RV-Archive.digest.vol-dp

October 29, 1997 - November 03, 1997



      --=_ORCL_54621559_0_11919710291429480
              name="anonymous-attachment-1";
              charset="us-ascii"
              filename="anonymous-attachment-1"
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      I am very interested.  Please elaborate.

Regards,   
  
Steve   
  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
The statements and opinions expressed here are my own and   
do not necessarily represent those of Oracle Corporation.    
 
When once you have tasted flight,  
you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward,  
for there you have been, and there you will always long to return.  

                                           -- Leonardo Da Vinci

                                          
Steven B. Janicki          
Director of Client Services  
ORACLE Data Center                        
Voice (415)506-2740                                
Fax (415)633-2933        
                                                           
  
  
  
 


 
 

--=_ORCL_54621559_0_11919710291429480-- ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: RV-List:RV4 empennage HS410
From: tcraig-stearman(at)juno.com (John T. Craig-Stearman)
Date: Oct 29, 1997
Mark, Wait until you mate the tail to the fuselage. Then you can see exactly how much bend is required. You may have to shim under the VS front spar, or even bend the HS-410 in a Z-shape to get it to match. Regards, Tom Craig-Stearman tcraig-stearman(at)juno.com RV-4 installing nutplates for the wing/fuse intersection fairings > >I'm finishing up my RV4 empennage kit. > >I have noticed in the fuselage plans that the HS front spar splice >plate, >HS410 gets a bend to mate to the VS front spar. I see nothing in the >empennage plans about this bend. Does this get done at the time of >attachment and is it mentioned in the instructions ? I could not find >any >mention of bending this plate anywhere. > >I am learning to do a lot of figuring it out myself, but it would have >been >nice to have done this bend before the HS was finished. > >Mark McGee >RV4 empennage ... wings on order. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Bob Nuckolls <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: alternator cooling
>Thank you Bob, for this opinion. Based on that I will forgo the test with >out the fan. . . . If you have a blast tube, you might be okay without the fan but here's the basic problem. If you look at the fan's airflow geometery, it produces a low pressure of air around the shaft and causes air to be drawn into all the cooling holes around the casting. Often, the size and placement of holes has be researched by the manufacturer for optimum cooling. A blast tube blows air where you point it and may indeed reduce stress on part of the alternator (diodes) but what about slip rings, stator wires, rotor, etc? I approach design changes to mass produced components with great care . . . those folk spent more money developing a good way to build an alternator than all of aviation will spend this year in procuring alternators! > There remains the question of whether the large pulley is good >or bad. My impression is that you feel it is better to have a small pulley. > I have a late model Lycoming with the large flywheel pulley. . . . . and the drive ratios are pretty amazing . . . with the stock, small pulleys in place, the Nippon_Denso's from B&C run routinely at over 10,000 RPM . . . rotor and fan balance is the key to bearing longevity at these speeds. At normally light running loads in cruise and if high output at taxi is not a factor for you, perhaps the larger pulley is more conservative. But several times a year, I depart with a less than fully charged battery . . . getting good output at taxi speeds is a noble goal . . . >Let me add one last (I hope) postscript to the alternator cooling debate. > If I had had the benefit of my present level of experience, which includes >Nuckolls' recent post on the subject, I would have bought the same Japanese >alternator, left the fan and pulley on, relocated the voltage regulator where >I can get to it, and used a blast tube. This is a 100% sure bet approach . . . and after we get some real data, it may still be a 100% bet without the blast tube. > . . . . . I suggest the rest of you follow the >same procedure, and forget about further research. It is seldom you find a >prudent approach which is cheaper, and costs you only thirty minutes to an >hour, building time. > >Of course it would be beneficial if others would share their exp[erience and >we could know of other incidences of alternator failure. I know there are a >lot of them out there, and my anecdotal gut tells me it is due to the very >hot location of the alternator. I've seen some hot spots in the low pressure air below an engine and moving over as little as 6" can make a 30 degree difference! Cooling on airplanes has always been a mixture of black magic and empirical testing. >I have left much of my analysis out of these posts for obvious reasons; >however I will add one more observation/comment. Upon looking at the failed >part, I was interested to note that the plate or heat sink to which the >diodes were mounted was a cupped affair which would obviously require airflow >from back to front to work!! This observation alone was a compelling reason >to establish airflow in that direction. I did that by installing a blast >tube at the rear and the suck fan on the front. It is my anecdotal gut >feeling that without an air mover involved the tendency in this area would be >from front to back. This would present preheated air to the diodes which >would have a cupped surface behind them to help trap and stagnate the hot >air. Quite possibly so . . . and some good work on your part to rationally devise a fix. With both fan and blast tube, you're probably covered. Do you have a feeling for how much water might be conducted down the tube when flying in rain? This is the biggest downside of blast tubes for cooling alternators. >This has been a very useful thread for me and I hope for the others. > Everyone has to deal with these alternator questions and Van gives little >guidance. Well, he's an airframe and power-plant guy who works miracles with what he knows best . . . I'll happily forgive his shortcomings in other areas! I Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= | | | Go ahead, make my day . . . . | | Show me where I'm wrong. | ================================= <http://www.aeroelectric.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Bob Nuckolls <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Don't "vote" on this list server . . .
I appologize for not opening my invitation to "vote" with the following: Anyone wanting to "vote" please mail directly to me at I'm sorry to have rattled some sensibilities with respect to applicabilty to this list but there is a point. It relates to our willingness as consumers of very expensive components that are ostensibly spec'ed, tso'ed, shaked baked and blessed with regulatory holy water. Then we're told that that the warranty is void if we ask suppliers to meet pretty ordinary requirements for longevity and operation. BTW . . The "vote" is running 5:1 in favor of having the folks make it work right. My boss agrees. This kind of thing is more than my "work problem", it relates to every one of you who, as a one-person airplane factory, has to make these same kinds of decisions. The avionics master switch discussion had probably rolled some eyes back and produced reactions akin to, "geezzz. . . he's at it again . . ." Yup, it's these kinds of discussions that come up in my work every day. They come up all over this airplane factory every day . . . how about YOUR airplane factory? And where else but right here do you expect to gather information to help you reslove the answer? Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= | | | Go ahead, make my day . . . . | | Show me where I'm wrong. | ================================= <http://www.aeroelectric.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Bob Nuckolls <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Don't "vote" on this list . . .
Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= | | | Go ahead, make my day . . . . | | Show me where I'm wrong. | ================================= <http://www.aeroelectric.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: chuckie8 <chuckie8(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Gascolator
For those 4's out there, where are you locating your gascolator? Besides putting it between the cross-over exhaust pipes, I'm not sure where else you can put it. help! Chuck ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Acker" <r.acker(at)thegrid.net>
Subject: Re: Electric flap replacement motor
Date: Oct 29, 1997
> Some time ago, Van's put out a recall notice on the electric flap motor because of the need to cross drill a hole. I sent in my request for change months ago and was acknowledged. I've heard nothing since. I understand there was a significant backlog but I'm curious to hear if people have been receiving their replacement. > Ken > RV6A FLying Ken, I asked them about this last week. I was put on the replacement list, and was told it may take up to a year to replace all the motors out in the field (I wonder if new kits have a priority...?). Rob (RV-6Q). ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Re;Everett Hatch Crash
From: tcraig-stearman(at)juno.com (John T. Craig-Stearman)
Date: Oct 29, 1997
>The impression that they got was that >there >was strong possiblity of pilot incapcitation. From my limited >knowledge of >Everett's flying, he didn't give me the impression that he would do >anything >that could be considered of a unsafe nature such as low level >aerobatics. 'Listers, I agree with Denny's assessment. I sincerely doubt that Everett did any unsafe flying. I met him at Copperstate, and spent many an hour talking engineering with him. My firm estimation is that he took a very conservative approach to all things aviation. For instance, he told me he does not not like to increase the compression ratio in his high-horsepower Lycoming modifications. I was so impressed with his approach that I sent him my shiny new 0-360 and told him to work his magic. The RV List might be interested to know that Everett's son Mark assured me he plans to complete all the work presently under way in his shop. My engine is within a week or two of completion, and he mentioned several other projects. After those are finished, he will carefully consider the course Everett's shop will take. Everett was a pioneer in our field. I have followed his work since Oshkosh '93. I was always impressed that his automotive conversions seemed to have the most elegant installations on the flight line. Everett was always willing to sit down and chat with me about progress on my engine, share his considerable engine knowledge, and talk design philosophy in general. I shall miss him sorely, and experimental aviation has suffered a great loss. Rest in peace, Everett. In sorrow, Tom Craig-Stearman tcraig-stearman(at)juno.com P.S. My 0-360 is now on the test stand and is making more power than any he has completed to date: almost 200 hp without increasing the compression. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Denny Harjehausen <harje(at)proaxis.com>
Subject: Engine Sumps
A fellow builder has a IO-360 with a "c" series sump. He is moving the injection unit to the front by re-milling a new mount. However he is concerned because the "C" series sump extends aft and may interfere with the engine mount for the RV-6. Has anyone used this engine and/or sump on a six, if so did it clear? Have a good one. Denny RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: John Bright <john(at)catlover.com>
Subject: Re: compressor question
>secured to the floor I drilled holes in the concrete and used lag bolts and shields with compressor legs on 1" oak spacers. >Harbor freight advertisies a FRL unit I bought a FRL for $100 from HQ. I lubricates tooo much. I would get a FR and put drops of oil in the tools occasionally. This will also keep you from having separate painting hoses. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne)
Subject: Re: Auto Conversion/Aerobatics
Mike Kiess asked: > > > >Does anyone have any reason to believe an auto conversion we be any more or > >any less reliable in an RV while doing aggressive aerobatics? > > and Al Mojzisik quipped: > > Gyroscopic forces on a PSRU...........Not me thanks........Al > Any particular reason Al? Is there something incompatible about gyroscopic forces and PSRUs? Or is this just a prejudice? Since I'm considering an auto based engine and want to do at least some acro, I really need to know. Hal Kempthorne RV-6AQ -- WANTED TO BUY - a used Chevy V-6 setup. halk(at)sybase.com Santa Clara, CA. Debonair N6134V @ SJC ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Bart Lalonde/Aero Sport Power Engines
Date: Oct 29, 1997
I am getting ready to order an engine (O-360 A1A) and would appreciate feedback on Mark Lalonde of Aero Sport Power, Kamloops, B.C. (Phone 250 376 2955) Post messages to me privately if you have concerns about publicizing your input. Thanks. Dennis 6A mounting seats Barrington, IL ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: John Walsh <walsh@matrix-one.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch
At 09:52 AM 10/29/97, you wrote: > >>Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 09:31:33 >>To: "trogers(at)utech.net" <40304(at)utech.net> >>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> >>Subject: Re: Master Switch >>In-Reply-To: <3456D551.2982(at)utech.net> >> >>>Bob, >>> >>>First off I visited your web site, it's great. I'll kindly explain why >>>I, others and many manufactures feel an avionics master switch is useful. Let's see if I understand Tom's position. Basically he is saying that he installs lots of gizmos in certified spam cams. Many of the gizmos will shit the bed at the drop of a hat. Therefore, he does everything he can to try and prevent the soiling of the sheets. Bob replies that we shouldn't put up with this crap. Send it back and make 'em fix it or buy elsewhere. I would suggest that it is deeply ingrained in the pilot mentality to accept a lousy hand and deal with it. If this were not true, nobody would fly certified planes. We have very few choices in the certified world and it is doubtful that these companies would respond. So, where does it leave us homebuilders? First, I want any gizmo that I buy to be suitable for use in a plane (DO-160) whether tested formally or not. This is REGARDLESS of whether an avionics master is installed or not. How do I know what's the "good stuff" and what's not? It's not like I can look for the UL label. Bob .... ? John ( who's almost feeling sorry for Bonanza drivers.. ) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Gert <gert(at)execpc.com>
Subject: I guess I will be an RV 8 builder now........................
Hi folks I gotta share this with you................ Just to prove that spouses never seize to amaze you, my wife for a good few years, out of the blue, decided to pick up and read my KitPlanes magazine. She has not once read it before. Her interest was grabbed by that beautiful yellow airplane on the front cover, the RV-8. Now, you have to know that I am looking for an airplane to build. I kinda settled in my mind on a Murphy Super Rebel or a Bearhawk, both 4 place, both high wing. Got two kids to haul, you see. Well, for one or another reason, she is convinced, and tried very hard to convince me, that we should build "Da Yellow One". She came up with all kinds of reasons why we should: morbid ones, "we can't all crash at the same time", (thanks hon), strange ones, "you have more change selling it if you (I) don't like it", to good ones like," seems a fun plane to fly !". Now that is an interesting statement for a gal who never flew general aviation planes. Anyway, I believe in a good marriage you should agree with your spouse every now and then and I believe then was now ;-} Just in case I was dreaming this, I waited for the next day, but nope, "Da yellow One" it is. The only restriction she had was that I have to sit in one before I am allowed to spent money on it. I am 6'6" you see, and most planes don't fit me. So, the next opportunity to do that will probably be Oshkosh 98. Hope I didn't bore y'all to death. Gert gert(at)execpc.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: MoeJoe <moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net>
Subject: heating skins
I thought this up this morning while brushing my teeth, and I figured I'd throw it out. I have heard that heating the skins before riviting will yield a tighter, better looking finish. Alot of people wondered how you could heat the skins, but not the structure underneath. What about electric blankets? You could wrap the skin in an electric blanket until it warms up, and keep it wrapped as you rivet, just sliding the blanket down as necessary. This seems like a good idea, but I know I'm probably missing something. It's just too simple. Moe Colontonio Cherry Hill, NJ RV-8 Emp ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Mike Denman <mikedenman(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Electric flap replacement motor
Ken Hitchmough wrote: > > > Some time ago, Van's put out a recall notice on the electric flap motor because of the need to > cross drill a hole. I sent in my request for change months ago and was acknowledged. > > I've heard nothing since. I understand there was a significant backlog but I'm curious to hear if > people have been receiving their replacement. > > Ken > RV6A FLying > It took about 6 weeks for mine to arrive after I sent it in. I requested, and got, the same one back. Mike Denman RV6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
Subject: Re: stall warning
From: gasobek(at)juno.com (Gary A. Sobek)
Gary: The RMI microEncoder has a programmable stall warning. This is an Air Speed warning and will not work on accelerated stalls. I hear my stall warning from my RMI microEncoder go off on all my GOOD landings. After flying any RV, I think that you will say that it does not need a stall warning. I think that the RV-6 stall (and RV-4) is very tame and easier to recover than a C-152. During a check ride with Mike Seagar, he will have you do a recovery without adding power. It is easy to go into a secondary stall (by over controlling) but no problem. I did go into a secondary stall the first time but have not ever experienced it again. I have done this several times in my own airplane. I do have a stall switch and horn in my shop that were removed from a Piper TramaHawk. (includes mounting plate.) I would sell it for the right price. I will NOT be using it in my RV. As I recall, the location for a Piper stall switch would be on the leading edge directly forward of the aileron / flap separation. Good luck. Gary A. Sobek RV-6 N157GS O-320 C.S. @ Cable Airport, Upland, CA writes: > > >I am looking for a stall warning switch for my rv6a. I looked through >the archives and found a lot of ideas, all were untested. Is there any >one out there that as installed one and tried it. I have the skin on >one >sided of both wings. > >Gary RV6A Wings ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Denny Harjehausen <harje(at)proaxis.com>
Subject: Re: Electric flap replacement motor
>Some time ago, Van's put out a recall notice on the electric flap motor because of the need to >cross drill a hole. I sent in my request for change months ago and was acknowledged. > >I've heard nothing since. I understand there was a significant backlog but I'm curious to hear if >people have been receiving their replacement. > >Ken >RV6A FLying I was one of the first few on the list and received mine about a month ago. Have a good one. Denny RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tony Moradian" <tonym(at)enviroaqua.com>
Subject: No mail
Date: Oct 29, 1997
charset="iso-8859-1" I haven't got any email for two day now. Is any body else experiencing the problem? Tony Moradian Empenage #80398 N100TM reserved tmoradia(at)ix.netcom.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.su.OZ.AU>
Subject: Re: S-Tec Autopilot
I have purchased and installed the S-Tec system 30. I have not yet flown it. The installation is everything you would wish for. Excellent drawings, hardware to the last rivit, the clearances as they say they will be. It is certainly a robust looking setup and if the completeness of the documentation is a guide it is probably well engineered. I was obliged to use the S-Tec because Australian rules require an STC for an IFR aircraft. I can't comment on the Navaids version but people on the list with good engineering skills (GV and others) have used it and speak favourably. If you want your hands free VFR at 8000 feet it sounds like a value option. If you want to fly coupled approaches the certified version may be the way to go. Leo Davies IFR 6A with system 30 > >I'm mostly a lurker, but recently checked prices on the new S-Tec System >20 and System 30 autopilots and thought I would share. For the >unfamiliar, the -30 has altitude hold and and -20 does not. Either model >fits in place of your turn coordinator without a need for a separate box. > > >S-Tec makes a nice product and has a fine reputation, but the prices are >pretty steep. The -30 sells for $5,300 and the -20 is $3,400. These >prices were quoted by Dewey at Pacific Coast Avionics. The installation >kit is included, but the heading indicator with the pick-up heading bug >is not. John Stewart used PCA for for his avionics panel and recommends >them highly. > >If anyone has had an opportunity to sample both the S-Tec and the Navaid, >I'd love to hear from you. The S-Tec is quite a bit more expensive than >the Navaid and I'm wondering if this is a case of "you get what you paid >for" or if it's just a matter of somebody charging more for the name. > >Thanks in advance. > >Rod Woodard >Loveland, Colorado >RV-8, #80033 >About to start on wings and thinking about roll servoes. > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Fuel pick up tube
From: smcdaniels(at)juno.com (SCOTT R MCDANIELS)
Date: Oct 29, 1997
I think the plans show a detail of making a braket that will prevent rotation, and possibly also breaking the seal besides. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: float levels
Kevin Lane sent this to me to forward to the list as nothing he's posting seems to be getting through. Personal responses should go to him, at n3773(at)postoffice.worldnet.att.net ------------- Begin Forwarded Message ------------- I have noticed that my newly rebuilt 160 hp O-320 D2J sputters moreso than a Cessna Aerobat when flying zero G's. Just flying rollercoasterly (yes GV, that's an adverb) it sputters as the stick is pushed forward. In my prior limited experience it took some time at zero G's before the engine quit. Is this a function of float levels, of compression or what? I set the floats when performing the venturi&float ADs according to the instructions. When I think about what is going on inside the carburator at zero G's my conclusion is, well, it'll never work! So will adjusting float levels fix it or is it, as IBM used to say, "probable user error"? It really catches your attention when you shove the nose over after a steep take-off climb! kevin 6A 20 hrs. ------------- End Forwarded Message ------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: Re: Sliding Canopy cutting & positioning
> For those of you who have successfully installed > a sliding canopy, where did the front of your > windshield end up? The forwardmost edge of my windscreen ended up just barely aft of the row of rivets across the F-6105 bulkhead. But this was probably 1/2" to 3/4" short compared to most others I've seen. The reason for this is that I trimmed a little too much off the bottom of the windscreen before splitting the bubble. Once I'd made the split the shape changed and I had to cut a bit of a wedge out of the back so the windscreen would tip down and I wouldn't have a gap at the bottom. It's really not noticable but of course I notice it. You should rough trim to the point that you can more or less confidently make the split, then final trim wherever it wants to fit. One hint here that I didn't really do but heard about was to leave the forward skin off and cut only enough out of the fwd bottom windscreen to get it to clear the ribs and F-6105 bulkhead. This would make it easier to get it to fit down on the roll bar without having to finish trim the fwd bottom edge. BTW the plans don't really show very well where the front of the roll bar support should go. I initially put mine in full length, and the bottom ended up right behind the F-6105 bulkhead. At this point and with my short windscreen it interfered with the windscreen. So I cut an inch or two off the top end and re-located the bottom. This makes the angle more in line with the angle of the attach weldment on the roll bar, and on RVs I've looked at since then most have cut down the roll bar so the fwd edge is a few inches back from the F-6105 bulkhead. Randall Henderson, RV-6 randall(at)edt.com http://www.edt.com/homewing ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
Subject: Re: How do you vote?
From: jerryinak(at)juno.com (Jerry C Paterson)
If we are voting for or against an avionics master switch, I vote against. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)netins.net>
Subject: Re: Auto Conversion/Aerobatics
Date: Oct 25, 1997
charset="iso-8859-1" > > >>Gyroscopic forces on a PSRU...........Not me thanks........Al > >Finally, I now know what it was that made the P-51 so dangerous-----big snip >here,-- it was that darned ole PSRU that they put on it. And you know what? I >still enjoyed every minute of it, never gave the PSRU a thought! How irrational >of me. :-) >John Darby > We all know that nearly all large hp recips have gear reductions in the nose case, but we also know that the lovely merlin you flew comes apart every 500 hours, The Radials were more durable but they had planetary reductions, conversely, so do the the lycomings on the queen air and grand commanders and they are real fragile. The point being, geared engines of any type are considerably less dependable and durable than their geared cousins. Why? Short Prop shaft and gear lash. This is a problem in stable flight, it is a bigger problem in aerobatic flight, and it is a huge problem in gyroscopic flight. How many times did you snap roll the Mustang? I believe it is prudent to be very cautious in endorsements in huge forum like this of any broad class of modification for aerobatic flight. For instance, What kind of reduction? What kind of aerobatics? Personally, if I am going to do anything other than a loop, a roll or combinations of both I would prefer that the crankshaft and the propellor be bolted togather. IMHO (That includes your Merlin.) Tailwinds, the pink panther Doug Rozendaal dougr(at)petroblend.com www.petroblend.com/dougr ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Craig Hiers <craig-RV4(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: S-Tec Autopilot
John Darby wrote: > > > I hear those navaids are dangerous. Had a friend tell me that he left OK, > got it all set up at alt and plugged in the direction hold on the Navaid, > woke up south of Dallas after flying right over DFW at 10k. Lulled into the > darkness of serenity and lack of something to do! > John Darby > Stephenville TX > johnd@our-town.com > > +-- Good thing the sound of a lycoming running out of gas did not wake him up. Craig Hiers RV-4 N143CH ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)traveller.com>
Subject: Re:finding Navaid
How do you get in touch with Navaid? Do they have a web site? Sam Buchanan sbuc(at)traveller.com brahms2.tivoli.com!Rick_Smith(at)matronics.com wrote: > > > The navaid autopilot uses position and rate of change feedback to determine > the correction necessary for a given situation. The S Tec uses position > only. Using both allows for much smoother and better proportioned > corrections according to Navaid. The guys at Navaid indicated that if they > were to certify their unit it would also cost 3-4 thousand rather than > $1,300. The guys at S Tec said their prices would double if they used rate > feedback also. All of the Navaid users I talked with are very > enthusiastic about the performance. I intend to have a Navaid mounted to > the right of the avioncs rather than replacing the turn coordinator. > I would like some how to info from the gentleman who has a interrupt switch > between the Navaid servo and the relay. > Thanks > Rick ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Al Mojzisik <prober(at)iwaynet.net>
Subject: Re: Auto Conversion/Aerobatics
> >Al, > Would you care to expound on that a little? What failure modes do you >anticipate as a result of "gyroscopic forces on the PSRU"? And on what type >of PSRU; spur gear, planetary gear, belt, HyVo chain, etc...? > I would agree that aggressive acro and auto conversions are probably not a >good mix at this time, simply because by flying an auto conversion you are >already pushing the envelope. Why try to push it further? > >Mike Wills >RV-4(wings) >willsm(at)manta.nosc.mil > > >> >>> >>>Does anyone have any reason to believe an auto conversion we be any more or >>>any less reliable in an RV while doing aggressive aerobatics? >>> >>>Mike Kiess (RV-6AQB on the way!) >> >>Gyroscopic forces on a PSRU...........Not me thanks........Al Mike, Thank you for asking. I thought at first I misread the question and it said "behind a RR with other P51 parts" But it did say "aggressive aerobatics" and "auto conversion" and that Mike was refering to an RV airframe. (I guess that some will jump at any chance to tell the list they flew P51's ;-)) I did some reading and studying on this subject a while back because I had a Subaru Legacy engine that I was converting for a Murphy Rebel that I was going to build before I became more acquanted with Total Performance. I talked to Lou Ross and Don Parham about their planetary and belt driven PSRU's. I also spoke to several people who had their units and nobody was doing any "aggressive aerobatics" or for that matter any aerobatics with their conversions. Of course many of those were in gyro's or non aerobatic aircraft so it was probably a wise decision. Then I looked around and read what I could get my hands on and learned that there are a lot of forces placed on a PSRU from engine power pulses and prop rotation. I also believed that I was seeing mostly failures in the primary bearing (right behind the prop hub) when their was a problem. It seems that bearing is never quite big enough or strong enough. Now I am not an engineer or anything like that but I am mechanically literate ( too some degree anyway, at least enough to keep my three vehicles and two tractors out of a shop for the past 15 years.) I know that aerobatic Lyc's have a beefed up crank and I believe main bearings too. I am under the impression that a lot of that has to do with the gyroscopic forces from the spinning prop being put onto the crank during "agressive aerobatics". I could be wrong in that impression but I still say that I wouldn't do aerobatics behind a PSRU in an RV. A Thunder Mustang, or Legend, or P-51 no problem, but not an RV. I still haven't seen a PSRU that I would trust that much (doing aggressive aerobatics) that is sized for an RV. Nomex on and zipped, foam trucks standing by.........................flame away........... Al ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rear Jump Seat
62,65,68-69,74-75
From: smcdaniels(at)juno.com (SCOTT R MCDANIELS)
Date: Oct 29, 1997
First off I would like to mention that utilizing the seat was a lot more complicated than installing it, a number of factors need to be considered and very depending on the age of your small passenger. Such as Hearing Protection, Decent rate control, etc. My goal when I started was to have an installation that made my son as safe as he was while riding in a car so I bypassed on making a simple alum seat with a single seat belt. I found a child's car seat that was based on a molded plastic shell (no steel bars, tubing etc.) that had a shoulder strap system with a buckle that latched in the crotch area. As a result it didn't have the big padded crash bar type device that a lot of the seats have that needs to flip down from above. Also being molded plastic its weight was a little less then most child seats. I then drilled off the baggage floor (He wasn't around when we were building the airplane) to gain access to the baggage ribs. I made 4 anchor plates from .063 steel about 4" X 3 1/2" and bent a 5/8 flange along 1 long side of each. These were riveted to appropriate anchor points on the baggage ribs using about 12 of the monel steel blind rivets that come in the RV kits. You position the plate so that the 5/8' flange lays tight under the bottom side of the upper flange of the baggage rib. This will give you something solid below the rib flange to anchor too. For my installation I had 1 plate on each outer rib slid all the way aft next to the baggage blkhead. The other 2 were on the inner 2 ribs about 18" fwd of the baggage bulkhead. I anchored the seat using a !/8' cable that I swagged up with thimbles on the ends that could be bolted to a couple of 45 Deg. bent metal brackets. The brackets then bolted with 1/4" AN bolts through the baggage floor to a 1/4" plate nut mounted under the 5/8 flange of the anchor plate. This cable basically took the place of the seat belt in a car installation. The fwd anchor plates received bolts from an .063 steel plate that was bolted acrossed the bottom fwd edge of the seat, they also screwed into 1/4" platenuts mounted under the anchor plate flanges. Then to be sure that the whole thing would not tilt fwd and tear loose from the floor during a hard deexceleration I bolted the cables clevis from the front seat shoulder harness cables to the top outer sides of the seat shell using longer bolts and large area AN970 washers. I think the whole design was over kill but I'm not an Engineer so I wanted to error to the safe side. The complete installation weighed about 14 lbs. (I'm sure someone out there can improve on that) but I could install or remove it in about 10 minutes. As for using it; functionally it worked great but we did have some problems. We began carrying our son in it at about 1 year old. He refused to wear a head set (which I had wire into our intercom system) any longer than it took to taxi to the runway. So we cut down the compressible foam ear plugs which worked very well until we began a decent from higher altitudes (mountains in Arizona) and his ears started to hurt. So he would cry and dig the plugs out of his ears. With practice we got so that we could put them deep enough that he couldn't remove them and we would use a tweezers, but he would still cry on decent ( I was then glad he didn't want to wear the head set). The only other problem with the installation was that a car seat was meant to be up on a seat in a car, but with it on the floor in the back his eye level was about 4 or 5 inches below the canopy skirt and he couldn't see out. We did a lot of formation flying with friends so that he had an airplane to look at while we flew. If doing it again I would try to design something that mounted the seat as high as possible while taking head room into consideration. Also, since we have a sliding canopy I slit a racquet ball and put it on the rear canopy track so he wouldn't bang his head getting in and out. Even though there were times he wasn't very happy back there he came to love flying (now 3 years old) and he talks dad into taking him quite often. Even asks to "go upside down" every flight (a true RVer at heart) I hope this may give you a start towards finding an even better installation, but please give them the same belt type security that you have in the front seats and find something for hearing protection that works for you. RV's are noisy, no matter what sound insulation you say you have. Sorry this is so long. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Tim Etherington <tjetheri@cedar-rapids.net>
Subject: Avionics Master...
