quickbuild. We plan on installing a > Bendix Fuel Injector onto a factory new O-360 A1A. Here are some > questions I have... > 1) Where can the fuel injector be purchased? > 2) How much will it cost? > 3) What type of modifications to the fuel system will I need to make > (pump type, etc.) > 4) Should I consider using a different brand of fuel injector? > > Thank you in advance, > > Glenn & Judi Gordon Airflow Performance supplies fuel injection systems that will fit your engine. I have a friend who has one of their systems in his RV-4 and is quite satisfied. The owner is also intimately familiar with Bendix fuel injectors (he used to work for Bendix). He provides overhaul services for (experimental) Bendix injectors and may have overhauled units available for sale. I don't have contact information in front of me at the moment, perhaps someone else can post it. I sent my RS5AD1 Bendix injector (I believe this to be an appropriate model number for your installation) to Airflow Performance for overhaul. I have not run the engine yet, but I was quite impressed with the work. All replaced parts were returned. The unit was tested on a flowbench and the test data was supplied. They even provided me with a copy of the operator's manual. I'm guessing it will cost $1500+ for a new or newly overhauled injection system - not including fuel pumps. Awfully expensive IMHO, but I was also shocked by the cost of an overhauled carb ($1000+, I think). You will need to replace your mechanical pump with a high pressure unit. The Bendix injectors need about 21 psi, whereas a carb needs about 6 psi. The price for the high-pressure mechanical fuel pumps is about the same as for the low pressure ones. The electric boost pump is quite a different story, however. The cheapest suitable electric boost pump I have located is an Airflow Performance unit at about $300. Other popular options are the uncertified Weldon pump (about $500-$600), or the very expensive certified pumps (Airborne, Dukes, etc.) Compare these figures to the $30-$50 boost pumps available for carb engines. I have been looking for a suitable automotive electric boost pump (for the reasons of cost and also availability in the event a replacement is required). I have not yet had any success. The bendix manual states that the injector is fairly insensitive to higher input pressures, I'm guessing 35 psi would still be OK. I am told some of the automotive injection systems use pressures up to 100 psi. Regards, Blake Harral ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JTB520(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Subject: E-mail
I'm not receiving any RV-e,ail any more I'm not to sure why. please resubscribe me to the list. John Bunn JTB520(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Turn coordinator/Radio noise
From: wstucklen1(at)juno.com (Frederic W Stucklen)
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Cheryl: I also had a significant amount of noise generated by the turn coordinator. I placed a .1uF, 50VDC, ceramic disk capacitor across the power leads inside the cannon connector and it eliminated most of the noise. You can get the cap at Radio Shack. Be sure to mount the cap in a manner such that it doesn't short out to the shell of the connector. Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV wstucklen1(at)juno.com writes: > > > >Hi, > > I am working on my instrument panel and today I noticed that >when I power up my turn coordinator it generates a significant >amount of radio noise. The radio is a handheld Icom ic-a20 that >I purchased six or seven years ago. Is this normal? Do I have a >bad turn coordinator? Should I use shielded wire for the power >hookups? > > Thanks. > >Cheryl Sanchez >csanchez(at)world.std.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Subject: brake fluid
From: jepilot(at)juno.com (J E REHLER)
As I understand the issue, the key to aviation brake fluid is not to attract water which will freeze at the temperatures often reached at altitude. Commonly used auto brake fluid will attract and retain moisture and is not acceptable. J. E. Rehler RV6A flying ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Oil cooler hookup question
From: ebundy(at)juno.com (Ed Bundy)
Date: Feb 26, 1997
> I am about to order the parts I need to do my oil cooler >hookup and I'm not quite sure what to get. My engine is a new >O-360 that I got from Van's. As I understand it, one of the >connections to the engine, near the oil filter, needs a 45 degree >fitting. My question is: is the 45 degree fitting the part that >screws into the engine or the fitting that goes on the end of >the Aeroquip hose? Cheryl, I finally gave up trying to collect all of the parts I needed for system installations. I ordered every AN fitting and hose that I thought I'd possibly need and ended up ordering more on 2 or more separate occasions. I also ended up with a lot of parts that I didn't use. You might as well install the cooler first, then figure out your hose runs and the types of fittings you MIGHT need. I found that once you start plumbing, the ideas you had don't always pan out. I mounted my cooler on the firewall and used 2 90's on the cooler, a straight fitting and a 45 on the engine, and all hoses had straight fittings. (the angled hose fittings are VERY expensive, don't use them unless you must. I also used a suggestion on the list and used industrial (as opposed to aircraft) Aeroquip hose. Same or better specs, and a LOT cheaper. Very chic blue cover too. I believe the designation is FC300. I found a local supplier, and I just ran over there every time I needed something else. It saved me a ton in shipping. Have fun, Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 ebundy(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Subject: Franklin Engines
From: ab6a(at)juno.com (ALLAN E POMEROY)
Listers, For those interested, I offer the following additional information regarding the PZL-Franklin engines. This info is from what apparently is a brochure from Atlas Motors, the U.S. distributer of these engines. (I received this info package from another gentleman.) The RVator talks of a 220 hp 6 cylinder engine. This brochure in one place refers to the same thing, in another place, the spec sheet, it talks of a 205 hp engine. I'm assuming they (Atlas Motors) are talking of the same engine here. The 6 cylinder is a 350 cu. in. engine rated at 205 + 5% hp at 2800 rpm. I'm not sure what they mean by the "+5%". This engine has 10.5 to 1 compression ratio which requires 100 octane fuel. They say that on special request, you can order this engine with the four cylinder pistons, which are 8.5 to 1 C.R. This will allow the use of 87 octane fuel, but the engine is "derated" to about 180 hp (within Van's recommendation of under 200 hp). They say the EGT rises and the fuel burned per horse power increases by about 25%. If using a fixed pitch prop, they also recommend using a different camshaft. For the RV-3 builders, PZl-Franklin has a 4 cylinder that puts out 116 hp. The reverse can be done to that engine also. The 6 cylinder pistons can be put into that engine and you get about 142 hp. But with those being a higher compression ratio piston, you get a rougher running engine at low rpm. For those of you that are really interested in using Franklin engines in your RV's, I would suggest letting Van know. The RVator stated that Atlas claimed there was a large interest while Van's has not heard many questions regarding it. Allan Pomeroy CNY AB6A(at)juno.com -6A H S Skeleton ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Oil cooler hookup question
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Try to use straight fittings where ever you can. The 45 or 90 degree fittings are a pain, because if the fitting is not tight enough in the desired position, then you must go one more full turn and sometimes that is too much and you risk twisting it off or stripping the threads. In many cases, putting the 45 or 90 on the hose is better as long as you have a straight fitting on the other end of the hose. This way you can rotate the hose fitting as needed to clear and then tighten up the hose fitting. A little hard to explain, but you will see... Herman > > Cheryl Sanchez wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I am about to order the parts I need to do my oil cooler > > hookup and I'm not quite sure what to get. My engine is a new > > O-360 that I got from Van's. As I understand it, one of the > > connections to the engine, near the oil filter, needs a 45 degree > > fitting. My question is: is the 45 degree fitting the part that > > screws into the engine or the fitting that goes on the end of > > the Aeroquip hose? > > > > Thanks. > > > > Cheryl Sanchez > > csanchez(at)world.std.com > > I am going to use an AN823-8 fitting in the accessory case. This should > allow a hose with a straight fitting to clear the oil filter. Where > angled fittings are necessary, I am trying to have the angle fittings in > the crankcase or accessory, rather than in the hoses. These angled pipe > thread - to - AN 37 deg flare fittings are cheaper than the angled hose > fittings. Also, hoses with angled fittings must be custom 'clocked' for > your particular installation in order to avoid twists in the installed > hose. Of course, there will always be a few cases where the angled hose > fitting is the best solution. > > Regards, > Blake Harral > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: control cables, oil pressure fittings
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Just drill out the hole in the bug nut a little larger to accept the .075 wire. A 10/32 screw will still have enough material left to handle this. Remember, on the bug nut, the bolt must be LOOSE on the mixture arm so it can move. The nut must just snug up on the wire. You can ben the end of the wire some as a safety. Herman > > I'm lashing up the controls to the O-320 and discover that the mixture > control I got from Van has a wire dia. of .075 in., but the collet gizmo that > grips the wire and terminates in a threaded (10-32?) rod end accepts only a > .050 wire or smaller. Yipes! Should I make an adapter from rod stock and > set-screws to couple two different sizes of wire, start over with a new > cable, bug-nut the cable I have now, or somehow narrow that .075 wire down to > .050 on the end? Can I do that without unaccepteble stress-risers? > > Second question: Confession--- despite having read NUMEROUS warnings not to > do this, I installed my engine without first putting the oil-pressure fitting > in! I've read all the archive data on this subject but am unclear on one > point: Is there any fitting that will allow installation "as-is" without any > disassembly? AN-823? AN-915? Weatherhead 45 deg street elbow? Why all the > insistence that these fittings be steel or stainless?? > > Bill Boyd -- RV-6A > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne)
Subject: Re: brake fluid
WOW! What do those poor folks in Montana do?? Or Nebraska?? Or ..... hal > As I understand the issue, the key to aviation brake fluid is not to > attract water which will freeze at the temperatures often reached at > altitude. Commonly used auto brake fluid will attract and retain > moisture and is not acceptable. > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: "r.acker" <r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Barnard Aircraft Components
Regarding the BAC components: Correct me if I am wrong, I recall the complete BAC package costing on the order of $4.5K. It seems the quickbuild's $8K premium (over the std. kit) vs. BAC's premium offers much more value. I think my airframe will be *completed* at the 350-400 hour mark (and I'm a slowwwww builder), does BAC even save that amount of time? The QB has no beautifully anodized parts, but there's a top skin and paint covering them all up anyway so does that matter? A safe, corrosion protected structure underneath in both cases. I think both the standard and quickbuild kits provide outstanding values depending on an individuals time/money ratio...the BAC kit not enough bang/buck. Just my $0.02... Rob Acker / r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com / RV-6Q project: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rob_acker (last update 12/23/96 - Oshkosh '96 RV pictures) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: "r.acker" <r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Flaps
>I think I will use Van's method on the right wing. > >Steve Soule Ha!...which one of Van's methods ? What I did (sorry listers for the long post, but this was a real sticky part for me and hopefully it helps others): 1) Used the female templates only for holding things in place while I lined things up properly. They did not match my wing at all. 2) Mounted aileron brackets on ailerons located exactly as per plans with #30 holes/clecoes (provides some margin for error if things don't line up, drill out to #12 later). 3) Located outboard aileron mount exactly as per plan, temporarily clamped in place. 4) Temporarily clamped inboard aileron mount in position, mounted aileron with all associated spacers/washers/bearings. I had to move the inboard mount 1/8" from plans position to fit the aileron length perfectly. 5) Locked aileron into neutral position via pinned bellcrank. Checked outboard end inline with tooling hole chord line. Used flexible rule laid along every rib extended to aileron, top and bottom of wing, to assure inboard end of aileron aligned correctly. 6) Drilled/clecoed inboard and outboard mounts in place (using four #40 holes for each, again providing some room for error later if needed). 7) Temporarily clamped flap in place on rear skin at both ends. Set flap t.e. exactly in line with aileron t.e. Assured aileron/flap joint alignment by using three "clecoe clamps" on top skins at joint (most visible) as outlined in 16 years of RVator. 8) Used a taught string drawn from outboard aileron to inboard flap t.e., to accurately locate flap t.e. at wing root. Double checked flap position with string, flexible rule, and tooling hole chord line. Drilled flap hinge in place. 9) Removed flap, drilled flap brace to hinge, remounted as an assembly and aligned as in step 8. Drilled flap brace to spar at root and outboard ends. Removed flap, clecoed flap brace back into position on hinge line and these two holes (this assures the rear skin is in the proper position at both ends of the flap brace). 10) Used straight steel bar clamped to rear skin to force it into proper position along entire span. Drilled a hole in the middle of the flap brace/rear spar, clecoed. Remounted flap to assure everything was in position. Remove flap, drill remaining flap brace/rear spar holes. 11) Mounted aileron and flap, rechecked alignment (whew...it lined up!), finish drill all flap/aileron holes. Everything on my quickbuild seems to be +/- 1/8" from plans everywhere so I have to "eyeball" some things in place, regardless of what the plumb lines and squares say. So far the naked eye can't tell, and hopefully the flight controls and airspeed indicator won't either . Rob Acker / r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com / RV-6Q project: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rob_acker (last update 12/23/96 - Oshkosh '96 RV pictures) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: Charlie & Tupper England <england(at)vicksburg.com>
Subject: Re: Franklin Engines
snipped >>My understanding is that the Franklin installation should weigh about the >same as the Lycoming (330 lbs.), produce at least as much power (205-210 >>one of the smoooothest engines I have flown with. Granted, that was a USA >built one that was factory installed in the airplane. Who out there knows >about these engines and why aren't more being used?? > There's a Globe Swift flying with one & most Swifters say it's the fastest Swift short of the LoPresti prototype (includes lots of Lyc 200's & Cont 210's). Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: Scott Johnson <rvgasj(at)popmail.mcs.net>
Subject: I hate to admit what I did with my new RV6A yesterday ...
Well I have 11 hours on my RV6A since it was given an airworthiness certificate last week. As I was flying along in my large 25 mile test area the other day, a beautifully painted shiny Piper Arrow went zinging by me in the opposite direction. I couldn't help noticing how sleek and fast that Arrow looked with its retractable wheels up in the wings. Well, I am not sure why I did this, and I hate even to admit it to this group, but I did a 180 degree turn and firewalled my 6A towards this Arrow on a parallel course. I was pleasantly surprised at how quickly I caught up. As I came abreast the Arrow about 3/4 mile out on a parallel course, I slowed down to his speed. He saw me, and wiggled his wings. Having been previously sad that I sold a similar Piper years ago, thinking I would never have as good a plane again, I realized how my 6A was significantly better than that Piper for my needs. I also realized how fast an RV6A is compared to most general aviation aircraft. I especially noticed this when going by Cessna 172's and Warriors like their standing still. Whats really incredible though, shortly after takeoff, I am climbing twice as fast as the popular spam cams, and climbing at a speed faster than their cruise speed (1,300 FPM @ 145 MPH). Match this with a stall speed of 50 MPH and I now know what VAN means by Total Performance ! Also, the visibility of the tip up canopy and control feel are unmatched on anything else I have flown. Yes ... all the long hours were worth it ! Looking forward to being released out of my large 25 mile test area in 29 hours ... Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.com Project Status: I wonder if VAN will give a second time builder a discount on an RV-8 ? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: Dean Spencer <dspencer(at)kiva.net>
Subject: Re: rv-list:Brake Fluid
aol.com!PresleyTL(at)matronics.com wrote: > > > Any comments would be welcomed.I have been told 3 times that (Type A ) > automatic transmission fluid is an acceptable substitute for aircraft brake > fluid .Have others used this in the past? Thanks in advance. > > Tim Presley N64TX RV-4/160 > First flight Aug '97(I > HOPE) Can I use automotive brake fluid? Why not just use aircraft hydraulic fluid? I have had other people ask me this question and this is the question I always answer with. MIL-H-5606 is not expensive, will not eat or swell seals, is not corrosive, will not remove paint, won't attack your skin, etc. It is what your system was designed to use. It works... very well. Why use that automotive junk -some if not most of which has the negative properties above? Scott N4ZW A&P CFII etc. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6DD(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Subject: Re: Turn coordinator/Radio noise
Cheryl, A lot of radio noise will disappear when the engine is started and the alternator is putting out 14 volts or so. I had an Icom wired up into the electrical system and the intercom system and it had noise until the engine/alternator was started. The turn coordinator doesn't need a shielded wire. I would wait and see if you still have noise after you crank up the engine. Dave D ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "oo" <duba(at)gate.net>
Subject: Deft primer 44GN11
Date: Feb 26, 1997
TO: Michael Angiulo FROM: AIRLINK I have a 1 gallon kit of Deft primer 44GN11. date mfgd: 12/96 ex 09/97 The next batch I will have will not be available from Deft until the second week in March. If you would like to purchase this last kit please give me a call. The price is $110 plus S/H for the l gallon kit./Quart kits $38 plus S/H Danny White AIRLINK 407 2238915 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Mmdf-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at relay-7.mail.demon.net
From: Rob Hatwell <hatters(at)overvne.demon.co.uk>
Subject: NZ Permits
NZ builders on the list There are a couple of questions that I would like to know the answers to in relation to NZ permits for homebuilts. 1. Do you have a separate category of certificate of airworthiness for homebuilts or are they the same as say for a cessna. 2. If the C of A's are different what are the differences. 3. Do you have any problems with the crank shaft AD. 4. Can you set up a homebuilt to fly IFR or are they restricted to VFR. 5. What are the inspection procedures for getting a permit. Reasons for questions. I might end up back in NZ at some time and it could be before I finish the RV8 All the best -- Rob Hatwell ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jim Sears <sears(at)searnet.com>
Subject: Re: I hate to admit what I did with my new RV6A yesterday ...