Date: Oct 29, 1997
The truth of the matter is that this guy is an avionics installer and = gets paid good money to install avionics master switches. His whole = column is suspect from this standpoint and is unfortunate given AvWeb's = stated purpose and scorn for the same behavior from everyone else. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Bob Skinner <bskinr(at)trib.com>
Subject: Re: Plenum
>Bob, > >Ditto here. Van's does not provide a baffling kit/plans for my particular >Lycoming, so I have to make my own baffling or plenum anyway. I would much >prefer the plenum. > >Rob (RV-6Q). Rob & others, I put a hint on the list to see if Warren Bishop could make some pictures available for someone to scan onto someones web page. (stuff that is way beyond me.) Although I chickened out on my first RV-6, I intend to do this on the second. One reason that I did not build a plenum was that I had bought Van's baffle kit and didn't want to "waste parts". In retrospect, I'm not sure that building a plenum might not have been easier. The toughtest part about conventional baffling, to me, was to get a uniform gap between the verticle parts of the baffle and the top cowl. In a plenum, this would not be the case. If I were to build a plenum, I would make the verticle baffles on each cylinder bank as short as possible, just tall enough for some kind of support and attach point for the top cover. These pieces would be pretty easy to make. The forward and rear baffles would require a bit more work but I think Van's plans would probably work pretty good. That support could be angle attached to the side baffles or possibly piano hinge. Same for the rear baffle. I would make a "U" shape bracket with a nutplate in it and mount it with one of the 1/4" case bolts in the middle of the engine to help tie down the top cover. On Bob Swanson's 150 hp RV-6, I recommended that he use some flexible aluminum, somewhat "spring loaded" on the top of the plenum inlet that would be spring loaded to bear against the molded cowl inlet openings that Van's supplies. He put a strip of the now famous adhesive backed UHMW on the top of these aluminum inlets so they wouldn't wear on the fiberglass inlets. The last that I heard, this system was working very well for Bob. I think Bob used cam locks or screws and nutplates for attachment of the top cover. Warren Bishop looked at Bob's installation and came up with some clever methods of attachment for the top cover. I hope we can get some pictures out, somehow. I think one advantage to the plenum, if you can keep the side baffles short enough, is that there will be easier access to the spark plugs with a torque wrench. The top rear plugs are hard to get at with the conventional baffles. Bob Skinner RV-6 380 hours Buffalo, WY bskinr(at)trib.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Bob Skinner <bskinr(at)trib.com>
Subject: Re: Mold Release
Gil, Thanks for the fiberglass tips. Unfortunately, we don't a local industrial epoxy supplier. As a matter of fact, we don't have much local anything here in Buffalo, WY. I'll probably try the PVA with vinyl ester and see what happens. The PVA worked OK on Safe-T-Poxy but sure didn't on Aeropoxy. As I remember, I used the PVA over the wax---kind of "double protection". Thanks, Bob > If you must use wax (as in the first step of my alternative tail >fairing production method posted last week) then buy real "mold release >wax" from your local industrial epoxy resin supplier ... Johnsons Paste Wax >is NOT a good substitute! The real stuff is fairly expensive, is >silicone-free and about $15 for a large, flat can ... several layers must >be applied. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Bob Skinner <bskinr(at)trib.com>
Subject: emepange fairing
Fellow RVers, I think I got my mold up and running so will start up production as soon as I get back from another trip back to NE. Sorry to use the list for this, but I've received so much inquiry about this fairing that to E-mail each one individually would take too much time. As I stated in an earlier post, I'm taking no more orders and no more checks until I've taken care of everyone who has contacted me to date. With one mold and one guy, this will take awhile. I'll go as fast as I can. Should be able to kick out one a day if nothing else comes up. (I would like to spend a little time building RV #2) I didn't really mean to turn this into a business. I was just trying to help out a few fellow builders. I'm really not fond of the sticky stuff. Maybe some enterprising young buck will gear up and put me out of business. Also, I need to charge for shipping. The first one out cost $5.90 to ship which is probably the profit on this deal. I didn't figure the freight would be this high as the fairing is so light, but I guess it is kind of bulky. If this stops any of those builders who have contacted me, please let me know and I'll take your name off the list. Please do all correspondence off-list as I've probably abused the list enough with "commercial" posts. Bob Skinner RV-6 380 hrs Buffalo, WY bskinr(at)trib.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: lottmc(at)datastar.net (Michael C. Lott)
Subject: Re: Fuel selectors
That sounds like a good idea to me. On another note, I met a man with a 180 rv-4, had a 25 gal tank made for the baggage compartment. Said it doesnt get aft of cg limit. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Ivoprop cheap shot (was Constant Speed)
From: less_drag(at)juno.com (JAMES E AYERS)
Date: Oct 30, 1997
writes: > >Paul, >A CS prop uses a governor to control the pitch of the prop and the rpm's. >Where a in flight adjustable you must adjust. Before you buy a Ivoprop you >may want to ask around there have been alot of failures with those >props.....George Orndorff Come on, George, be specific. Van should have as good a safety record as the Ivoprop prop. Over 16,000 flying and 11 incidents reported. (Both numbers a year old) Taking a cheap shot at a new product doesn't cut it anymore. TELL US WHAT YOU KNOW. FACTS. NOT HANGAR TALK. AND NO B.S. ABOUT THE "BOB TREUTER" PROP. I WILL BE HAPPY TO TRY TO CORROBORATE ANYTHING YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THE IVOPROP "MAGNUM" PROP. Jim Ayers Flying an RV-3 with an Ivoprop Magnum VP prop. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 1997
From: Gil Alexander <gila(at)flash.net>
Subject: Make your own tail fairing easily
RV guys and gals, I'm not sure if this one got out while the server was all &*^^% *(. But since Bob S. is having production problems, you can make a good tail fairing yourself from what Van sent you. Van's part has nice curves, but is angled too acutely to fit the VS to HS angle, and everyone seems to have a slightly different forward position of the leading edge of the VS with respect to the HS leading edge. The following method nicely gets around these two problems. Incidentally, you might still have problem number 2 with Bob's fairing. ... not feeling guilty about not recommending Bob S. fairing since he doesn't really like making them ...:^) ... Gil (use WEST epoxy) Alexander **** repost follows **** > >I am in the process of fitting the fuselage/empanage fairing on my -6. >Confirming what I have heard from many builders, it came as no surprise >that it initially fits like s***. Today I entertained the idea of >pitching it totally, and glassing a new fairing from scratch. Is it >worth the effort, or should I rework the one I've already got? > Bob ... there is an easy way that works .... 1. Go out and buy WEST epoxy and 410 microballoons. *** sorry, original post said 411 - bad typo *** 2. Use Vans part as a male mold to make new fairing with only ONE layer of 4 oz. cloth. Get some mold wax and PVA release agent and use them to ensure seperation after curing. 3. Tape everything in sight at the fin/stab. area with a layer of vinyl tape. I used 3M #417 tape (also called 'glider tape' ...:^) Do not use masking tape ... this taped surface must be a release for epoxy. Do a good job here or you will find all sorts of eppenage parts unintentionally bonded into a single assembly....:^) 4. The molding you just made is VERY flexible and can now be taped in place at it's edges only (the edge 1/8 inch only) on the fin/stab junction. I used vinyl electrical tape a different color from the tape of step 3. It will hold it's curve well when the edges are held. 5. It probably won't fit well around the LE of the fin ... no big deal, just cut a notch in the molding so it fits. Every plane seems to be different in this area. 6. Lay up 2 layers of 9 oz. cloth (satin weave preferred) onto of your thin, taped-in-place molding with the WEST epoxy. Use seperate pieces on each side and overlap an inch or two at the centerline. The floppy cloth should nicely bridge the the notch you had to cut in step 5. Use a peel ply over the final wet layup and gently squegee the excess resin into the peel ply ... I cut the peel ply into 3 to 4 inch wide strips since the peel ply won't conform well to curves. 7. Let cure completely. Leave it for 2 or 3 times longer than you would think ...:^) 8. Sand lightly .. you will usually need some sort of curved sanding block ... I made one from blue foam. 9. Any low spots found in the sanding step can be lightly filled with WEST epoxy and microballoons applied with a squegee. 10. Sand again, sanding most of the filler off. 11. Repeat 9 and 10 until you are happy with the smoothness. I only needed two applications of filler. All sanding was done by hand, starting with 60 grit. I found the latex paint compatible sandpaper (the green stuff) from the hardware store to be the least likely to clog. When you are all done, there should only be patches of filler left, not a complete layer of filler. 12. Pull the tape off that is holding the edge of the original single layer molding down. A sideways motion works here since the tape edge is now laminated between the original 4 oz layer and the later two 9 oz layers. 13. Trim the edges of the part to final dimensions .. usually this should be just inside the tape location of step 4. 14. Remove all tape from step 3 that was providing a masking function. 14. Re-install fairing and drill for the #8 mounting screws. This technique has been used on at least 4 local RV6s, and with the WEST epoxy will give a much more stable molding than the original kit one. It will also fit your plane EXACTLY. Other materials may work, but those listed above definitely work and are easy to use. It was clean enough with the WEST epoxy mini-pumps I found I could laminate a layer of cloth in my regular clothes without a mess. ... hope this helps ... ... Gil (epoxy ain't that bad) Alexander ------------------------------------ RV6A, #20701, finishing kit "REPLY" sends to entire RV-list mailto:gila(at)flash.net to reply privately ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Constant Speed Vs. In-Flight Adjustable
From: less_drag(at)juno.com (JAMES E AYERS)
Date: Oct 30, 1997
>Kempthorne) writes: >> >>Hi all, >> >>Paul Bessing asked: >>> >Does anyone know if there is a difference between "in-flight >adjustable" and constant speed props? >> >>Jim Ayers answered: >> I have 50plus hours in a Cherokee Arrow with a CS prop, and 100plus hours >>>flying my RV-3 with the Ivoprop "in-flight" adjustable prop. The >>>biggest difference is in the lever you use to operate the prop. A lever for the >>>CS prop, and a switch for the electric "in-flight" adjustable prop. >>>You're working off of the tachometer for the rpm with either prop. >> >>I thought I understood the in-flight adjustable prop but maybe I >don't??? >>Wouldn't throttle still be used to control manifold pressure? >> >>I have a Debonair with CS prop. I set the RPM I want with the Prop >>control and the MANIFOLD PRESSURE with the throttle. With the CS prop, I can >>"phugoid" up and down and the RPM will remain constant - hence the name. >>With the Ivoprop I would have to keep RPM constant by constantly moving the >>switch - right? >> >>What I want is a constant AIRSPEED prop. It would keep the A/S >>constant in both cruise and climb. Wouldn't that be neat!! >> >>Hal Kempthorne RV-6AQ -- WANTED TO BUY - a used Chevy V-6 setup. >>halk(at)sybase.com Santa Clara, CA. Debonair N6134V @ SJC I have climbed at 80 mph ias and I have cruised at 80 mph ias. But you don't need a RV for that. And I don't think that is what was really meant. A VP prop has characteristics like a fixed pitch prop, small changes in airspeed create small changes in RPM, without making any changes in throttle or pitch. A fixed pitch prop is like a car with only one gear. A variable pitch prop is similar to a transmission in a car. However, the car transmission normally has only three or four gears. The variable pitch can be used at any position within the limits of the blade travel. Thereare mechanical stops in the hub to limit the travel of the blades. And the blade is completely variable between the stops. The CS prop is a variable pitch prop with a governor added. The pilot adjusts the governor with the lever in the cockpit. The governor adjusts the variable pitch prop to maintain the RPM setting. With changes in throttle position and airspeed, the governor will maintain the engine RPM as long as the blades doesn't hit the mechanical stops. When the throttle is pulled back to idle on the ground, the blades are resting on the low pitch stops. As the throttle is advanced, the engine RPM will increase until it reaches the governor control setting. Then the governor will change the blade angle to hold that RPM. On the variable pitch (VP) Ivoprop Magnum prop, the low pitch mechanical stop is established to provide engine red line RPM at full throttle for take-off and climb. The mechanical stop position is established as part of the prop installation. When the initial maximum angle climb is changed to a cruise climb, both the throttle and engine RPM are adjusted. (Very similar for both the CS and VP prop) The difference between the CS and VP prop adjustment; The CS prop allows the RPM to be changed directly by the cockpit lever. The VP prop changes the blade angle to change the engine RPM. However, the engine rpm is also changed by the throttle and changes in airspeed. I hope this helps explain how the VP and CS props relate to each other. I would explain the real benefits of the VP/CS prop over a fixed pitch prop, but no-one believes a RV-3 pilot. (No witnesses on board.) Jim Ayers LOM M332A engine Ivoprop VP Prop Sportcraft Antennas RV-3 N47RV Maroon Marauder Less_Drag(at)juno.com LesDrag(at)aol.com Thousand Oaks, California USA http://member.aol.com/lesdrag/rv3.htm http://member.aol.com/lesdrag/Ivoprop.htm ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6160hp(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: Pickling advice
My used 0320 Lycoming is on a home made engine stand bolted to prop flange facing down. I have over 36 quarts now invested in the fill up. You will need to plug with a plate, the carb bolt on inlet location and exhaust inlets if not done. The intake and heads above the piston will eventully fill? I have a funnel on the high point, the air breather point on the accessory drive case, to fill at. I use cheapy 10-30 motor oil as I will later use it in cars most likely. I kept topping the thing off every day as I initially started the pickling stuff. The trouble is...oil leaks out of this thing slowly. seals probably will hold once it is in normal attitude and much less full, but for now I refil it bi-monthly from the catch pan under it. By using a paint filter straining the oil back in. About a gallon in 2 months, unless its high summer heat. Kerosene might be way to thin IMHO. Respectfully, Dave McManmon, RV6 Cicero NY. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Craig Hiers <craig-RV4(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Gascolator
chuckie8 wrote: > > > For those 4's out there, where are you locating your gascolator? > Besides putting it between the cross-over exhaust pipes, I'm not sure > where else you can put it. help! Chuck > > +- I put mine on the bottom just to the left a bit. I shielded the exhaust pipes and have a tube ducting cool air from the rear baffle. Craig Hiers RV-4 N143CH ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: Ivoprop cheaper shot
<19971030.005345.12839.2.Less_Drag(at)juno.com>
From: bstobbe(at)juno.com (bruce d stobbe)
E AYERS) writes: >Taking a cheap shot at a new product doesn't cut it anymore. I saw his product line at OSH, including the in-flight adjustable design. After watching the mechanism grind back and forth, and listening to that poor little motor load up and bog down as it reached its travel limits while it galled up the jack screw and twisted the prop blade, I wasn't impressed and wouldn't use one of those things in a ceiling fan, let alone an airplane... But that's just my opinion.... Bruce Stobbe RV-6 (won't have an Ivoprop) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mlfred(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Plenum- manufacturer!
Hi all: After watching all the bandwidth about the plenum, I guess I should tell you that Sam James is working on a variety of these for the RV market- IO-540,IO-360, O-360, and O-320. These things have to be made of a high temp resin, and post-cured at higher temps in an oven. Call Sam about availablity time, or I'll post it after I hear from him. Check six! Mark ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: charles(at)onramp.net (charles young)
Subject: Re: Electric flap replacement motor
Same here, have been on the list supposedly for a number of months. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: AIRPLANEIT(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: Constant Speed
>Just remember--Constant speed prop, means constant speed prop, not constant speed engine. Air adjustable prop, means air adjustable prop, not constant speed engine.< >(Where's that 16 year old airport bum, when you need him?)< Well, here I am. And, I am, sorry to say, slightly lost. In direct crankshaft to prop combo (or even with reduction gears), isn't a constant prop speed the same as a constant engine speed (albeit, in a geared motor, the engine will slow down more than the prop, but still proportional)? The only way I can see any different is if there is some sort of a slipping clutch assembly in there somewhere. Perhaps you could elaborate a little more so the 16 year old can do what he strives to do in all situations.....learn. -Nick Stolley airplaneit(at)aol.com Saw an ultralight land tonight when is was very dark. At least the pilot remembered to put on an automotive headlight. Oh! Another thing. I am only one of the two 16-year-old airport bums. The other, Jeremy King, can be contacted at ShowCtrGuy(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Don McNamara <mcnamara(at)sbt.infi.net>
Subject: Re: I guess I will be an RV 8 builder now........................
Gert wrote: The only restriction she had was that I have to > sit in one before I am allowed to spent money on it. I am 6'6" you see, > and most planes don't fit me. Gert-- You WILL fit. When I first asked to sit in the prototype at Oshkosh, Tom Green of Van's (who stands about 9ft and weighs around 110) looked down at me as a Bubba was exiting the plane and said, "You won't fit. You should be looking at the RV-4." (Tom would probably deny saying that.) I'm 6'1" and will have headroom galore, even with a parachute. > So, the next opportunity to do that will probably be Oshkosh 98. Wrong, my friend and budding young plane builder! Hop a flight to Portland (NEVER in October!) and drive to North Plains. Van's will let you sit in the plane to your heart's content. Might even take you for a ride between the rains. Take your wife along, too. Sure beats waiting until next summer. Good luck. --Don McNamara 8 wings ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: "Anderson Ed" <AndersonE(at)bah.com>
Subject: Mazda Rotary?
Hi Tony, Yes to your questions. I have a Maza Rotary running in an RV-6A (awaiting FAA inspection). Tracy has over 500 hrs on one in his Rv-4. Not only are his conversion manual and newsletter well worth the modest price, Tracy is very forthcoming about the good, the bad and the ugly on his modification (mostly good). Also, he has a dual ignition computer which I highly recommend if you are going to use the stock Mazda 13B coils. Tracy is also working on a Electronic Fuel injection module (Tracy is an electrical engineer) which you might be interested in. I will tell you this, be prepared to spend a lot of time on any auto conversion. You will hear all sort of claims and disclaimers, exaggerated horsepower, etc. Take everything with a grain of salt. My conversion put out a solid 165HP on the test stand and that was with two very restrictive mufflers (to keep peace in the neighborhood) and I expect to get 10-15 more HP once tuned up. Ed Anderson andersone(at)bah.com Rv-6A with Hrummmmmm Ed ---------- From: wport.com!Alivic Subject: RV-List: Mazda Rotary? Date: Tuesday, October 28, 1997 9:12AM I read with great interest ,"The "HMMMMMMMMMMMM" alternative," in my latest issue of the RVator. Tony Livic alivic(at)wport.com RV-8 empennage still in the box | | | ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RICKRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: S-Tec Autopilot
Having just purchased an S-Tec 30 for my RV-8 let me clue you in on a few tidbits. First, I wanted altitude hold and simply wasn't willing to wait for Navaid to come up with something they've been promising for a number of years now. Additionally, other than cost, I've only heard the best regarding the S-Tec products. Although I've generally heard good things about Navaid I've also talked to some folks who have had trouble, both performance and service. I can't verify that, it's only what I've been told, so don't jump on me about it! I purchased my entire setup through Chief Aircraft for $5092.50. They seemed to have the cheapest advertised price and I've always had good luck working with them. That includes the installation kit designed for the RV-6. I'm the first -8 builder they're working with and therefore a dedicated installation kit for my airplane is not yet available. Shouldn't be much different though, either in design or cost. The flight engineering people at S-Tec have been very good to work with so far. My major complaint is S-Tec's "Kitplane Program". They advertise a progressive purchase program, not unlike how most of us build our RVs. Their claim is you buy the servos as you need them followed by the instrument and the computer, etc. toward the end. Same old justification that you delay expensive purchases until you actually need them. Sounds good so far. Unfortunately, unlike Van's their pricing is much different. I verified this not only with Chief but also with S-Tec. S-Tec doesn't provide their retailers the same markdown on these individual items that they do on a "complete" kit. Get this, the difference in cost between the S-Tec 30 "complete" kit (in other words you get everything up front) and their "Kitplane Program" is $1600. Unless I was planning to take ten years to build this airplane it's clear their "Kitplane Program" is a farce. Sure hurt my pocket book to purchase it up front but they don't leave you any choice. Thought you might want to know. Rick McBride RV-6 N523JC sold (boo hoo!) RV-8 80027 (man does it go together fast) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: chris marion <flyrv6(at)cinci.infi.net>
Subject: Re:finding Navaid
I cant seem to find navaid either,have checked trade a plane with no luck.I am also curious about installation,can this unit be fitted easily after the wings are built or should I plan on this being part of the wing construction? thanks chris marion rv6/6a?WAITING on wings ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rick_Smith(at)brahms2.tivoli.com
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: stall warning
You might consider making the angle of attack indicator that was describes in Sport Aviation about 15 years ago. The EAA can send you a copy of the article. It consists of a small vane that looks like a 3-inch long missile mounted on a low friction pivot. The front of the missile indicates the AOA against a scale. The one I saw installed was mounted on the wing of a BD-4 about 2 feet out from the root on a short probe. he took me for a ride and it was reassuring to fly around in slow flight, bank into a 45 degree bank and be able to pull on the stick watching the AOA displayed on the scale. The owner built it to teach his two sons how to fly and claimed that he wouldn't have let them fly the airplane without it. He had a green line on the indicator for final approach speed and a red line where the wing would start to nibble at a stall. Good Luck Rick monroeville.gulf.net!harvell(at)matronics.com on 10/29/97 07:29:26 AM Please respond to rv-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RV-List: stall warning I am looking for a stall warning switch for my rv6a. I looked through the archives and found a lot of ideas, all were untested. Is there any one out there that as installed one and tried it. I have the skin on one sided of both wings. Gary RV6A Wings | | "rv-list-request(at)matronics.com" | | & put the word "[un]subscribe" in the | | ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Al Mojzisik <prober(at)iwaynet.net>
Subject: Re: Rear Jump Seat
> >First off I would like to mention that utilizing the seat was a lot more >complicated than installing it, a number of factors need to be >considered and very depending on the age of your small passenger. Such >as Hearing Protection, Decent rate control, etc. > >My goal when I started was to have an installation that made my son as >safe as he was while riding in a car so I bypassed on making a simple >alum seat with a single seat belt. Scott, Please excuse my ignorance here but was there any requirement from the FAA (re: paperwork etc....) to legally use your plane as a three place. When getting your air worthyness cert. I thought that you had to declare how may souls you could levitate? I have an interest in this as I intend on trying to make a three place RV-6 since my wife and I are relatively small and light and we have one young daughter. I would rather not get into how we plan to fit into the six but suffice it to say I don't plan on any structural changes and plan on using UPS for unlimited baggage carrying capacity. Thanks..Al ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: "Anderson Ed" <AndersonE(at)bah.com>
Subject: Re: Tip lighting wire run
I too used the thin wall PCV pipe to run all electrical wiring to wing tips, works fine. Ed ---------- From: Jones, Bryan D. (LPT) Subject: RE: RV-List: Re: Tip lighting wire run Date: Tuesday, October 28, 1997 8:42PM Don, Just be sure you use wiring rated for the voltage you plan to use. I have a similar installation (except I am using thin-wall PVC pipe as conduit) and am going to run strobe leads from a central unit to the wing tips. I called the strobe manufacturer (Federal Signal) and asked what the max voltage the unit generates and was told it was no greater than 400-volts. The person sounded very competent and I believed him. Therefore, I used 600-volt, 18-ga four conductor shielded wire. Three of the conductors are for the strobe and I plan to use the fourth as positive 12-volts for the nav light. I feel like this will work well - does anyone believe otherwise? I have modified an industrial alarm/warning strobe unit for my RV. The enclosure was aluminum and it uses 12-volts. I have already rewired it and installed locking lead connectors for the wiring runs. Trial operation with 14-foot leads and Whelen strobe/nav light units work great. BTW, my folks live in Mansfield. My dad is thinking hard about buying an RV-6A - maybe we can look you up when I go visit. Bryan Jones JONESB(at)GEON.COM > I installed 1/2x .058- 6061-T6 tubing 1 inch below top skin & 2 inches > > aft of spar. Does anyone know whether I can run High voltage through > there for the strobe lights ??? > > > Don Jordan, RV-6A, #24330 > Mansfield, Tx > | | | ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Double Flaring Tool
From: bob.char.reeves(at)juno.com (Robert L Reeves)
Does anyone know of a source to purchase a "Double Flaring Tool" ? I used on once and it makes a much stronger flare on fuel lines than a regular one. Thanks in advance, Bob Reeves Building Bearhawk, Flying RV-4 Hidden River Airport, Sarasota, Florida ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mark Richardson <Mark.Richardson(at)sofkin.ca>
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: I guess I will be an RV 8 builder now..............
> > Hi folks > > I gotta share this with you................ > [Stuff about spouse suggesting the RV-8 deleted] I have had the tail kit for the -6 in may basement (alright, basements because I've moved 3 times) for 5 years now. My wife saw me drooling over theRV-8 in the kitplanes and asked "Why don't you build it instead?" Right after I came to, I said that I had thought she preferred side-by-side seating, and besides, I had already invested in the tail kit. She responded with "Hey, if you are going to enjoy the -8 more, why build the -6 ? It would be a waste of money and time. I can live with the tandem seating, no big deal." Right after I came to again, I sent an e-mail to Vans to get a new license agreement. I'm sending it out today for a new builders number. > > Just in case I was dreaming this, I waited for the next day, but nope, > "Da yellow One" it is. The only restriction she had was that I have to > sit in one before I am allowed to spent money on it. I am 6'6" you see, > and most planes don't fit me. > I'm 6'4", on the north side of 250 lbs (not arctic circle north, but maybe the tundra), and I have 26" wide shoulders. I fit in very few airplanes other than the -6 comfortably, but I can sit in the -8 and have over a hands width of space between my head and the canopy. I can even fit in the back seat comfortably with the canopy closed ! Anyway, thought I'd share this with you. Mark ---------------- Mark Richardson Mark.Richardson(at)sofkin.ca Project Manager, Flight Systems and Electronic Warfare Software Kinetics Ltd. http://www.sofkin.ca VOX 613-831-0888 FAX 613-831-8255 RV-6 20819 #include ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: "Patrick E. Kelley" <patk(at)mail.ic.net>
Subject: Re: I guess I will be an RV 8 builder now........................
Gert wrote: > > > Hi folks > > I gotta share this with you................ *** story of husband abuse omitted ;) *** > Hope I didn't bore y'all to death. Gert, she sounds like a sensible gal. If I didn't have one of my own, I'd offer to take her off your hands. Come to think of it, if she gets tired of working alone, she's welcome to gang up on me with Judi. Seriously, congratulations! You've overcome the biggest hurdle. Don't wait for Oshkosk; look for local builders and check out where Van may be attending flyins. Also, have your spouse check out the RV-6/6A. While it may be fun to control the aircraft by slapping the pilot on the back of the head, the view from up front is fantastic. On second thought, forget I said anything. Why stir up trouble? :) Good luck on your project. PatK - RV-6A ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 07, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Avionics Master...
> >The truth of the matter is that this guy is an avionics installer >and gets paid good money to install avionics master switches. >His whole column is suspect from this standpoint and is unfortunate >given AvWeb's stated purpose and scorn for the same behavior from >everyone else. Hmmmm . . I think I'd cut him more slack than this. I'd much rather believe that he's subordinated his own ability to observe and reason to the common wisdom . . . problem is that the common wisdom has not matured with the technology . . . in a highly regulated environment it's to be expected. I WILL grant him this . . . I'll bet you a steak dinner that KING radio hasn't the foggiest notion of how trashy the bus can be in a single engine airplane and under what conditions. I'll suggest further that Cessna knows even less. In spite of the fact that King, Cessna and all their contemporaries sat on Special Committee 135 and crafted DO-160, not one of them is so sure of their effort that they'll back off the notion than an avionics master is "advisable" or "recommended" . . . it's a CYA move. Would that a similar document be produced to guide airframe folks in the design and maintenance of electrical systems, avionics suppliers would still have a well placed distrust in the airframe folks ability and willingness to comply with it. But I'll suggest further that Ford and Toyota know to within a millijoule of what transients exist on their systems and just exactly what to do about it . . . I've see the engineering papers and the resulting flow of products for dealing with the problem. My problem with avionics master switch is that it adds to system complexity, pilot workload, reduces reliability, and fosters fear and distrust on the part of consumers who purchase these very complicated and expensive products. It also give the warranty service tech a tool to hammer some pilot who's radio is lying dead on the bench. Very sad given the solutions laying all around us. If Tom would take the time to discover what we have learned outside the padded cockpit environment, I'm sure he would agree. In the mean time, nobody's standing in our way for becoming both better airplane designers -AND- better consumers. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= | | | Go ahead, make my day . . . . | | Show me where I'm wrong. | ================================= <http://www.aeroelectric.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: charles(at)onramp.net (charles young)
Subject: Re: Mold Release
Yes, the black, electicians tape makes great mold release, have used it on my windshield and canopy skirting. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Bob Skinner <bskinr(at)trib.com>
Subject: Re: Make your own tail fairing easily
> ... not feeling guilty about not recommending Bob S. fairing since he >doesn't really like making them ...:^) >14. Re-install fairing and drill for the #8 mounting screws. Gil's method will work great. This, in essence, is what I have done so I know it works. My fairing saves the builder the step of making his own single layer laminate. The only area where Gil and I disagree---I'd use #6 flush stainless steel screws for mounting. Builders might glean the most useful construction tips from Gil and me and try building their own fairings. It's not brain surgery, just takes time. And, it's a good way to build the fiberglass working skills that you will need for gear leg cuffs, cowl work, canopy work, etc. The fairing would be a good place to get practical experience without taking a chance of goofing something up (unless you glue the whole mess to your airplane. As I can't remember whether I posted my instructions to the list, they are listed below. Bob Skinner RV-6 380 hrs Buffalo, WY bskinr(at)trib.com Empenage Fairing Fabrication The fairing that you have received is made of a one-layer laminate, laid up with epoxy resin. This results in a very thin, flexible fairing which can be cut and flexed to fit your RV-6. Preparation Start by masking all surfaces in the vicinity of where the fairing will be with adhesive-backed contact paper (shelf paper). The idea here is to protect the surface of the airplane from any wax used as a parting agent. Wax contamination of the aluminum surface can lead to paint adhesion problems later. This contact paper will also protect the aluminum surfaces from scratching. The fairing will need to be washed with warm, soapy water to remove the PVA release agent. I would also recommend that the fairing be cleaned with acetone when dry, sanded to remove any sheen and re-cleaned with acetone. Initial Fitting After the contact paper is applied, trial fit the fairing. The fairing curves around the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer. There may be a fit problem in this area, as no two airplanes are exactly alike. There may also be a fit problem in the vertical stabilizer area. The fairing can be cut, material remove and spliced back together with body putty. Edges can be stuck down to the contact paper with double sided tape. The curved area that wraps around the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer could be cut completely away, back to the part of the fairing that fits flush. Once the trial fit has been accomplished, mark the outline of the fairing on the contact paper on the fuselage, horizontal and vertical stabilizer. This will help you in the positioning of the double sided tape used to tack the edges of the fairing down flush with the various surfaces. Before tacking the edges down, you may want to feather the edge on the single lay-up fairing for a smooth transition to the aluminum. Now, place small pieces of double sided tape at intervals along the marked lines, slide the fairing on and press down to tack the edges of the fairing down. Don't get carried away with the tape. It sticks well and if you use too much, you will have difficulty in removing the completed fairing. Now that the fairing is mounted solidly, final fitting can be more easily accomplished. If the fairing does not fit tight against the vertical stabilizer, you can slit the fiberglass (and possibly even cut out a section) and stick it back on the stab with the double sided tape. You can then fill in any imperfections with body putty. If the curved area that wraps around the horizontal stabilizer does not fit, you can completely remove it down to where it fits flush. New lay-ups will replace what you've cut away. You will lay up fiberglass on the fairing and lap over onto the *waxed* contact paper. Don't forget to wax any area that will have fiberglass laid up on it. Now would be a good time to make a template for the fiberglass that you'll be using to complete the fairing. I laid my fairing up in halves, using one template for both halves. You can tape newspaper to the stabs and trace an outline of the fairing. You'll want to cut extra cloth so you can reach all of the edges. After the fairing is fitted and is tacked down and before doing any lay-ups, do a final cleaning of the fiberglass. After this is done, you'll need to wax the surface of the stabilizers and fuselage from the edge of the fairing on out. You apply the wax to the shelf paper being very careful not to get any on the fairing. I used Johnson Paste Wax as a release agent. Lay-ups I used three layers of 8.92 oz/sq yd., crowfoot weave fiberglass with a thread count of 60x54, Aircraft Spruce part no. 7791-50. This is a fine weave which requires less work to fill than courser weaves. The crowfoot weave seems to follow complex contours better than some other types of cloth. You could use lighter cloth and ACS has a good selection. This isn't a structural lay-up so I imagine there are other cloths that will work OK. This is a cloth similar to what we worked with on the Glasair, and so, is one cloth that I am familiar with. Trace your pattern onto the cloth and cut out your fiberglass pieces. Lay out your templates on a 45 degree bias. For a 3 layer laminate, you will cut out six pieces of cloth. This will give you a total of 4 layers which is what I used on my RV-6. You may be able to get by with just adding 2 lay ups. Use your own judgement. If you use lighter cloth, you might want an extra layer. I did machine countersink the fiberglass for use with #6 stainless steel, flush screws. Four layers seemed to give enough material for a nice countersink. By laying out patterns end to end, I estimate that it will take 11 feet of the 50 inch wide fiberglass to apply three layers of fiberglass to the single layer fairing. Now it's time to mix the epoxy and go to work. I used Safe-T-Poxy on my fairing. Brush some resin on the fairing, lay the fiberglass on and wet the cloth on out. I did my fairing in one session. As soon as all of the bubbles were out of the first lay up, I applied the second, an so forth. Applying all of the layers in one session generally results in a little lighter lay up and you get the best chemical bond. If for some reason you can not do all of the layups at one time and the fiberglass has cured, you should probably sand the fiberglass and clean the dust off to promote the best adhession. I overlapped at the leading edge of the vertical stabilizer. This results in a greater thickness which can be sanded down, later. If you had to cut away the horizontal stabilizer leading edge wrap around, you can use scraps from your cloth and lay up from the fairing right onto the waxed contact paper and make a new wrap around. When done, clean up and let the fairing cure for a few days, the longer the better. After the fairing is cured is a good time to do any filing and sanding while the fairing is still stuck to the airplane. The fairing is easier to work on when held solidly. For rough work, I used little 2 inch sanding disks in various grits (Rol-lock, bought from Avery) on a right angle air drill. I finished the fairing with foam block-backed sandpaper of various grits. When it was time to pop the fairing off, I polished my chip chaser so I'd be sure it wouldn't scar the aluminum and used it to slide under the fairing to separate the fairing from the double sided tape. This is when you'll find out if you used too much tape. It took me a little while to get the fairing to release and it was a little nerve wracking to think that I'd permanently bonded the fairing to the airplane but it finally popped loose. You can then trim the fairing to final dimensions and finish sanding. To locate the screw holes for attaching the fairing, I put the fairing on the airplane and used a #40 hole finder to locate the #40 holes in the vertical and horizontal stabilizer and the fuselage that I drilled for the fairing screws. One airplane that I saw that used a similar fairing with the horizontal stabilizer leading edge wrap around feature used only two screws at the very aft of the fairing. With a substantial wrap around on the horizontal stab, this should work fine. I felt better using a series of screws on the H.S. and V.S. and I used three on the fuselage. My thinking was the extra screws would help eliminate any curling of the edges of the fairing. Epoxy resin is the best to use to help eliminate this tendency. Polyester is the worst, especially if the fairing is painted a dark color. Disclaimer: Use this fairing at your own risk. Just because it worked on my RV-6 doesn't mean it will work on yours. If fact, if you use this fairing, it will probably cause your airplane to fall out of the sky. You may die or kill hundreds of innocent people or both. I would suggest that, after going to all of this work, that you turn this fairing into a conversation piece, ash tray, table lamp or flower planter. For god's sake, don't put it on your airplane! Use Van's fairing. That way, the heat's on Van's Aircraft, not me. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: list use suggestion
From: bstobbe(at)juno.com (bruce d stobbe)
First, let me say that I really enjoy this list and the information it provides. It has definitely been very helpful to me as I progress with my RV construction. But, do we really need 20 or 30 responses with virtually the same information describing the difference between a CS and variable pitch prop, or any other question of this nature?? I've noticed this happens quite often with these types of questions (or subjects) and wonder why so many feel it necessary to respond when there have already been so many answers with the same info they are about to provide. I would like to gently suggest that before anyone responds to a question, you read the rest of your mail to see if someone has already responded with the same answer you are about to give. If so, try to hold back and help keep the duplication to a minimum. Bruce Stobbe RV-6; working on fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
From: MKswing(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: Auto Conversion/Aerobatics
Thanks for the responses on the Auto Conversion/Aerobatic question- seems like there is not enough known about them in RV's to seriously consider them if I plan on being upsidedown a lot. Some other questions concerning RV's, engines and aerobatics. I am a student pilot. I have taken several aerobatic rides and love it and will be doing a quite a bit of it in my RV6A. Its one of my main reasons for buying the kit. Beyond that I know little about aerobatics and even less about engines. I have ordered from Vans an 0-360 engine with inverted fuel and oil options and a Hartzel constant speed prop to go along with the RV. They will be arriving in about six weeks. Questions: 1) Does Lycoming make a specially modified engine for aerobatics? If so, would it be overkill to order it? 2) Are the inverted fuel and oil systems needed or are they overkill? The new engines are so expensive it seems like a minor expense to make sure its lubricated. 3)Does a fuel-injected engine have any advantages over a carberated one as far as areobatics are concerned? If so, when and what is the best way to modifiy a 0-360? Thanks in advance for all the input. Mike Kiess (RV-6AQB on the way!) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rick_Smith(at)brahms2.tivoli.com
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re:"commercial" use of the list
Gentlemen, Some of the most useful information I have gained from this RV list is information about various products, services and suppliers. Is it considered bad form to advertise unique RV parts here? I for one would be glad to get info on where to buy a set of trick wheelpants or wingtips for my RV. It seems like this would be "the place" to sell or trade parts we dont need. For example I have an unused Harrison oil cooler of the type for a C-172. Anybody have a Mac trim servo to trade? I am planning to use the servo for the cabin heat actuator. Thanks Rick ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RobHickman(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: Bart Lalonde/Aero Sport Power Engines
I purchased an IO-360 from Bart in June and so far I am very pleased. I have NOT run the engine yet, but it looks better than a new one from the outside. Any question that I have had he has been more knowledgable than Lycoming on. The following is what my engine is: 1) First run wide deck case. 2) New Lycoming cylinders 3) One new mag, one rebuilt. 4) Rebuilt Bendix system. 5) New wires & light weight starter. 6) Crome valve covers & intake. We shall see how this turns out in the spring when I fire it up. I had planned on a new engine but I could not resist the savings!!! I figure I saved over $9000 Rob Hickman (N401RH) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HAWKBUD(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: ways to heat a garage
I have a pretty good size shed to work in..... 32' x 64' with a 13' ceiling and too much stuff stored in it. I have found a $40 electric radian heater that works fine , I have two of the and focus them in the area I am working. The warm the objects ... and me. I put them on a timer to shut them off every 45 minutes in case I forget to turn them off. hawkbud(at)aol.com fliying a 182RG Building RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 07, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Master Switch
>Let's see if I understand Tom's position. Basically he is saying that he >installs lots of gizmos in certified spam cams. Many of the gizmos will >shit the bed at the drop of a hat. Therefore, he does everything he can to >try and prevent the soiling of the sheets. > >Bob replies that we shouldn't put up with this crap. Send it back and >make 'em fix it or buy elsewhere. > >I would suggest that it is deeply ingrained in the pilot mentality to >accept a lousy hand and deal with it. If this were not true, nobody would >fly certified planes. We have very few choices in the certified world and >it is doubtful that these companies would respond. > I'm not so sure. For example, I get lots of e-mail asking, "what do you think about this product." 99% of the time, all I can say is that I've heard nothing bad about it. This should be an indication that people who own them consider them to be a good value . . .no matter what idiosyncracies they may exhibit. Suppose we were more sophisticated consumers and talked more openly about things we disliked about products. It's very hard for a pilot to fess up with good critical review of some accessory that he's just spent a killobuck on . . . if he badmouths it too bad, people will wonder why he's keeping it. >So, where does it leave us homebuilders? First, I want any gizmo that I >buy to be suitable for use in a plane (DO-160) whether tested formally or >not. This is REGARDLESS of whether an avionics master is installed or >not. How do I know what's the "good stuff" and what's not? It's not like > I can look for the UL label. If someone has taken the trouble to do DO-160 testing they are entitled, indeed encouraged to put a lable on their prouduct so stating. There's a special code that tells the observer exactly what tests were run and to what level. I'll work up a post on deciphering the code. But it's a good point. When you talk to folk about buying their product, ASK if it's tested and labeled to that fact? Here's a buying technique that I think can have a profound positive influence on products. On your FIRST call to a prospective supplier, ask any questions you have with respect to features and operation. Then ask about testing. If you don't like the answer, then appologize for taking up so much of their time and make it clear that you're only interested in products that have been quantified. Call back a week later and go ahead and order the thing if you really want it. They probably won't remember you anyhow but the point is to register a loss-of-sale for cause. This works everywhere, especially at the booths at airshows. >Bob .... ? > >John ( who's almost feeling sorry for Bonanza drivers.. ) Me too . . . not so much that they're flying a Bonanza, I find the airplane to be basically a good, fun machine but just think how much more flying they could do if the same money were spent on an RV while using the excess to finance the travel! They'd end up with a machine with better cost/performance ratio and be able to use it more often. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= | | | Go ahead, make my day . . . . | | Show me where I'm wrong. | ================================= <http://www.aeroelectric.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: "Anderson Ed" <AndersonE(at)bah.com>
Subject: Re;Everett Hatch Crash
Hard to believe anyone would intentionally try a split S from 800 ft. Ed ---------- From: aol.com!MAlexan533 Subject: RV-List: Re;Everett Hatch Crash Date: Tuesday, October 28, 1997 12:53PM The news tonite here at said that Everett Hatch may have been doing low level aerobatics at the time of the crash, according to a witness. Estimated altitude, 800 feet. | | | ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Denny Harjehausen <harje(at)proaxis.com>
Subject: Re:finding Navaid
> >How do you get in touch with Navaid? Do they have a web site? > >Sam Buchanan >sbuc(at)traveller.com Navaid Devices, Inc 100 Cherokee Blvd., Suite 333 Chattanooga, TN 37405 (615) 752-1718 They don't list a E-mail or Web page. Have a good one. Denny RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Acker" <r.acker(at)thegrid.net>
Subject: Re: I guess I will be an RV 8 builder now........................
Date: Oct 30, 1997
> sit in one before I am allowed to spent money on it. I am 6'6" you see, > and most planes don't fit me. > > So, the next opportunity to do that will probably be Oshkosh 98. Welcome to the list Gert. You'll fit (I'm 6'4, 220lbs, mostly torso, had 2" headroom with a cushion and plenty of legroom...that was in the original prototype, the production version has even more room). Van's flys to airshows and fly-ins throughout the year, and may be coming to one near you. Give 'em a call or check the web page for schedules. Rob (RV-6Q). ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Acker" <r.acker(at)thegrid.net>
Subject: Re: Ivo Cheap Shot
Date: Oct 30, 1997
> Van should have as good a safety record as the Ivoprop prop. Over 16,000 > flying and 11 incidents reported. (Both numbers a year old) > Taking a cheap shot at a new product doesn't cut it anymore. > I WILL BE HAPPY TO TRY TO CORROBORATE ANYTHING YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THE > IVOPROP "MAGNUM" PROP. > TELL US WHAT YOU KNOW. FACTS. NOT HANGAR TALK. AND NO B.S. Jim, nice to see someone step up to the plate. Since you brought up numbers... First, I doubt Van himself has had eleven incidents of prop failure this year . Second, your numbers state 16,000 total flying Ivoprops with 11 incidents reported THIS year. How about reporting both numbers for the same time period? Also, I did not see the 16,000 number and 11 incidents referenced by model type. Are the 16,000 of a mixed variety being used in various applications (ultralights, trikes, drones...i.e. including those where Ivo has an excellent record)? If so, posting such skewed numbers here on the list is an equally "cheap shot" since they have nothing to do with the lists targeted use. If not, 16,000 flying Magnums is an awesome production and sales number. How about specific Ivo Magnum on Lycoming O-320/360 numbers (a couple of years data...prop model & number flying, number of failures & a/c type, hours on failed prop, injuries and fatalities as a direct result, number of customer returned props, etc.)? Post the numbers. You may just sell a whole bunch of Ivo's here, or just the opposite. I'm tired of the Ivoprop BS too, your providing real numbers would settle the issue (along with constant Ivo bashing and resultant sales effort). Regards, Rob (RV-6Q). ________________________________________________________________________________
From: dralle(at)matronics.com (Matt Dralle 510-606-1001)
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: "commercial" use of the list
>-------------- >Gentlemen, >Some of the most useful information I have gained from this RV list is >information about various products, services and suppliers. Is it >considered bad form to advertise unique RV parts here? I for one would be >glad to get info on where to buy a set of trick wheelpants or wingtips for >my RV. It seems like this would be "the place" to sell or trade parts we >dont need. For example I have an unused Harrison oil cooler of the type >for a C-172. Anybody have a Mac trim servo to trade? I am planning to use >the servo for the cabin heat actuator. >Thanks >Rick >-------------- I believe one of the charters of the List is to provide medium for exchanging parts as well as ideas. Obviously everyone would get pretty tired of shameless commercialism on a regular basis, but I think that occasional classifieds are great. Matt Dralle RV-List Admin. -- Matt G. Dralle | Matronics | P.O. Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 510-606-1001 Voice | 510-606-6281 FAX | dralle(at)matronics.com Email http://www.matronics.com/ W.W.W. | Featuring Products For Aircraft ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Richard Bibb <rbibb(at)fore.com>
Subject: Re: I guess I will be an RV 8 builder
now........................ Ah go ahead - I'm 6'5" and I fit in a -4. With all that extra room in the -8 I can't beleive you wouldn't fit.... :) The only restriction she had was that I have to >sit in one before I am allowed to spent money on it. I am 6'6" you see, >and most planes don't fit me. Richard E. Bibb RV-4 N144KT Oak Hill, VA rbibb(at)fore.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: "Jeff J. Dingbaum" <dingbaum(at)hep.net>
Subject: Flames! RV6 vs Mustang II
Hi everyone, I have talked to one or two of you out there about why you chose an RV6 vs a Mustang II. If this is a taboo subject, please - flame me off list!!! I have been trying to decide between them and have been monitoring both email lists to try to get a feel for what types of problems are encountered. I have also scanned thru the last 7 years of mail archives. To be honest, I really don't have a STRONG feeling one way or another. They both appear to be really nice aircraft. Van seems to have a great builder network. On the other hand I really like the tapered wing of the Mustang. If you have been in the same quandry as I am could you please send me a not, saying what caused the balance to tip to the RV6? Thanks, Jeff PS. Cost is a factor. I would really like to to a Composite 4 place, but the kit runs 25k and then there is the IO360, so that probably is out of my range. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HinkleyC(at)fca.gov
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re:finding Navaid
* * * * The views expressed in this EMail are my own and do not represent the policy or position * * * * * * * * of the Farm Credit Administration. * * * * This is what I have for Navaid. NAVAID DEVICES 641 N. Market Street Chattanooga, Tennessee 37405 423-267-3311 FAX 423-756-6154 I cant seem to find navaid either,have checked trade a plane with no luck.I am also curious about installation,can this unit be fitted easily after the wings are built or should I plan on this being part of the wing construction? thanks chris marion rv6/6a?WAITING on wings Curtis Hinkley RV-8 N815RV reserved CHink11769 @ aol.com hinkleyc(at)fca.gov ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: mauser(at)claris.com (Richard Chandler)
Subject: Re: Mold Release
> Gil, > > Thanks for the fiberglass tips. Unfortunately, we don't a > local industrial epoxy supplier. As a matter of fact, we don't have > much local anything here in Buffalo, WY. > I'll probably try the PVA with vinyl ester and see what happens. > The PVA worked OK on Safe-T-Poxy but sure didn't on Aeropoxy. As > I remember, I used the PVA over the wax---kind of "double protection". Check around for a chain of stores called TAP Plastics, they should have pva, and other mold release stuff. Any place that specializes in Plexiglas may be a good source. If you've got a relly good marine supply store, they may have it. they will definitely have the eposy and related items. -- Richard Chandler RV-6: Garage bought and being finished, saving for tools and tail kit. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Scott Gesele <scottg(at)icsnet.com>
Subject: Re: Gascolator
>For those 4's out there, where are you locating your gascolator? >Besides putting it between the cross-over exhaust pipes, I'm not sure >where else you can put it. help! Chuck > Chuck, On my 6A, it is located on the right side of the fuse, within the wing root. It stays cool, was easy to install, is away from heat and electrical and if I had it to do it over, I wouldn't change a thing. Scott Gesele N506RV - Flying ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: charles(at)onramp.net (charles young)
Subject: Re: Finding Navaid
Try phoning 423-267-3311, I think they are in Tenn. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: charles(at)onramp.net (charles young)
Subject: Re: Double Flaring Tool
I like the Rolo-Flair, about $80 bucks, can be had from Aircraft Spruce, it is a 37 degree and makes excellent flares and accepts different size of tubing. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ShelbyRV6A <ShelbyRV6A(at)aol.com>
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: Plenum- manufacturer!
I talked to him yesterday(Steve Barnard gave me his number). He has a list of people wanting plenums already. For those of you looking for his number - it is 941-675-4493. Shelby in Nashville. IO-360 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: charles(at)onramp.net (charles young)
Subject: Re:finding Navaid
Navaid can supply you with some installation instructoins for RV-6 under the seat installation (where mine is) my friend has his in the wing, near the ailerson bellcrank. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: charles(at)onramp.net (charles young)
Subject: Re: Tip lighting wire run
What would be the source of you power unit? What is the brand name? Would like to look into using. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Denny Harjehausen <harje(at)proaxis.com>
Subject: Re:finding Navaid
> I posted this earlier, but maybe it didn't get thru. > > Navaid Devices, Inc > 100 Cherokee Blvd., Suite 333 > Chattanooga, TN 37405 > (615) 752-1718 > > They don't list a E-mail or Web page. > Have a good one. Denny RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: denis <denis.rolandoeugio(at)hol.fr>
Subject: red zone
Thank alot everybody for your answers ( and your welcomes on the list ) on the propeller diameter. I received monday my gear legs from Van and I decide, due to the new length of them, to ...wait and see. If I can avoid to shorten my blades it's better for me (very high cost in France). My next question will be on engine red zones. Some engines have vibration zones which is better to avoid ( between 2000 and 2250 rpm for my 0360 ). How are these red zones determined ? Is it only feeling or is it instrumental measures ? And if you mount this engine on a different plane (different structure, different engine mount and so on) will this vibration zones stay to the same rpm ? A few words to introduce me a little more precisely: I'm french homebuilder,38 years old, 3 children. I leave in north east of France, at the Luxemburg border (bad weather in winter!), my only hobby is planes. After job, I'm flight instructor (I begin this year to try to teach to fly to my wife, it's sometimes hard !) ;-). I'm falling in love with RV4 3 years ago, when a man show me his plane: the first RV4 build in France. This man is now a good friend of mine and he helps me regularly on my construction. Now that I have flown RV4, I understand better the RV grin ! Never flown a better plane !!! Hope not to bore you to much and sorry for my poor english. Denis ROLANDO RV4 fuselage in progress ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Acker" <r.acker(at)thegrid.net>
Subject: Re: Ivo Cheap Shot
Date: Oct 30, 1997
> Van should have as good a safety record as the Ivoprop prop. Over 16,000 > flying and 11 incidents reported. (Both numbers a year old) > Taking a cheap shot at a new product doesn't cut it anymore. > I WILL BE HAPPY TO TRY TO CORROBORATE ANYTHING YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THE > IVOPROP "MAGNUM" PROP. > TELL US WHAT YOU KNOW. FACTS. NOT HANGAR TALK. AND NO B.S. Jim, nice to see someone step up to the plate. Since you brought up numbers... First, I doubt Van himself has had eleven incidents of prop failure this year . Second, your numbers state 16,000 total flying Ivoprops with 11 incidents reported THIS year. How about reporting both numbers for the same time period? Also, I did not see the 16,000 number and 11 incidents referenced by model type. Are the 16,000 of a mixed variety being used in various applications (ultralights, trikes, drones...i.e. including those where Ivo has an excellent record)? If so, posting such skewed numbers here on the list is an equally "cheap shot" since they have nothing to do with the lists targeted use. If not, 16,000 flying Magnums is an awesome production and sales number. How about specific Ivo Magnum on Lycoming O-320/360 numbers (a couple of years data...prop model & number flying, number of failures & a/c type, hours on failed prop, injuries and fatalities as a direct result, number of customer returned props, etc.)? Post the numbers. You may just sell a whole bunch of Ivo's here, or just the opposite. I'm tired of the Ivoprop BS too, your providing real numbers would settle the issue (along with constant Ivo bashing and resultant sales effort). Regards, Rob (RV-6Q). ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Acker" <r.acker(at)thegrid.net>
Subject: Re: list use suggestion
Date: Oct 30, 1997
> I would like to gently suggest that before anyone responds to a question, > you read the rest of your mail to see if someone has already responded > with the same answer you are about to give. If so, try to hold back and > help keep the duplication to a minimum. Bruce, I concur. However, I have also had some of my responses take over a day to get to the list. With such delays some duplication is unavoidable. Rob (RV-6Q...installing electric flap mechanism). ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: DJA <ahearns(at)bigfoot.com>
Subject: Re: I guess I will be an RV 8 builder now........................