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Boy, I hate it when people brag! :-) I can't wait to get there! Jim Sears RV-6A #22220 (Fuse jig built. About to start building fuse.) AA5A Cheetah N26276 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: David Peck <dpeck(at)ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Parts for Desoutter drill
G'day I am fairly new to the list but a friend of mine ( Kieth Ellis RV-4, VH-KME ) is in need of assistance and I thought it would be the ideal chance for me to try it. He has a Desoutter angle drill which has broken the shaft that the collet screws into. I would like to know of any mail order parts suppliers that might have this part, preferably with an e-mail address. Thanks David Peck, SAAA TC & RV-6A dreamer dpeck(at)ozemail.com.au ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne)
Subject: Re: Brake Fluid
Someone asks: >> Can I use automotive brake fluid? And a certified A&P answers: > MIL-H-5606 is not expensive, will not eat or swell seals, is not > corrosive, will not remove paint, won't attack your skin, etc. It is > what your system was designed to use. It works... very well. I agree. It *is* an aircraft standard. But then the certified A&P says: >Why use that automotive junk -some if not most of which has the negative > properties above? I have to ask for evidence that R3 or better automotive brake fluid is junk. The stuff is used in some very expensive machines whose brakes suffer considerably more strenuous duty than airplane brakes. They get into lotsa water. Then there's the extreme heat in the case of 18 wheelers in Arizona's Rockies in the summer and the numbing cold of Montana's in the winter. Hal Kempthorne halk(at)sybase.com Santa Clara, CA. (SJC) Debonair N6134V A zillion RV-6AQ parts in the "hangar" we call home. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: SportAV8R(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Subject: Re: control cables, oil pressure fittings
> RV-List message posted by: Herman Dierks > > Just drill out the hole in the bug nut a little larger to accept the .075 > wire. Herman: thanks for your input; I guess I wasn't clear. I'm not using a bug nut (at least not yet). I have the fancy pin-vise gizmo that Van sells to make the transition from cable to threaded end and it flat out won't accept this larger diameter wire. A bug nut might be the best option, but not as slick as the pin-vise (if it worked). And this just in from Randall: >all it takes is to undo the top >engine mounts (or maybe even just the one on the side where the oil >fitting is) and let the thing drop forward a bit and you can install >the fitting. Randall- I'm hoping that won't be necessary! The mounts aren't that easy to re-align once they pop into their uncompressed position. Using my former technique, I would have to remove all 4 bolts (or at least 3) and start over with the top mounts first,then the bottom ones using the Tri-State Wing Newsletter nifty alignment tool. Possible but not fun- and all for such a tiny little pipe fitting! I'm still hoping for an easier way out. Re-torquing all those mount bolts from the wrong end again- Ugh! Bill ________________________________________________________________________________
From: SportAV8R(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Subject: Re: Cowling question:
I'm going to start my cowl fitting any day now (once I finish the endless fiberglassing phase I seem to be stuck [pun alert] in now; anyone else have to split the front of the nose gear fairing to get it to fit on the rear half?!) I plan to do the cowl attach hardware per plans and by the book; no fancy fasteners. How many vote for doing the top half first and how many for working from the bottom up? I've seen arguments both ways. Feel free to respond off-list. I know it's a sort-of no right or wrong answers kind of question. Your input may give me the push I need to start drilling holes in one of the last remaining loose parts of my kit. Bill Boyd ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BrooksRV6(at)webtv.net (Chris Brooks)
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Subject: Re: Parts for Desoutter drill
David, you might try U.S. Industrial Tool web page.....www.ustool.com E-mail.........info(at)ustool.com Chris Brooks BrooksRV6(at)webtv.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: Bill Benedict <billb(at)europa.com>
Subject: Re: I hate to admit what I did with my new RV6A
yesterday ... > >Well I have 11 hours on my RV6A since it was given an airworthiness >certificate last week. > >..... Having been previously sad that I sold a >similar Piper years ago, thinking I would never have as good a plane again, >I realized how my 6A was significantly better than that Piper for my needs. >I also realized how fast an RV6A is compared to most general aviation >aircraft. I especially noticed this when going by Cessna 172's and Warriors >like their standing still. > >Whats really incredible though, shortly after takeoff, I am climbing twice >as fast as the popular spam cams, and climbing at a speed faster than their >cruise speed (1,300 FPM @ 145 MPH). Match this with a stall speed of 50 MPH >and I now know what VAN means by Total Performance ! Also, the visibility of >the tip up canopy and control feel are unmatched on anything else I have flown. > >Yes ... all the long hours were worth it ! > >Scott Johnson / Chicago >rvgasj(at)mcs.com > >Project Status: I wonder if VAN will give a second time builder a discount >on an RV-8 ? Scott, You betcha. Once you finish and fly an RV we are waiting for the next order to come in. I think it has something to do with the blood brother ritual you went through when you cut yourself on the aluminum. I have noticed that I have a thing for drill bits. Just can't pass up a good deal on bits. Must be a result of one of the times the #30 or #40 drill bit went through my finger while holding the back side of a longeron while drilling through from the outside. I would guess that between 10 and 20% of the current builders are "repeat offenders". We love ya. Bill PS: I think the spouses realize they get to watch their choice of TV programs if you are out in the garage building. That is the real reason they encourage you to build again. Bill N894RV with over 400 hours behind a O-320, Over 1000 RV flying hours. RV-4-180 soon. These opinions are mine and do not necessarily represent the opinions or position of my employer. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: SportAV8R(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Subject: engine mounting made easy (well, easier)
(I don't think this made it to the list, so I'm resending it 3 weeks later...) Listers: having just completed the task of hanging the O-320 on the nose of my -6A, I can vouch for the effectiveness of a simple little tool depicted in last years Tri-State Wing Newsletter (contact jamescone@aol to subscribe. James: where is my first 97 issue?!) Basically the tool is a hardware store 7/16ths bolt cut off and turned down to a bullet shape to be used as a guide to align the Barry mounts with the ears on the engine case as the mount bolts are tapped home. Without this or similar tool the job is most difficult; with it, one man can do it with ease. Use a shop crane (engine hoist, "cherry picker") for max flexibility in holding the engine in place while you work. The first two (upper) bolts go in rather easily without any alignment tool needed. For the bottom two, the tool will prove its worth! There are two things underemphasized or omitted in the article which you should know, however. First, there is a lot of shear on the alignment tool as it is tapped into the holes by the mounting bolt behind it. A brisk tap is required to seat the tip of the AN bolt into the bore of the crankcase mounting ear in one rapid motion as the alignment tool clears the last of the Barry mount structure. If this is not done quickly, the parts will spring instantly back to their resting, nonaligned position and your efforts to seat the bolt will only bugger-up the bolt or the ear. To hold the bolt's nose in position, it is necessary to relieve the base of the alignment tool in concave fashion at least 1/16th in. depth, with rather sharp edges, so the bolt can't wander sideways behind the "bullet" tool. This is essential. A Dremel tool with rouond burr will work if no lathe is handy. Likewise the profile shaping can all be done with grindstone and Scotchbrite wheel. Give it a nice ogive (bullet nose) shape so it won't scratch things up too much. Secondly, as I learned the hard way, although the tool in the newsletter is shown alongside a rule indicating a length of almost 3in., it will not clear the base of the dipstick/oil-fill mounting boss on the lower right side of the O-320 crankcase unless shortened to a max length of 1-1/2 inches!! Failure to observe this max length may result in a cracked case or at least a jammed alignment tool requiring removal of the other three mount bolts to retrieve it, or careful surgery with a cutoff wheel on a long extension (I chose the latter and got away with it. You do NOT want to do this.) At 1-1/2 in. by 7/16th in, the tool looks just like a silver bullet for a .50 cal Browning machine gun. Very formidable. Just imagine 8 streams of these things ripping through a Me-109 in the sights of a Thunderbolt at 2500 fps and you will understand why gun camera footage shows so much exploding debris! Hope this helps. Do it right and you won't have to pester your neighbor or wife to help horse the engine into its mounts :-) Bill Boyd ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BPattonsoa(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Subject: Re: Oil cooler hookup question
Both will work, but the 45 degree hose fitting is a lot more expensive than the 45 degre AN part. Bruce Patton barely ahead of you ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Russ Werner" <russ(at)maui.net>
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Subject: Re: Barnard Aircraft Components
Rob, Some more thoughts on the various options: > Correct me if I am wrong, I recall the complete BAC package costing on the > order of $4.5K. It seems the quickbuild's $8K premium (over the std. kit) > vs. BAC's premium offers much more value. BAC's kit will make your $3500 wings $8000 wings. It has no impact on the rest of the airplane. But there isn't a QB kit from VANS for the RV3, RV4, RV8 or the Rocket II. Maybe the QB RV6 is a better deal - seems to be, IF that is the plane you want to build. > > I think my airframe will be *completed* at the 350-400 hour mark (and I'm a > slowwwww builder), does BAC even save that amount of time? I figure it is saving me several hundred hours (probably a year of my building time) on my wings. My plane will still take me years to build. > > The QB has no beautifully anodized parts, but there's a top skin and paint > covering them all up anyway so does that matter? A safe, corrosion > protected structure underneath in both cases. > You're absoultly right. > I think both the standard and quickbuild kits provide outstanding values > depending on an individuals time/money ratio...the BAC kit not enough > bang/buck. Just my $0.02... The BAC kit is great value for what it is. For my project it is the only option, and it is working out great. If I were building a 6, I'd be rowing the same boat you are. I think we both made good choices. The market is obviously wanting more work pre-built, otherwise Van wouldn't be offering it and neither would all the other sucessful kit companies. Van's standard kit keeps the "cheap" option open for those who want to invest a bit (lot) more sweat equity. I just wish Vans would go back and clean up the plans where we continue to read that there are errors or could use clarification. More photos and language in the assembly manual would eliminate hundreds of hours of head scratching! Aloha, Russ Werner Maui Hawaii USA mailto:russ(at)maui.net sends to me mailto:RV-List(at)matronics.com sends to the RV List ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Russ Werner" <russ(at)maui.net>
Date: Feb 26, 1997
Subject: Building wings - sequence
I am looking for opinions on what to build/drill in what order. The items in question are: 1. Outboard leading edge skin 2. Fuel tank 3. Top Skins 4. Bottom Skins An RV6 builder locally (he has PP skins) is doing it in the above order. I seem to read that 3,4,1,2, is better/more common/in the instructions/in Hovan's directions. Any ideas here? Another question for those who have been there: What tool did you use on the gun to back-rivet the top skins (assuming you back-riveted them)? Aloha, Russ Werner Maui Hawaii USA mailto:russ(at)maui.net sends to me mailto:RV-List(at)matronics.com sends to the RV List ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
Subject: Re: Brake Fluid
From: ab6a(at)juno.com (ALLAN E POMEROY)
Hal, 18 wheelers do not use brake fluid. They use an air brake system. And if they're going over the Rockies, they should have an engine brake also, or a very large life insurance policy. Allan Pomeroy CNY AB6A(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 27, 1997
Subject: Re: brake fluid
<< As I understand the issue, the key to aviation brake fluid is not to attract water which will freeze at the temperatures often reached at altitude. Commonly used auto brake fluid will attract and retain moisture and is not acceptable. >> The original post said nothing about using auto brake fluid. Please read the posts more carefully. He asked if automatic transmission fluid could be used in lieu of MIL-H-5606 hydraulic brake fluid. Who cares if it could be? The right stuff is cheap, why sub? -GV ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 26, 1997
From: Bob Haan <bobh(at)cdac.com>
Subject: Re: Building wings - sequence
> >I am looking for opinions on what to build/drill in what order. The >items in question are: > >1. Outboard leading edge skin >2. Fuel tank >3. Top Skins >4. Bottom Skins > >An RV6 builder locally (he has PP skins) is doing it in the above >order. I seem to read that 3,4,1,2, is better/more common/in the >instructions/in Hovan's directions. Any ideas here? I did 3,4,1,2 per the manual. I understood that the reason was that by installing the Top and Bottom Skins the wing structure was stronger and would be better (stiffer) for pulling the outboard leading edge skin into position with cargo straps. Next time I will do 1,3,4,2 because the fit of the aft leading edge joint to the top and bottom skins can be easily done by pushing the top and bottom skins up tightly to the clecoed leading edge. Any tolerance stack up occurs at the trailing edge where it can be trimmed. Van's should leave the pre punched holes off the trailing edge of the top and bottom skins so any trimming of the trailing edge does not cause an edge distance problem. It is easy to mark and drill this one line of rivet holes. Bob Haan bobh(at)cdac.com Portland, OR 503-636-3550 RV6A 24461 drilling the fuselage skins ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: Barry WARD <ward(at)axime.com>
Subject: Re: Building wings - sequence
I went the 1 2 3 4 route you mentioned and it seems to work out quite well. In fact I havn't yet fitted the bottom skins as they go on later after initial fitting of wings to fuselage. I will probably pop rivet the bottom skins on as this is the way of my French Guru, Michel Jaoul. We tend to think that a pop rivet is more reliable than using a standard rivet which you can not visually inspect. I back riveted the top part of the Outboard Leading edge skins. This was an idea someone on the list came up with a few months ago I tried it and it worked ok for me. Averys sells a long bent tool that goes in the rivet gun for back riveting. Barry Ward ward(at)axime.com working on ailerons. > >I am looking for opinions on what to build/drill in what order. The >items in question are: > >1. Outboard leading edge skin >2. Fuel tank >3. Top Skins >4. Bottom Skins ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JRoss10612(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 27, 1997
Subject: Missing Parts
Phil, I'll bet the extra parts that were included in your wing kit were W 425 R&L, two each. I called Van's last week and was told that these were RV-4 parts, and were sent in error. So... I'm returning them to Van's. I also got confused when the revision page that was included with the wing kit stipulated the use of AA3 3/4 X 3/4 X 17 aluminum angle. According to the parts numbering system Van's uses, this would be 2024 T3 aluminum angle. The only thing I did have included was a piece of 6061 T6 that was of the same physical dimension... So I called Van's and was told by Bill Benedict the part was indeed supposed to be 6061 T6, the revision sheet was incorrect, and that no 2024 T3 aluminum angle of that dimension was used in the entire aircraft. Concerned about the mixup, Bill said that he was going to correct the revision sheet right away. I was also missing the 4 steel aileron bellcrank brackets (823PP?) These were promptly shipped by Van's at no cost. When you consider the number of components included with the wing kit, it is amazing what few errors there were. Everything is first class... especially the long awaited spars. One local RV-6 builder who has seen and helped on my project says: "I'm buying an RV-8" All he has to do is convince his bride to be as to the prudence of such as decision... Anyone going with capacitance fuel senders? Regards, Jon Ross - RV-80094 Starting on wings... ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RICKRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 27, 1997
Subject: Re: I hate to admit what I did with my new RV6A yesterday ...
Yes, 3% off all subsequent projects. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: hqb(at)netcom.netcom.com (Henry Bibb)
Subject: Alternative Engines, was Franklin Engines
Date: Feb 27, 1997
On the subject of Van's engine recommendations for engines, it occurs to me that perhaps the excellent discount Van offers on Lycomings somehow involves Lycoming being the primary/only engine "officially recommended". Not trying to imply anything underhanded, mind you; it's just my impression that a lot of distribution agreements work that way. Henry Bibb RV builder wanna-be ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Turn coordinator/Radio noise
From: wstucklen1(at)juno.com (Frederic W Stucklen)
Date: Feb 27, 1997
writes: > >Cheryl, > A lot of radio noise will disappear when the engine is started and the >alternator is putting out 14 volts or so. I had an Icom wired up into the >electrical system and the intercom system and it had noise until the >engine/alternator was started. The turn coordinator doesn't need a shielded >wire. I would wait and see if you still have noise after you crank up the >engine. > >Dave D Dave, I have to take exception to this. If the noise is present while running on just a battery, it will also be present while running on a charging battery, only masked by other noise (alternator whine, ignition noises). Never the less, the noise is still there. What you are probably hearing in your system is the summation of all wiring noise. While this level of noise in some installations is acceptable, it may not be in others. Our approach to building up an instrument panel should always be to identify potential noise sources, and be knowledgable in methods of their elimination. While the turn coordinator noise may not be significant, its elimination, and the elimination of other noise sources (alternator whine) will increase all your radios receiver sensitivity (ie, its ability to receive lower level signals). By isolating and elimination of noise sources, you should see better comm receiver performance, and maybe less noise (as perceived by those listening) when transmitting. I didn't use a shielded wire on my turn coordinator either. But adding the cap across its supply input allowed for the "noise" to be contained in the instrument itself, and not out into the wiring harness where it could easily be coupled into other radios. I also installed a filter (rated at 70 Amps) on the alternator output to eliminate its whine (which increased the ADF's receive range and eliminated comm transmission noise). One way to test for alternator noise while flying is to open the squelch on you comm radio while on an open frequency. Switch you alternator field ON/OFF and note the difference in the noise level. Also run the same check on an ADF if you have one. (Do this while listening to a distant station.) The ADF will be more susceptible to the alternator noise. Another check easily performed is having someone close listen to you comm transmissions while your flying. Sometimes alternator whine can be heard by them if you have a problem. Another important item is the transponder antenna location relative to any ignition noise souces. Sometimes, a noisy mag or ignition lead will cause the transponder to transmit randomly without prompting from an ATC radar. While ATC radars seem to be capable of handling this to some extent, what would they say if we all had the problem? Better to keep the transponder antenna away from the engine compartment/firewall (while keeping its lead as short as possible). Sorry to get so long winded..... Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV wstucklen1(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: "r.acker" <r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Barnard Aircraft Components
> >Maybe the QB RV6 is a better >deal - seems to be, IF that is the plane you want to build. Oops...guess I should have made myself clearer, my message was directed towards those considering a std, BAC, or QB RV-6. >I just wish Vans would go back and clean up the plans where we continue >to read that there are errors or could use clarification. More >photos and language in the assembly manual would eliminate hundreds >of hours of head scratching! DITTO! I have the utmost respect for those completing the std kit, I have enough troubles getting through the plans on the QB . The next one will be a std kit since I already have something to fly (what I am waiting for is an RV-8 with a smoother, cheaper O-540 option). Rob Acker / r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com / RV-6Q project: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rob_acker (last update 12/23/96 - Oshkosh '96 RV pictures) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: Dr John Cocker <jcocker(at)medhumor.com>
Subject: Credit due to Flightcom.