Hurry ! Order the kit!! Gert wrote: > > Hi folks > > I gotta share this with you................ > > Just to prove that spouses never seize to amaze you, my wife for a good > few years, out of the blue, decided to pick up and read my KitPlanes > magazine. She has not once read it before. > > Her interest was grabbed by that beautiful yellow airplane on the front > cover, the RV-8. > > Now, you have to know that I am looking for an airplane to build. I > kinda settled in my mind on a Murphy Super Rebel or a Bearhawk, both 4 > place, both high wing. Got two kids to haul, you see. > > Well, for one or another reason, she is convinced, and tried very hard > to convince me, that we should build "Da Yellow One". > She came up with all kinds of reasons why we should: > morbid ones, "we can't all crash at the same time", (thanks hon), > strange ones, "you have more change selling it if you (I) don't > like it", > to good ones like," seems a fun plane to fly !". > Now that is an interesting statement for a gal who never flew general > aviation planes. > > Anyway, I believe in a good marriage you should agree with your spouse > every now and then and I believe then was now ;-} > > Just in case I was dreaming this, I waited for the next day, but nope, > "Da yellow One" it is. The only restriction she had was that I have to > sit in one before I am allowed to spent money on it. I am 6'6" you see, > and most planes don't fit me. > > So, the next opportunity to do that will probably be Oshkosh 98. > > Hope I didn't bore y'all to death. > > Gert > > gert(at)execpc.com > -- http://www.ntr.net/~ahearns/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- If this stops 1 spam...... WARNING: Unsolicited commercial e-mail: $500 per message: US Code, Title 47 Section 227 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.html ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)netins.net>
Subject: Re: Constant Speed
Date: Oct 29, 1997
charset="iso-8859-1" >>(Where's that 16 year old airport bum, when you need him?)< > >Well, here I am. And, I am, sorry to say, slightly lost. In direct crankshaft >to prop combo (or even with reduction gears), isn't a constant prop speed the >same as a constant engine speed (albeit, in a geared motor, the engine will >slow down more than the prop, but still proportional)? The only way I can see >any different is if there is some sort of a slipping clutch assembly in there >somewhere. Perhaps you could elaborate a little more so the 16 year old can >do what he strives to do in all situations.....learn. > >-Nick Stolley > airplaneit(at)aol.com Nick, You are absolutely correct, The propeller and the engine do infect turn the same speed (or prop. if geared), the point is that the governor controls the prop, not the engine. When you select a prop speed with the prop control and a manifold pressure (really vacuum, unless turbo or supercharged) the engine will deliver the same hp to the propeller regardless of airspeed. With a fixed pitch prop like I have on my -4 I can only achieve about 2200 rpms while climbing at 120 mph. Hence my engine is only developing 70-80 percent power on take off and climb, when I need it most. Worse yet when I am coming down the back of a loop as my speed increases my engine develops more power when I need it least. Fixed pitch props pose little problem on a 172 that takes off at 70 and cruises at 120. In an RV when you take off at 60 and cruise at 190 the pitch of the prop has to be so great that at slow airspeeds it is difficult to get much power out of the engine. Imagine taking off from a stop sign in a manual transmission sports car in high gear. It is very difficult and hard on the equipment. However in a lawn mower you can start out in high gear with no problem. (guess which airplane is the sports car and which is the lawn mower?) It is not as bad as all that in the RV because at low speeds the prop slips some. Also the RV is so over-powered even with a 150 Hp engine that it is capable of taking off in high gear without hurting the equipment. If you have the bucks and don't mind the extra weight the Constant Speed Prop is a big improvement. You will learn that everything in Aviation (and in life) is a compromise. Hope this explanation helps. Tailwinds, -4 N240 the pink panther Doug Rozendaal dougr(at)petroblend.com http://www.petroblend.com/dougr ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: "Scott A. Jordan" <SAJ_SLJ(at)compuserve.com>
Subject: Builders/Groups in NYC area
>>Anyone on-line currently building in the New York Metro area? Any RV builders groups in the metro area?<< Mike, Don't know about the city but there are a couple builders up here in Wappingers. I'm just finishing the tail of a -8, another lister is skinning the top fusalage of a -6. Don't know of any builders group in t= he area, I guess we are a two builder group. Scott A. Jordan -8 #331 N733JJ Empanage fibreglass, wings in the spring ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mlfred(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: Fiberglass gear leg fairings
<< Hi Mark, Does this include the gear leg intersection fairings, too? M >> Sadly, no. I could sell a gazillion of those things. Mark ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: "John B. Abell" <jbabell(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Avionics Master Switches
I had planned not to install an avionics master switch simply because its failure would shut down my whole avionics stack. Now I think I'll install two in parallel. Tom Rogers is trying to tell us something: isolate your avionics during engine start and shutdown. Bob Nuckolls seems to be saying that things ought not be this way. While I, too, wish for an ideal world, I do not conclude that Tom is wrong. Tom's advice distinguishes between what ought to be and what really is. I doubt that any avionics manufacturer would be favorably impressed by my refusal to install a master switch were I to show up at his door with failed components. BTW, I know Tom Rogers to be a very competent and honest man, and I found Tim Etherington's comments not only very cynical but completely off the mark. Jack Abell RV-6A N333JA (Reserved) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Rick Osgood <rick(at)ccc.henn.tec.mn.us>
Subject: Re: Flames! RV6 vs Mustang II
Not that we are biased :)..... I looked at the Mustang and RV6 before deciding on the RV. My reasons for the RV was: 1) Higher degree of finished parts on the RV (not quickbuild) 2) More builders = more knowledge base to draw from 3) Vans reputation 4) Lower cost 5) Shorter build time (my estimation) 6) Personal note. The Mustang people refered me to a Minneapolis builder to see his project and he was an ass. Oh Well!! Hope this helps Rick Jeff J. Dingbaum wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I have talked to one or two of you out there about why you chose an RV6 vs > a Mustang II. If this is a taboo subject, please - flame me off list!!! I > have been trying to decide between them and have been monitoring both > email lists to try to get a feel for what types of problems are > encountered. I have also scanned thru the last 7 years of mail archives. > > To be honest, I really don't have a STRONG feeling one way or another. > They both appear to be really nice aircraft. Van seems to have a great > builder network. On the other hand I really like the tapered wing of > the Mustang. > > If you have been in the same quandry as I am could you please send me > a not, saying what caused the balance to tip to the RV6? > > Thanks, > Jeff > > PS. Cost is a factor. I would really like to to a Composite 4 place, > but the kit runs 25k and then there is the IO360, so that probably > is out of my range. > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: "carlos bellido c/o joseph Matza" <matzaj(at)gghlaw.com>
Subject: Re: starting with fear
help! i just finished setting up the garage, building the workbenchs, bought the tool kit, built the epp jig, and completed the epp inventory. now i'm looking at all these tools and parts and am saying "what did i get myself into." any one have any general advice on getting over the fear of getting started. also when do i prime? (immediately or just before i rivet), what do i prime? (everything or just the structural supports, both sides of the skins etc.), and what do i have to do to prepare the metal before i prime? with what products? and what primer? i live on the atlantic coast in the northeast. thanks in advance. joe 8 epp ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Flames! RV6 vs Mustang II
hep.net!dingbaum(at)matronics.com wrote: > I have talked to one or two of you out there about why you chose an RV6 vs > a Mustang II. If this is a taboo subject, please - flame me off list!!! Argggghhh!!! No, not the M-word ;-) Actually, if the RV-6's general configuration appeals, you might also want to consider a Thorpe T-18. I'm building an RV-6. A friend started scratch-building a MII (and has now sold his plans and parts to someone else). I wouldn't recommend scratch-building unless you've already built a couple of planes (and in that case you wouldn't be asking *me* which to choose :-). Since he was scratch-building, I don't really know how good the MII kit is. However, since IIRC it's significantly cheaper than the RV-6 kit, I'd say it's probably not as complete. ________________________________________________________________________________ of the MII is possibly easier -- IIRC all 1/8" rivets, and thicker skins. The tapered wing would make it more difficult though. From what my friend said, it appears that the MII designer (Chris Tieman?) may be somewhat more helpful with plan variations than Vans. IMHO, Van's construction manual is abysmal, especially when you get past the empennage. FWIW, it's apparently much improved from the RV-4 manual. The poor manual isn't critical because of the manual additions that are available on the Net (including my own humble offering at <http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4809/bunnytop.htm>). One of the things that tipped things the RV way was that there's the RV-list. Also, RVs are more common than MIIs so any problems are probably better known and it's easier to find someone to swap tips with. Another important aspect for me is that although the MII's top speed is slightly higher, the RV stalls slower and therefore has better STOL performance and I guess crash survivability. Frank. s in the spring ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Ivoprop cheaper shot
<19971030.083940.3502.1.bstobbe(at)juno.com>
From: less_drag(at)juno.com (JAMES E AYERS)
Date: Oct 30, 1997
d stobbe) writes: >(JAMES >E AYERS) writes: > >>Taking a cheap shot at a new product doesn't cut it anymore. I saw >his product line at OSH, including the in-flight adjustable design. >After watching the mechanism grind back and forth, and listening to >that poor little motor load up and bog down as it reached its travel >limits while it galled up the jack screw and twisted the prop blade, I >wasn't >impressed and wouldn't use one of those things in a ceiling fan, let >alone an airplane... > >But that's just my opinion.... > >Bruce Stobbe RV-6 (won't have an Ivoprop) +-- You must be planning on using your RV for aerobatics. Only a Lycoming with a Sensenich prop is allowed on an aerobatic airplane. (True believers all.) Just their opinion. Talk to a competition aerobatic pilot, and see if you get anything different. BTW, for power transmission, the Acme thread and square thread has been around at least a century longer than we have. The electric motor is designed to take the stall current when the prop blades are against the "soft stops". Just my opinion. BTW, One of the electronic governors being developed has a current limit circuit to stop driving the motor at the "soft stop". Just my design. Jim Ayers Still trying to induce failures of any type in a properly installed Ivoprop Magnum VP prop. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne)
Subject: Re: ways to heat a garage
In Palm Springs Hawkbud? > I have a pretty good size shed to work in..... 32' x 64' with a 13' ceiling > and too much stuff stored in it. I have found a $40 electric radian heater > that works fine , I have two of the and focus them in the area I am working. Doesn't sound like Cut Bank! hal ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Mitch Robbins <robm(at)am2.com>
Subject: Engine Instrumentation, Website
Thanks Matt, for the license about commercial use of the list. Having resigned my position as an NTSB investigator, I'm no longer restricted by the executive order that prevents me from from having a commercial interest in aviation. I'm trying to find a few builders that would like free engine monitoring instrumentation in exchange for technical feedback about the instrumentation. Email me off list or check out our, still under construction, website at: http://am2.com I'm still doing prototype flight testing and it will probably be a few months because I'm trying to find some very cold weather!!! I'll post details at the am2.com web site as the project develops. Mitch Robbins robm(at)am2.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "B&S Eckstein" <eckstein@net-link.net>
Subject: Re: Double Flaring Tool
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Avery sells one for $95. ---------- > s) > > Does anyone know of a source to purchase a "Double Flaring Tool" ? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Charlie Kuss <charliekuss(at)sprintmail.com>
Subject: Re: Mazda Rotary?
Anderson Ed wrote: snipped I have a Maza Rotary running in an RV-6A (awaiting FAA inspection). You will hear all sort of claims and disclaimers, exaggerated horsepower, etc. Take > everything with a grain of salt. My conversion put out a solid 165HP on the > test stand and that was with two very restrictive mufflers (to keep peace in > the neighborhood) and I expect to get 10-15 more HP once tuned up. Ed, How hard are you twisting it's tail? (What RPM does it take to make 165HP?) Please elaborate on modifications, if any, to the engine. I have a friend with a Cosy 4. He is having a mutual friend fabricate a firewall forward (rearward? in this case) package, based on Tracy's information. Charlie Kuss ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Donald DiPaula <dipaula(at)access.digex.net>
Subject: Re: Ivoprop cheaper shot
> >Bruce Stobbe RV-6 (won't have an Ivoprop) +-- > > You must be planning on using your RV for aerobatics. > > Only a Lycoming with a Sensenich prop is allowed on an aerobatic > airplane. > > (True believers all.) Just their opinion. Talk to a competition > aerobatic pilot, and see if you get anything different. > > BTW, for power transmission, the Acme thread and square thread has been > around at least a century longer than we have. > The electric motor is designed to take the stall current when the prop > blades are against the "soft stops". > > Just my opinion. > > BTW, One of the electronic governors being developed has a current limit > circuit to stop driving the motor at the "soft stop". > > Just my design. jim, does the ivoprop have a spinner? in a picture of what i think was your plane, it didn't appear to. does that make much difference? could you have easily put one on had you wanted to (even if for only cosmetic reasons)? i'm a long way from deciding what prop to use, but it sure sounds like no more trouble than extending and retracting the flaps. how many hours do you have on yours? any troubles or difficulties at all, including installation? did the $1740 price you quoted before include everything we would need? is it the same prop for all the different horsepower engines? -D- Cynthia Alice DiPaula was born 9 June 1997, 3:36 p.m., 7 lb. 10 oz., 20.5" "Even a single elephant can be destructive." My 1989 Honda CB-1 (CB400F) is for sale, email me if interested. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Joe Rex" <jfr(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: heating skins
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Moe, Your idea is not so crazy. I have a good friend who used to work for Boeing. He tells me that they used the electric blanket method on the B-52 wing skins. Joe Rex ---------- > From: MoeJoe <bellatlantic.net!moejoe(at)matronics.com> > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: heating skins > Date: Wednesday, October 29, 1997 6:18 PM > > > I thought this up this morning while brushing my teeth, and I figured > I'd throw it out. I have heard that heating the skins before riviting > will yield a tighter, better looking finish. Alot of people wondered how > you could heat the skins, but not the structure underneath. What about > electric blankets? You could wrap the skin in an electric blanket until > it warms up, and keep it wrapped as you rivet, just sliding the blanket > down as necessary. This seems like a good idea, but I know I'm probably > missing something. It's just too simple. > > Moe Colontonio > Cherry Hill, NJ > RV-8 Emp > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: QmaxLLC(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: Flames! RV6 vs Mustang II
Why the RV6 instead of the Mustang? Well, sounds like you've done your homework. I guess you should just ask yourself which one you are least likely to look back on in a couple of years and say to yourself, "I should have built the other one." Also, if you stretch out that couple of years to the point where you have to sell it (reality time, here), then resale value is a factor. I suspect that the RV6 will win that one hands down. But I chose the 6 based on the fact that I've got a lot of experience with aluminum and when I quit for the evening, so does the sound of a rivet gun. The smell of plastic remains. That, though, is a personal decision: when you're done and flying who cares what the smell was like? You gotta look at it and fly it and be happy with it. By the way, have you flown an RV6? Or the Mustang? That's important. After all, you may find that you're too big, tall, wide, whatever to feel comfy in one or the other. Or you may just not like the feel of one of them. Of course the number of super-pilots i.e., F-117 jocks, Airline mega-hour types, astronauts, etc. in RV's is a pretty strong vote when put alongside the fact the 6 is a sweety for even ultra-greenies like me. Heck, it even makes me look like I'm a lot more experienced than I am. Don't know about a Mustang....didn't try one. Love at first flight, donchaknow. Best thing to do is.......do something. Heck, Newt Gingrinch could be Pres. tomorrow and we'll all (most of us) be working for minimum wage and can't afford squat. Just do it and have no regrets. Bob F. Tail's done! QB is next ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: John Kitz <jkitz(at)greenapple.com>
Subject: Re: Gascolator
Craig Hiers wrote: > > > chuckie8 wrote: > > > > > > For those 4's out there, where are you locating your gascolator? > > Besides putting it between the cross-over exhaust pipes, I'm not sure > > where else you can put it. help! Craig; I made a bracket that curls around both horizontal motor mount bars at the botton center of the firewall. Plate nuts and # 6 bolts lock it around both. I have used auto gas through the summer with no problems. John Kitz RV-4 N721JK 183 hours ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz>
Subject: Re: starting with fear
gghlaw.com!matzaj(at)matronics.com wrote: > now i'm looking at all these tools and parts and am saying "what did i > get myself into." any one have any general advice on getting over the > fear of getting started. Start on something easy. IIRC, the first step is to taper and round the ends of the HS-609 spar stiffeners. That's not a difficult job. Pick up your new Sharpie pen, mark out what you need to do, pick up your file and/or hacksaw, take a deep breath (or two) and do it. Don't think about doing the whole thing. Just set yourself a small achievable target (eg finish the HS-609s) and do that. Look for on-line help -- what I've learnt can be found at <http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/4809/bunnytop.htm>. Don't be afraid to ask questions, but first try to do a search of the RV-list archive... your question (eg what primer) has probably already been answered. Find another nearby RV-builder, have a look at his project from time to time, and pick his brains for ideas. > also when do i prime? (immediately or just before i rivet), what do i > prime? (everything or just the structural supports, both sides of the > skins etc.), and what do i have to do to prepare the metal before i > prime? with what products? and what primer? i live on the atlantic > coast in the northeast. I prime everything. Generally, I prime just before I assemble parts. Follow the link above to my Bunny's Guide page, and you'll find my priming technique on the "Odds & Ends" page. Frank. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Ernie Billing <Ernie.Billing(at)seagatesoftware.com>
Subject: Avionics Master Switches
Date: Oct 30, 1997
As a wannabe RV builder (attending Alexander Sportair sheet metal workshop this weekend and clearing out the garage in effort to start RV6 emp.) I can only speak from experience in my spam can Cessna 177RG. It does not have an avionics master switch, but has a relay that is SUPPOSED to disconnect the bus when the ignition switch is engaged. On more than one occasion, my GEM has come on in a "strange" state, looked like it was stuck in some test mode. Cycling the master switch brought the GEM back to normal operation. I can only guess that startup transients are responsible for this behavior. I am going to put an avionics master in the Cardinal to avoid this problem as more electronics without their own power switch get put in the panel. Ernie Billing Cardinal RG N55HS >-----Original Message----- >From: John B. Abell [SMTP:ix.netcom.com!jbabell(at)matronics.com] >Sent: Thursday, October 30, 1997 3:20 PM >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com >Cc: jbabell(at)ix.netcom.com >Subject: RV-List: Avionics Master Switches > > >I had planned not to install an avionics master switch simply because >its failure would shut down my whole avionics stack. Now I think I'll >install two in parallel. Tom Rogers is trying to tell us something: >isolate your avionics during engine start and shutdown. Bob Nuckolls >seems to be saying that things ought not be this way. While I, too, >wish for an ideal world, I do not conclude that Tom is wrong. Tom's >advice distinguishes between what ought to be and what really is. I >doubt that any avionics manufacturer would be favorably impressed by my >refusal to install a master switch were I to show up at his door with >failed components. > >BTW, I know Tom Rogers to be a very competent and honest man, and I >found Tim Etherington's comments not only very cynical but completely >off the mark. > >Jack Abell >RV-6A N333JA (Reserved) > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Sleeper on the List
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Mike Kukulski <kukulski(at)highfiber.com>
It has been about a week or so now since I've first seen Scott McDaniels on this list as a newcomer - just thought I would highlight what a valuable new asset is now available. I met Scott about 4 years ago when he was the president of one of Phoenix's westside EAA chapters. He had just completed his RV-6A, which he has advertised for sale twice now on this list. I don't know what he is asking for it, but I can testify to the very fine standard of craftsmanship it exhibits. Others think so as well, as he won a well deserved "Best Metal Construction" homebuilt award with it at Copperstate (in 1993, I believe.) I also seem to remember it coming in at just over 200 mph in one of the Sun & Fun speed races. Scott graciously offered me a right seat with him on a hop from Phoenix up to Page, Arizona and back. The aircraft was very nicely built, flew straight, and had one of the smoothest engine/prop combinations I've seen in a piston aircraft. It was his own overhaul on the engine, and he had a 3-blade fixed pitch wood prop from Performance Propellers. As I recall,cockpit was basic IFR/deluxe VFR (?) Anyway, enough free unsolicited endorsements of Scott's airplane - if you know of someone looking for a completed RV-6A, and the price is right, that is a fine aircraft. More to the point for listers (especially you RV-8 builders) is the fact that Scott got pulled away from Phoenix to work for Van in the prototype shop. He was one of the two guys who built the yellow RV-8 demonstrator, and I would imagine he is now working on the new RV-8A prototype (with the training wheel). Bottom line - if I was building an RV-8 and using this list, I'd sure think about addressing RV-8 (or any general RV) construction specific questions his way. As I recall, inputs from the prototype shop had direct impact on the final versions of the kits you're buying now. Enough patting Scott on the back - he's a quiet guy and probably would just as soon have had me keep my mouth shut. (All painted, installing baffles, then wiring, then to the airport - December 1st flight??) Mike Kukulski RV-4 N96MK kukulski(at)highfiber.com Albuquerque, NM ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: John Kitz <jkitz(at)greenapple.com>
Subject: Scotch Bright polishing wheels
I thought someone might have a good idea where I could best advertise 3M brand Scotch Bright polishing wheels for building aluminum airplanes. I have a limited supply of 12 inch diameter by 3 inches thick polishing wheels with approximately a 5 inch bore for sale for less than the 1 inch by 6 inch that Van sells. I saved hours of time with the polishing wheels because no filing is necessary, simply saw on a bandsaw, smooth on a belt sander to the line, ans polish. A perfect radiused edge every time. I had mounted it on a 1/2 HP motor. Contact me off line if you have some good ideas for me. John Kitz RV-4 N721JK ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Gert <gert(at)execpc.com>
Subject: Re: I guess I will be an RV 8 builder now..............
Mark Richardson wrote: > > > > > > Hi folks > > > > I gotta share this with you................ > > > > [Stuff about spouse suggesting the RV-8 deleted] > > I have had the tail kit for the -6 in may basement (alright, > basements because I've moved 3 times) for 5 years now. My wife saw me { even more stuff deleted } Ahhh. I was not the only one blindsided......... My wife recons it's the Mazda Miata of the homebuilds.... Gert ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Mitch Robbins <robm(at)am2.com>
Subject: Re: starting with fear
You can get over the fear of getting started by starting!!! You can't finish until you do. You may ruin a few parts at first but that's small potatoes in the overall project. Visit someone who has started! If you prime immediately you'll scratch much of it before you're ready to rivet. I'll get arguments on this subject but alclad is corrosion resistant. Unless you plan to be flying the plane in 75 years, there is usually (exceptions noted) no need to prime except where there is metal to metal contact. Non alclad parts should be primed (ask airbus industries). Check the archives-there's several meg of comments on priming! > > > help! i just finished setting up the garage, building the workbenchs, > bought the tool kit, built the epp jig, and completed the epp inventory. > > now i'm looking at all these tools and parts and am saying "what did i > get myself into." any one have any general advice on getting over the > fear of getting started. > > also when do i prime? (immediately or just before i rivet), what do i ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re:finding Navaid
<< I cant seem to find navaid either,have checked trade a plane with no luck.I am also curious about installation,can this unit be fitted easily after the wings are built or should I plan on this being part of the wing construction? >> The servo goes in the fuselage under the pax seat and would be possible to retrofit to a completed plane, although you need to rivet some doublers to the bottom skin prior to mounting it. Check out the Yeller Pages at http://www.sound.net/~hartmann/yelrpage.htm -GV ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rear Jump Seat
From: smcdaniels(at)juno.com (SCOTT R MCDANIELS)
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Yes you do declare the num. of seats on the application form, just as you declare the gross weight that you are cert. the airplane for. Not everyone uses the recommended gross weight either ( because after installing all there gadgets and such it would be a single place airplane otherwise). So, from my experience it is not a problem - as long as you cert in the U.S. because of the liberal experimental cat. rules we have. I believe if you are in Can., Australia, or elsewhere, it would be tough to do because I believe the usually require certif. to all the designers specifications, gross weight, # of seats, etc. Can anyone else verify this? Plan on having all the weight and balance data showing that you can operate within the approved C.G. range and I don't think you will have any problems Scott Mc. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: starting with fear
<3459407B.60F5(at)gghlaw.com>
From: gasobek(at)juno.com (Gary A. Sobek)
Joe: This is a very normal reaction. Building an airplane is a HUGE undertaking. My suggestions are: Divide and conquer. i e: 1. Start looking at only one part at a time. ALWAYS remember that it must work in conjunction with another part. 2. Start like the only thing that you are building is the Rear Spar for the Horizontal stabilizer. This is one part that you should be able to complete in short order on not be over whelmed. 3. Admire what you did and pat yourself on the back for finishing this part. 4. Build the forward spar for the horizontal stabilizer. 5. Repeat step 3. 6. Assemble the skeleton structure in the jig 7. repeat step 3. 8. Lay out the skin for the Horizontal Stabilizer. 9. Repeat step 3. 10. Rivet the horizontal stabilizer together. 11. repeat step 3. Priming is a subject I will not advise. On my next airplane, I will only prime the steel and Aluminum extrusions right before I rivet them. (i.e.: I will NOT prime any alclad part.) If you start out looking at he whole project, it will overwhelm. As the Romans said years ago, "Divide and Conquer." Also, remember that Rome was not built in a day. :-) Gary A. Sobek RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell 3,000 hours of work over 8.5 years. It flew 8 years 11 months after I wrote the first check. Cost: 2 wives, 1 girlfriend, 2 houses, 3 rental properties and one car. :-) Worth ever cent! ;-) writes: > > >help! i just finished setting up the garage, building the workbenchs, >bought the tool kit, built the epp jig, and completed the epp >inventory. > > now i'm looking at all these tools and parts and am saying >"what did i >get myself into." any one have any general advice on getting over the >fear of getting started. > > also when do i prime? (immediately or just before i rivet), >what do i >prime? (everything or just the structural supports, both sides of the >skins etc.), and what do i have to do to prepare the metal before i >prime? with what products? and what primer? i live on the atlantic >coast in the northeast. > >thanks in advance. >joe >8 epp > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: Make your own tail fairing easily
From: gasobek(at)juno.com (Gary A. Sobek)
I also used Gil's method with the #6 screws. It took about 1.5 hours of work to make. I used Hexcell Epoxy instead of the West Systems since I had it in my pump. It is not painted yet. The only concern that I presently have with the 2 1/2 layer fairing is that it may not be stiff enough in the long run. I may add another layer or two before I paint. The concern about stiffness came from several other flying RV pilots. The tip Gil and Bob have given is the easiest part to make from scratch for the whole airplane. Gary A. Sobek RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell Cable Airport, Upland, CA --------- Begin forwarded message ---------- From: Bob Skinner <trib.com!bskinr(at)matronics.com> Subject: Re: RV-List: Make your own tail fairing easily Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 08:29:33 -0700 > ... not feeling guilty about not recommending Bob S. fairing since he >doesn't really like making them ...:^) >14. Re-install fairing and drill for the #8 mounting screws. Gil's method will work great. This, in essence, is what I have done so I know it works. My fairing saves the builder the step of making his own single layer laminate. The only area where Gil and I disagree---I'd use #6 flush stainless steel screws for mounting. Builders might glean the most useful construction tips from Gil and me and try building their own fairings. It's not brain surgery, just takes time. And, it's a good way to build the fiberglass working skills that you will need for gear leg cuffs, cowl work, canopy work, etc. The fairing would be a good place to get practical experience without taking a chance of goofing something up (unless you glue the whole mess to your airplane. As I can't remember whether I posted my instructions to the list, they are listed below. Bob Skinner RV-6 380 hrs Buffalo, WY bskinr(at)trib.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Re: Flames! RV6 vs Mustang II (NO FLAMES!)