I decided to use the Flightcom Intercom unit, as it is so small, and does everything I require, but I seemed to make heavy weather out of fitting it. There is a standard 25 pin plug, the type for computers, and I tried to solder all the required leads using a soldering iron which was too large, and too hot. Next I checked each lead was to the right pin about ten times. I should have checked eleven times, as the 12v was on the wrong pin. It only took me four or five hours to work that out. Next the intercom still did not work. It was too loud on the passenger side, and not loud enough on the pilot side.. Getting frustrated by now, I called customer service at Flightcom. They were most helpful, and offered to have the unit back. They checked it over, and sent it back overnight courier at their expense, even though the problem was clearly my fault. On re-assembly, it still did not work, and I found the solution. When I mounted the socket for the transmit plug, one of the "lugs" was touching the aircraft panel, and shorting it out. Now, despite the abuse, the unit works extremely well. Summary : 1. Use the right equipment, in this case the right soldering iron. 2. Engage brain before starting work. John C-GDOC, almosr ready to paint. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6junkie(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 27, 1997
Subject: Re: Brake Fluid
RIDER Magazine (a magazine for us two wheel types) did an excellent article on brake fluid (automotive type) about six months ago. Try to find it if you can. I was amazed how much water the fluid DOT 3 will absorb. Gary Corde RV-6 N211GC - NJ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: Scott Gesele <scottg(at)villagenet.com>
Subject: Re: Missing Parts
> >Anyone going with capacitance fuel senders? > >Regards, >Jon Ross - RV-80094 Starting on wings... > > Jon, Besides your original concern about the longevity of the capacitance senders, remember that they will be installed through all the bays. Probably from the outboard top slanting to the inboard rear end for the most accuracy. That alignment, while possible, won't be that easy. If you are still planning on flop tubes, the capacitance senders will have to end in the next to the last bay on the root end. Overall, I found the floats from Van's to be easy to install. IMHO, if you are planning on installing a fuel flow/ totalizer, I see no reason to incur the additional expense and trouble with the capacitance senders. Hope this helps. Scott Gesele (N506RV- It WILL fly this Spring) ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Cowling question:
From: ebundy(at)juno.com (Ed Bundy)
Date: Feb 27, 1997
> How many vote for doing the top half first and how many for >working from the bottom up? I've seen arguments both ways. Feel free >to respond off-list. I know it's a sort-of no right or wrong answers >kind of question. Your input may give me the push I need to start drilling >holes in one of the last remaining loose parts of my kit. HI Bill. I would definitely recommend starting with the top first. The first half is easier to fit than the second half (more places to fit) and by doing the top first, gravity will help keep it there rather than hinder. Getting the alignment with the spinner is the a tricky area, and by installing the top first, you can cleco a small tab onto the front top of the cowl and rest the tab on the spinner backplate. Then you can adjust the tab for the proper spinner/cowl line height. (Don't forget to allow for the thickness of the spinner fiberglass) I installed my spinner about 3/8" higher than the cowl. In the 60 hours I've put on the airplane, the spinner has come down a about 11/32". The fit is perfect unless you really get in there and look, and the extra 1/32" is in the bank if it settles more. That part is a black art, I know people that had settling anywhere from 0 (if the engine was installed for a long time) to 1/4". Caveat Emptor (let the installer beware). Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 ebundy(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: control cables, oil pressure fittings
From: ebundy(at)juno.com (Ed Bundy)
Date: Feb 27, 1997
>Randall- I'm hoping that won't be necessary! The mounts aren't that easy to >re-align once they pop into their uncompressed position. Using my >former technique, I would have to remove all 4 bolts (or at least 3) and >start over with the top mounts first,then the bottom ones using the Tri-State >Wing Newsletter nifty alignment tool. Possible but not fun- and all for >such a tiny little pipe fitting! I'm still hoping for an easier way out. > Re-torquing all those mount bolts from the wrong end again- Ugh! I don't have my airplane in front of me right now, and I forgot to install the fitting first also, but I'm pretty sure I was able to put in a straight fitting after the engine was installed. I used a steel pipe-to-flare fitting with the hole soldered up and a #60 hole drilled through the solder for a restrictor. I then ran an Aeroquip hose to a sender mounted on the firewall. It is possible I may have installed the fitting when I removed the engine mounts... I had the engine all mounted, torqued and happy when I noticed that I had installed the lower Barry mounts upside-down! AAAARRRGGH! I triple-checked the orientation of the mounts when I installed them, and STILL managed to install the bottom ones wrong. Ugh. Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 ebundy(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Alternative Engines, was Franklin Engines
From: ebundy(at)juno.com (Ed Bundy)
Date: Feb 27, 1997
>On the subject of Van's engine recommendations for engines, >it occurs to me that perhaps the excellent discount Van offers >on Lycomings somehow involves Lycoming being the primary/only >engine "officially recommended". >Not trying to imply anything underhanded, mind you; it's just >my impression that a lot of distribution agreements work that >way. Actually, I think it probably has something to do with the fact that Van's moves more 0-320's and 0-360's than anyone on the planet. It's like anything else; if you sell a whole bunch of Corn Flakes, you'll get a big discount from Kelloggs. Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 ebundy(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Alternative Engines, was Franklin Engines
> > Actually, I think it probably has something to do with the fact that > Van's moves more 0-320's and 0-360's than anyone on the planet. It's > like anything else; if you sell a whole bunch of Corn Flakes, you'll get > a big discount from Kelloggs. > > Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 > ebundy(at)juno.com > Van's price is the standard OEM discount offered to any Mfg. Chris cruble(at)cisco.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6DD(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 27, 1997
Subject: Re: Turn coordinator/Radio noise
Fred, The instructions on my PMC 2000 said that the 14 volts would get rid of any noise that I had by just running on the battery. In my case, they were right. All of the noise did go away. I'm not saying that this will work in all cases, but just wanted to point out that this may be a possibility since most avionics are designed for 14 volts, not 12. I'm mot an expert on the subject, just offering my experiences. Dave D ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ernesto Sanchez" <es12043(at)utech.net>
Subject: Re: Alternative Engines, was Franklin Engines
Date: Feb 27, 1997
> On the subject of Van's engine recommendations for engines, > it occurs to me that perhaps the excellent discount Van offers > on Lycomings somehow involves Lycoming being the primary/only > engine "officially recommended". > > Not trying to imply anything underhanded, mind you; it's just > my impression that a lot of distribution agreements work that > way. > > Henry Bibb > RV builder wanna-be I agree with the above statement. I don't believe RV builders would be getting as good as deal on their new engines if Van's was recommending anything else. And that's a great deal for the majority of builders. I think us "Alternative Engine Guys" are going to be on our own. That's part of the fun of building experimental aircraft. Ernesto Sanchez RV-6 with Alum Buick V-8 maybe ?? es12043(at)utech.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6DD(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 27, 1997
Subject: Re: Turn coordinator/Radio noise
The instructions on my intercom , PMC2000, said that when the voltage goes up to 14 volts, the noise would go away, and in my case it did. I'm not say ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: Owens(at)aerovironment.com (Owens, Laird)
Subject: Re: Missing Parts
> >Phil, > >Anyone going with capacitance fuel senders? > >Regards, >Jon Ross - RV-80094 Starting on wings... Jon, I'm using the Skysports capacitance probes with Mitchell gauges. I mounted them off the rear baffle, in the bay just outside the inverted pickup. The installation worked out very nicely. Laird owens(at)aerovironment.com RV-6 22923, hanging the ailerons and flaps (fuselage kit waiting attention) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6junkie(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 27, 1997
Subject: Re:Turn coordinator/Radio noise
I missed most of the original posts on this subject....but I'll be glad to answer a question that I didn't even hear:). If you have a battery charger connected to a battery while you are testing equipment in your RV you will get a lot of noise from the conversion of AC to DC. When I first installed my Navaid A/P I sent it back to Doug because it seemed to be all out of wack (ground testing in my garage). The Navaid people called me at home to let me know that the head unit bench-tested fine. I said "no way" something has to be wrong. Then they asked what I was using for a power source and I told them my charger. Problem Solved. Next Point. Every piece of avionics I have in my RV uses one common ground location. This reduces the possibility of noise. If you have multiple ground points it can be hard to isolate the problem. My common point is where the longerons meet the firewall. This gave all of my grounds the shortest wire length. My avionics are wisper quiet. Gary Corde RV-6 N211GC - NJ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tony Partain" <aviator(at)tseinc.com>
Subject: Rod End Lubrication
Date: Feb 27, 1997
Should the rod end bearing surfaces be lubricated on the control rods and flaps ? If they were lubricated , will this collect dirt and lead to more wear? Tony Partain N17PT RV-4 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: John Morrissey <John.Morrissey(at)its.csiro.au>
Subject: Re: Building wings - sequence
Hi Russ, I built my first wing using the "Vans instruction's" way and my second using the "Hovan's directions" method. I found the second method to be a bit easier, especially in lining everything up. The main difference is you will find it a lot easier fitting the nose section as it is basically pulled down to contact the edge of the top and bottom skins. I vote for the second method!! John Morrissey Awaiting the arrival of the fuse and finishing kits. > >I am looking for opinions on what to build/drill in what order. The >items in question are: > >1. Outboard leading edge skin >2. Fuel tank >3. Top Skins >4. Bottom Skins > >An RV6 builder locally (he has PP skins) is doing it in the above >order. I seem to read that 3,4,1,2, is better/more common/in the >instructions/in Hovan's directions. Any ideas here? > > > >Another question for those who have been there: What tool did you use >on the gun to back-rivet the top skins (assuming you back-riveted >them)? > > >Aloha, > >Russ Werner >Maui Hawaii USA > >mailto:russ(at)maui.net sends to me > >mailto:RV-List(at)matronics.com sends to the RV List > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Morrissey CSIRO ITS Data Communications Manager Phone:- 06 2766811 Fax:- 06 2766617 Mobile:- 018 628804 Email:- John.Morrissey(at)its.csiro.au CSIRO ---- AUSTRALIA'S SCIENCE, AUSTRALIA'S FUTURE! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: Cheryl Sanchez <csanchez(at)BayNetworks.COM>
Subject: Re: Turn coordinator/Radio noise
> >The instructions on my intercom , PMC2000, said that when the voltage goes up >to 14 volts, the noise would go away, and in my case it did. I'm not say > > Just to clarify things a bit. I have a power supply that will put out up to about 20 amps at 13.4 volts. This is what I am using, not a battery. I am doing this in my home on a table. With my handheld radio on, I can hear the turn coordinator spinning up. If I pull the fuse for it the radio is instantly clear. Cheryl Sanchez csanchez(at)world.std.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: Mike Hartmann <hartmann(at)sound.net>
Subject: RV Yeller Pages
Attention listers! The latest revision of the RV Builder's Yeller Pages is available at: http://www.sound.net/~hartmann/yelrpage.htm For your convenience, this edition includes links to the entities with either web pages or e-mail addresses. Thanks to Gary VanRemortel for the list. - Mike hartmann(at)sound.net http://www.sound.net/~hartmann ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: engine mounting made easy (well, easier)
Date: Feb 27, 1997
A few comments to add to this. I came up with this same idea on my own and later saw it in Sport Aviation and several other places. I knew the long version they showed would cause problems. You want to grind the the rounded shape on the end of the bolt BEFORE you cut it off. Also, it only needs to be about 1/2 inch long. This is just enought to get the two parts to allign and short enough to fall out the other side when the bolt is driven through. You can also do this with the engine laying on the floor (on an old tire, upside down). Then you just picke up the entire assembly and slip in the 4 bolts that bolt the engine to the firewall. I did one this way and it worked fine. You can also do it with a hoist while it goes onto the plane as the note below suggests. I have done two engines by myself so this device makes it a simple one person operation. I have heard of others that took 4 adults to get the mount on. Herman > > (I don't think this made it to the list, so I'm resending it 3 weeks > later...) > > Listers: having just completed the task of hanging the O-320 on the nose of > my -6A, I can vouch for the effectiveness of a simple little tool depicted in > last years Tri-State Wing Newsletter (contact jamescone@aol to subscribe. > James: where is my first 97 issue?!) Basically the tool is a hardware store > 7/16ths bolt cut off and turned down to a bullet shape to be used as a guide > to align the Barry mounts with the ears on the engine case as the mount bolts > are tapped home. Without this or similar tool the job is most difficult; > with it, one man can do it with ease. Use a shop crane (engine hoist, > "cherry picker") for max flexibility in holding the engine in place while you > work. The first two (upper) bolts go in rather easily without any alignment > tool needed. For the bottom two, the tool will prove its worth! > There are two things underemphasized or omitted in the article which you > should know, however. First, there is a lot of shear on the alignment tool > as it is tapped into the holes by the mounting bolt behind it. A brisk tap > is required to seat the tip of the AN bolt into the bore of the crankcase > mounting ear in one rapid motion as the alignment tool clears the last of the > Barry mount structure. If this is not done quickly, the parts will spring > instantly back to their resting, nonaligned position and your efforts to seat > the bolt will only bugger-up the bolt or the ear. To hold the bolt's nose in > position, it is necessary to relieve the base of the alignment tool in > concave fashion at least 1/16th in. depth, with rather sharp edges, so the > bolt can't wander sideways behind the "bullet" tool. This is essential. A > Dremel tool with rouond burr will work if no lathe is handy. Likewise the > profile shaping can all be done with grindstone and Scotchbrite wheel. Give > it a nice ogive (bullet nose) shape so it won't scratch things up too much. > Secondly, as I learned the hard way, although the tool in the newsletter > is shown alongside a rule indicating a length of almost 3in., it will not > clear the base of the dipstick/oil-fill mounting boss on the lower right side > of the O-320 crankcase unless shortened to a max length of 1-1/2 inches!! > Failure to observe this max length may result in a cracked case or at least > a jammed alignment tool requiring removal of the other three mount bolts to > retrieve it, or careful surgery with a cutoff wheel on a long extension (I > chose the latter and got away with it. You do NOT want to do this.) > At 1-1/2 in. by 7/16th in, the tool looks just like a silver bullet for > a .50 cal Browning machine gun. Very formidable. Just imagine 8 streams of > these things ripping through a Me-109 in the sights of a Thunderbolt at 2500 > fps and you will understand why gun camera footage shows so much exploding > debris! > Hope this helps. Do it right and you won't have to pester your neighbor > or wife to help horse the engine into its mounts :-) > > Bill Boyd > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: engine mounting made easy (well, easier)
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: Mike Kukulski <kukulski(at)highfiber.com>
Re: Listers: having just completed the task of hanging the O-320 on the nose of my -6A, I can vouch for the effectiveness of a simple little tool... _________________ This is not intended to deride another engine mounting method that evidently has proven successful for many others, but examine your situation and determine whether Tony Bingelis' recommended method isn't easier for you. Specifically, first bolt the engine mount to the engine while the engine is in a storage cradle or hanging from the hoist. Then bolt the engine mount to the firewall. I just did this two weeks ago on my RV-4. Engine mount attached by just myself in under one hour with no problems at all. (You align the approximately 10 lb (?) mount to the engine vice the 300+ lb engine to a stationary mount.) A friend (Dan Boudro from this list) happened to stop by and help bolt the mount/engine assembly to the firewall and then install the gear legs (wheels already installed on legs). Lowered the fuselage/engine combo off the hoist onto the wheels. Dan's help was welcome, but the job could easily have been done solo. By the way, the Ordnorff video was also helpful regarding bolt and nut tightening sequence even with this method. Result, engine mounted and airplane on gear in a few hours. Mike Kukulski RV-4 N96MK kukulski(at)highfiber.com Albuquerque, NM ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Building wings - sequence
From: cecilth(at)juno.com (Cecil T Hatfield)
Date: Feb 27, 1997
Russ, I'm ' where you are now, riveting the top skins on both wings at the same time. Also just finished my fuselage jig and ordered that kit. I get it in June. I ordered that backrivet tool, you talk about, for the rivet gun from averys. Great tool supplier by the way. My daughter and I started with me doing the back riveting and her the bucker. I had bad results and am redoing about 50 rivets. I switched to her riveting on the top with the head that has the rubber bumper on it, while I bucked on the bottom. perfect rivets. Two things tho., I used an old rusty huge bucking bar I got at the flymart in Oshkosh last summer for $5 and polished up. The other thing is, that I placed 50% of the rivets in place and covered with a 1" piece of electricians tape. Result, no (none) scratches to the skin. Some of those rivets that I'm removing were because I flattened them to much. I went to the next size rivet. That may be the reason I had a hard time with the Avery tool. However the Avery tool made some marks on the rib too. If I had stuck it out longer I might have gotten the hang of it. But I decided to stop at fifty bad rivets. Ha. I'm going to get the fuselage ready to come out of the jig before I close the wings up. That way I can have tech counselor over to look at both at the same time. Cecil Hatfield Thousand Oaks, California RV-6A =Another question for those who have been there: What tool did you use =on the gun to back-rivet the top skins (assuming you back-riveted =them)? =Aloha, =Russ Werner =Maui Hawaii USA mailto:ru ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RFierb6707(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 27, 1997
Subject: Pneumatic squeezer
Anyone know the names of manufacturers of pneumatic squeezers? Chicago pneumatic is one, any other (cheaper) makers? Rob ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Cleaner
From: ebundy(at)juno.com (Ed Bundy)
Date: Feb 27, 1997
What are some suggestions for cleaning the grime off of the bottom of the fuselage? Thanks, Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 ebundy(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RFlunker(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 27, 1997
Subject: Plastic covering
Hi Everyone, Nothing real serious, but I had some well intentioned help backfire on me, and am hoping someone has an idea. After carefully explaining how I used the sodering gun to remove plastic strips along the rivet lines, and having my friend actually do several long lines, I later asked that he remove the plastic strips from the side skin. Apparently he didn't hear the word strips, or completely forgot what he had done 15 minutes earlier, but you guessed it, he removed all of the protective plastic. Not a serious item I know, but I am wondering if anyone is aware of a self-adhesive plastic that would be useable to reapply? Dick Flunker, RV-6A, Skinning Fuselage - still.. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)navix.net>
Subject: Fuel Lube
Fellow RVers, I would have thought everyone was "lubed" by now, but the orders keep coming in. I just emptied another can so will have to order another one tommorrow. Hopefully, the next can will be here as fast as the last one was. I ran out of 35 mm flim canisters so will have to round some of them up as well. Please be patient and I'll get you covered as soon as I can. (I need a little break so my hands can have time to heal---boy, is that stuff thick!) Thanks, Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner@navix ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.su.OZ.AU>
Subject: Re: Alternative Engines, was Franklin Engines
Dear Henry, It is my experience that Richard Van Grunsven speaks little, carefully and truthfully. I would be inclined to believe the reasons he gives for the engines he recommends. Leo Davies 6A: Trimming canopy. > >On the subject of Van's engine recommendations for engines, >it occurs to me that perhaps the excellent discount Van offers >on Lycomings somehow involves Lycoming being the primary/only >engine "officially recommended". > >Not trying to imply anything underhanded, mind you; it's just >my impression that a lot of distribution agreements work that >way. > >Henry Bibb >RV builder wanna-be > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: Frank Smidler <smidler(at)dcwi.com>
Subject: Re: I hate to admit what I did with my new RV6A yesterday ...
Scott Johnson wrote: > and firewalled my 6A towards this Arrow on a parallel course. I was > pleasantly surprised at how quickly I caught up. Quit making us so jelous, were trying to build airplanes down here. Frank Smidler ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)navix.net>
Subject: Re: Rod End Lubrication
>Should the rod end bearing surfaces be lubricated on the control rods and >flaps ? If they were lubricated , will this collect dirt and lead to more >wear? Tony Partain N17PT RV-4 Tony, A good question. I've wondered the same thing. Several months ago when I was pre-flighting my RV-6, I heard noise that I suspected was rod end noise when I moved my rudder. I gave each bearing a shot of LPS and things got quiet. I would have thought that the lubrication in the bearing would last a long time, especially in an airplane that is always hangered. I think I've seen a tool that is used to lubricate rod end bearings. I'm sure this would be the preferred method but, taking everything apart would be a pain. I guess I'd rather chance a little wear due to the spray method that dis-assemble my airplane. Lubrication does tend to attract dirt but I'm thinking that with the tight clearences that a rod end bearing operates under, maybe this dirt gets swiped off. Lubrication of piano hinges is a different matter. I'm sure we've all seen worn piano hinge on factory ships. By the way, I've read that WD-40 can actually be corrosive and the article recommend CRC, instead. I used LPS 1, I believe. Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)navix.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: William Yamokoski <wiyst1(at)vms.cis.pitt.edu>
Subject: Re: Pneumatic squeezer
Rob, I got my squeezer from Action Air Parts, Inc. It's a little place in Port Huron, Michigan. Offers rebuilt and reconditioned tools. I paid $289.50 for a squeezer with a 2 1/2" yolk and I've loved every minute I get to work with it. The phone number is 810-364-5885. Call and he'll send you a small flyer with some of their tools listed. By the way, I'm just a lowly Glastar builder, but hey....a squeezer's a squeezer, no matter what plane you use it on. I answered this message on the list for the benefit of any lurkers who are wondering about tools. Bill William Yamokoski 4608 Windbrook Dr. Murrysville, PA 15668 wiyst1(at)vms.cis.pitt.edu ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: Bill Benedict <billb(at)europa.com>
Subject: Re: Alternative Engines, was Franklin Engines
> >> On the subject of Van's engine recommendations for engines, >> it occurs to me that perhaps the excellent discount Van offers >> on Lycomings somehow involves Lycoming being the primary/only >> engine "officially recommended". >> >> Not trying to imply anything underhanded, mind you; it's just >> my impression that a lot of distribution agreements work that >> way. >> >> Henry Bibb >> RV builder wanna-be > >I agree with the above statement. I don't believe RV builders would be >getting as good as deal on their new engines if Van's was recommending >anything else. And that's a great deal for the majority of builders. > >I think us "Alternative Engine Guys" are going to be on our own. That's >part of the fun of building experimental aircraft. > >Ernesto Sanchez >RV-6 with Alum Buick V-8 maybe ?? >es12043(at)utech.net Henry and Ernesto, I've watched several postings but gotta put in my $0.02 worth. Van was a Lyc man even before he was offering engines. The fact that we sell Lyc engines has very little to do with his statements about alternative engines just like it has nothing to do with the pricing we get from Lyc. I am confident that all the kit manufacturers get the same price from Lyc. Van's just skims less off the top than the others do. A lot of his feeling are due to the fact that there have been claims that the 'alternative engine' has finally arrived for years, and it is still not here running around with us on the weekends. But I am convinced that it is out there, and it is up to you "alternative engine" types to identify and develop it. Bill Bill N894RV with over 400 hours behind a O-320, Over 1000 RV flying hours. RV-4-180 soon. These opinions are mine and do not necessarily represent the opinions or position of my employer. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 27, 1997
From: Bill Benedict <billb(at)europa.com>
Subject: Re: Missing Parts
> > >> >>Anyone going with capacitance fuel senders? >> >>Regards, >>Jon Ross - RV-80094 Starting on wings... >> >> >Jon, > >Besides your original concern about the longevity of the capacitance >senders, remember that they will be installed through all the bays. >Probably from the outboard top slanting to the inboard rear end for the most >accuracy. That alignment, while possible, won't be that easy. If you are >still planning on flop tubes, the capacitance senders will have to end in >the next to the last bay on the root end. Overall, I found the floats from >Van's to be easy to install. IMHO, if you are planning on installing a fuel >flow/ totalizer, I see no reason to incur the additional expense and trouble >with the capacitance senders. > >Hope this helps. > >Scott Gesele (N506RV- It WILL fly this Spring) Scott, I will add a comment about the fuel totalizer. Of all the instruments Van has put on the airplanes, the fuel monitoring system (Electronics International FP-5) is the one I use the most other than the GPS. On the -8, I use it as a check that I am not too lean. When the totalizer indicates I am out, I am dry. I think it is only off about 0.3 gal on a fill-up of 25 to 30 gallons. At this point, the fuel gauges become a secondary instrument to the fuel flow totalizer. We have one of Matts instruments in one aircraft and set the warning such that it alerts us to switch tanks every 30 minutes on a cross country. If you have $500 to $800 burning a hole in your pocket, a totalizer is the item to buy. Bill Bill N894RV with over 400 hours behind a O-320, Over 1000 RV flying hours. RV-4-180 soon. These opinions are mine and do not necessarily represent the opinions or position of my employer. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JamesCone(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 1997
Subject: Re: engine mounting made easy (well, easier)
I appreciate the plug that Bill Boyd gave to my newsletter and the tool that I invented to help mount the engine. I sent the prototype of the tool to Bob Avery and he has made some up and they are available from him. Call 1-800-652-8379 to order one. I donated this idea to the RV community and do not get any royalties other than the satisfaction that I have helped RV'ers mount their engines easier so that they can join me in the joys of flying their own RV. My prototype is not 3" long, it is only about 1 1/2", as are the ones that Avery sells. In the instruction sheet that comes with the tool, it specifically says that your should tap the alignment tool in place and then just before it goes into the mount, to give it a sharp rap to drive it in with the bolt following. The tool does have to have a concave end where the bolt pushes on the alignment tool so that the bolt can get into the engine mount before the parts try to jump out of alignment. This tool allowed me to get my engine mount bolts into the engine in about 15 minutes, where before I made this, I spent more than 4 hours trying to get the last bolt in without success. Necessity really is the mother of invention. Jim Cone, RV-6A Flying!!! jamescone(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: "Paul Osterman III" <PineRanch(at)msn.com>
Subject: Building wings - sequence
Russ, The order you mentioned, top skin, bottom, leading edge & then fuel tank is how I did it. Seemed to work well. Riveting was LE, top skin, bottom, then (still working) fuel tank work. I had planned on using a 6" section of railroad track for back riveting, and even bought the long bent rivet set Avery's sells that another lister mentioned. Once I read the builder beware note that came with it about possible pitfalls I ended up not back riveting. Instead I used Avery's flush rivet set with the rubber grommet and the long skinny arms of my 13 year old daughter to hold the bucking bar. The first top skin took a little over an hour as I recall, but then we're not really hurrying. Enjoying the building too much. Paul Osterman III RV6A-buidling ailerons and flaps Anderson, CA I am looking for opinions on what to build/drill in what order 1. Outboard leading edge skin 2. Fuel tank 3. Top Skins 4. Bottom Skins I seem to read that 3,4,1,2, is better...Any ideas here? What tool did you use on the gun to back-rivet the top skins (assuming you back-riveted them)? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jerry H. Prado" <jerryprado(at)wa.net>
Subject: Rod End Lubrication
Date: Feb 27, 1997
------ =_NextPart_000_01BC2503.4E95C8E0 If a non corrosive lubricant is used, can a 'boot' of some sort be used = to contain the lubricant and isolate the linkage from abrasive dust and = contamination? =20 Issues: Accessability and maintenance of the boot.=20 Possible boot materials. I'm just starting. Laugh gently if you must.=20 Jerry Prado ------ =_NextPart_000_01BC2503.4E95C8E0 eJ8+IicHAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAQABAAEEkAYAJAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAASQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHJ2LWxpc3RAbWF0cm9u aWNzLmNvbQBTTVRQAHJ2LWxpc3RAbWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbQAAAAAeAAIwAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAA AB4AAzABAAAAFgAAAHJ2LWxpc3RAbWF0cm9uaWNzLmNvbQAAAAMAFQwBAAAAAwD+DwYAAAAeAAEw AQAAABgAAAAncnYtbGlzdEBtYXRyb25pY3MuY29tJwACAQswAQAAABsAAABTTVRQOlJWLUxJU1RA TUFUUk9OSUNTLkNPTQAAAwAAOQAAAAALAEA6AQAAAAIB9g8BAAAABAAAAAAAAAIyNwEEgAEAIQAA AFJFOiBSVi1MaXN0OiBSb2QgRW5kIEx1YnJpY2F0aW9uALQKAQWAAwAOAAAAzQcCABsAFwAJACQA BAA5AQEggAMADgAAAM0HAgAbABcABAAzAAQAQwEBCYABACEAAAAwQ0U5OTQ1NEU1OTBEMDExQkND QjAwMDBDMEFDNEY1NAAkBwEDkAYANAMAABQAAAALACMAAQAAAAMAJgABAAAACwApAAEAAAADAC4A AAAAAAMANgAAAAAAQAA5AMD8NltGJbwBHgBwAAEAAAAhAAAAUkU6IFJWLUxpc3Q6IFJvZCBFbmQg THVicmljYXRpb24AAAAAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAbwlRlsVuVIk4pD1EdC8ywAAwKxPVAAAHgAeDAEA AAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8MAQAAABIAAABqZXJyeXByYWRvQHdhLm5ldAAAAAMABhDLwEMlAwAH EO0AAAAeAAgQAQAAAGUAAABJRkFOT05DT1JST1NJVkVMVUJSSUNBTlRJU1VTRUQsQ0FOQUJPT1RP RlNPTUVTT1JUQkVVU0VEVE9DT05UQUlOVEhFTFVCUklDQU5UQU5ESVNPTEFURVRIRUxJTktBR0VG Uk9NAAAAAAIBCRABAAAAnwEAAJsBAABhAgAATFpGdffQd6f/AAoBDwIVAqQD5AXrAoMAUBMDVAIA Y2gKwHNldO4yBgAGwwKDMgPGBxMCgzIzEw9mNALjAgBwcrJxEiBCYRHAAMBzAoAufQqACM8J2TsX jzI1HjUCgAqBDbELYG5nMXwwMxQgCwoVUQvwFVBjAQBAIElmIGEgbh0CICAFoQNgAJB2ZSB1CkBi BRBjAHAFQAQAIHJ1EfBkLBzwA5EcoCdBBuBvdCcgbxyAc88DcB2AH9AAICBiHYAecnggdG8c8QIw C3Eg4GifHYoAcCDQBAAG8GF0HYDjIaMLgGthZx2AA1IckHcdwBZwHWJkHnAiZCEjbYsLgCMAaQIg PyAgCoXmSQQQClBzOgqFAzABkWkTcGNjB5BzAaADEGl8dHkicwDAC4AjECXgbm8oQB+SIaIfQi4m ZifTUH8dQACQAmAqVCkxIxAHInPWLgqFJnYnJDBqJPIlAA8KwCYAGpAqsExhdWdsaCAj0AIwbCjg BpAgvnkIYCkwJPEqtwqFSgSQynIo4FAkcGRvCoUWsQIAMwAAAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAAAEAABzDA TBSxRSW8AUAACDDATBSxRSW8AR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAAAwANNP03AACPyQ== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BC2503.4E95C8E0-- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV4131rb(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 1997
Subject: Re: Cleaner
Ed, Simple Green works great and wont hurt your paint. Ryan ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: dieck(at)apexcomm.net (Robert Dieck)
Subject: Re: Alternative Engines, was Franklin Engines
>Henry and Ernesto, I've watched several postings but gotta put in my $0.02 >worth. Van was a Lyc man even before he was offering engines. The fact >that we sell Lyc engines has very little to do with his statements about >alternative engines just like it has nothing to do with the pricing we get >from Lyc. I am confident that all the kit manufacturers get the same price >from Lyc. Van's just skims less off the top than the others do. >Bill N894RV with over 400 hours behind a O-320, Over >1000 RV flying hours. RV-4-180 soon. >These opinions are mine and do not necessarily represent the opinions or >position of my employer. Bill, I've been wondering for sometime why it is that there seems to be such a stigma against Continental engines? I've been flying for almost 20 years and never heard the same level of complaints with Lycoming. Perhaps it has something to do with prehistoric engine lore. This doesn't make sense. Mooney for example uses both engines. Bob The Airplane Factory Robert/Tammie Dieck Wausau WI USA dieck(at)dwave.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)magic.ca (J.Ken Hitchmough)
Date: Feb 28, 1997
Subject: Re: control cables, oil pressure fittings
< Second question: Confession--- despite having read NUMEROUS warnings not t= o do this, I installed my engine without first putting the oil-pressure fitti= ng in=21 I've read all the archive data on this subject but am unclear on one= point: Is there any fitting that will allow installation =22as-is=22 witho= ut any disassembly? AN-823? AN-915? Weatherhead 45 deg street elbow? Why all t= he insistence that these fittings be steel or stainless?? < Bill, there was quite a bit of chatter about this some time ago. I too made= the same booboo. My way around it was to buy a right angle brass male pipe to female pipe th= read street fitting. Byjust filing off the corners I was just able to get t= his in without removing engine mounts. A straight flare fitting will now fi= t nicely into this. Another builder, David Fried did the same thing. If I r= ecall, he undid one mount (closest to the fitting) and used a lever to push= it away (David, please correct me if I'm wrong here). I also believe new engines have another hole. Ken RV6A Flying 50 hour inspection this weekend.....yippee it'll be above zero degrees C. This message sent using the FirstClass SMTP/NNTP Gateway for Mac OS. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mlfred(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 1997
Subject: Re: Cleaner
<< What are some suggestions for cleaning the grime off of the bottom of the fuselage? >> Fellas, and ladies: I asked a friend who has cleaned many more a/c than most of us have ever thought we would, except for maybe some of you mil-spec types. WD-40. I tried it, and it's amazing. Even takes the exhaust off, which is what my friend said it would ( that's normally the hardest part to clean). Much better than the Carbon-Tetrochloride my dad had me using when I was little, and didn't know any better... Check six! Mark ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: Alan Carroll <carroll(at)geology.wisc.edu>
Subject: Re: Pneumatic squeezer
I bought a rebult Chicago Pneumatic 3x rivet gun and a Rockwell drill rom AAP and have been very happy with them. Do you know what he charges for a squeezer without a yoke? > >Rob, > I got my squeezer from Action Air Parts, Inc. Alan Carroll RV-8 #80177 (Empenage) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: Dean Spencer <dspencer(at)kiva.net>
Subject: Re: Brake Fluid
Hal Kempthorne wrote: > > > Someone asks: > > >> Can I use automotive brake fluid? > > And a certified A&P answers: > > > MIL-H-5606 is not expensive, will not eat or swell seals, is not > > corrosive, will not remove paint, won't attack your skin, etc. It is > > what your system was designed to use. It works... very well. > > I agree. It *is* an aircraft standard. > > But then the certified A&P says: > > >Why use that automotive junk -some if not most of which has the negative > > properties above? > > I have to ask for evidence that R3 or better automotive brake fluid is junk. OK, so I should have probably said that if you use this stuff in your aircraft, then the seals, etc. will be JUNK. Have fun flushing your system and putting in the 5606 you should have used first. Automotive fluid is GREAT -in automobiles. Incidently, I use automotive gasoline in my low compression aircraft engine (and have for years/hundreds of hours) with better results than 100LL -so I don't necessarily think that if it's aviation quality it's always best for every situation. Go ahead, Flame me! I can take it! Really. Scott N4ZW (the A&P) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RBusick505(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 1997
Subject: Re: Plastic covering
<< Apparently he didn't hear the word strips, or completely forgot what he had done 15 minutes earlier, but you guessed it, he removed all of the protective plastic. Not a serious item I know, but I am wondering if anyone is aware of a self-adhesive plastic that would be useable to reapply? >> Go to KMart and get clear plastic shelf paper, the stuff your wife uses in the kitchen. It is self adhesive and provides great protection. It goes on/off very easily. Before Van started putting on the protective plastic, I did this myself for all my skins. Bob Busick RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: "Larry D. Hoatson" <lhoatson(at)e2.empirenet.com>
Subject: Re: Cleaner
I've been using a solution called BIG ORANGE (Purchased at Smart & Final). It's biodegradeable, made from citrus (and who knows what else), and even smells good. It takes ALL the grease and grime off of anything I've used it on. Runs about $8 a gallon, and a little bit goes a long why. My IA started me on it, as it is non-corrosive. We used it exclusively to bathe 45 years worth of crud out of the belly of the C-170 project. Spray it on, wash it off! Larry -- +++ Larry D. Hoatson Yucaipa, CA Redlands (L12) Airport KC6WYF via packet at: KC6WYF(at)W6JBT.SOCAL.CA.USA.NOAM Restoring 1950 Cessna 170A N9948A Looking forward to RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Flight System Reliability