From: gasobek(at)juno.com (Gary A. Sobek)
Jeff: This is a good comparison. Van did a fly off against a Mustang II several years ago and the RV out performed the Mustang in a dog fight. Van knew what the Mustang could do better than the RV so kept the dog fight where the RV had the advantage. Slow and in tight turns. IMHO, the Mustang does has the advantage of top speed. (I may get shot down by some of the RV's that are faster but then I am talking aircraft built to the designers plans without any changes.) I started my RV-6 almost 9 years ago. It took 8.5 years to complete and fly. It still is not painted. At that time, the Mustang kit was a material kit. I know 4 people that had built the Mustang and that they put many hours into making parts. All the ribs are different sizes and were required to be made from different form blocks. The builder had to make all the form blocks. It also had a higher stall and landing speed. Projects where the builder has to make all or most of the parts have a bad completion rate. (90% are never finished). IMHO, Van puts out a kit that has many of the hard tasks complete. IMHO, Van's philosophy is such that if you do what they recommend, there is a much better chance of completing the project than for many other designs. IMHO, that is the reason that Van recommends Lycoming engines only. He designed the airplane around them. The installation of a non-Lycoming engine in an RV requires as much work as building the airplane. Most builders will not put that kind of time into a project. I have never flown in a Mustang but have the T-18. If the Mustang is like the T-18 and I assume it is, it flys very nice. All the homebuilts that I have flown have very light responsive controls like the RV. I did own and originally plan to build the T-18 but chose the RV for two reasons. It had a slower landing speed and it was a better value. (Better value = less cost, greater chance of completing, better chance of having the pilot skills necessary to SAFELY operate it, more friends building RV'S) I wanted to build an airplane when I retired. A friend at work who was retiring said, "Do not wait until you retire. Build it now and enjoy it while you are still young enough too." BTW, I turned 40 this year. My recommendation to anyone who want to build an airplane, "Decide what makes the most cents for the skills and finances available and get started. The sooner the project is started, the sooner it will be complete." Gary A. Sobek RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell AeroSPACE Electrical Systems Engineer FAA A& P EAA Tech Counselor writes: > >Hi everyone, > >I have talked to one or two of you out there about why you chose an >RV6 vs >a Mustang II. If this is a taboo subject, please - flame me off >list!!! I >have been trying to decide between them and have been monitoring both >email lists to try to get a feel for what types of problems are >encountered. I have also scanned thru the last 7 years of mail >archives. > >To be honest, I really don't have a STRONG feeling one way or another. >They both appear to be really nice aircraft. Van seems to have a >great >builder network. On the other hand I really like the tapered wing of >the Mustang. > >If you have been in the same quandry as I am could you please send me >a not, saying what caused the balance to tip to the RV6? > >Thanks, >Jeff > >PS. Cost is a factor. I would really like to to a Composite 4 place, > but the kit runs 25k and then there is the IO360, so that >probably > is out of my range. > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 07, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Avionics Master Switches
h02.smg.seagatesoftware.com> >> >>I had planned not to install an avionics master switch simply because >>its failure would shut down my whole avionics stack. Now I think I'll >>install two in parallel. Please look at an article in Sport Aviation, February 1993, Page 80. for an article: "Aircraft Electrical Systems: A Philosophy for Reliability" or <http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles.html> and follow the link. Instead of two switches in parallel which only helps for a defunct switch, how about two separate paths . . . the article explains. >> . . . . . . . .Tom Rogers is trying to tell us something: >>isolate your avionics during engine start and shutdown. Bob Nuckolls >>seems to be saying that things ought not be this way. Not exactly, if you really want an avionics master switch, by all means have one . . . in the normal feed path to the essential bus. But provide an alternate feed path to the same bus per article. >> . . . . While I, too, >>wish for an ideal world, I do not conclude that Tom is wrong. Tom's >>advice distinguishes between what ought to be and what really is. I >>doubt that any avionics manufacturer would be favorably impressed by my >>refusal to install a master switch were I to show up at his door with >>failed components. Don't wish for it, make it happen. So far, all I've heard from avionics manufacturers is that the switch is "suggested" or "recommended". What's the warranty statement say? If they disallow warranty repairs for damage caused by spikes, what about spikes that happen when the avionics master switch is on? If the radio guy is telling you that your airplane can kill radios, how can he be sure that it's only during starting that it will happen? How about flap motors, landing gear pump motors, or any other gizmo you choose to install in your airplane? What's wrong with simply turning the radio(s) OFF? If you can't trust yourself with twisting a radio knob as a checklist item, how can you trust yourself with the avionics master switch? Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= | | | Go ahead, make my day . . . . | | Show me where I'm wrong. | ================================= <http://www.aeroelectric.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)netins.net>
Subject: Re: Flames! RV6 vs Mustang II
Date: Oct 26, 1997
charset="iso-8859-1" >Best thing to do is.......do something. Heck, Newt Gingrinch could be Pres. >tomorrow and we'll all (most of us) be working for minimum wage and can't >afford squat. Just do it and have no regrets. > Please don't drag politics into this, because I can sit in the sidelines for Avionics masters and Ivoprops but when anyone starts trashing Republicans, I will not! No Flames, just Fair Warning..... ok? Tailwinds, Cerro Gordo Co. (IA) Republican Co-Chair Doug Rozendaal dougr(at)petroblend.com www.petroblend.com/dougr ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: chester razer <crazer(at)egyptian.net>
Subject: Re: Wheel pants plate rubs brake disc??
I had the same problem with the alum plate that supports the wheel pant. I cured the problem by cutting off of sizable chunk of the front part of the plate. I removed enough so the plate was no farther forward than the brake disc. My recollection was that it still rubbed. I then went ahead and centered the pant over the tire and made sure the aft portion of the pant had sufficient ground clearance as specified in the plans and after the nutplates were installed and everything was in place the rubbing went away. I just noticed my brake pads are dragging on the discs since I charged the lines with brake fluid and tried the brakes. -- Chet Razer crazer(at)egyptian.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Derek Reed <dreed(at)cdsnet.net>
Subject: Re: Plenum
Bob Skinner wrote: > > >Bob, > > > >Ditto here. Van's does not provide a baffling kit/plans for my > particular > >Lycoming, so I have to make my own baffling or plenum anyway. I > would much > >prefer the plenum. > > > >Rob (RV-6Q). > > Rob & others, > > Although I chickened out on my first RV-6, I intend to do this on the > second. One reason that I did not build a plenum was that I had > bought > Van's baffle kit and didn't want to "waste parts". > In retrospect, I'm not sure that building a plenum might not have > been > easier. Come to think of it my 65 Mooney has a plenum arrangement,if you see one around[they are easy to spot,they are the only 'spam cans' with the tail one the right way!]it may give you some ideas on adaptation.Hmm, wonder if the tail on the RV6 could be changed,nah,why spoil a good thing.!! Derek Reed RV6A,wings[can't get away from that training wheel] ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: "Anthony Self" <CHEVY_TRUCK(at)classic.msn.com>
Subject: RV6 tail-kit
I just found a guy a few miles from my house who bought a RV6 tail kit and has never started on it. He said he bought it quite a while ago and has lost interest. I was really planning on buying and starting a RV6A this spring, but maybe I'll consider this instead. My questions to you guys, however, are: How much should I pay this guy for the tail kit (bargain prices)? Are the new tails prepunched or otherwise improved enough to warrant paying Van's full price? Are the tail kits for the 6 and 6A really all that different (can a 6 be converted easily to a 6A)? Thanks for any info, hope you guys can help save me some money. Anthony K. Self Collecting tools, money, tools, money, money.......... ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re[2]: Ivo Cheap Shot
39-41,44-45,47,49,52-55,58,64-65,67,69,71-73,76-79,83,85-88
From: less_drag(at)juno.com (JAMES E AYERS)
Date: Oct 30, 1997
(Snip) >First, I doubt Van himself has had eleven incidents of prop failure this year . True. True. However, with 16,000 props sold in a five year period and 11 reported incidents, Van could have only 1 incident for 1600 airplanes flying during five years. >Second, your numbers state 16,000 total flying Ivoprops with 11 incidents >reported THIS year. How about reporting both numbers for the same time >period? The numbers given were outdated by a year. They apply to the time from the beginning of production sales until about a year ago. >Also, I did not see the 16,000 number and 11 incidents referenced by model >type. Are the 16,000 of a mixed variety being used in various applications >(ultralights, trikes, drones...i.e. including those where Ivo has anexcellent record)? That's right. All Ivoprop prop types were being addressed in the 16,000 props. >If so, posting such skewed numbers here on the list is an equally "cheap >shot" since they have nothing to do with the lists targeted use. If not, >16,000 flying Magnums is an awesome production and sales number. The 11 reported incidents are about all types of Ivoprop props. I don't know that even one of the reported incidents applies to an Ivoprop VP Magnum prop. >How about specific Ivo Magnum on Lycoming O-320/360 numbers (a couple of >years data...prop model & number flying, number of failures & a/c type, >hours on failed prop, injuries and fatalities as a direct result, number of >customer returned props, etc.)? I do not know of any FAA/EAA reported incidents on the Ivoprop Variable Pitch (VP) Magnum prop. If anyone has any different information, I would appreciate hearing about it. Starting from July, 1996, when the IO-360 compatable production model first started being delivered; For the Ivoprop Magnum VP prop. There have been no aircraft incidents where a blade was thrown, or broken from the hub. There has been at least one incident were the blades became loose. The prop bolts had not been re torqued. A schedule for re torquing the prop bolts is specified in the installation instructions. The following items are unlikely to happen on a RV. One aircraft door departed a pusher type aircraft in flight and was hit by the prop. The door made a small nick one blade of the prop. The door (pieces?) was not found. Another pusher type aircraft with a Rotax engine lost the muffler. A prop blade hit the muffler as it tried to pass through the prop arc. The blade is repairable, but Ivo uses it as a conversation piece for his Sun'n'Fun and Oshkosh sales. The section of the muffler sheared by the prop was recovered, and it nests around the leading edge of the prop blade. >Post the numbers. You may just sell a whole bunch of Ivo's here, or just >the opposite. I'm tired of the Ivoprop BS too, your providing real numbers >would settle the issue (along with constant Ivo bashing and resultant sales >effort). The same pusher type aircraft with a Rotax engine and a WOOD prop lost its muffler. The muffler took a blade off of the WOOD prop. The pilot was the only person on board. He was killed. I hope this helps clarify the Ivoprop VP Magnum prop situation. I would like to remind you that when I originally addressed the Ivoprop prop I was flying, I was told by a number of the people on this list to make sure my life insurance was paid up. And I believe at least one wanted to be a beneficiary. I thought that was really funny. So much so, that I've not only become an agent, I've also passed the SEC tests. Jim Ayers Less_Drag(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Ivoprop Q & A's (was cheaper shots)
54-55,60,63-66,68-73
From: less_drag(at)juno.com (JAMES E AYERS)
Date: Oct 30, 1997
writes: > (Snip) >jim, > >does the ivoprop have a spinner? in a picture of what i think was your >plane, it didn't appear to. does that make much difference? could you >have easily put one on had you wanted to (even if for only cosmetic >reasons)? I had a spinner on my prop. It was a 9 3/4" spinner to fit the LOM cowl. It didn't have a front plate. On the way to Oshkosh, the backplate failed. So I took the spinner off. All of the pictures taken at Oshkosh show my RV-3 without a spinner. I now have a UHS spinner that I am trying out. >i'm a long way from deciding what prop to use, but it sure sounds like >no more trouble than extending and retracting the flaps. > >how many hours do you have on yours? I have about 100 hours on the prop hub. It was just recently upgraded from the prototype crush plates to the production style crush plates. > any troubles or difficulties at all, including installation? I've worn out two sets of prop bolts because of all of the different configurations of blades I have tried. The same hub is used for both a two, and a three, bladed prop. I've lost track of the number of blade combinations I have run. Everything from a three blade 62" diameter to a two blade 76" diameter. Being the first, I was supposed to find the problems. (I had already flown the ground adjustable prop for two years prior.) I had a minor problem with an electric motor wire. This was corrected for the production units, and retrofited in my unit. I have had two gear train failures. The first resulted in a stronger gear being installed (incorporated into production units). The second was due to a gear train being installed without grease (factory assembly error). The electric motor problem occured in-flight. I simply landed with the prop in the cruise position. The high pitch position does limit the climb capability; just like a fixed pitch prop. I had deliberately left the prop in full high pitch on two previous occasions to get data for Ivo. I found the gear drive problems on the ground. I noticed a change in the tempo of the electric drive on the ground (pre-flight check), and returned the unit to Ivoprop for repair. > did the $1740 price you quoted before include everything we would need? Yes. Everything you need to install the VP Magnum prop is included. The prop hub is a bolt-on installation to the prop extension. The slip ring bolts onto the ring gear. The brush holder bolts onto the engine case. A switch and circuit breaker are mounted on the panel (near the throttle). You'll need your own spinner. UHS has a spinner that is pre-cut for the Ivoprop prop. Aircraft Spruse also has a 12" spinner, SN-5, that I used on my Lycoming installation. > is it the same prop for all the different horsepower engines? It's the same prop hub. The prop blades vary from a 60" two blade to a 76" three blade to cover the 65 Hp to 400 Hp engines. >-D- > >Cynthia Alice DiPaula was born 9 June 1997, 3:36 p.m., 7 lb. 10 oz., >20.5" ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Beverly Hull" <hull@net-master.net>
Subject: Index to Bingelis Articles
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Can anyone tell me where to find an index to the Tony Bingelis articles which appeared in EAA's Sport Aviation magazine for several years? I know I have seen it somewhere on the net but I cannot find it now. Thanks, Don Hull RV Wannabe (Probably a 6A) "First Officer" on N413BB Bob Butler's 6A Decatur, Alabama ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.su.OZ.AU>
Subject: Avionics Master...
> >The truth of the matter is that this guy is an avionics installer and gets paid good money to install avionics master switches. His whole column is suspect from this standpoint and is unfortunate given AvWeb's stated purpose and scorn for the same behavior from everyone else. > I have used Tom Rogers for avionics purchases and found him competitive, reliable and helpful. He may differ with Bob N. on the need for an avionics master and he may well be wrong but I think it is not fair to attribute this to commercial motives, the extra profit from wiring an avionics master switch is unlikely to force him to perjury. Leo (Like Tom and Bob) Davies 6A engine and panel ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ve7fp(at)jetstream.net (Ken Hoshowski)
Subject: Baffles
Date: Oct 30, 1997
I bought my baffle kit from Vans and it fit pretty well. I mounted my oil cooler on the right front baffle. After 100 hours or so I noticed a crack around one of the attach bolts. If you mount your oil cooler here put a doubler plate ( I ended up using some stainless I had) around the cut out hole for the cooler. And, don't forget to use some thick wall tubing of some sort, that the 4 mounting bolts go through, between the top and bottom of the cooler flanges. Ken ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ve7fp(at)jetstream.net (Ken Hoshowski)
Subject: Fiberglass dust
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Fiberglass dust and sandings hate bearings. I ruined a vacuum cleaner motor during construction of my RV6. Just a reminder that if you are doing any sanding of the cowl while it is in place make sure your alternator and starter are well covered to avoid getting any fiberglass dust into any bearings. Ken ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Bob Reiff <Reiff(at)execpc.com>
Subject: heating skins
MoeJoe wrote: > > > I thought this up this morning while brushing my teeth, and I figured > I'd throw it out. I have heard that heating the skins before riviting > will yield a tighter, better looking finish. Alot of people wondered how > you could heat the skins, but not the structure underneath. What about > electric blankets? You could wrap the skin in an electric blanket until > it warms up, and keep it wrapped as you rivet, just sliding the blanket > down as necessary. This seems like a good idea, but I know I'm probably > missing something. It's just too simple. > > Moe Colontonio > Cherry Hill, NJ > RV-8 Emp Moe, Someone else I know had a very similar idea - check out the wing skin heater at: http://www.execpc.com/reiff Bob Reiff RV4 #2646 O-360/CS, skinning fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ve7fp(at)jetstream.net (Ken Hoshowski)
Subject: Re: Bart Lalonde/Aero Sport Power Engines
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Dennis, Bart is as honest as they come. To my knowledge Aero Sport is a subsiduary of Progressive Aero who overhaul All engines for certified applications. Progressive have been in business for many, many years and ship engines worldwide. Aero Sport was started because no one was filling the niche that was being created by the homebuilt market. Bart told me thay they were hoping to put out at least 100 engines in the first year. They have the expertise and the facilities to do a good job. ( I had a dynamic prop balance done there.) I live 70 miles east of Kamloops, many of the local builders have been happy with Bar's engines. Another consideration is the American dollar is about $1.39 Cdn, which may help. Don,t take my word for it though, give Bart a call and ask for the names of RV customers he has supplied. A happy customer is the best advertising you can buy.. Incidently, Bart is building an RV8. . Regards Ken Hoshowski, Editor, Western Canada Rvator RV6 C-FKEH 160 HP/C/S First flight Sept 8, 1993 ---------- > From: Dennis Persyk <worldnet.att.net!dpersyk(at)matronics.com> > To: rv-list > Subject: RV-List: Bart Lalonde/Aero Sport Power Engines > Date: Wednesday, October 29, 1997 5:00 PM > > > I am getting ready to order an engine (O-360 A1A) and would appreciate > feedback on Mark Lalonde of Aero Sport Power, Kamloops, B.C. (Phone 250 > 376 2955) Post messages to me privately if you have concerns about > publicizing your input. > Thanks. > Dennis 6A mounting seats > Barrington, IL > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV4131rb(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Re: Ivoprop cheaper shot
<< I saw his product line at OSH, including the in-flight adjustable design. After watching the mechanism grind back and forth, and listening to that poor little motor load up and bog down as it reached its travel limits while it galled up the jack screw and twisted the prop blade, I wasn't impressed and wouldn't use one of those things in a ceiling fan, let alone an airplane... >> Bruce, Please dont sugar coat it for our benefit. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: L & M Rowles <lmrowles(at)netspace.net.au>
Subject: Re: Avionics Master Switches
> John, I was instructed from my first flight to have the avionics turned of at the master switch or at least pull the fuse, or throw the circuit breaker before cranking up. Then turn on components after engine running as part of checks then the whole operation in reverse before closing down. I do not know much about electronics, but at my areo club we have never had many problems with our avionics (except the time I reported the radio was US after a flight and the CFI just turned the squelch back and told me to carry on. heh,he,he red face) The gear we install in our aircraft is pretty expensive so why not take the precautions to protect it. What is the cost of a switch? What is the cost of repairs? Regards Les Rowles. Les Rowles Po Box 1895 Traralgon Australia 3844 lmrowles(at)netspace.net.au ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Ronald Vandervort <rvanderv(at)linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us>
Subject: Setrab oil cooler...?
What about the Setrab oil cooler? Does anyone have any experience with it. Is it any good? Is it safe to use on an aircraft? Thank You, Ron Vandervort, RV-6Q ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 1997
From: Gil Alexander <gila(at)flash.net>
Subject: Re: Mold Release
Bob, ... sorry, I sometimes forget I live in the big city. However, I also deal with UPS (our local driver is now friends with our retired neighbor ..:^) ... so, checking the 1997/1998 Aircraft Spruce catalog, the same brand I bought is there for $14.50 (part # RELWAX). So, for all you builders out there contemplating using wax as a release agent, do yourself a favor and buy the real stuff ... it is easy to get, and the results from using the wrong stuff can be quite upsetting! ... Gil (use the real stuff) Alexander PS I did one fairing with PVA over the wax, and one (for another buider) without any PVA. Both were OK, but do use at least 3 applications of wax. >Gil, > > Thanks for the fiberglass tips. Unfortunately, we don't a local >industrial epoxy supplier. As a matter of fact, we don't have much local >anything here in Buffalo, WY. > I'll probably try the PVA with vinyl ester and see what happens. The PVA >worked OK on Safe-T-Poxy but sure didn't on Aeropoxy. As I remember, I used >the PVA over the wax---kind of "double protection". > >Thanks, > >Bob > >> If you must use wax (as in the first step of my alternative tail >>fairing production method posted last week) then buy real "mold release >>wax" from your local industrial epoxy resin supplier ... Johnsons Paste Wax >>is NOT a good substitute! The real stuff is fairly expensive, is >>silicone-free and about $15 for a large, flat can ... several layers must >>be applied. ------------------------------------ RV6A, #20701, finishing kit "REPLY" sends to entire RV-list mailto:gila(at)flash.net to reply privately ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Gil Alexander <gila(at)flash.net>
Subject: Re: Make your own tail fairing easily
>I also used Gil's method with the #6 screws. It took about 1.5 hours of >work to make. I used Hexcell Epoxy instead of the West Systems since I >had it in my pump. > >It is not painted yet. The only concern that I presently have with the 2 >1/2 layer fairing is that it may not be stiff enough in the long run. I >may add another layer or two before I paint. The concern about stiffness >came from several other flying RV pilots. Gary, ... interesting point. The use of two layers came froms Vans instructions that call for 2 to 3 layers of 9 oz cloth. I just split the difference and went with 2 1/2 ...:^) I'll amend my instructions and now reccommend 3 1/2 layers. Since all of the layers are added to the 'flimsy' layer at once, it really is very little extra work to add that extra layer. Gil (use an extra layer) Alexander PS My #8 screws also used tinnerman finishing washers, I guess you would use #6 screws with no washers?? If this is the case, the extra layer would help. > >The tip Gil and Bob have given is the easiest part to make from scratch >for the whole airplane. > >Gary A. Sobek ------------------------------------------------------- mailto:gila(at)flash.net Gil Alexander, Los Angeles, CA ________________________________________________________________________________
From: pbennett(at)zip.com.au
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Re: Don't "vote" on this list server . . .
> The avionics master switch > discussion had probably rolled some eyes back and produced > reactions akin to, "geezzz. . . he's at it again . . ." > Never. This has been one of the most informative threads ever, particularly as it illustrates failure mode analysis. Keep at 'em Bob. Peter Bennett Sydney Australia RV6 doing the fiddly bits before engine ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: "Patrick E. Kelley" <patk(at)mail.ic.net>
Subject: Re: RV6 tail-kit
Anthony Self wrote: > > I just found a guy a few miles from my house who bought a RV6 tail kit and has > never started on it. He said he bought it quite a while ago and has lost > interest. I was really planning on buying and starting a RV6A this spring, but > maybe I'll consider this instead. My questions to you guys, however, are: > > How much should I pay this guy for the tail kit (bargain prices)? A lot depends on the condition and how much you are willing to pay for the convenience of starting right away. Assuming you find no corrosion, I'd say $700 would be about ballpark. Also, did he get the electric trim option? Taillight fairing? Do you care? > Are the new tails prepunched or otherwise improved enough to warrant paying > Van's full price? Yes, but.... They are nice, but not really necessary. Many RVs were built without the pre-punch feature. In fact, I personally prefer the non-punched kit. > Are the tail kits for the 6 and 6A really all that different (can a 6 be > converted easily to a 6A)? There is no difference at all. Nothing to convert. > Thanks for any info, hope you guys can help save me some money. You're welcome. Now, before you run out and acquire this jewel, you should check on a few things. Talk to Van and see about arranging to take over the serial number of this kit and getting an updated set of plans. If you need to change the tail-kit options, this is the time to do it. You want to do this first so that you can factor any costs from Van's Aircraft into what you are willing to pay for the tail-kit. I don't know whether they will charge anything for switching over the serial number, but they might charge you for an updated plans set and any options you wish to change. Hope this helps. PatK - RV-6A ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jeffrey Davis" <jdavis1(at)ford.com>
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Quick Build without the tail?
I am completing the tail of my 6 (non-prepunched) and am considering going with a QB for the rest of the kit. Is there any issue attaching the parts I have built to the QB Fuse? Are people happy with the quality of the construction of the QB. Would I be better off purchasing the entire kit and having my tail feathers as spare parts or selling. Thanks in advance for the help. -- Jeffrey S. Davis Senior Research Engineer Advance Vehicle Technology Ford Motor Company Phone (313)845-5224 Fax (313)845-4781 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: MKswing(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Re: Builders/Groups in NYC area
Scott- Thanks for the response. My post located several people (one building a -4 and another a -6A) about 5 miles from my home. I'm hoping to get the chance to see their projects. Since I ordered a QB kit and will be starting in "the middle" of the project I would like to see how to do some metalwork before starting in on my kit. I'm only about an hour from Wappinger Falls-would enjoy viewing your project and helping in any way I can if you feel so inclinded. Regards, Mike >>Anyone on-line currently building in the New York Metro area? Any RV builders groups in the metro area?<< ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: "Patrick E. Kelley" <patk(at)mail.ic.net>
Subject: Re: starting with fear
carlos bellido c/o joseph Matza wrote: > > any one have any general advice on getting over the > fear of getting started. Great question! There are some things you can do to help. Getting the George & Becki videos is a big help. Find some local builders and help them, then get them to help you. Spend a couple of bucks on some scrap aluminum (visit your local airport), and try drilling holes, dimpling, riveting, etc. Be sure to drill out some rivets. Eventually, though, you will have to drill or cut that first piece. Once done, it can't be undone. Take a breath and do it anyway. Once you have, the feeling of dread evaporates. Understand that you *will* make errors. If you stay close to the plan, most can be corrected. Consult Van's, other builders (especially Technical Advisors), and IAs for advice on what can be lived with and what can be redone. Unless you are perfect, you will doubtless scratch and/or dent your skins. Don't panic; most of these are not structurally threatening (again, consult someone) and will be hidden with a coat of paint. Consider it as a series of problems and work through them one at a time. Eventually you'll be done. Good luck! PatK - RV-6A ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Ken Gray <klgray(at)startel.net>
Subject: Protecting wood props
I have a RV6 (N69KG) with 305 hours on it. O320-E2D, 150 hp, warnke prop. Can someone with experience with wood props give me some hints on what to use for a clear coat paint? Also anyone that built their RV during the change from Fixed pitch cowls to the universal CS cowls, check your spinner diameter. Mine was a 12" spinner, but I had 1/2 inch of cowl showing around the spinner. Well Van's people were at Kerrville EAA flying with the RV8 and they told me I needed the 13" CS spinner. I called Van's several times and finally got an answer. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: catbird(at)taylortel.com (TTC Carroll A. Bird)
Subject: Re:finding Navaid
chris marion wrote: > > > I cant seem to find navaid either,have checked trade a plane with no > luck. Try 423-267-3311, Carroll Bird, I found this in the Yeller Pages. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HAWKBUD(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Re: Double Flaring Tool
Bob let me know when you get the info on the flaring tool... I want one too. If you order buy 2 I'll reimburse you. the RV-list is fun... sure keeps your mailbox full. se yah in a couple of weeks bud ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HAWKBUD(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Re: S-Tec Autopilot
rick the time value of the money makes purchasing & saving $1600 smash is worth it. hawkbud ( about to fly an RV-6 i am building,first time in November) flying a 182RG now. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: FMark40(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Re: RV4 Web Page
I just added a page to my Web Site dedicated to my RV4 which is under construction now. It has some pretty good photos of the empennage jig if any new builders are interested in that. The URL is : http://members.aol.com/F Mark40/homepage.htm Mark RV4 Empennage ... wings on the way ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mlfred(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Re: Setrab oil cooler...?