Aircraft Electrical Systems: a Philosophy for Reliability I have presented numerous forums at Oshkosh, EAA chapter meetings and kit type gatherings around the country on the topic of electri- cal system reliability. This is a prominent issue on most aircraft builder's list of concerns for several reasons: First, the electri- cal system is generally the least understood of all airplane sys- tems. Second, some electrical system components are useful (if not critical) to safe termination of flight during an electrical system failure. I will often begin a presentation with questions to the audience about their own ideas for achieving reliable operation. It's not surprising to find heavy emphasis on quality (cost) of components and workmanship. Nearly every magazine on electrical system fabrica- tion or installation will list tasks to be accomplished or mistakes to be avoided in the interest of producing a reliable installation. Reliability discussions often include matters of cost, convenience, and perceptions founded on incomplete or inaccurate data. For this article to arrive at its intended conclusion, let us agree that a reliable flight system permits comfortable termination of flight (preferably at the intended destination) irrespective of any single failure of a system component. It's easy to visualize a situation where one airplane owner is always doing some kind of work on his airplane but seems to fly where he wants when he wants without mishap. Contrast this with another pilot who suffers maintenance conditions causing repairs off his home base. Worse yet, his problems may precipitate unplanned arrivals with the earth! These airplanes may be identical and experience the same problems. Never-the-less, when compared with the other, one of these aircraft might be perceived very unreliable. I've often asked groups of pilots and builders to prioritize their personal flight system reliability requirements. The first consen- sus is that airframe failures of any type are not tolerable; design goals require an airframe to withstand normal operations with an expectation of zero failures. Airframe systems include structure, skin, gear, flight controls, etc. Second on most everyone's list is the power plant which would include engine, prop, fuel system, ignition, etc. The electrical system usually comes in third. Under electrical systems, people tend to jump on radios as "most desira- ble." Consider please my personal list: I. Airframe (1) Structure (2) Flight Controls (3) Flight Instruments (a) Airspeed (b) Turn Coord. (c) Compass (d) Altimeter (e) Gyros (f) etc. (3) Gear (4) etc. II. Pilot/Builder (1) Skills (2) Knowledge (3) Health III. Power Plant (1) Engine (2) Prop (3) Ignition (4) Fuel System (5) etc. IV. Electrical System (1) Battery (2) Instrument Lights (3) Turn Coordinator (4) Engine Support (boost pumps . . etc.) (5) Nav/ILS/Comm (6) Transponder (optional) (7) Landing Light (8) Alternator (9) Position and Strobe Lights (10) Stereo System Note that I have added the pilot and his/her "subsystems" at II on the list. First, consider that when everything thing else (lower on the list) has gone belly-up, an adequately trained and proficient pilot has an excellent chance of living to tell the grand-children a true life, wing-and-a-prayer survival story! The pilot's tool box must contain knowledge and skills along with a body capable of utilizing them. Note also that electrical systems and components thereof are a distant fourth place on the list. Other items are conspicuous by their absence. Note that engine instrumentation and fuel gauges are not even on the list. I know of no immediate hazard to flight posed by failure of these kinds of devices. I do not imply that electrical systems need not be reliable. I just want to place them in proper perspective with respect to other flight systems. Further, I do emphasize a pilot's very important position as a component in the total flight system. Your personal list may vary from mine as well it should, provided you have a rational basis for development along different lines, unique to your assets. One goal of this article is to suggest tools for development of your own reliability priorities list. Accom- plishment requires knowledge of personal needs and skills combined with an intimate familiarity with your airplane's systems and per- formance envelopes. This, ladies and gentlemen, is what separates us from Pilot John Public who has become bored with scuba diving and decides it would be nice to add flying to his recreational activi- ties. As builder/pilots we are permitted alternate approaches to systems design. Powers-that-be recognize that a majority of Pilot John Public will never be as familiar with their airplanes as you are with yours! The inference to be drawn suggests that our personal flight systems are automatically more reliable. I would say it's true to a point. It's a sure bet that most of us do understand more about airplanes than the general pilot population; after all it's our avocation, perhaps even vocation. Consider that most of us learned to fly in certified, production airplanes. We are not permitted to modify these airplanes, they're accepted as-is. Furthermore, these machines were certified under rules giving Pilot John Public the best possible chances of survival knowing that for some, piloting skills (from the systems viewpoint) will not advance beyond manipulation of levers and knobs. Since most of us learned to fly in the padded-cockpit environment, it is possible that we bring detrimental attitudes with us into amateur-built aviation. For example: existence of a pilot's operat- ing handbook with mandated topics is intended to afford great com- fort as we launch into the blue. By federal decree, everything we must know about that airplane is between covers of the book! If you can recite emergency procedures, performance and weight/balance calculations in your sleep, your spouse and offspring may wave you off wearing broad smiles. These attitudes have been mulched into fertile soil for the plaintiff bar. "Well now, Mr. Cessna, explain to this court and jury why you didn't . . . . ." The most important attribute to be cultivated in amateur built aviation is the ability to think beyond the present in considering all "what-if?" scenarios. Yeah, I know, as students we were all admonished to "stay ahead of the airplane," that's not what I'm talking about. What-if's I am considering relate to pieces and parts of the airplane. For example: when building, modifying or just maintaining any part of your airplane, operate two progressions of thought. The first involves doing a quality job on a task at hand. The second is, "what if this part fails?" Go over the ways in which the part may fail and deduce whether or not any failure presents a hazard to successful termination of flight. Analyze how the failure will manifest itself to the pilot (handling qualities, strange noises, engine roughness, dead radio, etc. etc.) And final- ly, is the failure pre-flight detectable? While designing products for the big guys, I've expended hundreds of hours going over these points. The fancy name for this procedure is Failure Mode Effects Analysis or FMEA for short. If any failure does present a hazard, what is the best means for dealing with it? Re-design may be in order. Example: if the head of a broken screw is likely to drop into an intake manifold, perhaps a nut plate installed to bring the screw in from the other side is in order. If a failure is not pre-flight detectable, is the item is buried too deep to visually inspect or simply not on your check list? Note: Whether you fly factory or home-built airplanes, published check lists are the MINIMUM to meet bureaucratic and/or institutional requirements. Nobody says you cannot EXPAND an existing list to cover items you'd like to peek at before launch time. Let's suppose failure of an item simply makes some component or system inoperative. Can you do without it? If not, what system backs it up? In other words, develop a "plan B" perhaps even "plan C" to back up most needed components and systems. This technique is applicable to all airframe systems but let's get back to the original topic of electrical systems. Referring to the list I gave earlier, let us agree that if the airframe is in good shape, engine is running well, you are skilled, rested and ate your Wheaties this morning, there's no reason for this to become a bad day in the cockpit. Let's examine the electrical system priorities in my earlier list: Numero uno is the battery; your single most reliable source of power (assuming the battery has been properly maintained). Next comes instrument lights. Why lights? Recall the admonition: "Aviate, navigate, then communicate?" "Aviating" at night becomes a jaw breaking chore of aiming a flashlight with your teeth. Therefore, number two on my list is instrument flood lighting. I would choose not to power up a 3-amp string of post lights. Instead, use one or two, 80-milliamp bulbs rigged to flood the panel with basic light- ing. Instrument lights on a C-150 are just that. Not elegant but they work, consume little power and don't make your lower jaw ache. Flashlights are good only for peering into fuel tanks and reading maps! Number three is the turn-coordinator; quite often your only electri- cally driven flight instrument and capable of literally saving your buns (you ARE current in needle, ball and airspeed technique, no?). Fourth, I would support any electrical item needed to keep the engine running such as electronic ignition (if you have one) and fuel boost pump. Putting these devices on the list of "essential" equipment recognizes a remote possibility of double failure . . . an electrical system condition followed by an engine condition. Aha! We finally get to THE radio; not the whole 20 kilo-buck stack of avionics. Remember, we're trying to get home on a power budget with finite limits. It does you little credit to navigate to final approach fix with millimeter precision and have everything go dark over the outer marker! Until favorable outcome of your adventure is assured, don't turn on anything you don't truly NEED. See why a PILOT must included in a systems reliability equation? A better understanding or a little practice may be key to reducing a hazard- ous situation to a challenging inconvenience. The transponder I list as optional. Recall that it is more a serv- ice to ATC than it is to you. It benefits you only if you need ATC assistance in navigating which assumes he isn't tracking you as a primary target. Even then, the transponder doesn't do you any good if you're not talking to the ground and it uses much more energy than your navigation receiver. However, if you do have the power budget, a 7600 or 7700 squawk may get you more elbow room. Landing light is another optional consideration. If you're headed for an unlighted field or you haven't honed your skills for night landings without light, then illuminating a landing light just before you flare is justified (Consider your own personal FMEA, what will you do if the bulb is out?). Next is the alternator because it has to be running if you're going to have any external lights on. [Assume the alternator to be least reliable of all electrical equipment. It handles lots of electrical and mechanical power, it sees extremes of temperature cycles and gets its itty-bitty diodes rattled by being bolted to the engine! What else could we do to it?] Nav lights use more ENERGY than any other system in your airplane including landing lights, electric flaps or landing gear! Six to eight amps continuous drain for the duration of flight. Even a strobe light may draw more than your entire compliment of necessary radios. External lights do not help you get where you are going and have a very low probability of being useful for being seen. If YOU have the problem and YOU are flying "dark", then keep your own eyes peeled for the guy who presently enjoys a luxury of showing external lights! Now that I've outlined one philosophy of electrical essentials. Let's consider the hammer-and-tongs aspects of implementing it. In Figure 1, (see February 93 issue of Sport Aviation or drop 32- cent SASE to address below. I'll be happy to send you a paper copy of the figure.) I show a basic power distribution diagram illustrat- ing the foregoing text. To begin with, if we've done our FMEA exercise, a way is needed to KNOW when the alternator has failed. If no device already exists to give an active warning of alternator failure then consider a low voltage warning light mounted prominent- ly on the panel. Further, this device should be set to illuminate the light very soon after alternator failure; when voltage falls below 13 volts. When the light does come on, you have several options: If comfort- able haven is close by and your battery is a known quantity, then perhaps no special action is needed other than to turn the alterna- tor off to reduce its field circuit load on the battery. It would be wise at this time to dump unnecessary loads but a fairly relaxed activity to get on the ground is appropriate. Most alternators re- quire a battery to be on line for voltage stabilization and noise reduction. If (for a variety of reasons) the battery contactor fails to keep the battery on line, the alternator should be shut down and ordinary load reductions made. In event of either alternator OR battery contactor failure, AND if a desired location for landing is some distance away, make the most of finite energy stored in the battery. Open both BATTERY MASTER & ALTERNATOR switches. Pull the ESSENTIAL BUS PRIMARY FEED breaker and close the ESSENTIAL BUS ALTERNATE FEED breakers. Taking a battery contactor off-line reduces load on the battery by several hundred milliamps (equal to several solid state nav receivers!). Setting the breakers in this manner isolates the essential bus and provides a direct path to the battery. If a voltmeter is part of your electrical instrumentation, it should feed from the essential bus; battery voltage should be monitored during battery only opera- tions. Figure 1 illustrates a number of departures from traditional tech- niques for aircraft power distribution. The most notable variant is the lack of an AVIONICS MASTER, a device who's time has gone by. This (and other features) will be topics for future articles. In the mean time, if you subscribe to the avionics master switch phi- losophy, certainly all avionics may be fed from the essential bus and "protected" by opening the PRIMARY FEED breaker during engine cranking. Just remember, when battery life needs to be maximized, turn OFF everything not truly needed to get you home. All this writing may seem like a long way around to a rather simple concept. I suggest that it's truly simple only if one understands how it is used and useful only if it adequately addresses require- ments established by personal FMEA studies. Primary goals for this article are (1) to encourage builder/pilots to accomplish FMEA studies in light of their equipment and personal skills, (2) relieve pressure to purchase the most expensive components in an effort to improve "reliability", (3) encourage design for failure tolerance (cheap) instead of striving for failure proof (very expensive and nearly impossible). Properly implemented, these techniques will reduce to near zero, probability that any electrical problem will ruin your day. ------------------------------------------------------------- The original article text was uploaded without modification. Since the article was published, conversations and deliberations with other designers and builders have modified the philosophy somewhat. We now believe that the normal feedpath from main bus to essential bus should include a diode that *prevents* the essential bus from backfeeding the main bus. Poor pilot technique during a perceived emergency could result in inadverted overloading of essential bus alternate feed path and leaving one totally in the dark! Given that the original need for avionics master switches disappeard about 15 years ago, the idea of making a solid connection between main bus and essential bus via diode makes sense. Any time the main bus is hot, the essential bus is too. The main bus can be shut down at any time to conserve finite battery energy with zero risk of backfeeding from the essential bus and blowing the altnernate feed protection. Comments and discussion are welcome! Regards, Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ==========oOOo=(_)=oOOo========== | Nuckolls' first law of air- | | craft systems design and fab-| | rication: "Things break!" | ================================= 72770.552(at)compuserve.com http://www.aeroelectric.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)magic.ca (J.Ken Hitchmough)
Date: Feb 28, 1997
Subject: NARCO AT 150 Transponder
Hi listers, Not being able to get a Terra in time, I'm obtaining a used Narco that come= s sans manual....so.... Does anyone have a Narco AT150 manual that they would be willing to copy fo= r me. I'd be happy to pay copying and mail costs? Thanks Ken RV6A Flying This message sent using the FirstClass SMTP/NNTP Gateway for Mac OS. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: Re: Cleaner
> Ed, Simple Green works great and wont hurt your paint. > Ryan For light cleaning simple green works well, but when it comes to heavy grime on the bottom of the plane, I've found that it only works so-so. When you put it on it cuts the grime where it first hits, but once you try to wipe it off, especially with water on the rag, it will lose strength quickly and tend to do as much smearing as cleaning. Also if it's warm out it will dry faster than you can clean it (and the grime) off. The A&Ps I've worked with just used some kind of solvent, such as mineral spirits. I don't know if that's so good for the paint but that's what I've seen used (and used myself). Randall Henderson ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Cleaner
Date: Feb 28, 1997
If it has Citric acid then it is somewhat corrosive. Herman > Final). It's biodegradeable, made from citrus (and who knows what > else), and even smells good. It takes ALL the grease and grime off of > anything I've used it on. Runs about $8 a gallon, and a little bit goes > a long why. My IA started me on it, as it is non-corrosive. We used it > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: J.Ken_Hitchmough(at)magic.ca (J.Ken Hitchmough)
Date: Feb 28, 1997
Subject: Re: Plastic covering
Gee, things have sure changed. I don't recall ANY of my skins having a plas= tic film on them. They turned out ok just the same. Ken RV6A Flying SNIP> Not a serious item I know, but I am wondering if anyone is aware of a self= -adhesive plastic that would be useable to reapply? < This message sent using the FirstClass SMTP/NNTP Gateway for Mac OS. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Shelby1138(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 1997
Subject: Re: Alternative Engines - Diesels
I am curious/interested in all the new diesels. Continental, Lycoming, Aerospeciale/Renault all have announced plans to offerr these. They run on Jet A, have fewer electronics, and are more fuel efficient. I have had great experience with auto diesels(Peugeot & Mercedes) and so am very receptive to the potential of these new powerplants. I remember when Mercedes came out with their 5 cylinder diesel in 1975. It raised a lot of eyebrows at the time, but became legendary for its durability and long term economy. The Renault is supposedly to have a 3000 hour TBO. Shelby In Nashville. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BARNES_ERIC(at)tandem.com
Date: Feb 28, 1997
Subject: Re: Pnuematic Squeezer - Action Air Parts, Inc.
Well, including me and two other 'listers, that makes 5 that are happy with Action Air P. Squeezers (mine's a rebuilt Chicago imitation, built in So. Cal., and works just great). I got mine with 1-1/2" yoke for $249 from AAP. Between myself and 2 -6 builders, we have a no-hole yoke, a 4", and a 2-1/2" longeron yoke to lend each other. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Feb 28, 1997
Subject: More on Governors
I took Dave Barnhart's advice and contacted Warner Propeller in Tucson. Here's what Dennis Warner told me about governors: He can provide an overhauled McCauley D2 governor for about $500. The D2 is no longer manufactured, but most of the parts for it are available. The head, pump cover, and housing are difficult to find, so if one breaks you can probably say goodbye to your governor. McCauley governors are not made from hardened steel, so Dennis thinks they should be overhauled no later than 1800 hours. Dennis considers the Woodward governor from Van's to be a very good deal. He says the Woodward governor is the best governor made. The parts are hardened steel, and should easily last 3000 hours. He's taken apart a 4000+ hour Woodward and found virtually no wear. Woodward doesn't offer parts price breaks to dealers, so field overhaulers aren't too enamored of Woodward. Furthermore, Woodward is well known for issuing service bulletins requiring parts replacement at overhaul, even if the part is different only because Woodward changed their manufacturing process and modified the part a bit for ease of manufacturing. This can mean more expense for the owner IF he/she needs a yellow tagged governor. Warner Propeller is at 520-294-4671. Tim --------------------- Tim Lewis RV-6AQ #60023 timrv6a(at)earthlink.net ----------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: "Joe C. Marshall III" <doufly(at)apex.net>
Subject: various
first of all... as a proffesional pilot (ATP, 10 years an 6000 hrs experience) who is currently working toward his A&P certificate, WHY on earth would anyone want to do somthing in, or to an airplane, just because it is CHEAPER? The amount of money saved by automotive parts, fluids, or powerplants is so inconsequential to the grand scheme. I am interested in building an airplane because I want something better, not worse than what I can get from Witchita. I have yet to see any of these alternative powerplants that I would trust my family's, my passenger's, or my own life with! Next, (and last).... as a newcomer to the wonderful world of RV's, What is a Phlogistone (sp?) spar? Thanks! Joe Marshall, ATP C-421 N918WK Dreaming of a RV-8 with a 200 hp Lycoming! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: Don Mack <donmack(at)flash.net>
Subject: F619 Floor Ribs
------------61B92BDA22920 I am working on the 6A floor ribs. Question: The plans call for only the F619L to be split. George O. video splits both. Do both need to be split? For those lucky ones out there with a completed plane and only the left split, how hard is it to get the spar plates in if only the left is split? Don Mack RV-6A donmack(at)flash.net http://www.flash.net/~donmack/ ------------61B92BDA22920
I am working on the 6A floor ribs.