<< What about the Setrab oil cooler? Does anyone have any experience with it. Is it any good? Is it safe to use on an aircraft? Thank You, Ron Vandervort, RV-6Q >> Absolutely! I use a 19 row model, and it keeps that 540 cool enough! Check six! Mark ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: "Anderson Ed" <AndersonE(at)bah.com>
Subject: Re:finding Navaid
Hi Curtis, Saw Al this past weekend, too nasty to fly, but indicated you two were still going to get together to do a little tail dragging. Had the aircraft out of the hangar Thursday and loaded the left wing tank full to its 18 gal limit to calibrate the fuel level gage - shows full at 13.5 Gallons, Soooo will need to keep in mind that 'Full" does not necessaryily mean 18 gallons. Appears my alternator is not putting out any juice, don't know yet whether problem with alternator or not getting juice to its field coils, will check that out this weekend. Hopefully, if the wx cooperates I may do a little taxi testing starting on Sunday. Still waiting for the FAA, the local guy deferred me to their Maintenance Division up in PA due to the Mazda engine. Wanted an enginer type to take a look. Sooo still waiting. Hope things are moving on with you and Mike on the 8's, still need to get over to see them. See you Ed ---------- From: fca.gov!HinkleyC Subject: Re: RV-List: Re:finding Navaid Date: Thursday, October 30, 1997 8:48PM * * * * The views expressed in this EMail are my own and do not represent the policy or position * * * * * * * * of the Farm Credit Administration. * * * * This is what I have for Navaid. NAVAID DEVICES 641 N. Market Street Chattanooga, Tennessee 37405 423-267-3311 FAX 423-756-6154 I cant seem to find navaid either,have checked trade a plane with no luck.I am also curious about installation,can this unit be fitted easily after the wings are built or should I plan on this being part of the wing construction? thanks chris marion rv6/6a?WAITING on wings Curtis Hinkley RV-8 N815RV reserved CHink11769 @ aol.com hinkleyc(at)fca.gov | | | ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 08, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Don't "vote" on this list server . . .
>> The avionics master switch >> discussion had probably rolled some eyes back and produced >> reactions akin to, "geezzz. . . he's at it again . . ." >> > >Never. This has been one of the most informative threads ever, >particularly as it illustrates failure mode analysis. Keep at 'em >Bob. Aha . . You've seen the light brother! May you be grinning ear to ear for ALL your flying days. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= | | | Go ahead, make my day . . . . | | Show me where I'm wrong. | ================================= <http://www.aeroelectric.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark D Hiatt" <ottopilot_msn(at)email.msn.com>
Subject: Re: starting with fear
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Don't sweat it. Nobody builds an entire airplane--not even Van. Think of it like writing a book. Nobody writes a book all at once, not even Stephen King or Tom Clancy. But if you sit down and type out a few words you'll make sentences. String a few sentences together and you'll have paragraphs. Put a few paragraphs together and you'll have a page. Several pages will make a chapter and a number of chapters will make it a book. Start small. Work on the tail kit and don't do anything you're not absolutely sure of. Don't worry about making mistakes--everyone does! Ask lots of questions. Read through the RV-List archives. Work slowly until your confidence builds and then when you think you're getting a handle on things, work slower--you're about to screw something up! Don't worry about it. We've all felt the same way. -- Mark D Hiatt Visit us on the new MSN v2.5! OttoPilot_MSN@msn.com http://Forums.msn.com/Aviation Aviation Forum Manager, AvChat Mondays 10pm Eastern The Microsoft Network -----Original Message----- From: carlos bellido c/o joseph Matza <gghlaw.com!matzaj(at)matronics.com> Date: Thursday, October 30, 1997 6:57 PM Subject: Re: RV-List: starting with fear > > Now I'm looking at all these tools and parts and saying "What did I > get myself into?" > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HAWKBUD(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Re: ways to heat a garage
not in palm springs, but in cold cold Michigan and the radiant heaters still work good. no pun intended. just trying to be helpful & economical. hawkbud ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: "Anderson Ed" <AndersonE(at)bah.com>
Subject: Re: Mazda Rotary?
Charlie, One additional thing concerning the Mazda installation. I do have my engine rotated 90 degrees so that the exhaust ports point down, Tracy has his mounted as in the auto installation which puts the ports on the side. I have encountered one minor problem with my installation. Apparently, the rotated position combined with my placement of coolant header tanks and radiators imped the ready flow of coolant when I pour coolant into the header tank. In other words there are apparently air pockets that do not readily get displaced with the coolant. I found this out after once draining the coolant and replacing it - I was somewhat surprise at how apparently little coolant that took. Well, after firing up the engine and letting it run awhile, I notice the temperature rapidly approaching the red line. After some puzzling I figured out what was going on, so now I simply pour in as much as it will take - leave the radiator cap off and run the engine for 2-3 minutes, the coolant level is now lower and I pour in more coolant. I continue this until I have approx 3 1/2 gallons of coolant into the system. I have a loop in the hose running from the header tank to the engine which I suspect traps the air until I run the engine after which I can then pour in more coolant. I have a fix in mind, but for the moment I know how to deal with it. Soooo, that's about all unless you have further questions. Ed ---------- From: Charlie Kuss Subject: Re: RV-List: Mazda Rotary? Date: Thursday, October 30, 1997 8:55PM Anderson Ed wrote: snipped I have a Maza Rotary running in an RV-6A (awaiting FAA inspection). You will hear all sort of claims and disclaimers, exaggerated Ed, How hard are you twisting it's tail? (What RPM does it take to make 165HP?) Please elaborate on modifications, if any, to the engine. I have a friend with a Cosy 4. He is having a mutual friend fabricate a firewall forward (rearward? in this case) package, based on Tracy's information. Charlie Kuss | | | ________________________________________________________________________________
From: DICKL RV6A <DICKLRV6A(at)aol.com>
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: August R-vator article on plexiglass
The article on the vagaries of plexiglass has caused me some concern. The article lists co-efficients for linear expansion of both steel and acrylic, the differences being so dramatically different that I fear a cracked canopy at sometime in the future if I follow the methods as suggested in the plans. Does anyone have similar feelings? Of those I have talkd to on the flight lines, no mention has been made of cracking problems or fears therof. Does anyone care to share their thoughts or experiences along these lines? DicklRV6A//working on canopy ________________________________________________________________________________
From: rodwoodard(at)juno.com
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Re: starting with fear
<345932C8.85DFD3A6(at)pec.co.nz> writes: >Start on something easy. IIRC, the first step is to taper and round >the >ends of the HS-609 spar stiffeners. That's not a difficult job. Pick >up >your new Sharpie pen, mark out what you need to do, pick up your file >and/or hacksaw, take a deep breath (or two) and do it. Welcome to the new world of pre-fabricated parts, Frank. :-) We no longer have to taper the HS-609 (or -809). It comes pre-tapered from Van's. All we have to do is run down the edges with a file and then make a few passes with a Scotchbrite wheel. Takes about 15 minutes, I'd guess. You gotta love it! Rod Woodard Loveland, Colorado RV-8, #80033 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 08, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Avionics Master...
et> >> >>The truth of the matter is that this guy is an avionics installer and gets >paid good money to install avionics master switches. His whole column is >suspect from this standpoint and is unfortunate given AvWeb's stated >purpose and scorn for the same behavior from everyone else. >> >I have used Tom Rogers for avionics purchases and found him competitive, >reliable and helpful. He may differ with Bob N. on the need for an avionics >master and he may well be wrong but I think it is not fair to attribute >this to commercial motives, the extra profit from wiring an avionics master >switch is unlikely to force him to perjury. > >Leo (Like Tom and Bob) Davies >6A engine and panel Leo, I agree and I think if Tim thought about it a bit he would also . . . remember, I used to pitch avionics master switches too! I was a tech writer at Cessna when the things were installed in the airplanes for the first time. I WROTE many of the words that are repeated today as though carved in stone back in 1966! Given some of the off-list replies I'm getting, a lot of people still don't grasp the thrust of my suggestions . . . it's not that I'm "picking" on avionics masters, key-lock mag switches, or panels full of circuit breakers. This isn't about suitability of any particular part or set of parts to serve their intended purpose. Its about reducing costs by the application of modern components that are equally suited to the purpose while increasing reliability by reducing overall parts count. It's also about deducing all the What-if-This-Happens scenarios and having SIMPLE plans in place to deal with anything before take off . . . not developed in-flight. It's about building SYSTEM reliability from what appears to be a collection of not terribly reliable parts. Tom isn't allowed to think in those terms, the airplanes and customers he chooses to serve are working to rules and paradigms that are indeed carved in stone. If anyone has taken a class in TQM, they can relate to how a poorly crafted set of rules can doom any system . . . well folks, certified single engine airplanes are evaporating at the rate of 4000-5000 airplanes per year and there's no credible relief in sight. The people who participate on this list and others like are THE FUTURE of general aviation . . . if there is to be a future. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= | | | Go ahead, make my day . . . . | | Show me where I'm wrong. | ================================= <http://www.aeroelectric.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Chris Ruble <cruble(at)cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Flames! RV6 vs Mustang II
I helped my father build a MMII in the '70s. I have flown both airplanes. The Bushby is a _much_ hotter airplane. The stall in an RV is almost a non-event. This is not true with the MMII, it stalls with a vengeance. If you don't have any flight time in a NLF wing airplane, it's hard to picture just how fast a wing can transition from flying to rock-mode. If you have problems keeping your speed controlled on final, don't build a Mustang. On the other hand the MMII is a _real_ fun bird. It's not all that much faster than the RVs, but it has a more nimble feel. This reflects it's "racer" heritage. If all of your time is in 172s or PA-28s, the Mustang is going to be a real strain on your flying skills. The RVs fly like a PA-28 on steroids. I'm building an RV. Chris > > Hi everyone, > > I have talked to one or two of you out there about why you chose an RV6 vs > a Mustang II. If this is a taboo subject, please - flame me off list!!! I > have been trying to decide between them and have been monitoring both > email lists to try to get a feel for what types of problems are > encountered. I have also scanned thru the last 7 years of mail archives. > > To be honest, I really don't have a STRONG feeling one way or another. > They both appear to be really nice aircraft. Van seems to have a great > builder network. On the other hand I really like the tapered wing of > the Mustang. > > If you have been in the same quandry as I am could you please send me > a not, saying what caused the balance to tip to the RV6? > > Thanks, > Jeff ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Craig Hiers <craig-RV4(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Setrab oil cooler...?
Ronald Vandervort wrote: > > > What about the Setrab oil cooler? Does anyone have any experience with > it. Is it any good? Is it safe to use on an aircraft? > > Thank You, Ron Vandervort, RV-6Q > > Ron I purchased a setrab oil cooler about 5 months ago to use in my rv. It looks fine to me, however about 6weeks ago a friend gave me a stewart oil cooler and I used it. So, if you would like to buy the setrab I will sell it for 60$. I think I paid about 95$. Craig Hiers craig-rv4(at)worldnet.att.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Bob Reiff <Reiff(at)execpc.com>
Subject: Heating skins
Joe Rex wrote: > > Moe, > > Your idea is not so crazy. I have a good friend who used to work for > Boeing. He tells me that they used the electric blanket method on the B-52 > wing skins. > > Joe Rex Yes, flexible pad heaters are used a lot for heat curing composite skins for various military aircraft. I've also sold some real long ones for heat curing composite helicopter blades. My RV wing skin heater is just a variation of that concept. Bob Reiff RV4 #2646 O-360/CS, skinning fuselage Reiff Preheat Systems FAA-PMA aircraft engine preheat systems, etal http://www.execpc.com/reiff ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Navaid Info.
From: rodwoodard(at)juno.com (Rodney W. Woodard)
I just got off the phone with the Navaid folks. The current price is $1300 and they are "about 10 weeks behind," but they can ship the servo sooner if you need it to keep building. I also asked him about the servo location he said there is no "preferred" location--wing or fuselage. Re: the altitude hold feature... It is under development at this time and they hope to have something available by "next year." None of the above really surprised me. What did, however, is that he said if I plan to do any IFR, I should probably plan on having a standard turn coordinator in addition to the Navaid unit. Panel space in my -8 will be at a premium and I'd really rather avoid this. In fact, it may make the difference for me between the S-Tec System 20/30 and the Navaid. For those of you out there flying IFR with the Navaid, what do you say to the idea of needing a separate, standard turn coordinator? Thanks in advance. Rod Woodard Loveland, Colorado RV-8, #80033 ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Double Flaring Tool
From: lm4(at)juno.com (Larry Mac Donald)
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Does anyone know of a source to purchase a "Double Flaring >Tool" ? >Bob Reeves Avery Tools began carrying double flaring tools about six months ago. I have one and it works great. Larry Mac Donald ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Steve Beckham <76623.1166(at)compuserve.com>
Subject: Re;Everett Hatch Crash
I apologize for not sending out any information sooner regarding the loss of my best friend and business partner, Everett Hatch. But as you can imagine, it has been an extremely difficult time for us and we wanted to wait until we had more information. I'll keep this short because I have to attend to Everett's burial this afternoon. Here is what has been reported to us at this time. A Cessna pilot from Albany was flying from 500-1000 feet above the Santiam River just a few miles south of our airstrip. He was checking from the air the status of a friend's boat which had evidently become stuck on a gravel bar in the Santiam River. This river runs right next to our airstrip and continues past it to the southwest. Everett had taken off in our RV-4 earlier and was reported by friends and other witnesses on the ground to have flown around the neighboring area at altitudes up to approximately 8,000 ft. The aircraft was well known to all in the area over the past 10 years. A short time later, the Cessna pilot reported he was loitering above the stranded boat when Everett came by at high speed and gave him a wing-wag to say hello. At that point the RV-4 simply rolled to the left and descended vertically under apparently full power until impact from an altitude of approx. 500-1000 feet. Witnesses adjacent to the crash site were deer hunting. A backhoe had to be used to excavate the aircraft, from a depth up to six feet according to sources close to the removal party. It has been reported to me that only the vertical and horizontal stabilizers and a short section of tail cone were above ground. The rest of the aircraft, including wings, spars, engine, everything else, were evidently buried. Everett had suffered headaches. In retrospect, their frequency had increased. Associated symtoms were visual problems and momentary speech loss. The NTSB investigation continues. But preliminary information indicates controls were fully functional and all aircraft surfaces were attached at point of impact. An autopsy was performed but the results have not yet been released to the family. The aircraft was not insured so hopefully we will have information soon. When we know more, we will do our best to report it accurately. What I do know, as any of you who knew Everett Hatch well also know, is that Everett was a very cautious, conservative man. Although Everett did occasionally fly aerobatics, his maneuvers reflected his approach to life: conservative and controlled. Our mantra that we said to each other before every test flight was that if there were trouble, the first thing to do was cut the power. I was closer to Everett than anybody in this world. And recently he was extremely upbeat. In the past two months we had finally dialed in the Powersport rotary engine and flight tests were producing performance we had never dreamed possible when we started the development program 10 years ago. Everett called me during the week before his death to report the latest test flying performance and it was stunning. I was out of town on business. Everett, as you who knew him were aware, was a very quiet man. But on that occasion when we spoke on the phone, he was absolutely giddy. "We did it!" he said. It was the last time we spoke. I don't know what I will do with the engine program. It's too soon to try and make a decision and I'm certainly in no emotional state to do so. But one of the options which Everett and I had discussed was that if anything ever happened to one of us, the other would see if we could locate someone or a group of people who could bring the technical and financial resources and get the unit into production or keep it there if we had already done so. In the near future I will seek the counsel of those I respect to make a decision. We bury Everett today at 2 p.m. A Memorial Service will be held at Everett's this Sunday at 2 p.m. Dick VanGrunsven is organizing a formation fly-by/missing man weather permitting at 2:15. I'm sure Everett would appreciate seening as many birds as possible fly in to his going-away but only weather permitting and it is safe to do so. If you do fly, please plan on being on the ground not later than 2:15. If you have questions, call 503-769-7188. In the meantime, on behalf of the family and those closest to Everett, I want to thank all of you for your wonderful words expressed on behalf of this exceptional, gentle man. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Flames! RV6 vs Mustang II
From: lm4(at)juno.com (Larry Mac Donald)
Date: Oct 31, 1997
>Hi everyone, >I have talked to one or two of you out there about why you chose an >RV6 vs a Mustang II. If this is a taboo subject--- I have been trying to decide between them and have been monitoring both email lists They both appear to be really nice aircraft. Van seems to have a >great builder network. I really like the tapered wing of the Mustang. >If you have been in the same quandry as I am could you please send me a note, saying what caused the balance to tip to the RV6? >Thanks, >Jeff >PS. Cost is a factor. I would really like to to a Composite 4 place, Jeff, I also had that problem. I liked the wing ( and the folding wing kit ). Imagine how stunning it was to read in SA about a shoot out between two ex-fighter pilots, one in a 6A and the other in a M2, and the fat wing plane won very early in the dog fight. Also I started a Polywagon but didn't have what it takes to do plastic and foam. In fact, it shook my confidence and made me doubt that I could build any kind of plane. I visited the plant in michigan and sat in both planes, two years in a row, at OSH but when I asked one of the wiser guys in my chapter and he said that the six was the rave because of product support, great numbers, price of kit, price of engine, ease to build I was sold. Now i'm sticking clecos in the right elevator of a six. Good luck in your dicision making. Larry Mac Donald ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jones, Bryan D. (LPT)" <JonesB(at)GEON.com>
Subject: Flames! RV6 vs Mustang II
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Jef, I'm building an RV-8, but you should ask yourself: 1. How many Mustangs are built and flying versus RV's? 2. Do you realize that the new RV-6 skins are prepunched and formed? I really don't think you get that with the Mustang. Regarding the tapered wings - I agree. I like them as well and decided that I might get motivated enough 6 or 8-years after completing my stock RV-8 to consider improved wings, either composite (yuck!) or metal. I can't help but believe that a slightly longer, higher aspect wing (like a Mooney) would perform better in cruise (what I will be doing more than radical aerobatics). Good Luck ...finishing the right RV-8 wing Bryan Jones JONESB(at)GEON.COM > Hi everyone, > > I have talked to one or two of you out there about why you chose an > RV6 vs > a Mustang II. If this is a taboo subject, please - flame me off > list!!! I > have been trying to decide between them and have been monitoring both > email lists to try to get a feel for what types of problems are > encountered. I have also scanned thru the last 7 years of mail > archives. > > To be honest, I really don't have a STRONG feeling one way or another. > They both appear to be really nice aircraft. Van seems to have a > great > builder network. On the other hand I really like the tapered wing of > the Mustang. > > If you have been in the same quandry as I am could you please send me > a not, saying what caused the balance to tip to the RV6? > > Thanks, > Jeff > > PS. Cost is a factor. I would really like to to a Composite 4 place, > but the kit runs 25k and then there is the IO360, so that > probably > is out of my range. > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: "John B. Abell" <jbabell(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Avionics Master Switches
Les Rowles wrote: > I was instructed from my first flight to have the avionics turned of at the > master switch or at least pull the fuse, or throw the circuit breaker > before cranking up. Then turn on components after engine running as part > of checks then the whole operation in reverse before closing down. I received the same instruction. In fact, these same procedures are in every checklist I've ever used. The thought of omitting a master switch in the face of Tom's advice to the contrary makes me nervous. > The gear we install in our aircraft is > pretty expensive so why not take the precautions to protect it. What is > the cost of a switch? What is the cost of repairs? > > Regards Les Rowles. I agree. If one must decide on an issue like this in the face of uncertainty, it makes sense to me to err on the safe side. I'm certainly no expert, but my guess is that there may be several or many sources of transient voltages in modern avionics components that can be damaging, D.C. power being only one (e.g., think about the wristbands Tom mentioned in his article), and engine starts and shutdowns only two of the contributors to that. Nevertheless, the traditional approach of using a master switch (or two) seems cost-effective. It makes sense to think about both the cost and risk of each option, as you suggest, especially when the "experts" disagree. Thanks for your comments. Jack Abell Los Angeles, Calif. RV-6A N333JA (Reserved) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Mike Hartmann <hartmann(at)sound.net>
Subject: Re: Flames! RV6 vs Mustang II
Regarding deciding between the Mustang II and the RV6 >If you have been in the same quandry as I am could you please send me >a not, saying what caused the balance to tip to the RV6? I was never in a 'quandry' as I eliminated the Mustang from consideration early on. It seems to be a fine aircraft, but it doesn't fit my 'mission profile'. Decide what you want do with the aircraft, then choose one that fits. My aircraft has to be happy and safe using a 2000 ft turf runway. The mustang kit seemed less complete than the RV, and it looked like it would be harder for me to build. It had been available for a long time, as had the Thorpe, but there were more RVs at Oshkosh the year I was looking to buy than Mustang IIs and Thorpes combined. The Mustang does look good, but I've always put more value on performance than appearance. The Mustang is slightly faster, but by every other measure of performance the RV comes out on top. I accept on faith that the Mustang is as nice to fly as the RV, I've never flown in a Mustang II. The RV's cockpit is also more comfortable. Get out some paper and list the pros and cons of each. Then send Van your check. Those ugly square wings will grow on you when they're yours. - Mike hartmann(at)sound.net http://www.sound.net/~hartmann ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Mike Hartmann <hartmann(at)sound.net>
Subject: Re: RV6 tail-kit
Regarding your consideration of a used RV6/6A empennage kit. At 04:38 10/31/97 UT, you wrote: >How much should I pay this guy for the tail kit (bargain prices)? The least he'll let it go for. Make sure you do a full inventory, get the plans set, builder's manual, etc. If the tail kit is complete and has been properly stored, it is still worth what he paid. I'd make a low offer, but would be willing to pay up to about 75% of what it cost him new, not including shipping. It would be worth more than that, but the difference has to be enough to make it worth dealing with an unknown (him) vs Van. Use the argument that the new kits are pre-punched and are in stock for immediate shipment as a bargaining position, but if he did any research at all before he bought the kit, he'll know what it's worth. Don't forget to ask him what tools he might be able to throw in to make the deal. >Are the new tails prepunched or otherwise improved enough to warrant paying >Van's full price? The kit is constantly being improved, but the earlier empennage kits were (are) quite easily built by the first-timer. Pre-punching can be a little overrated by some. It would save you some time in layout, but it also limits flexibility. On a structure as simple as the tail of an RV it really has more value as a marketing incentive than in real time or work saved. >Are the tail kits for the 6 and 6A really all that different (can a 6 be >converted easily to a 6A)? The empennage and wings for the 6 and 6A are identical. You won't see any differences until you get to the fuselage kit; the 6A kit has more parts in it than the 6. The engine mounts are different as well. There is really no need to decide between them until you order the fuselage. Good luck - Mike hartmann(at)sound.net http://www.sound.net/~hartmann ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jones, Bryan D. (LPT)" <JonesB(at)GEON.com>
Subject: starting with fear
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Mitch, Please elaborate on not priming the Alclad parts and what exceptions would you consider reasonable. I live in the Gulf Coast area and am priming everything - inside and out...I believe this is the best way unless someone can explain a better way. Thanks. Bryan Jones JONESB(at)GEON.COM > I'll get arguments on this subject but alclad is corrosion > resistant. Unless you plan to be flying the plane in 75 years, there > is > usually (exceptions noted) no need to prime except where there is > metal > to metal contact. Non alclad parts should be primed (ask airbus > industries). Check the archives-there's several meg of comments on > priming! > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com>
Subject: RV-6A fuselage question
Date: Oct 31, 1997
charset="iso-8859-1" Hello listers, The RV 6A uses a plate-gusset called F-6101 between the lower longeron and a diagonal longeron from the firewall to F-604. The Frank Justice notes suggest that a spacer fits between the F-602 bulkhead and the F-6101. I don't see any spacer on either drawing 59 or drawing 31. I don't mind installing the F-6101 and F-602 without a spacer. Without a spacer to drill through, though, it looks like there will be no way to buck the skin rivets into the F-602 for the lower part that is blocked by the F-6101. What have the rest of you done? Did you make a spacer? What did it look like? Did forego a spacer and use pulled rivets in that part of the skin? Steve Soule Huntington, Vermont (Fuselage pieces in the jig and puzzled.) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HAWKBUD(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: 0-320-E2D Crankshaft
I am in need of a serviceable crankshaft for an 0-320-E2D engine Anybody out there have one with a yellow tag? hawkbud ( about to fly RV-6) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: "Anderson Ed" <AndersonE(at)bah.com>
Subject: Imperfect Tube Flaring?
Noticed subject of tube flaring tools. If you have ever ended up with a "slightly" imperfect flare and don't have sufficient tubing left to cut it off and "reflare" there is a product that may help. Don't know its technical name, but it is basically a cone of soft aluminum (with hole) that you can place over the cone of the AN fitting that matches with your "imperfect" flare. When the fitting is tightened this cone deforms into any scratches or other small imperfections of the flare and seals the fitting. I use them to solve a leak in an aluminum pitot line and appears to work fine. Earl's automotive products carries them for any AN fitting size from -3 thru -16. Ed ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mitch Faatz <mfaatz(at)sagenttech.com>
Subject: Quick Build without the tail?
Date: Oct 31, 1997
You are good to go. I did the same exact thing - build my empennage and then decided to get the QB. The quality is great, and you get a $2000 deduction on the QB price since you already have the tail. Keep your tail! This is really the best route if you ask me - building the tail before the QB for the learning experience and confidence. Mitch Faatz San Jose, CA N727MF (reserved) RV-6AQME working on the sliding canopy... > ---------- > From: Jeffrey Davis > Sent: Friday, October 31, 1997 4:36 AM > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: Quick Build without the tail? > > > I am completing the tail of my 6 (non-prepunched) and am considering > going with > a QB for the rest of the kit. Is there any issue attaching the parts > I have > built to the QB Fuse? Are people happy with the quality of the > construction of > the QB. Would I be better off purchasing the entire kit and having my > tail > feathers as spare parts or selling. Thanks in advance for the help. > > -- > Jeffrey S. Davis > Senior Research Engineer > Advance Vehicle Technology > Ford Motor Company > Phone (313)845-5224 Fax (313)845-4781 > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson)
Subject: Re: Mold Release
Interesting that this mold release thread should come up at this time... I just laid up my first wheel pant intersection fairing. I read, I believe it was in Bingelis' book but it might have been Van's manual, that modeling clay has oils that act as a natural release agent. I used kids clay from the variety store, and didn't use any mold release over the clay, and had to end up spending a couple of hours scraping the stuff off the back side of the lay-up. I will use mold release wax over the clay on the other one for sure. Is this normal? Any other suggestions? Other than the above, the thing came out pretty well. I have done some fiberglass before but mostly repair type stuff -- this was my first lay-up over a mold. Pretty neat actually, in a smelly, sticky kind of way. Randall Henderson, RV-6 randall(at)edt.com http://www.edt.com/homewing ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Bob Nuckolls <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: How they voted . . .
I didn't make it very clear in my request for a poll but I can share with you now that over 95% of the respondents favor making the product perform in accordance with the INTUITIVE specification. But I did receive a number of letters like the following: > ( ) Insist that the manufacturer conform to REASONABLE > EXPECTATIONS for performance even though it was > NOT explicit in my specification? > > > >I would vote for the above, although reasonableness is in the mind of the >beholder. Actually, I think you goofed! > >With all of your encouragement to us to build work reducing systems (which I >support 100%), why wouldn't you have included a simple statement like "Must >be up and running reliably once being switched on" in your specs? If you >know how to do this, the spec could be made more specific assuring >compliance. Okay, but where do you draw the distinction between issues of performance (the job you want to do) and the intuitively obvious. For example, suppose the same product was suffering from peeling paint, or perhaps was supplied with a power cord that only fits European outlets, or any number of other things. I understand what you're suggesting . . . the military has been VERY busy attempting to do just that . . . cover EVERY base right down to paint color shades and outdoor tests for paint weathering. The problem became one of data overload . . . The last military program we signed up to came with 100 pounds of paper to COMPLY with. Hmmmm . . . what's the chances that ALL of that paper was read, understood and reacted to in a way beneficial to the customer . . . ZERO. We certainly got the important parts and we enjoy the knowledge of having lots of happy customers. Deep in our hearts, we know that a lot of that paper work added no value and if ALL of it had been evaluated and strictly observed, would have driven us out of the competition. A number of people missed the point (my fault) for suggesting this excercise and I twisted a number of list-ops tails with the notion that I was asking list suscribers to help me solve a professional problem. I'll suggest now that the exercise was very much to the point as follows: If the list membership advice to me is so much in favor of making the vendor comply with an INTUITIVELY derived performance specification, why not apply it to the way we buy and use avionics - or any other product? It doesn't matter if you're buying stuff from me, King Radio, or Dick VanGrunsven. There are reasonable expectations for supplier and product performance. Even if you choose to LIVE with the product or service as received you can only help yourself in the future and the industry in general by bringing deficiencies of all kinds to the suppliers attention . . . and talking about it here too in front of everybody. Flaming doesn't work . . . it only raises defenses and starts wars. Discussing facts in evidence with requests and suggestions for solutions do work . . . at least for suppliers that value your business. I can't speak for Dick, but I knew Ed King. He would have and I do appreciate feedback. Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me and thanks also for some patient list-ops. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= | | | Go ahead, make my day . . . . | | Show me where I'm wrong. | ================================= <http://www.aeroelectric.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne)
Subject: Re: Quick Build without the tail?
Jeff, The emp you have built is perfectly ok for the QB kit. The attachment to the fuselage is very simple. The construction of the QB is excellent! I understand that the people in the Phillipines who build them used to work on F16s before Mt Pinatubo blew up and they closed the AF Base there. Hal Kempthorne RV-6AQ -- WANTED TO BUY - a used Chevy V-6 setup. halk(at)sybase.com Santa Clara, CA. Debonair N6134V @ SJC > I am completing the tail of my 6 (non-prepunched) and am considering going with > a QB for the rest of the kit. Is there any issue attaching the parts I have > built to the QB Fuse? Are people happy with the quality of the construction of > the QB. Would I be better off purchasing the entire kit and having my tail > feathers as spare parts or selling. Thanks in advance for the help. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Acker" <r.acker(at)thegrid.net>
Subject: Re: Quick Build without the tail?
Date: Oct 31, 1997
> From: Jeffrey Davis <ford.com!jdavis1(at)matronics.com> > Are people happy with the quality of the construction of > the QB. I am. > Would I be better off purchasing the entire kit and having my tail > feathers as spare parts or selling I think Van's gives a $2K discount on the QB less tail feathers. I would use yours and take the $2K. Rob (RV-6Q). ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Acker" <r.acker(at)thegrid.net>
Subject: Re[2]: Ivo Cheap Shot
Date: Oct 31, 1997
> From: JAMES E AYERS <juno.com!less_drag(at)matronics.com> > However, with 16,000 props sold in a five year period and 11 reported > incidents, Van could have only 1 incident for 1600 airplanes flying > during five years. I guess my point was missed, the comparison seems invalid. The 16000 props had *one* manufacturer, the 1600 airframes had *1600* manufacturers. Incidents attributable to factors beyond what Van provides each manufacturer (airframe design, materials and prefabricated components per design spec) cannot be included in a fair comparison. > I hope this helps clarify the Ivoprop VP Magnum prop situation. It has for me, thanks. Regards, Rob Acker (RV-6Q with wood or Sensenich at this point!) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mick_G" <micky_g(at)email.msn.com>
Subject: Re: Re;Everett Hatch Crash
Date: Oct 31, 1997
I wish to extend my condolences, although I did not know Mr.. Hatch he seems to have been a fine aviator who will be sorely missed. Mick -----Original Message----- From: Steve Beckham <compuserve.com!76623.1166(at)matronics.com> Date: Friday, October 31, 1997 2:18 PM Subject: RE: RV-List: Re;Everett Hatch Crash > >I apologize for not sending out any information sooner regarding the loss ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne)
Subject: Re: Navaid Info.
Hi, I still may go for the Navaid but I believe I would not install it in = the=20 location usually occupied by a standard turn coordinator (or =14T&B). = I would=20 retain the standard instrument for insurance and liability = considerations even=20 it is not an FAA requirement. Just because it is new technology. Hal Kempthorne RV-6AQ -- WANTED TO BUY - a used Chevy V-6 setup. halk(at)sybase.com Santa Clara, CA. Debonair N6134V @ SJC =20 >=20 > None of the above really surprised me. What did, however, is that he = said > if I plan to do any IFR, I should probably plan on having a standard = turn > coordinator in addition to the Navaid unit. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Chris Hinch <chris(at)dcc.govt.nz>
Subject: I guess I will be an RV 8 builder now...............
.........
Date: Nov 01, 1997
>I am 6' and when I have sat in the -8 I find I need at least 6" of cushion >so that I can see over the panel. The rudder pedals are adjustable with a >good range so this should not be a problem. NOW I'm worried - *especially* after the post that a Van's person told a 6' pilot to downsize to the -4 because he "wouldn't fit". I'm 5' 7" and had decided on (read: fallen in love with) the -8. Am I going to have a problem? Or just need really thick cushions? Chris Hinch chris(at)dcc.govt.nz ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Jim Cimino <jcimino(at)epix.net>
Subject: Re: Builders/Groups in NYC area
I don't know about N.Y., but there is one in NE PA. Our group has at least seven under construction including one "4" and three "8"s. > >>>Anyone on-line currently building in the New York Metro area? Any RV >builders groups in the metro area?<< > >Mike, > >Don't know about the city but there are a couple builders up here in >Wappingers. I'm just finishing the tail of a -8, another lister is >skinning the top fusalage of a -6. Don't know of any builders group in the >area, I guess we are a two builder group. > >Scott A. Jordan >-8 #331 >N733JJ >Empanage fibreglass, wings in the spring > > > > > > Jim Cimino RV-8 sn 80039 http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/5771 (717)842-4057 N.E. Pennsylvania ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: August R-vator article on plexiglass
Date: Oct 31, 1997
---------- > From: DICKL RV6A <aol.com!DICKLRV6A(at)matronics.com> > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: RV-List: August R-vator article on plexiglass > Date: Friday, October 31, 1997 9:16 AM > > > The article on the vagaries of plexiglass has caused me some concern. The > article lists co-efficients for linear expansion of both steel and acrylic, > the differences being so dramatically different that I fear a cracked canopy > at sometime in the future if I follow the methods as suggested in the plans. The differing coefficients of expansion are why holes in Plexiglas are drilled oversize. With proper oversizing of the holes the Plexiglas cannot contract sufficiently to cause cracking. Dennis 6A Barington, IL ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Austin Tinckler" <tinckler(at)axionet.com>
Subject: Plenum
Date: Oct 31, 1997
---------- > From: Austin Tinckler <tinckler(at)axionet.com> > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: Plenum > Date: Thursday, October 30, 1997 8:34 PM > > > > ---------- > > From: Bob Skinner <trib.com!bskinr(at)matronics.com> > > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > > Subject: Re: RV-List: Plenum > Bishop looked at Bob's installation and came up with some clever > > methods of attachment for the top cover. I hope we can get some pictures > > out, somehow. > > I think one advantage to the plenum, if you can keep the side baffles > > short enough, is that there will be easier access to the spark plugs with > a > > torque wrench. The top rear plugs are hard to get at with the > conventional > > baffles. > > > > Bob Skinner RV-6 380 hours Buffalo, WY bskinr(at)trib.com > Bob, > Thanks for the ideas and follow-up on this plenum idea. I really > did open up a can of worms as I stated on my first post on baffles. It's > just that we locals have done some talking about plenums vs. baffles and I > have also seen some nice photos ( as in Bingelis's book), that I determined > that I was definitely going to go this route next time around. I would > really like to see the scan you mentioned and other suggestions for > down-loading.....Austin. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Austin Tinckler" <tinckler(at)axionet.com>
Subject: Re: Bart Lalonde/Aero Sport Power Engines
Date: Oct 31, 1997
---------- > From: Dennis Persyk <worldnet.att.net!dpersyk(at)matronics.com> > To: rv-list > Subject: RV-List: Bart Lalonde/Aero Sport Power Engines > Date: Wednesday, October 29, 1997 5:00 PM > > > I am getting ready to order an engine (O-360 A1A) and would appreciate > feedback on Mark Lalonde of Aero Sport Power, Kamloops, B.C. (Phone 250 > 376 2955) Post messages to me privately if you have concerns about > publicizing your input. > Thanks. > Dennis 6A mounting seats > Barrington, IL Anything said about Bart Lalonde can and should be said publicly. You will have to look long and hard to find anyone as good or better than Lalonde for his honesty, thorough experience, and sense of fairplay. I have dealt with him and found all the above to be true. In fact, he doesn't need any publicity at all and we would rather keep him a secret. He has so much work ahead of him on referrals alone that he gets no time left to work on his RV-8. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Scott Gesele <scottg(at)icsnet.com>
Subject: Re: Builders/Groups in NYC area
>>>Anyone on-line currently building in the New York Metro area? Any RV >builders groups in the metro area?<< > We have a bunch of RV's on Long Island. My RV-6A is almost done with the flight testing (two weeks of weather in a row sure puts dampeners on things). One 8 is going together, a few quickbuilds, another regular 6 was just started and there are a few 4's flying. Respond off list if you are near Long Island. Scott Gesele N506RV - Flying ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Sky Doc2 <SkyDoc2(at)aol.com>
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Re: Tank Crafters & Carl Fisher
I was wondering if anyone has Carl's current telephone number or has any information on the tanks he was building. When my RV-8 wing kit was sent the tank material was picked up by Carl, and I am now trying to find out its' status. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Qmax LLC <QmaxLLC(at)aol.com>
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Re: Flames! RV6 vs Mustang II
Touchy!!!! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Charlie Kuss <charliekuss(at)sprintmail.com>
Subject: Re: Mazda Rotary?
Anderson Ed wrote: Snipped > Charlie, > One additional thing concerning the Mazda installation. I do have my > engine rotated 90 degrees so that the exhaust ports point down, > Soooo, that's about all unless you have further questions. Ed, Yeh, now I have lots more questions. Are you running some sort of dry sump system? Could you email me any photos of your installation? Is the engine carburated or fuel injected? What type & brand of fuel system is used? How is the engine mounted? Did I not receive one of your posts? This is the first reply I've gotten from you. You still haven't answered my original questions. See below. Thanks in advance Charlie > From: Charlie Kuss > To: rv-list > Subject: Re: RV-List: Mazda Rotary? > Date: Thursday, October 30, 1997 8:55PM > > > Anderson Ed wrote: > snipped > > I have a Maza Rotary running in an RV-6A (awaiting FAA inspection). > You will hear all sort of claims and disclaimers, exaggerated > > Ed, > How hard are you twisting it's tail? (What RPM does it take to make > 165HP?) Please elaborate on modifications, if any, to the engine. I have > a friend with a Cosy 4. He is having a mutual friend fabricate a > firewall forward (rearward? in this case) package, based on Tracy's > information. > > Charlie Kuss ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: "les williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)classic.msn.com>
Subject: August R-vator article on plexiglass
My first RV-6A tip-up canopy was completed according to plans and manual including pop riveting where it says. Didn't develop any cracks during the 350 hrs/3 1/2 years I flew it. Les Williams/RV-6AQ/Tacoma WA ---------- From: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com on behalf of DICKL RV6A Sent: Friday, October 31, 1997 7:16 AM Subject: RV-List: August R-vator article on plexiglass The article on the vagaries of plexiglass has caused me some concern. The article lists co-efficients for linear expansion of both steel and acrylic, the differences being so dramatically different that I fear a cracked canopy at sometime in the future if I follow the methods as suggested in the plans. Does anyone have similar feelings? Of those I have talkd to on the flight lines, no mention has been made of cracking problems or fears therof. Does anyone care to share their thoughts or experiences along these lines? DicklRV6A//working on canopy ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: John Ciolino <jbc1(at)ziplink.net>
Subject: rudder bottom
Listers, I am fitting the fiberglass botton to the rudder. The nose of the rudder bottom is not wide enough to reach completely across the rudder spar. On the RV-4s and -6s I have looked at, the bottom is as wide as the spar. Is this the way the bottom is supposed to fit on the -8 Do I need to build it it up if I want it to wrap around the spar? Or did I get a malformed part? Any suggestions would be appreciated. John Ciolino RV-8 jbc1(at)Ziplink.net Hartford, CT ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bumflyer(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: prop note
I am proud of myself for refraining from the great prop debate; however for all of you out there agonizing over prop decisions check out the SENSENICH site for the latest on the 180 HP metal prop. It is finally looking promising again!! It sounds to me like this prop will be just what the RV-6 guys have been dreaming about. Its weight with the 180 HP should give you a marvelous cross country airplane. "I'd rather fly than argue about it." D Walsh---- going to pick up my RV-6A from the painter tomorrow. Hope I remember how to fly it. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Quick Build without the tail?
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: n5lp <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net>
> > >I am completing the tail of my 6 (non-prepunched) and am considering going >with >a QB for the rest of the kit. Is there any issue attaching the parts I have >built to the QB Fuse? Are people happy with the quality of the >construction of >the QB. Would I be better off purchasing the entire kit and having my tail >feathers as spare parts or selling. Thanks in advance for the help. > I built my tail from the regular kit and went QB the rest of the way. I think that is a good way to go. I haven't seen the QB tail pieces but the ailerons and flaps I got were quite good; probably the best workmanship on my QB. As for fitting, I think that is always an issue. Nothing fits on my kit. I just completed mounting my prepunched tail on by QB fuselage. The front and rear spars of the vertical and horizontal stabilizers did not come close to matching up. Judging from the extra instructions about this problem, that is the norm. I had to use two of the suggested solutions, a 1/8 inch shim at the front stabilizers and a 3/16 inch shim in front of the rear spar of the vertical stabilizer. I had no control over any of the pertinent dimensions. Prepunched tail and QB fuselage. But as I say, it seems to be the norm for things not to fit. I was especially frustrated with a pilot hole drilled way in the wrong place on one of my wings, where the aileron bellcrank mounts. I'm getting pretty good at shim construction. Larry Pardue Carlsbad, NM Pacer N8025D RV-6QME N441LP Reserved Attaching Tail and Setting Control Throws ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bumflyer(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Flames! RV6 vs Mustang II
I really like the Mustang II and we have a couple good examples in the area which I have scrutinized, but none have offered to let me try them out. I agree with most of the comments offered on this thread. My choice was swayed by one thing not yet mentioned. My decision went to the RV-6 primarily because of the "RV" feel . The flying qualities of the RV are unmatched by all reports and the controls on the MII do not appear balanced or as large as the RV. To most people the real joy of flying an RV is the responsiveness and harmony of control balance, not that it goes fast. I believe the MII should be faster and more efficient. If you don't mind ugly and even more work, try a Thorp. They are even more efficient, and I did see one do an aileron roll once. D Walsh ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: I guess I will be an RV 8 builder now........................
From: tcraig-stearman(at)juno.com (John T. Craig-Stearman)
Date: Oct 31, 1997
>Her interest was grabbed by that beautiful yellow airplane on the >front >cover, the RV-8. >Well, for one or another reason, she is convinced, and tried very hard >to convince me, that we should build "Da Yellow One". > Gert, Fantastic! Wonderful! Your wife is a keeper. Welcome to the RV List. Regards, Tom Craig-Stearman tcraig-stearman(at)juno.com RV-4 mounting all those nutplates on the inboard wing ribs. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Alex Peterson <alexpeterson(at)MCI2000.com>
Subject: Re: RV-6A fuselage question
Steve, > I don't mind installing the F-6101 and F-602 without a spacer. Without > a spacer to drill through, though, it looks like there will be no way to > buck the skin rivets into the F-602 for the lower part that is blocked > by the F-6101. What have the rest of you done? Did you make a spacer? > What did it look like? Did forego a spacer and use pulled rivets in > that part of the skin? > Put spacers in. There will be loads in that area during landing, and I don't believe there is enough clearance for pop rivet heads anyway. Put a few small flush rivets off to the side when you rivet the skeleton together to hold the spacers in place while the skins are fitted. Incidentally, I had to trim 3 of 4 edges of the F6101 part to make it fit correctly. Alex Peterson 6A instr. panel mount Maple Grove, MN ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: jerry walker <efford(at)bellatlantic.net>
Subject: Fuselage Construction
I'm building a RV-6 with the sliding canopy option. I've combed the plans and cannont distinguish how the F-6113 is connected to the longeron. I am also at the point of installing the 605 bulkhead. The F657 gussets have been modified according to the plans on SC-3. I'm not exactly clear on how to drill the bulkhead and gusset to the longeron. All suggestions are welcome. Jerry Walker ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Paul Besing <rv(at)tppal.com>
Subject: Ivoprop Flames
Ok, we all know what some think about this prop, but is there a consensus on what is believed about the Ivoprop? Jim Ayers is the only one (from what I see) that has one. He likes it, it has not caused a problem for him, so Ivoprop must be doing something right. Is there anyone else who has EXPERIENCE not just input of numbers that they read somewhere? So far, I believe that Jim is the most credible source, since he seems to be the only one to have direct experience! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: "Anthony Self" <CHEVY_TRUCK(at)classic.msn.com>
Subject: acronyms ???
Well, I'm still kind of new to aviation and for the past two months I've been subscribing to the list. I've tried to guess at what a lot of the abbreviations used here stand for, but there are a few I can't figure out. I keep seeing them everday and it's about time I know what the heck you guys are talking about. Anybody feel like defining some? Here are few: PSRV IMHO IIRC BTW alclad I guess I may need an aviation dictionary, well, thanks anyway. Anthony K. Self RV6A starting sometime soon ________________________________________________________________________________ <3459407B.60F5(at)gghlaw.com>
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: Shirley Hobenshield <shobenshield(at)cmsd.bc.ca>
Subject: Re: starting with fear
> >Joe: > >This is a very normal reaction. Building an airplane is a HUGE >undertaking. > >My suggestions are: : > >1. Start looking at only one part at a time. >2 >3. Admire what you did >3a - if you can't - do it again >3b - it's ok, it happens. >3c - now you got it ! >If you start out looking at he whole project, it will overwhelm. > Gary's right >Cost:. For performance ? For self Satisfaction ? For self esteem ? yes yes >yes. >:-) Worth ever cent! ;-) > Yes yes yes. > >>"what did i >>get myself into." Don't worry, be happy, I did it and Van's TELLS the truth! >> RV-6 F-XXG and, yes, I survived. Ed Hobenshield. >>thanks in advance. >>joe >>8 epp >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: morristec(at)ICDC.COM
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: August R-vator article on plexiglass
RV>The article on the vagaries of plexiglass has caused me some concern. The article sure provides food for thought doesn't it. I verified the Coeficient of Expansion and came up with similar numbers. Now some comments about the practical side. I have seen helicopter canopys with spans over 8 ft installed with only 1/16 slop in the holes. Also there are many RV's at OSH without cracks. So where does it all go when the plastic expands or contracts? Here's my thoughts and they may well be wrong. The canopy is curved. The greatest length is diagonal across the relatively unsecured curve. As the plastic expands or contracts the curve radius changes to take-up or make-up the length. Now this doesn't account for the length along the (slider) canopy bow. This is not as long, but is well secured. I wonder what happens here. All helicopter canopys that I am familiar with are also prosealed in. The proseal doesn't provide that much elongation to allow the plexi to move more than 1/8" max. Next guess? Dan Morris RV-6 landing gear fairings.. light at the end of long tunnel. Morristec(at)icdc.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Flyinghi(at)worldnet.att.net
Subject: RV-6 Chevy Powered
Date: Oct 31, 1997
I traveled over by San Antonio thisweek to see one of the newest RV's flying. Immediately after the Kerrville flyin, the RV-6 was flown for the first time with a Chevy 4.3L Vortec and Belted Airs PSRU. Prop was a 3 bladed Warp Drive. The -6 now has about 8 hours and was very impressive to hear and watch. When details about flight performance become available, I will post to the list. Charles Golden 6A N609CG Hanging Chevy 4.3 this week ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Ivoprop Q & A's (was cheaper shots)
<19971030.212818.7967.1.Less_Drag(at)juno.com>
From: smcdaniels(at)juno.com (SCOTT R MCDANIELS)
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Which prop is designed for the 700 H.P engines as mentioned in the IVO adds? Is it the same one you are running? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: FMark40(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: starting with fear
<< All we have to do is run down the edges with a file and then make a few passes with a Scotchbrite wheel. >> What about the radius where they fit into the spar? My HS 409s were pre-tapered and I had to do the radius myself. I did this with a router and a carbide tipped round over bit which worked great. Wood cutting tools work good on the aluminum in general. Mark McGee ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com>
Subject: RV-6A fuselage question
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Thanks Alex, By the way, I have been busy all week filing and fitting that darned F-6101 to the longerons. Other than the fact that it is slow work, it is very satisfying when you finally get the thing to fit. Steve Soule Huntington, Vermont -----Original Message----- From: Alex Peterson [SMTP:MCI2000.com!alexpeterson(at)matronics.com] Sent: Friday, October 31, 1997 9:46 PM To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-6A fuselage question Steve, Put spacers in. There will be loads in that area during landing, and I don't believe there is enough clearance for pop rivet heads anyway. Put a few small flush rivets off to the side when you rivet the skeleton together to hold the spacers in place while the skins are fitted. Incidentally, I had to trim 3 of 4 edges of the F6101 part to make it fit correctly. Alex Peterson 6A instr. panel mount Maple Grove, MN ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com>
Subject: rudder bottom
Date: Nov 01, 1997
It is my understanding that the RV-4 and RV-6 builders do some fiddling around to get the rudder bottom to fit. Some split the bottom and lay up some fiberglass to fill the split. Steve Soule RV-6A fuselage Huntington, Vermont -----Original Message----- From: John Ciolino [SMTP:ziplink.net!jbc1(at)matronics.com] Sent: Friday, October 31, 1997 8:36 PM To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RV-List: rudder bottom Listers, I am fitting the fiberglass botton to the rudder. The nose of the rudder bottom is not wide enough to reach completely across the rudder spar. On the RV-4s and -6s I have looked at, the bottom is as wide as the spar. Is this the way the bottom is supposed to fit on the -8 Do I need to build it it up if I want it to wrap around the spar? Or did I get a malformed part? Any suggestions would be appreciated. John Ciolino RV-8 jbc1(at)Ziplink.net Hartford, CT ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com>
Subject: RV-6 Chevy Powered
Date: Nov 01, 1997
charset="iso-8859-1" Please keep that Chevy news coming. I still haven't decided on which engine to use. Steve Soule Huntington, Vermont -----Original Message----- From: worldnet.att.net!Flyinghi(at)matronics.com [SMTP:worldnet.att.net!Flyinghi(at)matronics.com] Sent: Friday, October 31, 1997 5:01 PM To: rv-list(at)matronics.com Subject: RV-List: RV-6 Chevy Powered I traveled over by San Antonio thisweek to see one of the newest RV's flying. Immediately after the Kerrville flyin, the RV-6 was flown for the first time with a Chevy 4.3L Vortec and Belted Airs PSRU. ... >>> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: PILOT8127(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: Flames! RV6 vs Mustang II
PILOT8127(at)aol.com Gary Rodgers I read with much interest the "ongoing" RV-6 vs. MMII debate. Here is my 2 cents. The 8127 in my E-mail was my "N" on my 1976 MMII. I owned and flew it regularly over a year! The Mustang is very comparable to the RV's in pitch, slighty heaveir in roll and yaw. I traded the Mustang II for a 1986 RV-3 with an O-320 (160hp) and PaceSetter 200 prop. The "sport flying" capabilities of the 3 are, in my opinion un-matched. The MMII I had was set up for X-country. It had a Hartzall C/S, IO-320 (160hp), full panel (IFR), TRI-GEAR (read easy-landing), full interior, lights, radios, ect,ect,ect, weight was over 1100 lbs. MMII style bubble canopy, fully adjustable seats and wheel pants. I had it at OSH. this year and decided to sell or trade for a pure sport-aerobatic "Taildragger". The RV-3 is MUCH FASTER!! But is a totally different style of aircraft. Bottom Line: Fly them both. Since I didn't build either of them, I can't help with "buildability" but don't count out the MMI or II until YOU fly one. They are stable. Clean. Fast. And do excellent aileron rolls, and loops ! Hope this adds fuel to the Flames Gary in Indiana Flying RV3 N5AJ and loving-it ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: acronyms ???
From: bob.char.reeves(at)juno.com (Robert L Reeves)
Hey, don't feel bad, I've been in aviation for 40 years and still don't know what some of the stuff means. But a few of them are: IMHO - In My Humble Opinions BTW - By The Way ALCLAD - Pure aluminum coating on sheet aluminum to prevent corrosion There are no stupid questions, just stupid answers. Good luck with your project Bob Reeves Building Bearhawk, Flying RV-4 Sarasota, Florida ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: "joseph.wiza" <joe(at)mcione.com>
Hello rv land Thanks for the info (about the clamp or not to clamp down the fuel line pick up). I have decided without question to clamp it down. I am about to seal the tank closed with the rear tank baffle. The outlets for the fuel vent and fuel pickup, appears to me it would require some sort of gasket seal between the washers and the tank bulkhead (rib). Has anyone found any leaks here if so what course of action? Joe/wingtankseal ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Bum flyer <Bumflyer(at)aol.com>
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: Navaid Info.
Rod I have no firm view on the need for a separate turn coordinator. I would refer you to some recent writings which argue for a change to the FAR deleting the need for a turn coordinator. His logic was that modern pilots use and require the attitude indicator any way. Based on that view I would tend to take advantage of the experimental status and consider the combination of attitude and wing level indicator as adequate back up. On the other hand , something else that keeps gnawing at my mind is the potential problems of an altitude hold feature in an RV! What do you think of the observation by one of the listers that the autopilot has the ability to exceed 6G in cruise flight ? Seems like a real hazard to me since you are always cruising above 135MPH indicated in an RV. BTW I have found the RV to be much slower to wander off in pitch in cruise, compared to roll. This leads me to conclude that I would not pay a lot of dough for an altitude hold and that the signal chasing and integrating wing leveler would be preferred. Almost all these opinions are not based on experience or technical knowledge, except the observation about pitch stability. I would just like to stimulate a few more views on the autopilot question. It is my view that more and more builders are looking to go that route, and it is a decision best made early. D Walsh RV-6A. Today's the day. I'm off to Akron to fetch the (now) green machine!!!! ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: DJA <ahearns(at)bigfoot.com>
Subject: Re[2]: Ivo Cheap Shot
What is a RV-6 "Q" > Dan > > > Rob Acker (RV-6Q with wood or Sensenich at this point!) > -- http://www.ntr.net/~ahearns/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- If this stops 1 spam...... WARNING: Unsolicited commercial e-mail: $500 per message: US Code, Title 47 Section 227 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.html ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: acronyms ???
From: lm4(at)juno.com (Larry Mac Donald)
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Well, I'm still kind of new to aviation and for the past two months I've been subscribing to the list. and it's about time I know what the heck you guys are talking about. Anybody feel like defining some? Here are few: >PSRU---------Propeller shaft reduction unit >IMHO--------- In my humble opinion >IIRC >BTW----------By the way >alclad--------Pure aluminum coating on alloyed a/c aluminum > >I guess I may need an aviation dictionary, well, thanks anyway. >Anthony K. Self >RV6A starting sometime soon. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RICKRV6(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: I guess I will be an RV 8 builder now........................