Question:
   The plans call for only the F619L to be split.
   George O. video splits both.
 
    Do both need to be split? 
    For those lucky ones out there with a completed plane and only the left split,
    how hard is it to get the spar plates in if only the left is split?
 
Don Mack
RV-6A
donmack(at)flash.net 
http://www.flash.net/~donmack/>  
------------61B92BDA22920-- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: Scott Johnson <rvgasj(at)popmail.mcs.net>
Subject: Advice needed on gear fairings, tires, primer lines, wheel
fairings Well I've got 15 hours on N345RV (RV6A) and its running great. Now for some jobs I have been putting off. Question 1: Does anybody have a method to put the gear fairing on a 6A without having to take it off the main gear. I am very hesitant about lifting a great working plane up in the air 2 feet and putting it back on it jig to rig the fairings. The plane is fairly heavy at 1106 pounds and I would rather not do it if at all possible. If I must put it back on the jig, can I lift the entire plane by placing a lift hook between the top two dynafocal engine mounts ( with someone holding the tail ) and lift the entire plane. Has anybody done this? Question 2: Does anybody have an idea how to make a jack so that I can take a wheel off the main. Will I have to take the gear leg fairing off to use it ? Question 3: I would like to change my primer lines to copper with the nipple fitting that have very tiny holes. I had used regular AN fittings with aluminum and it just doesn't work that well (AN fitting hole is to big, no fuel atomization, and uneven priming occurs due to different primer line lengths to cylinders and not enough back pressure from the fitting). It does not allow me to start the engine at 20 degrees F. The question I have is: can you flair the copper tubing with an aircraft flair where it connects to the electric primer switch with a regular AN aluminum fitting. Because they are different metals, will it corrode fast ? Somehow the copper tubing has to connect to the aluminum fuel line. How did you do it ? Question 4: I wonder if its really worth putting the wheel pants on because I will be in and out of fields that may be bouncy and a little muddy. VANS plans say you will lose 4 MPH without the pants, and I could care less about that. But the plans say you will lose 8 MPH without the gear fairings and that to me is more significant. Can anybody tell me what they found with and without fairings and if the wheel pants might not be a great idea on rough, somewhat muddy grass fields ( or snowy taxiways ). Thanks to all who respond -- I'm looking forward to fine tuning this incredible machine. Only 25 more hours and the FEDS release me from my large 25 mile test area ! USA watchout ... Scott Johnson / Chicago rvgasj(at)mcs.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: chester razer <crazer(at)egyptian.net>
Subject: KT76C
check out the king KT76C transponder:
http://www.Bay-Avionics.com/ -- Chet Razer crazer(at)egyptian.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JamesCone(at)aol.com
Date: Feb 28, 1997
Subject: Re: Cleaner
Top Job is one of the best cleaners around. There is almost nothing that it won't clean. Grease and oil just disolve when using this stuff. It is available at Wal Mart and other variety stores. Jim Cone, RV-6A Flying!!! jamescone(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: jorear(at)mrnet.com
Date: Feb 28, 1997
Subject: Re: Plastic covering
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: RCB <snaproll(at)rmi.net>
Subject: Re: Franklin Engines
> I am also extremely interested in the Franklin option for the RV-8. I > suggest that all interested parties let Van know of our interest. If > enough interest is expressed maybe he will develope a Franklin option. > > Kevin Horton > future RV-8 builder (lurking and gathering info, tools, etc) > khorton(at)cyberus.ca > Engineering Test Pilot > Transport Canada > Ottawa, Canada I too have been following this thread with a great deal of interest. I would like to know more about the Franklin and I think it would be interesting if there was a mount for it. A fellow stopped by my hangar last summer and showed me some info on the Franklin. The first thing I noticed was that, being a 6 cyl, it was a few inches longer than the Lycoming. I lost interest pretty quick because I didn't want to get into any re-designing. Building is challenging enough for me. IMHO the Continental is the same scenario. Roy Burkhead 80096 Wing should be shipped in March. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: Edward Cole <emcole(at)concentric.net>
Subject: Re: Pnuematic Squeezer - Action Air Parts, Inc.
tandem.com!BARNES_ERIC(at)matronics.com wrote: > > > Well, including me and two other 'listers, that makes 5 that are happy > with Action Air P. Squeezers (mine's a rebuilt Chicago imitation, built > in So. Cal., and works just great). I got mine with 1-1/2" yoke for > $249 from AAP. Between myself and 2 -6 builders, we have a no-hole > yoke, a 4", and a 2-1/2" longeron yoke to lend each other. I also bought a pneumatic squeezer from Action Air Parts for $250. It was reconditioned very nicely and works great! Ed Cole RV6A Wings ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Feb 28, 1997
From: Bill Benedict <billb(at)europa.com>
Subject: Re: Alternative Engines, was Franklin Engines
>Bill, I've been wondering for sometime why it is that there seems to be such >a stigma against Continental engines? I've been flying for almost 20 years >and never heard the same level of complaints with Lycoming. Perhaps it has >something to do with prehistoric engine lore. This doesn't make sense. >Mooney for example uses both engines. > >Bob > >The Airplane Factory >Robert/Tammie Dieck >Wausau WI USA >dieck(at)dwave.net Van got started with Lyc's using GPU's that had been converted. These were relatively inexpensive units and would allow you to get in the air for little money. As the business grew, the Lyc was the engine he was most familiar with. He stated once that Lyc's were the most abundant engine in those days for homebuilders to acquire, since many were used on the light twins, and they whould often be switched out at TBO rather than rebuilt. I have two Continentals and tops on these engines are not unusual at annual time, whereas the Lyc seems to make it through to almost TBO with seldom needing to be opened up. Bill Bill N894RV with over 400 hours behind a O-320, Over 1000 RV flying hours. RV-4-180 soon. These opinions are mine and do not necessarily represent the opinions or position of my employer. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 1997
From: bbland(at)busprod.com (Brian Bland)
Subject: Re: various
Joe C. Marshall III wrote: > > as a newcomer to the wonderful world of RV's, What is a Phlogistone > (sp?) spar? > Phlogiston Products, Inc will preassemble the RV-4/RV-6/RV-6A/RV-8 spar. The last price of the labor that I got was $765. This option will reduce your building time and give you a very high quality wing spar. Phlogiston Products, Inc. P.O. Box 9, Gaston, OR 97119 (503) 985-3212 Brian Bland Dreaming of RV-6A ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 1997
From: Charlie & Tupper England <england(at)vicksburg.com>
Subject: Re: Cleaner
><< What are some suggestions for cleaning the grime off of the bottom of the > fuselage? >> >WD-40. > >I tried it, and it's amazing. Even takes the exhaust off, which is what my I can't verify the story, but an older friend of mine recently told me that decades ago someone who maintained bank vaults, etc. gave him some WD40 (it wasn't on the market yet), & told him it was a great cleaner which they used to clean & shine the exposed surfaces of vaults. Supposedly, the lubricating properties were an unexpected bonus which later resulted in it being marketed to the public. Charlie RV-4 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 1997
From: Frank Smidler <smidler(at)dcwi.com>
Subject: Re: F619 Floor Ribs
Don Mack wrote: > > I am working on the 6A floor ribs. > > Question: > The plans call for only the F619L to be split. > George O. video splits both. > > Do both need to be split? > For those lucky ones out there with a completed plane and only the > left split, > how hard is it to get the spar plates in if only the left is > split? Don, I split only the left rib. You can get the controls in with only a little effort but it would be much easier if both were split. If I were to do it over I'd spend the little extra time and split both. Frank Smidler RV-6, Ready to install canopy ________________________________________________________________________________
From: mikel(at)dimensional.com
Date: Mar 01, 1997
Subject: Re: Cleaner
Cleaner: Dow makes a spray-on cleaner called Scrubbing Bubbles (who ARE these guys that think of these names) which is a bathroom cleaner that seems to work well on underbellies. It goes through wax and everything so rewaxing the bottom will help keep the mess easier to remove in the first place. Michael RV-4 232 SQ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michael Angiulo <mikeang(at)MICROSOFT.com>
Subject: Pro Seal
Date: Mar 01, 1997
I was reading the Aircraft Spruce catalog and they claim to have a Pro-Seal equivalent that comes in tubes and can be dispensed through a gun. Has anyone used this or know if it is as good as the stuff Van's sells? Looks like it would be a lot easier to mix and apply. Also AS&S sells Stitts Epoxy primer so I bought some to try it. The can says that you need to use "E-500 Epoxy Reducer" to clean the gun and that MEK won't do it completely. I can't find E-500 Epoxy reducer anywhere. Is that just a Stitts attempt to sell another jar of something? I don't want to ruin my gun testing that theory though. Suggestions? Thanks, -Mike ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: F619 Floor Ribs
From: ebundy(at)juno.com (Ed Bundy)
Date: Mar 01, 1997
> The plans call for only the F619L to be split. > George O. video splits both. > how hard is it to get the spar plates in if only the left is >split? Hi Don. It does make things a little bit trickier. When it comes time to install the splice plates you will need to enlarge some of the holes in the F619's here and there to get them in. You just need to be careful and do it a little at a time. It probably ended up taking the same amount of time to get the plates in that way as it would have to make two split 619's, but my kit didn't have enough of the splice plate to do two, and I didn't want to add the extra weight if I didn't have to. It isn't a LOT of weight, but a little here and a little there adds up quickly. Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 ebundy(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Advice needed on gear fairings, tires, primer
lines, wheel fairings
From: ebundy(at)juno.com (Ed Bundy)
Date: Mar 01, 1997
>Does anybody have a method to put the gear fairing on a 6A without >having to take it off the main gear. I am very hesitant about lifting a great >working plane up in the air 2 feet and putting it back on it jig to rig the I've just finished doing all of the things you mentioned. With 60 hours on the airplane I figured it was time to start cleaning it up.. :) I didn't like the idea of lifting the airframe either. So I jacked up one side (a floor jack with a round concave "lift area" under the wing tie down works great) to see just how (and how much) the gear leg changes attitude when weight is off of the leg. My opinion is that the flex is not very great, and most of the attitude change is side-to-side rather than rotational. i.e.: the aerodynamic attitude of the fairing is virtually unchanged with weight on or off of the gear. So I just mounted the fairings with the airplane sitting on the ground. >Does anybody have an idea how to make a jack so that I can take a >wheel off the main. Will I have to take the gear leg fairing off to use it ? I stacked 2 steel reinforced milk crates (mouth down) with a small sheet of 1" plywood across the top, then put the aforementioned floor jack on top of that. I REALLY recommend using a jack that has a "cup" shaped lifting area rather than a flat top for obvious reasons. >I would like to change my primer lines to copper with the nipple fitting >that have very tiny holes. I had used regular AN fittings with aluminum > and it just doesn't work that well (AN fitting hole is to big, no fuel > It does not allow me to start the engine at 20 degrees F. I used the AN fittings too, and had the same problems. However, I've found that giving 2-3 shots of accelerator pump while cranking will start the engine very easily. BTW, you should NEVER start your engine at 20 degrees if you can avoid it. Pre-heating will not only make starting easier, it will spare a LOT of wear on your engine. >more significant. Can anybody tell me what they found with and without >fairings and if the wheel pants might not be a great idea on rough, >somewhat muddy grass fields ( or snowy taxiways ). I put the 3 wheel fairings on first, and picked up about 3mph. With the main gear fairings on it went up about 5 more. I don't know if this is exclusive, or if they somehow work together. I haven't yet installed the nose gear fairing or the intersection fairings yet. (I HATE fiberglass) I'm not planning on doing a lot of rough field work, but the fairings on the factory airplanes don't seem to mind the grass strip at Van's. The fairings seem to be very solid, and you can cut the wheel openings larger if you think dirt or snow might be a problem. >Only 25 more hours and the FEDS release me from my large 25 mile test >area ! I was able to weasel a 40 mile test area and IT wasn't anywhere near big enough. I think 100 would be more appropriate. :) Ed Bundy RV6A N427EM first flight 11/20/96 ebundy(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 1997
From: Jack Gageby <aj752(at)lafn.org>
Subject: Re: Pro Seal
Michael Angiulo wrote: > > > I was reading the Aircraft Spruce catalog and they claim to have a Pro-Seal > equivalent that comes in tubes and can be dispensed through a gun. Has > anyone used this or know if it is as good as the stuff Van's sells? Looks I used the 2.5 oz size (Kit A P/N 0938500) last week. It is enough to install one baffle plate on a fuel tanks. It is easy and quick to mix; no measurement of components required. It fits in a standard caulking "gun" you can get at any hardware store. It is more expensive than buying the stuff from Vans and mixing it your self. Jack Gageby RV4 tanks done....putting skins on both wings. Anyone building an RV4 within 25 miles of Simi Valley, Ca? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 1997
From: Jack Gageby <aj752(at)lafn.org>
Subject: Re: Pro Seal
Michael Angiulo wrote: > > > Also AS&S sells Stitts Epoxy primer so I bought some to try it. The can > says that you need to use "E-500 Epoxy Reducer" to clean the gun and that > MEK won't do it completely. I can't find E-500 Epoxy reducer anywhere. Is > that just a Stitts attempt to sell another jar of something? I don't want > to ruin my gun testing that theory though. Suggests> Thanks, > -Mike Mike...I use the SYSTEM THREE epoxy primer. It thins and cleans with water and/or alcohol. Seems to give a good "hard shell" coating. I repare al parts by scuffing surface to be painted with scotch brite pad and cleaning with MEK. I keep plastic squeeze bottles with the 2 System Three epoxy primer components to make it easy to mix small quantities to shoot with touch-up gun or air brush. System Three is at 800-333-5514 (also in ACS catalog) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 1997
From: John Top <jjtop(at)cts.com>
Subject: GLASTARNET: Sun 'n Fun Price increases
A recent posting from the GlaStar net that is probably of interest to more than 1 RVer >From: "Sid & Mari Lloyd" <sidl(at)insync.net> >In case you haven't heard, Sun 'n Fun is increasing prices dramatically. >A week pass is $70 for non-members, $60 for members. However, there >will no longer be family discounts. The spouse will have to pay full fare. > >There will still be discounts for kids. > >The other major change is in camping. $60 for the week, no refunds. Even >if you only stay one night! > >Ouch! > >You can let your feelings be known about this by contacting them at > >Sun 'n Fun EAA Fly-In >P.O. Box 6750 >Lakeland, FL 33807 > >Tel: 941-644-2431 >Fax: 941-644-9737 > >or linking to http://www.sun-n-fun.com/info.html and using their email >form. > >Sid > John Top Phone: (619) 549-3556 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 1997
From: bcon(at)ix.netcom.com (Robert M. Cornacchia )
Subject: Re: NARCO AT 150 Transponder
You wrote: > Hitchmough) > >Hi listers, > > >Not being able to get a Terra in time, I'm obtaining a used Narco that come= >s sans manual....so.... > >Does anyone have a Narco AT150 manual that they would be willing to copy fo= >r me. I'd be happy to pay copying and mail costs? > > > >Thanks > > >Ken > >RV6A Flying > > > >This message sent using the FirstClass SMTP/NNTP Gateway for Mac OS. > > > Hi Ken, I have a Narco AT 150 installation manual that I could copy for you. e-mail me. bcon(at)ix.netcom.com Bob Cornacchia RV6 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mlfred(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 01, 1997
Subject: Re: Pro Seal
<< I was reading the Aircraft Spruce catalog and they claim to have a Pro-Seal equivalent that comes in tubes and can be dispensed through a gun. Has anyone used this or know if it is as good as the stuff Van's sells? Looks like it would be a lot easier to mix and apply. Man, you got that right. I've got one of those guns, and buy the sealant in the tubes. It's a LOT faster (important when you work by the job, not the hour), and a lot more civilized. Several companies sell the tubes, and I'd recommend the B-4 (4 hour setup). Also AS&S sells Stitts Epoxy primer so I bought some to try it. The can says that you need to use "E-500 Epoxy Reducer" to clean the gun and that MEK won't do it completely. I can't find E-500 Epoxy reducer anywhere. Is that just a Stitts attempt to sell another jar of something? I don't want to ruin my gun testing that theory though. Suggestions? Use U.S.Paints epoxy (mil-spec), clean up with laquer thinner. Search the archives for more primer stuff. Check six! Mark ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 01, 1997
Subject: Re: Pro Seal
<< Also ACS sells Stits Epoxy primer so I bought some to try it. The can says that you need to use "E-500 Epoxy Reducer" to clean the gun and that MEK won't do it completely. I can't find E-500 Epoxy reducer anywhere. Is that just a Stitts attempt to sell another jar of something? I don't want to ruin my gun testing that theory though. Suggestions? >> Mike- ACS used to sell the E-500. I think the Polyfiber (formerly Stits) guys are on the net but I don't know the URL. Try a search. The MEK will clean the gun fine but don't use it to reduce the material for spraying. I remember that the mixed material was quite viscous and sprayed better with a little reduction with only E-500 after the induction period. I use this for all my steel parts. Top coat within 48 hours and you don't have to sand. The green Stits Strontium Chromate primer goes on better than the yellow. I think they also have an off-white but I haven't used it. Gary VanRemortel vanremog(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 1997
From: chester razer <crazer(at)egyptian.net>
Subject: Exp-BUS DC Load Center
I saw this item advertised at the top of page 124 of the March issue of Sport Aviation. Since I'm beginning to think about wiring my 6A it was of interest. I checked it out at the following web site: http://www.controlvision.com/page20.htm If anyone is using one in their aircraft or has knowledge of the item would you please comment on it. -- Chet Razer crazer(at)egyptian.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: SportAV8R(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 01, 1997
Subject: Re: control cables, oil pressure fittings
> My way around it was to buy a right angle brass male pipe to female pipe > thread street fitting. Byjust filing off the corners I was just able to get > this in without removing engine mounts. A straight flare fitting will now fit > nicely into this. Another builder, David Fried did the same thing. If I > recall, he undid one mount (closest to the fitting) and used a lever to push > it away I have tried the hardware-store variety street fitting and it ain't gonna go without doing at least what David did with a pry bar. My quandry is wondering how far to go with the search for the "right" fitting since it seems I have to unbolt the mounts, or at least one of them, anyway... May as well do it right if I have to redo it. Why the stainless steel fittings, guys? Have the brass and aluminum ones been breaking off? Bill Boyd ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 1997
From: Dave Barnhart <barnhart(at)a.crl.com>
Subject: Re: Alternative Engines, was Franklin Engines
>I've been wondering for sometime why it is that there seems to be such >a stigma against Continental engines? It's not stigma, it's emperical data. Some examples: 1. An FBO near here flys both Continental- and Lycoming-equippped aircraft. They keep entire spare sets of Continental cylinders on the shelf, but not even one single Lycoming cylinder. 2. Caphart (sp) (an engine overhauler in Mena, Arkansas) specializes in the big Continentals. He specializes in modifications and machining that increase reliability and smoothness. When asked why he does not also do this for big Lycomings, he replied that the Lycs don't need it. 3. I have service bulletin subscriptions from both Continental and Lycoming. I see a lot more 'we screwed up' SB's from COntinental than I do from Lycoming. Continental *does* make some good engines, though. The -470 and IO550 are pretty darn good engines. I'd take either one any day. I know of no aircraft engine with a stronger more reliable bottom end than the 470. If Cessna had but a pair of O-470's on the Skymaster instead of those stinking Continental IO360's, they would have had one hell of an airplane. (On the other hand, the IO346, which was 2/3 of an IO520, was also a darned good engine). Best Regards, Dave Barnhart rv-6 sn 23744 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 1997
From: Dave Barnhart <barnhart(at)a.crl.com>
Subject: Bragging
I'd like to brag about what I did today: I landed an RV-6 for the first time. My good friend, Richard DeWitt, owner of RV6 N106RJ allowed me to fly his RV-6 left seat to the Antique Aircraft Association FLy-In at Casa Grande, AZ today. Granted, I have about 40 recent hours of tailwheel time (Aeronca CHamp and Cessna 120), but landing the RV-6 was a piece of cake. It was a beautiful morning too: smooth as glass with visibility that must have been a hundred miles. No back to building so that next year we can take MY RV-6 instead. Best Regards, Dave Barnhart rv-6 sn 23744 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michael Angiulo <mikeang(at)MICROSOFT.com>
Subject: Bragging
Date: Mar 01, 1997
Speaking of this, what is the general consensus of what kind of recent and total experience it takes to fly one of these? Since I spend most of my free time building I'm sure that if I don't plan to have a set # of total, high performance, and tailwheel hours by the time my plane is ready I'll have close to none. I know that the more experience the better, but what do most people seem to think is adequate for taking (perhaps not the very first ) flights in an RV8, 6 or 4? I have a funny feeling that 100 total, 6 in tailwheel isn't quite going to cut it :-) You can reply just to me if you want. I'll compile the suggested average. Thanks, -Mike Pondering the wingwalk reinforcement mikeang(at)microsoft.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 01, 1997
From: David Price <dwprice(at)webspan.net>
Subject: Re: Exp-BUS DC Load Center
chester razer wrote: > I saw this item advertised at the top of page 124 of the March issue of Thanks I think if that unit can hold up to all the vibration it can save alot of panel space,and if it can I'm shure alot of RV'rs wish they had gone with it.I wonder what the optional panel looks like?????? ( With the optional indicator module, the ExpBUS also provides an ammeter, adjustable panel lighting output, as well as high and low voltage warning lights, and an indicator bank to show the status of the individual outputs.) David Price(soon RV-4 start) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JamesCone(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 02, 1997
Subject: Re: Advice needed on gear fairings, tires, primer lines, wheel
fairings I took a 2" pipe cap and drilled a hole in the center of it. I then used JB Weld and secured a bolt in it with the threads comming out the end of the cap. I put some padding on the end of the cap around the bolt. This then screws into the tiedown fixture in the wing. I then use a long ram jack mounted on a board so that it is stable to lift one wing at a time to change tires, etc. The end of the ram fits into the pipe cap so that it won't slip off the jack. Total cost of this setup was about $35.00. This works great. Jim Cone jamescone(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JamesCone(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 02, 1997
Subject: Re: Bragging
I strongly recommend that you take the Mike Seager checkout course in the RV-6. Mike is really good and is easy to work with. Even a three turn spin to the left, (the fast way), with the nose pointed straight down didn't faze him. He will check you out and you will be confident from the first flight. I flew with Mike for about four hours and at the end of that time I felt in total control of the plane. I could spot land and stop easliy in less than 1000 ft. Mike will be giving checkouts in the St. Louis area from March 31st to April 2nd. Mike will be my guest during that time so you can call me to set up a time and I will put you on the list. I have 22 checkouts scheduled and several demo rides. I hope to have my test time flown off so that I can give demo rides as well. Mike will also be giving rides in other areas on his way to Sun-N-Fun. Call Van's to find out about other possibilities. Jim Cone (314) 928-8703 RV-6A flying!!! jamescone(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV4131rb(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 02, 1997
Subject: Re: Cleaner
Randal I think your watering it down to much. If anyone has experience with oil on the belly of their airplane its me. When I first started flying I might as well have been flying behind an old round engine. I was dumping a horendous amount of oil. any way the simple green has always worked well I mix a little stronger than recomended. Ryan ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Paul Quick" <paulq(at)global.co.za>
Subject: Fw: subscribe
Date: Mar 02, 1997
---------- > From: Paul Quick <paulq(at)global.co.za> > To: rv_list(at)matronics.com > Subject: subscribe > Date: Sunday, March 02, 1997 9:10 AM > > would really like imfo on fuse construction rv4 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave and/or Diane Irwin" <dirwin(at)ibm.net>
Subject: RV-6A F632/F632B
Date: Mar 02, 1997
Can someone tell me what the .032 spacer that fits between the F632B angle and F606 is supposed to do and what it's dimensions are? Plans say that it is 4 inches - assume this is 4 inches wide and 1 inch long to fit on top of the F632B angle(?). My F606 has an indent at top-dead-centre on the flange and the F632B and the spacer will hit up against it. Where does the F632B and it's spacer go in relation to this indent (which is about 1 inch wide)? Dave Irwin dirwin(at)ibm.net RV-6A 22607 Grumman AA-1B ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: Glenn & Judi <flyers@anet-chi.com>
Subject: fuel injection
Is anyone out there building or flying an RV with fuel injection on it? I want to put fuel injection on my RV and am in need of advice. Thanks, Glenn Gordon flyers@anet-chi.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: Glenn & Judi <flyers@anet-chi.com>
Subject: Powder Coating
Hi, I would like to hear from people who have used powder coating on parts of their RV, ie. rudder pedals, instrument panel, etc. Are there any places that powerder coating shouldn't be used? Thanks in advance, Glenn Gordon flyers@anet-chi.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Cafgef(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 02, 1997
Subject: Re: F619 Floor Ribs
<< Question: The plans call for only the F619L to be split. George O. video splits both. Do both need to be split? For those lucky ones out there with a completed plane and only the left split, how hard is it to get the spar plates in if only the left is split? >> I'm curious. What happens if you don't split any of them. I put my plates in before I rivited things together. They seem to fit OK. Am I overlooking something? Gene cafgef(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Cafgef(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 02, 1997
Subject: Re: Cleaner
<< If it has Citric acid then it is somewhat corrosive. Herman > Final). It's biodegradeable, made from citrus (and who knows what > else), and even smells good. >> The electronics industry has looked into using citrus oil solvents as a substitute for freon solvents. Some of them are very good, no acid, rinse off with no residual film and do not cause any corrosion problems if used correctly. There is a great variety of citrus oil products out there and some of them are junk. There was a great rush to get a substitute for freon and lots af stuff came onto the market. The easiest way to determine if there is much of a corrosion problem with the citrus solvent is to check its pH. You can get some pH paper at a swiming pool supply house, high school chemistry class,or maybe a drug store. You might have to call around. Another way is to clamp some solvent between a couple of pieces of aluminum and let it set for a couple of weeks, then examine the aluminum for corrosion. The good stuff is used as follows: Apply solvent Water is used as the rinse Dry thoughly Gene Francis cafgef(at)aol.com fitting all that stuff in the frount end together, waiting for warmer temperatures to do the canopy ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: chinkley(at)ix.netcom.com (Curtis R. Hinkley)
Subject: Re: Pro Seal
Mike, Most home or paint stores carry the Parks line of thinners, Parks #2213 Epoxy & Lacquer Thinner will cut any Epoxy primer. Just remember to clean up as soon as you stop spraying. I would also discourage the use of MEK, the above thinner will work just as well without the hazards associated with MEK. Curtis Hinkley RV8 chinkley(at)ix.netcom.com You wrote: > > >I was reading the Aircraft Spruce catalog and they claim to have a Pro-Seal equivalent that comes in tubes and can be dispensed through a gun. Has anyone used this or know if it is as good as the stuff Van's sells? Looks like it would be a lot easier to mix and apply. > >Also AS&S sells Stitts Epoxy primer so I bought some to try it. The can says that you need to use "E-500 Epoxy Reducer" to clean the gun and that MEK won't do it completely. I can't find E-500 Epoxy reducer anywhere. Is that just a Stitts attempt to sell another jar of something? I don't want to ruin my gun testing that theory though. Suggestions? > >Thanks, >-Mike ________________________________________________________________________________
From: j.henley(at)worldnet.att.net
Subject: Wag-Aero Nav/Com
Date: Mar 02, 1997
Is anyone using or have experience with the Wag-Aero ICS Nav/Com radio? This looks, from their catalog, to be an excellent unit to put in an RV with glideslope and 2 place intercom included for $1450. It even has built in CDI and GS indicators. John Henley (j.henley(at)worldnet.att.net) RV6 standing on it's own legs . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <72770.552(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Turn coordinator noise . .
>Hi, > I am working on my instrument panel and today I >noticed that when I power up my turn coordinator it >generates a significant amount of radio noise. The radio >is a handheld Icom ic-a20 that I purchased six or seven >years ago. Is this normal? Do I have a bad turn coordinator? >Should I use shielded wire for the power hookups? > Cheryl Sanchez >>I also had a significant amount of noise generated by the turn >>coordinator. I placed a .1uF, 50VDC, ceramic disk capacitor >>across the power leads inside the cannon connector and it >>eliminated most of the noise. You can get the cap at >>Radio Shack. Be sure to mount the cap in a manner such >>that it doesn't short out to the shell of the connector. >>Fred Stucklen With a handheld radio on a "rubber duck" antenna, you're more likely to pick up panel generated noises that are radiated as opposed to conducted. If you're using an external antenna on the hand held while in flight, the t/c's noise should be much less, if at all noticable. Fred's suggestion is a good start. You CAN get capacitors that are so tiny that they will fit totally inside the connector's backshell. If you cannot find any, drop me an SASE with the words "TC Noise Filter Capactior" on the back and I'll send you some from my junk box. It might also require some more aggressive filtering but I doubt it. If you expect to use the hand held quite a bit and with it's own antenna inside the cockpit, go ahead and send me the SASE. I'll include some extra components that are tiny enough to fully filter the T/C's noise from the wiring. Shielding the wires might help but a filter is a sure bet. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: Glenn & Judi <flyers@anet-chi.com>
Subject: RV Geneology
Regarding the History of RV Aircraft: Have any designs or prototypes by Vans used the designations of RV-2, RV-5, or RV-7? Just curious. Thanks in advance, Glenn Gordon ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Exp-BUS DC Load Center
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: Mike Kukulski <kukulski(at)highfiber.com>
RE: If anyone is using one in their aircraft or has knowledge of the item would you please comment on it. ---------------- I asked about this a couple of months ago on the list; an interesting short thread resulted with good points raised by Bob Nuckolls. Recommend checking the list archive to get the total thread discussion. Mike Kukulski RV-4 N96MK kukulski(at)highfiber.com Albuquerque, NM ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Pnuematic Squeezer - Action Air Parts, Inc.
From: cecilth(at)juno.com (Cecil T Hatfield)
Date: Mar 02, 1997
Eric I've been trying to E-mail you direct at ERIC_BARNS(at)tandem.com and it doesn't go through. Cecil Hatfield cecilth(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 1997
From: Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz>
Subject: Re: RV Geneology
> >Have any designs or prototypes by Vans used the designations of RV-2, >RV-5, or RV-7? I wondered about this too. The 1997 RV calendar shows the RV-5 on the April page (reg no is N5RV). It's an all-metal single-place shoulder-wing tailwheel aircraft, with RV-4-like cheek cowls, constant-chord wings and tailplane. The cockpit is kindof a bubble above & forward of the leading edge, with the back half faired down to the fuselage aft of the wing's TE... IMHO, fairly ugly. There's a couple of small photos showing the wing being rotated back to parallel with the fuselage. Here's the caption: "The long awaited new model from Van's revealed here for the first time!! OK, Little April Fool;s joke.....but it really is one of Van's designs, circa 1976. The RV-5 was designed as a test bed for the Carr Twin engine, one of the first 1/2 VW conversions, and built by Van and a handful of EAA Chapter 105 members. The non-traditional styling was determined by the unique "swing wing", which pivoted to legal highway width for easy trailering. The 2 cylinder engine encountered development problems, so the aircraft was retired after about 75 hours. In 1983 it was resurrected with a 40 hp Rotax 447 and flew several more years before permanent retirement. The RV-5 weighed 307 pounds empty. Take off took only 175 feet and it climbed at 1200 fpm. Stall speed was 41 mph and it topped out at 120-125 mph. Photos: Dick VanGrunsven" I'm also wondering about the RV-9 rumoured in the latest RVator; how about a sweepstake as to what it will be? My guess is an RV-8 with retractable gear. Frank. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michael Angiulo <mikeang(at)MICROSOFT.com>
Subject: RV Geneology
Date: Mar 02, 1997
I think I remember seeing the RV-5. There is a piece of a tail of an airplane hanging in the barn where the factory prototypes lived. The guy giving me the tour said something about it, and that it was the only one. He didn't get into the details though (probably didn't want to scare me). -Mike >---------- >From: Glenn & Judi[SMTP:anet-chi.com!flyers(at)matronics.com] >Sent: Sunday, March 02, 1997 10:25 AM >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Subject: RV-List: RV Geneology > > >Regarding the History of RV Aircraft: > >Have any designs or prototypes by Vans used the designations of RV-2, >RV-5, or RV-7? > >Just curious. > >Thanks in advance, >Glenn Gordon > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Michael Angiulo <mikeang(at)MICROSOFT.com>
Subject: RV Geneology
Date: Mar 02, 1997
<> > I really doubt it will be a retract. It seems like Van's methodology is to keep assembly simple, rugged and safe. It's not like the RV series is suffering from low speeds either... I bet between building the RV8A, the quickbuild RV8, and maybe ressurecting the RV3 with an updated kit I think they're going to have their hands full for quite some time. I'm not sure what it would look like but I wonder if they've ever considered doing something with more seats? Looks like the homebuilt market treats 4 place planes well. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: Smith <kpsmith(at)cnsnet.com>
Subject: Re: VS question
Real Question: VS on RV 6 Note: Looked in the archive, but was overwelmed and unable to get to the answer. I know it is there...but it is huge and unweildy! The question: My old unpunched RV-6 VS stuff and drawings and instructions present a conflict. The instructions say: to use a level and set the top rib 1.5 inches from vertical from the rib spar junction. I note that the spar is not level when mounted to the level jig...ok. Maybe. The rib is notched at the tip... The drawings say: 1.5 inches from the perpendicular from the end of the spar to the front end of the top rib. The difference is perpendicular and the junction point. What is the right setup? I am going out to the shop to play with geometry, but in the meantime, you gus who've long past that point, any help? Ken Smith kpsmith(at)cnsnet.com RV6 Status obvious. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: Craig Hiers <CRAIG-RV-4.@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Powder Coating
Glenn & Judi wrote: > > > Hi, > > I would like to hear from people who have used powder coating on parts > of their RV, ie. rudder pedals, instrument panel, etc. > > Are there any places that powerder coating shouldn't be used? > > Thanks in advance, > Glenn Gordon > > flyers@anet-chi.com Glenn I know my experience with powder coating is not typical but...... I had several steel parts powder coated by a company called Southern Powder Coating in Moultrie,GA. This is the same company that powder coat's all of Maule aircraft's airframe's. I paid about 60$ to get it done, then I paid another 50$ to get it sand blasted off. Why, because it was peeling off in sheets, I mean big area's that would almost fall off.The section's that stayed on you could not get off with sandpaper or a file. I could have taken it back, but I was not about to take a chance with parts on my RV. If you have parts powder coated I hope you have better luck than I did Craig Hiers RV-4 N143CH Tallahassee,FL. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: Giertz <snow(at)insync.net>
Subject: Re: RV Geneology
> >> >>Have any designs or prototypes by Vans used the designations of RV-2, >>RV-5, or RV-7? > > >I'm also wondering about the RV-9 rumoured in the latest RVator; how about a >sweepstake as to what it will be? > >My guess is an RV-8 with retractable gear. > >Frank. > > >I believe the RV-9 may be a powered glider. Tom Giertz ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: "r.acker" <r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Wag-Aero Nav/Com
> > Is anyone using or have experience with the Wag-Aero ICS Nav/Com radio? > >John Henley (j.henley(at)worldnet.att.net) John, I posted a message about this radio a while back, I can send you a couple of "product reviews" from someone using them in his tri-pacer for IFR work and long-ez (same bubble canopy/sunlight problem). His reports are *very* favorable. When did the $1450 price come in? Last time I checked, they were $1595 new and $1175 refurbed. Vicky's Pilot Shop has them for $1495 new. Regards, Rob Acker / r.acker(at)ix.netcom.com / RV-6Q ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: Greg Puckett <71155.2336(at)CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Steel Parts in fuel tank
Hey Everyone, I was just preparing all my fuel tank parts and was wondering what to do with the nut-plates that go on the inside of the fuel tank that are used for the cover plate/sender ring. Should these nut-plates be primed or left bare? If so what should they be primed with? I can't imagine that the self-eching auto primer I'm using on other steel pieces holding up to avgas. Greg Puckett RV-8 80081 71155.2336(at)compuserve.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: Bill Benedict <billb(at)europa.com>
Subject: Re: RV Geneology
> >Regarding the History of RV Aircraft: > >Have any designs or prototypes by Vans used the designations of RV-2, >RV-5, or RV-7? > >Just curious. > >Thanks in advance, >Glenn Gordon Glenn, Since you asked, the -2 (I think) was a glider but was never completed. The wings are ready for covering and have been in a barn for the last 25 or more years. The -5 was a single place pop-riveted swing wing/tow-it-home on Sunday evening 1/2VW powered "thing". It flew about 40 hours but there was not a decent engine available for it. Also, the cockpit was not really large enough for an average person. The -7 was/is a design Van may someday put on paper, so we will not discuss it at this time. Bill Bill N894RV with over 400 hours behind a O-320, Over 1000 RV flying hours. RV-4-180 soon. These opinions are mine and do not necessarily represent the opinions or position of my employer. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: Scott Johnson <rvgasj(at)popmail.mcs.net>
Subject: Shadowed Today By a Berkut Canard - RV6A pulled a Top Gun
Maneuver Trundling along today in my large 25 mile test area, I had a most unusual experience. Out of the corner of my eye I saw what looked like a star wars spaceship swooping down from high altitude behind me ( I would have never seen this had I not been turning ). Wondering what the heck it was, I turned left then right and could not find it anywhere. This was kind of spooky, and I had to think twice wondering if it had been a bird or something else. Then I thought I bet some other crazy experimental is tailing me for the heck of it. Thinking in Top Gun how the one jet slowed, and the other one passed, I slowed to 60 MPH. Sure enough, a Berkut canard went zooming by me. I firewalled it and caught up to him and slowly started going by. My airspeed indicator was indicating about 195 MPH when I went by. I called on 122.75 and he replied. Smugly I thought, I am faster than him, serves him right for tailing me. When I asked him if he was at full power, he said heck no, and then went zooming by me. Apparently, he had a 180 HP fuel injected engine in it and told me he routinely gets 220 MPH out of it. Beautiful looking plane he had. We talked for a while and flew together and then we split to return to our own airports. I will definitely be stoping by his hangar in the future to get a closeup of that plane. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't trade my RV for his stall speed or takeoff distance though. On a different note today, I took off behind a Mooney 201, and an experimental sidewinder. These were both friends of mine and we were racing to an airport for lunch. My RV6A guickly went by both in climb and got considerably ahead. After about 10 minutes, the Mooney 201 went by me slowly (much slower than the Berkut) , and the sidewinder was a little behind. It was a lot of fun, and gives me more impetus to clean up the drag on my airframe even more. Now if Van would only design that RV8 retractable, with the 250 HP ... Scott Johnson N345RV RV6A 20 hours Total Time and Building Fast ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 02, 1997
Subject: Re: Powder Coating
<< I would like to hear from people who have used powder coating on parts of their RV, ie. rudder pedals, instrument panel, etc. Are there any places that powder coating shouldn't be used? >> My opinion is that powder coating is a wonderful "cosmetic" coating. It is not really a good anticorrosion coating in that it has no sacrificial capability, it merely protects by having low permeability to moisture comparable to any good sprayed on top coat applied to an equivalent dry film thickness. There are a different polymers used in powder coating, epoxies, polyesters and others. Some are more flexible than others and could theoretically hide underlying substrate fractures with no apparent surface indication. It is this thickness, flexibility and hiding power that makes it a good cosmetic finish. Very thick flexible powder coatings IMHO should not be applied to motor mounts or any highly stressed structure. It will provide a lasting finish in benign environments, but probably not in salt spray or other corrosive conditions as well as would a properly applied strontium chromate primer with urethane top coat. That said, the only powder coating I used on my 6A is for the instrument panel. If you are using a color that the powder coater has on-hand, great. Otherwise you are going to have to buy hundreds of dollars worth (there is a minimum buy) of power to get your stuff done. Look in the phone book for your area. There are many powder coaters in the Silicon Gulch area but I don't know how plentiful they are in your neck of the woods. The one I used primarily restores patio furniture. Gary VanRemortel vanremog(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 02, 1997
Subject: Re: MEK et al
<< I would also discourage the use of MEK, the above thinner will work just as well without the hazards associated with MEK. >> Just curious as to what you think those unique hazards might be. The MSDS for MEK does not read sufficiently different in terms of hazards than other organic solvents or blends having similarly high solvency. I prefer using Acetone but MEK has no unique problems of which I am aware. We use 5 gallon cans of it at work. Yes it's flammable, yes it defats the skin, yes it's a suspected carcinogen. So are other ketones (like acetone), glycol ethers, aromatics, alcohols, etc. You should be careful of them all. Gary VanRemortel vanremog(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 02, 1997
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)navix.net>
Subject: Re: Advice needed on gear fairings, tires, primer
lines, wheel fairings Scott: >Does anybody have an idea how to make a jack so that I can take a wheel off >the main. Will I have to take the gear leg fairing off to use it ? Larry Vetterman makes and sells (as do Van's and/or Avery-saw it for sale in one of their catalogs) a neat little jacking device that slides into the axle. You have to modify the axle nut, but that's no big deal. I much prefer this method to jack pads on the wing. Awhile back, we got to see what happens when a jack goes through the wing of a Bonanza. Not a pretty sight. >The question I have is: can you flair the copper tubing with an aircraft >flair where it connects to the electric primer switch with a regular AN >aluminum fitting. Because they are different metals, will it corrode fast ? >Somehow the copper tubing has to connect to the aluminum fuel line. How did >you do it ? I used copper and flared the tube with a Rolo Flare---no problem. I came off the gascolator to the primer valve and from the primer valve to 3 ports, all with copper line and aluminum fittings (except, of course, the primer port fittings). Some people recommend annealing copper lines every couple of years or so and this would be a good time to check for corrosion. As cheap as the copper line is, you could just make new lines every couple of years. >Scott Johnson / Chicago Bob Skinner RV-6 BSkinner(at)navix.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 1997
From: Boris <smbr(at)digital.net>
Subject: RV4 Kit For Sale
G'day, Due to family matters, I am unfortunately forced to sell some of my toys which includes my RV4 complete kit. Tail finished. The wings are mostly finished, need to do the final closure (all drilled, dimpled and primed). All parts are primed with self etching zinc chromate primer. Workmanship is above average, I had a very experienced bucker to assist me for all of the skin riveting. The engine is part of the package. It is a 0 SMOH bendix injected O-320, 160 hp. Overhaul done by Don George, Inc., Orlando, Florida. It includes new accessories (needs generator and vacuum pump), new cylinders, pistons, rings, ect. This is a copy of my Trade-A-Plane ad. I can also be reached at: smbr(at)digital.net. I'm located in Ft. Pierce, Florida. RV4 COMPLETE KIT, includes 0 SMOH 160hp IO-320 with Bendix inject., new access., tail 100%, wings 95%, primed in/out, very good workmanship, elect. elev. trim, elect. flaps, dual lights, whelen 4-strobe, many extras, over $27,000 invested, first $25,000. 561, 466-8209 eve., 234-1303 day. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Darrell L. Anderson" <d.l.anderson(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Steel Parts in fuel tank
Date: Mar 03, 1997
>I was just preparing all my fuel tank parts and was wondering what to do with the nut-plates that go on the inside of the fuel tank that are used for the cover plate/sender ring. Should these nut-plates be primed or left bare? If so what should they be primed with? I can't imagine that the self-eching auto primer I'm using on other steel pieces holding up to avgas.< I can't imagine that the nutplates would NOT be covered with Pro Seal. Mine ended up that way. Anyway, they are Cad plated I believe. D. Anderson RV-4, wings, Montana d.l.anderson(at)worldnet.att.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 1997
From: Patrick Kelley <patk(at)srv2.ic.net>
Subject: Re: Steel Parts in fuel tank
Greg Puckett wrote: > > > Hey Everyone, > > I was just preparing all my fuel tank parts and was wondering what to do with > the nut-plates that go on the inside of the fuel tank that are used for the > cover plate/sender ring. Should these nut-plates be primed or left bare? If so > what should they be primed with? I can't imagine that the self-eching auto > primer I'm using on other steel pieces holding up to avgas. > > Greg Puckett RV-8 80081 > 71155.2336(at)compuserve.com > > Prime NO parts for the fuel tank. After it is assembled, you will etch and prime the exterior (unless you are building a polished aluminum plane), but you don't want primer anywhere inside your tanks. PatK - RV-6A - Waiting for weather to warm up so I can work outside. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Darrell L. Anderson" <d.l.anderson(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Advice needed on gear fairings, tires, primerlines, wheel
fairings
Date: Mar 03, 1997
>Larry Vetterman makes and sells (as do Van's and/or Avery-saw it for sale in one of their catalogs) a neat little jacking device that slides into the axle. You have to modify the axle nut, but that's no big deal. I much prefer this method to jack pads on the wing. < I've seen this jack adapter in the catalogs, but for the life of me, I can't see how you're supposed to get the wheel off the axle when the jack adapter is stuck on the end of it holding up the aircraft. It seems to me that you need to pick the gear up from the inboard side of the axle. Is the point to only get the tire off the ground, and then drop down on some sort of cribbing? Not far enough to need it yet... RV-4, wings D.Anderson ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Joe Wiza" <joe(at)flnet.com>
Subject: IO-360-A3B6D
Date: Mar 03, 1997
About two weeks ago I requested information from some of you old timers informations about using a IO-360 200HP engine in my RV6. I appreciatte all the advice that was given to me. It appears this engine would require quite a bit of extra work for my RV6 which is beyond my abilities. However this would be an excellent buy for someone building the RV8 so here is the information which I will pass on. I personally Know this individaul and the following information to be true. The engine came out of a 1987 Mooney 201 which has been converted into a 300 missile. This engine did not come out of a damaged airplane or prop strike. It has 1122 hours since new it is complete with all accessories mount exhaust etc. the asking price is $12,500 firm. The engine is crated ready to be shipped with all papers and documents avialable. contact Mat Simon Phone 941 475 1676 Florida Or Email me joe(at)flnet.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RBusick505(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 03, 1997
Subject: Re: Exp-BUS DC Load Center
> >chester razer wrote: >> I saw this item advertised at the top of page 124 of the March issue of > > Aero Electric Bob Nuckolls did a review on this item about 6 months ago. Should be in the Archives, he did not recommend it. Bob Busick Rv-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV4131rb(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 03, 1997
Subject: Re: Powder Coating
Glen, I used powder coating on all my steel parts, and my experience is a good one. Ive listened to pro's and con's for sometime. I would not recomend powder coating aluminum parts, I had a freind who did his instrument panel and his RV4 seat back. He is a fairly light person and after a few hours of flying he found his seatback supports( the eighth inch angle running up and down the sides) bent in a curved shape. The only thing he could atribute this to, was the temp that the powder coating was curred at somehow affected the temper of the aluminum.Some people believe that if you have cracks they will not show up on the surface. I do not agree I believe if you use a light color such as white or gray the cracks will show up. They should appear in the form of a thin dark colored line. Ryan RV4131RB(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Iikaiser(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 03, 1997
Subject: Re: MEK et al
I'm not certain that MEK is any more hazardous than acetone. Its one advantage over acetone is that it has an additional methylene group present in its structure, which makes is a bit less volatile so it doesn't evaporate as rapidly. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV4131rb(at)aol.com
Date: Mar 03, 1997
Subject: Re: Steel Parts in fuel tank
Greg, I believe the nut plates are cad plated (thats the blackish gray color on the nut plate) they should require no further treatment. That is as long as their not scratched or dinged. Ryan ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 1997
From: Bob Skinner <BSkinner(at)navix.net>
Subject: Advice needed on gear fairings, tires,
primerlines, wheel fairings >I've seen this jack adapter in the catalogs, but for the life of me, I can't see >how you're supposed to get the wheel off the axle when the jack adapter is stuck >on the end of it holding up the aircraft. It seems to me that you need to pick the >gear up from the inboard side of the axle. Is the point to only get the tire off >the ground, and then drop down on some sort of cribbing? >D.Anderson Darrell, You modify the axle nut by cutting a hole in it and fitting a nut plate that is removable. To jack the plane up, you remove the nut plate, insert rod on the jacking tool, remove the axle nut which slides onto the shaft as does the wheel. Then you set the horizontal part of the axle on some blocks of wood and remove the jacking tool, nut and tire/wheel. Bob Skinner RV-6 Bskinner(at)navix.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Alternative Engines - Diesels
Date: Mar 03, 1997
From: Bill Watson <watson1(at)apple.com>
>I am curious/interested in all the new diesels. Continental, Lycoming, >Aerospeciale/Renault all have announced plans to offerr these. They run on >Jet A, have fewer electronics, and are more fuel efficient. Recently, I sent an e-Mail to Zoche, asking for an RV-6 engine.... 1/21/97 "We are currently in the concurrent JAR-E (European) and FAR 33 certification program. The usual way would have been to address the European (JAR-E) certification first before handling the US (FAR 33) certification procedure. With both the German and US aviation authorities having agreed upon a concurrent certification, we expect to have both Type Certificates available within one year's time - but, as with any leading edge technology, precise schedules are difficult to predict. Still, we do not anticipate to sell engines during 1997. It is part of our company policy to sell certified engines only; we consider the certification as a further proof of the design validity and production quality. Prices will be competitive to e.g. Lycoming engines.There is considerable interest in our engines from RV6 builders. To obtain further data you might want to poll our brochure from our fax (++49 89 342451) or visit our webpage at: http://193.26.97.194/ Sincerely, Dr. Stefan Ittner" ======================= Bill Watson Licensing Operations Phone: 408 974-7216 Fax: 408 974-0604 Page: 800-240-6371 email:watson1(at)apple.com |___| ____(+)____ | | "I'd rather be flying" ======================= ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 1997
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: Re: Advice needed on gear fairings, tires, primer lines, wheel
> Question 4: > > I wonder if its really worth putting the wheel pants on because I will be in > and out of fields that may be bouncy and a little muddy. I had the same thoughts as you, but that was before I flew Ken Scott's RV-6 into the Flying M Ranch, a short narrow one-way gravel stip in the foothills of the Oregon coast range, without them on. I was not happy to discover that the wheels had kicked up some rocks and dinged the bottoms of the flaps and leading edge of the h-stab. You probably want to stay away from the fancy two-piece ones however if you are going to fly into rough/soft fields. Randall Henderson, RV-6 randall(at)edt.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: mikel(at)dimensional.com
Date: Mar 03, 1997
Subject: Re: Powder Coating
Hey,Glen: I powder coated my rollover structure in the -4 and it looks GREAT!! It has already suffered a fair amount of grief and still looks good. (By the way: it is BLACK which has a tenedency NOT to reflect off the canopy in the sunlight, making visibility MUCH nicer for my GIB). My mount is coated a light grey (and has suffered even more greif and still looks good) and, I agree with Ryan in that if the metal under the coating is cracking, the coating will also crack as it is adherent to the metal under it. A lot of the tubular steel fuselage kits (KitFox, etc) have powder coated fuselages from the factory. I looked and asked around and found a company I liked. (Ask around your local builders or EAA groups). They will slip your stuff into a batch of things they are already doing, if you like the color they are using, and it costs MUCH less doing it that way. You may have to wait a little longer but the savings can be substantial. They do a lot of black, grey and white things. Steel is best to coat as the temperatures used are high and can change the temper of aluminum. THICK aluminum that isn't being stressed may be OK. Keep building....... Michael ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Mar 03, 1997
From: sburch(at)norfolk.infi.net (stan burchett)
Subject: Spray gun QUESTION?
Rechargeable spray guns sound ideal for priming...portability, no clean-up, always ready. Just recharge/refill as needed. Harbor Freight has a 1 qt. brass for $40. Has anyone tried these that knows a down side? Stan from Yorktown,VA -6A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Herman Dierks <dierks(at)austin.ibm.com>
Subject: RV4 curved seat back problem (was Power Coating)
Date: Mar 03, 1997
Be advised that the RV4 seat back with the 3/4 inch angles ARE TOO WEAK and will bend. Mine bent in the first year of use and mine are NOT power coated. Van's published a plans change about 2 yrs ago (I can look it up if needed) to go to 1 inch x 1 inch angle on the RV4 seat back. I made this change about 2 months ago and this version is much stronger. FYI, I weigh about 170 to 172 and have pulled a max of 5 G's in my RV4. The 1 inch angles are still straight. Expect to see more about the RV4 seat backs. I sent van a long note on a problem I had on the RV4 seat back. I almost put someone into the baggage area doing aerobatics. The rear seat back went completely into the baggage area. Waiting to hear van's response. The rear seat back and bulkhead in the RV4 are NOT designed to take much G-load. Herman > > Glen, > I used powder coating on all my steel parts, and my experience is a good > one. Ive listened to pro's and con's for sometime. I would not recomend > powder coating aluminum parts, I had a freind who did his instrument panel


February 21, 1997 - March 03, 1997

RV-Archive.digest.vol-cn