I'm sure that comment was made in jest. I'm not all that tall and I fit in great. You won't have any problem. Rick McBride ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: Jack Gageby <aj752(at)lafn.org>
Subject: Re: Index to Bingelis Articles
Beverly....Here is a place on the Internet that has the index.. http://www.eaa1000.av.org/refernce/artindex.htm#Bingelis Beverly Hull wrote: > > > Can anyone tell me where to find an index to the Tony Bingelis articles > which appeared in EAA's Sport Aviation magazine for several years? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: "Patrick E. Kelley" <patk(at)mail.ic.net>
Subject: Re: RV-6A fuselage question
Stephen J. Soule wrote: > > What have the rest of you done? Did you make a spacer? > What did it look like? Did forego a spacer and use pulled rivets in > that part of the skin? George O.'s video shows the placement of the spacer. It looked to be about 3/4" wide aluminum material, .063" thick. Not having gotten that far, I'd say make one. Otherwise, even pulled rivets will buckle your skin. PatK ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: "Patrick E. Kelley" <patk(at)mail.ic.net>
Subject: Re: I guess I will be an RV 8 builder now........................
aol.com!RICKRV6(at)matronics.com wrote: > > I'm sure that comment was made in jest. I'm not all that tall and I fit in > great. You won't have any problem. Yeah, he'll fit. I think the old electrician's rule on wire length works here: If it's too short, you can always splice it; too long and you just have to live with it. :) Mr. Nuckolls will probably deny knowing this rule; I think they wanted to keep it secret... PatK - RV-6A ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: Al Mojzisik <prober(at)iwaynet.net>
Subject: Re: acronyms ???
> > >Well, I'm still kind of new to aviation and for the past two months >I've been subscribing to the list. and it's about time I know what the >heck you guys are talking about. > Anybody feel like defining some? Here are few: > >>PSRU---------Propeller shaft reduction unit >>IMHO--------- In my humble opinion >>IIRC >>BTW----------By the way >>alclad--------Pure aluminum coating on alloyed a/c aluminum >> >>I guess I may need an aviation dictionary, well, thanks anyway. >>Anthony K. Self >>RV6A starting sometime soon. PSRU is Propeller SPEED Reduction Unit. Al ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Protecting wood props
From: smcdaniels(at)juno.com (SCOTT R MCDANIELS)
Date: Nov 01, 1997
I think a lot of the prop makers use a clear Polyurethane. There can be a comparability problem between some clear finishes (lifting and bubbling problems) so you should probably try and get in touch with Bernie and ask him what he uses. Also keep in mind that when adding any finish/paint to a wood prop. you should have a way to check it for proper balance. It doesn't take much variation to be noticeable. Scott Mc ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: RV6 tail-kit
From: smcdaniels(at)juno.com (SCOTT R MCDANIELS)
Date: Nov 01, 1997
I have built RV empennage from the early kits and the current P.P. kits and I think the current P.P. emp kit is a big value over the early kits, particularly for a first time builder. It makes it hard to do something wrong. One example; the horiz stab rear spar parts (both spar channels, both spar stiffener bars, and all the elevator hinge brackets are all prepunched and ready to cleco together for riveting except a little deburring and priming before hand. This makes just this one subassy. take about 1/4 the time of the orig. kit to put together. Some experienced builders (previous RV building experience) have built entire RV-6 or 8 P.P. emp. kits in about a week while on vacation from there regular job. I for one wouldn't pay more than about 60% of the current kit price for an older emp. kit ( which would probably be about 70 - 75% of what there orig purchase price was) A lot of builders have built nice RV's from the older kits though and it would be a good way to save some money while getting started. Scott Mc ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: Bud Newhall <bud(at)softcom.net>
Subject: Re: acronyms ???
Anthony Self wrote: > > > Well, I'm still kind of new to aviation and for the past two months I've been > subscribing to the list. I've tried to guess at what a lot of the > abbreviations used here stand for, but there are a few I can't figure out. I > keep seeing them everday and it's about time I know what the heck you guys are > talking about. Anybody feel like defining some? Here are few: > > PSRV > IMHO > IIRC > BTW > alclad > > I guess I may need an aviation dictionary, well, thanks anyway. Check out this site. http://www.netdictionary.com/html/index.html -- Bud Newhall bud(at)softcom.net __|__ __|__ ____(+)____ ____(+)____ ' ' ' ' ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RVator(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: red zone
Denis; I'm sure you'll receive more technical answers than I can give concering prop / engine / airframe harmonics, but here's my two cents worth. As I understand it RPM restrictions only apply to fixed pitch metal props. Not to wood or constant speed props. The restrictions are determined by manufactures of certified aircraft and the respective metal prop maker. Exhaustive testing is done to measure the harmonics of the prop / engine / airframe combination. As I understand it, at specific RPM's certain airframes and prop harmonics may come into sequence, which is very bad for the prop and could lead to prop breakage. (which is very bad for you) :) The restriction you mention for your 0-360 is for that particular prop / airframe / engine combinaton. It would not neccessarily apply if any one of the three were changed. However, that can not really be determined without harmonics testing. The problem with using a metal fixed pitch prop on any homebuilt, is that this harmonic testing has not been done. (except of course for Sensich approved prop for RV's which is RPM restricted) To shorten a metal prop is usually highly discouraged account this leads to increased chances of breakage. Rvator ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV4131rb(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: alternator cooling
Dennis and others, since the subject has come up I will give an example of my set up and experience with the alternator. I have the light weight nipon denso 35 amp alternator. It lasted exactly 415hrs before the bearings gave out. It cost me a whoping $70.00 to replace with a new rebuilt. I did not have the fan on the old one or a blast tube. Would it have lasted as long with the fan or the blast tube? It sounds reasonable to me that it might have. I took the fan off of the new one and am now considering reinstalling it. Considering most of these alternators are rebuilts its any ones guess as to how long they will hold out before they give up. I cant help but believe with a larger pully ( I have the small one) that the alternator wouldnt run cooler. Im sure if you cut the RPM down the bearing life would be much longer. My vote is to at least leave the fan on, and installing a blast tube sure wont hurt a thing. Cheap insurance! Hope this helps some of you. Ryan RV4131RB Thornton Co. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mlfred <Mlfred(at)aol.com>
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: Gascolator
<< For those 4's out there, where are you locating your gascolator? Besides putting it between the cross-over exhaust pipes, I'm not sure where else you can put it. help! Chuck >> Chuck: Consider not using the thing at all. Your tank drains are the low point. I and others are using 3/8" inline filters in each tank outlet line, before the selector valve. I've seen no evidence on my Matronics Fuel Scan of a pressure drop on takeoff & climb, even with 30 GPH indicated flow. Check six! Mark ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Beverly Hull" <hull@net-master.net>
Subject: Re: Index to Bingelis Articles
Date: Nov 01, 1997
---------- > From: Jack Gageby <lafn.org!aj752(at)matronics.com> > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: Index to Bingelis Articles > Date: Saturday, November 01, 1997 8:54 AM >Jack, thanks for the address. For any of you who have not read all of Mr. Bingelis's past articles, he has some good information which may at times be generic in nature but much of it is applicable to RV builders. Although his books are excellent, his magazine articles contained some extra stuff! Also, he finished an RV-6A at about the same time as when he retired from his magazine column. Maybe he is now flying his RV instead of writing! Don Hull RV-6A Wannabe > > Don....Here is a place on the Internet that has the index.. > > http://www.eaa1000.av.org/refernce/artindex.htm#Bingelis > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mlfred <Mlfred(at)aol.com>
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: red zone/modified props
<< Denis; I'm sure you'll receive more technical answers than I can give concering prop / engine / airframe harmonics, but here's my two cents worth. As I understand it RPM restrictions only apply to fixed pitch metal props. Not to wood or constant speed props. Check the Christen Husky- 180 Lyc, C/S prop, tach with "barber pole" from 2100 to 2350 (I could be off a bit with the restriction numbers- it's been a while since I flew one of these). This restriction didn't seem to hamper normal operation of this a/c. Certain models of the 180 and 200 with crank mounted counterweights get around this restriction. The restrictions are determined by manufactures of certified aircraft and the respective metal prop maker. Exhaustive testing is done to measure the harmonics of the prop / engine / airframe combination. As I understand it, at specific RPM's certain airframes and prop harmonics may come into sequence, which is very bad for the prop and could lead to prop breakage. (which is very bad for you) :) Or crank breakage- also v bad. The restriction you mention for your 0-360 is for that particular prop / airframe / engine combinaton. It would not neccessarily apply if any one of the three were changed. However, that can not really be determined without harmonics testing. Correct, but I'd guess it's more to do with engine/prop combos than airframe. The problem with using a metal fixed pitch prop on any homebuilt, is that this harmonic testing has not been done. (except of course for Sensich approved prop for RV's which is RPM restricted) Not entirely true- locals still running the Wittman-style modified metal props are still alive. They have had their props vibe tested, and avoid that RPM which is dangerous. Did you know that the Sensenich certified for the O-320 has a destructive vibe node around 2750? That is the reason for the 2600 redline. To shorten a metal prop is usually highly discouraged account this leads to increased chances of breakage. You would need to modify the prop in chord also (after shortening) to get the vibe characteristics survivable. Not easily done, but possible. >> Check six! Mark ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: Finn Lassen <finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Mazda Rotary?
Tony, I'm fortunate to live next door to the airpark where Tracy keeps his RV-4. I bought his book (and later his ignition controller). If you are looking for an inexpensive way to power your RV and want to do the work yourself, I'd highly recommend his book. I know of no other way to get a 130 - 160 HP powerplant at similar weight to the Lucoming for $6,000 or less. You can reach him at 71175.606(at)compuserve.com Finn wport.com!Alivic(at)matronics.com wrote: > > > I read with great interest ,"The "HMMMMMMMMMMMM" > alternative," in my latest issue of the RVator. > Has anybody subscribed to Tracy Crook's newsletter and/or > bought his book on how to put together a Mazda rotary engine for > aircraft use? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Jun 09, 1996
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Avionics Master Switches
>I received the same instruction. In fact, these same procedures are in every >checklist I've ever used. The thought of omitting a master switch in the face >of Tom's advice to the contrary makes me nervous. > >> The gear we install in our aircraft is >> pretty expensive so why not take the precautions to protect it. What is >> the cost of a switch? What is the cost of repairs? If the critter fails during otherwise normal operations on an airplane, cost of repairs should be zero . . . of course there's still the inconvenience, downtime and r/r costs. By all means, have an avioncis (or essential bus) master switch, or simply turn of the radios . . . all these things work but have a SECOND PATH of power to the same bus that (1) cannot back feed the main bus and (2) works even when all the rest of the system is shut down . . . The idea of putting a second switch across the first as a hedge against switch failure is only a tiny part of the failure mode consideration. But should the unhappy day arrive that your radio died because you forgot the switch, or something besides the starter generated the "spike" . . . I'd resist at least repair bills to the radio. The manufacturer either meets his specs or it doesn't. If it doesn't he should pay. > >I agree. If one must decide on an issue like this in the face of uncertainty, >it makes sense to me to err on the safe side. It's not an ERR to have an avionics master, it's an ERR to put all your eggs in one basket and the act of paralleling one switch with a second addresses only part of the problem. >I'm certainly no expert, but my guess is that there may be several or >many sources of transient voltages in modern avionics components that >can be damaging, D.C. power being only one(e.g., think about the >wristbands Tom mentioned in his article), Whoops!!!! don't get internal considerations for the safety of electronic components mixed up with external matters . . . Tom should NOT have mixed that example in with this discussion. Static electricity considerations for a radio laying in pieces on your workbench has nothing to do with manufacturer's requirements to make the box survive as a line-replaceable-unit. They are distinct and separate considerations. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= | | | Go ahead, make my day . . . . | | Show me where I'm wrong. | ================================= <http://www.aeroelectric.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Tilt-up or slider
From: donspawn(at)juno.com (Don R. Jordan)
Date: Nov 01, 1997
I am building a 6A & need to decide on a tilt up or a slider canopy. Would anyone like to indicate the reasons which way they went? I like the tilt up because of visibility & egress to the panel. Is the taxi out that bad? Don Jordan, RV-6A, Arlington, Tx ________________________________________________________________________________
From: ShelbyRV6A(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: S-Tec Autopilot
In a message dated 11/1/97 5:49:34 AM, you wrote: <> Correct me if I am wrong. The System 30 is not designed to fly approaches. The altitude hold and the lack of back course setup. My understanding is you have to go with the System 60 for couple approaches. System 50 has back course setup. One of the things I like most is the TSO'd Turn and Bank inclusive system. The Navaid has turn and bank, but I don't think I would want to rely on it in the clouds. By the way, flew to Oshkosh in a 6a with a Navaid and it performed beautifully. Shelby in Nashville. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: HAWKBUD(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: RV6 fuselage Jig
I have just what you are looking for. A well made fuselage jig. It is located at Hidden River Airport 14 dme se of SRQ. I am in Michigan but will be in Florida in about 10 days. Post your phone number to hawkbud(at)aol.com and I will phone you. My phone is 517-659-2295. By the way... at Hidden River, you can see the results of the jig. I hope to fly N400BH shortly after I get to Florida. I have about $100 in materials and about 4-5 days of labor.... make me an offer. Bud Hawkins ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: Scott Johnson <rvgasj(at)popmail.mcs.net>
Subject: What I Learned About Real IFR Today In My RV6A
I decided to get an instrument compentency check today in my RV6A. The first hour was spent under the hood performing holding patterns, climbing and descending turns etc. Things went very well so we decided to shoot some instrument approaches in real IMC. My airplane is equipped with both a vacuum attitude indicator and an electric attitude indicator in addition to all the other required instruments. For navigation, I have a king KX155 navcom with glideslope, Garmin 195 GPS moving map, Magellan Skystar GPS, and backup handheld Navcom. I also had the avionices shop do the required certifications on the systems. The conditions today involved light to moderate turbulence with winds in the 20 MPH range, with the cloud layers a few thousand feet thick about 1000 feet off the deck. I have about 1500 hours flying experience and 70 hours in RV's. I have over 100 hours instrument experience in skyhawks, and cherokees. My impressions: 1.) I would not fly an RV6A in IMC without 2 attitude indicators ( 1 electric and 1 vacuum ). I believe it would be very marginal to attempt to fly on a partial panel with moderate turbulence in an RV6A. In my opinion, the RV6A yaws back and forth to much in significant turbulence to the point where it doesn't inspire a whole lot of confidence in trying to average the turn coordinator. 2.) I initially designed my instrument panel so that the approach chart could be clipped right to the panel which is right next to the attitude indicator and navigation radios ( I will post a picture soon ). This made it very easy to scan everything. I felt I had to work much harder in the Cessna and Piper panel layouts. 3.) I would not fly an RV in IMC faster than about 140 mph if there was any turbulence, or significant cockpit workload going on. It becomes to hard to fly precisely at speeds above that. Just a moments in-attention to the gauges while copying clearances etc. could result in an upset. The RV is significantly more control sensitive at 191 mph ( my normal VFR cruising speed, yes the landing gear fairings and wheel pants do add a lot ! ) than at 140 mph. 4.) I do not plan on doing any hard IFR over long intervals. However, to go through a cloud deck to get on top, or as an emergency to get back down, I feel very confident in my airplane and my experience to do that. *** Even though I passed the instrument competency check today after having flown numerous different approaches to different airports in real IMC conditions in Chicago today, I plan on getting lots more hood practice with check pilots. To me, the challenge of precision IFR is probably the same as those fellow RVers who love doing aerobatics. P.S. For those of you who have not seen the Garmin 195 moving map, I can attest that it is incredible. It leaves a thin dotted line where you have been. When we were holding today, we were comparing the picture of my holding pattern to the depicted one on the chart. Then you can dial in an IFR approach and watch how you are doing. Of course to be legal, your primary required reference is the NAVCOM ILS. I would be interested in comments from others who have flown IFR in RV's as this is of course new territory in my flight testing. Does anybody use a wing leveler in IFR in an RV ? Scott Johnson rvgasj(at)mcs.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: Alex Peterson <alexpeterson(at)MCI2000.com>
Subject: Re: Fuselage Construction
Jerry, > I'm building a RV-6 with the sliding canopy option. I've combed the > plans and cannont distinguish how the F-6113 is connected to the > longeron. I am also at the point of installing the 605 bulkhead. The > F657 gussets have been modified according to the plans on SC-3. I'm not > exactly clear on how to drill the bulkhead and gusset to the longeron. > All suggestions are welcome. If you are just jigging the fuse, you don't yet need to worry about F-6113. (Its attachment is shown on the fuse skin rivet layout drawing.) The only purpose the 657 gussets serve at this point is to provide the vertical spacing between the longeron and the bulkhead. You don't even need to drill the 605 bulkhead to the longeron until it is out of the jig. Alex Peterson Maple Grove, MN ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: DJA <ahearns(at)bigfoot.com>
Subject: Re: What I Learned About Real IFR Today In My RV6A
Scott Johnson wrote: > > I decided to get an instrument compentency check today in my RV6A. Scott I enjoyed the write up. Having never flown an RV ( i dream a whole lot, ordering my -8 tail kit in April). With regard to IMC many have said it's too sensitive, my sense is you feel the same at this point. I'm curious if that is because most of your prior experience is in a certified airframe (C140 I believe) My experience is with fairly high performance stuff and I'm wondering about the transition. I've flown A-4's at FL 410 with no auto pilot, the plane I have the most experience in is the OV-10. Again no auto pilot, canopy all around down to your waist. IMC was a real challenge, with just a TACAN (basically VOR DME) but just part of the job (read work not fun). I'd like to be able to get down to ILS mins and I feel like an autopilot is a must for me personally. Frankly I worry more about ice here in the northeast Anyone else flying regular IMC in an RV? Dan -- http://www.ntr.net/~ahearns/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- If this stops 1 spam...... WARNING: Unsolicited commercial e-mail: $500 per message: US Code, Title 47 Section 227 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.html ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6junkie(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: red zone
<< If I can avoid to shorten my blades it's better for me (very high cost in France). >> Do NOT shorten you blades. You can be sure that the prop will come apart sometime during its (your) life. As far has harmonic vibration is concerned, wood props are mostly immune to this phenomena. Metal props tend to have more trouble with this type of vibration. What kind of prop do you have? What is the diameter? I don't think that I would want to go much larger than 74" to 76". Gary Corde RV6 N211GC - NJ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: RV6junkie(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: Wheel pants plate rubs brake disc??
Add a couple of washers to get 1/8 tp 3/16 spacing. Gary Corde RV-6 N211GC - NJ ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 31, 1997
From: lottmc(at)datastar.net (Michael C. Lott)
Subject: Fairings
Does any one know of anyone who makes gear leg and gear leg intersection fairings? Let me know, please. Michael ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: Toad <toad(at)favorites.com>
Subject: wing/tail jig
Hello, I am new to the list, and just bought my tailfeathers for the rv-6, I find in the drawing for the wing jig that it calls for a distance of 105"-109" inches between the up-rights, This seem like it is on the short side if any room is needed to work on the end ribs for the wing, Just wondering what yours measure and is it enough room if I set it at 109". thnx in advance Mel, Slightly confused but elated, in Utah. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Robert Acker" <r.acker(at)thegrid.net>
Subject: Re: Mazda Rotary?
Date: Nov 01, 1997
> From: Finn Lassen <ix.netcom.com!finnlass(at)matronics.com> > I know of no other > way to get a 130 - 160 HP powerplant at similar weight to the Lucoming > for $6,000 or less. > Finn Finn, I have Tracy's book and can attest that its a goldmine for those who admire the rotary engine (as I do), and can spend the extra time getting it flying. Ultimately, I decided a conversion was too much work for me, would keep me from getting into the air sooner, and *cost more* than a good midtime Lycoming from a reputable source (I got one two months ago for $5.5K). Saving money and auto conversions is, at the present time, not a reality. Come overhaul time though, there are major savings to be had...and the bragging rights of a successful conversion at flightlines. Rob (RV-6Q). ________________________________________________________________________________
From: James Cone <JamesCone(at)aol.com>
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: RV4 Canopy - fitting side skins - help!!
You can get the back issues from the new editor, Kevin Lowery, 1032 Picardy Lane, St. Charles, MO 63301. He has the masters of the back issues and will send you copies. Just drop him a check for $15.00 or $20.00 if you want to continue to subscribe. Thanks, Jim jamescone(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: charles(at)onramp.net (charles young)
Subject: Re: Navaid Info.
It is very simple to put an Auto Pilot Disconnect Swith on the stick, if you fear the Navaid has dangerous habits. We have flown one in an RV-6A with no problems to date. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Mazda Rotary Engine (NZ Connection)
Some time ago, some-one posted to the list a reference to some-one in New Zealand who is into Mazda rotaries in aircraft. FWIW, Given the small size of NZ's homebuilding community, I was a bit surprised that an acquaintance with a little experience in putting rotaries into aircraft hasn't heard of Grant Nicholls. I emailed him, asking whether he'd be interested in doing a rotary for the RV... here's his reply (his reply in CAPITALS). Frank ************************************************************************** > THANK YOU FOR YOUR ENQUIRY ABOUT MAZDA 20B, 3 ROTOR, ROTARY ENGINES. > WE HAVE AVAILABLE PICTURES OF THE MAZDA 20B ENGINE A TRIPLE ROTOR, > TWIN TURBO, ROTARY ENGINE SHOULD YOU REQUIRE AN INFORMATION PACK. > This engine is now flying! That's great news. What is it flying in? (COSY MARK 4) However, what I'm really interested in is a Mazda 13B engine suitable for an RV-6. I'd hoped that with your experience in getting the 20B going, you might be able to build a 200hp, fuel-injected aircraft conversion of a 13B for me. (NOTE WE DO NOT MANUFACTURE ENGINES. WE ONLY SUPPLY PARTS) Preferably with some sort of sub-frame to attach it to an O-360 dynafocal engine mount. With over 60 RVs currently being built in NZ, there is a reasonably large market for a firewall-forward package. Are you interested in a project like this? (N0) (13B ENGINES ARE READILY AVAILABLE IN THE USA THEREFORE IT IS NOT VIABLE TO SUPPLY THE 13B ENGINE TO THE USA. HOWEVER ALL THE COMPONENTS FOR THE 20B ARE REQUIRED FOR THE 13B ENGINE TO WORK.) REGARDS GRANT NICHOLLS. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JRWillJR(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: Ivoprop cheap shot (was Constant Speed)
I have posted on the IVO PROP in the past and you may recall that I do not like them. I am a Kfox builder as well aRV builder. I get the Kitfox Builder News Letter which reported yet another close call--this time an IVO Mag. on a 912 that developed began vibrating (56TT) and removal showed elongated holes, fretting, cracking. This being a 80 HP geared engine----imagine the results on a big Lycoming. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz>
Subject: Re: wing/tail jig
> > Hello, I am new to the list, and just bought my tailfeathers for the > rv-6, I find in the drawing for the wing jig that it calls for a > distance of 105"-109" inches between the up-rights, This seem like it is > on the short side if any room is needed to work on the end ribs for the > wing, Just wondering what yours measure and is it enough room if I set > it at 109". Mel, Firstly, welcome to the list. Secondly, go to <http://www.geocities.com/Capecanaveral/Hangar/4809/bunnytop.htm> for my experiences in building the RV-6 empennage. That includes some stuff on building the jig. Please get back to me with any comments, additions, etc. Thirdly, the empennage jig is NOT the wing jig. I was under the same misapprehension as you. When building the wings, you don't have the horizontal beam between the uprights... distance apart of the uprights is the same as the length of the wing rear spar. Fourthly, (to finally almost answer your question :-) you need the horizontal beam to be longer than your HS, plus a bit of room for working on the end ribs. I can't remember the exact length of mine (a second-hand RV-4 one), but allow yourself an extra foot or so (6" at each end) over the span of the HS (ie length of the HS rear spar). Frank. re relatively straightforward, but would cut into my building time and cure insomnia for others. Alex Peterson Maple Grove, MN 6A fuse ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JRWillJR(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: I guess I will be an RV 8 builder now........................
I do not think that Vans numbering system indicates that the 8 is twice as good as the 4 or 1.5 time better than the 6. When the 6A came out with trike gear and a slider that was the wonder machine and now you 6A builders seem to want a tandem with a slider but no trike gear-----??? what gives----if Van comes out with an 8A will you convert to that from a tailgear? What about the 10A when it is hatched? Building a RV4 (secretly wanting a RV6A) and not wanting an 8. Is this like the Sienfeld episode were Elan did not like the ENGLISH PATIENT and so was sent to Africa. ----- do not like or want or at least drool over Vans latest am I going to be kicked out of Vans Airforce. Jim. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Ivoprop Q & A's (was cheaper shots)
<19971031.133654.4823.0.SMCDANIELS(at)juno.com>
From: less_drag(at)juno.com (James E Ayers)
Date: Nov 01, 1997
R MCDANIELS) writes: > >Which prop is designed for the 700 H.P engines as mentioned in the IVO >adds? Is it the same one you are running? +-- I believe I stated up to 400 Hp. I appologize if it came out different. The hub is the same. The number and length of the blades is varied to accommodate the engine horsepower. The three blade 76" diameter Ivoprop Magnum prop has been reported to run exceptionally smooth on a Cont. O-720. There is an airboat in Florida with a 600 Hp V-8 running the six blade Ivoprop Magnum prop. These are both 8 cylinder engines. There is not the impulse load problem that the four (4) cylinder four (4) cycle engine has. I'll say it once again. The impulse loading from the four cylinder four cycle engine is very hard on any prop design. Jim Ayers Less_drag(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JRWillJR(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Subject: Newt comment---
If Gore becomes president kiss homebuilding goodbuy. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)netins.net>
Subject: Re: What I Learned About Real IFR Today In My RV6A
Date: Oct 28, 1997
charset="iso-8859-1" -----Original Message----- From: DJA <bigfoot.com!ahearns(at)matronics.com> >Anyone else flying regular IMC in an RV? > I have not, but I am going to, I have done enuf scud running to last a lifetime and I am using my -4 for alot more X/C than I ever planned. It is so quick their is no point in renting a beech travelair for $120 to go the same speed. Then I found myself flying down the florida coastline at 500 AGL last month. NOT! Hopefully this winter I will get a vacuum system. I don't believe it is going to be too squirrelly for hand flying. It is quick but stable. I am an old frieght pilot and a bit of a hardhead, but I believe... If you are not able to hand fly your airplane to the destination with raw data, (no Autopilot, no HSI and no flight director) don't ask me to ride along. Just my opinion. As soon as you believe you have to have it it will quit. (Avionics Master or not ;-) ) People will retort, yes but it makes it so much easier and safer. My response is, Most people barely fly enuf IFR to do it at all. If the A/P does what little they do when it quits ( usually part of a multiple failure) They are in real big trouble. Many problems occur as a result of a failure. Often not even an important one. However, in a single pilot airplane if you start diagnosing the failure and quit flying the airplane (especially a quick one that build up speed fast) you can get in deep trouble real quick. Autopilots are great for turbines or straight and level X/C but when you get near the airport Fly the Airplane. If you don't like flying IFR then don't. IMHO Tailwinds, Doug Rozendaal dougr(at)petroblend.com www.petroblend.com/dougr ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Ivoprop cheap shot (was Constant Speed)
From: less_drag(at)juno.com (James E Ayers)
Date: Nov 02, 1997
writes: > >I have posted on the IVO PROP in the past and you may recall that I do not >like them. I am a Kfox builder as well aRV builder. I get the Kitfox Builder >News Letter which reported yet another close call--this time an IVO Mag. on a >912 that developed began vibrating (56TT) and removal showed elongated holes, >fretting, cracking. This being a 80 HP geared engine----imagine the results >on a big Lycoming. A four cycle four cycle engine has an impulse loading that is very hard on any prop. Am I repeating myself too much?? Was the recommended re torquing sequence followed. I've asked that question before with no response. It is much easier to blame a new product, rather than admitting that the installation procedure wasn't followed. Granted I'm speculating. But I don't think I'm speculating too much. No more than the last statement made about a "big Lycoming". The "big Lycoming"'s haven't had a problem with the Ivoprop Magnum prop. Just the "little four cylinder Lycomings". :-) IMHO, anyone who just bolts on a prop and goes flying is asking for problems. It just takes the longest to show up on a metal prop. Check Six................As in six prop bolts Jim Ayers Less_Drag(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JRWillJR(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Subject: Re: Ivoprop cheap shot (was Constant Speed)
The propeller was installed by a Certified Rotax Mechanic and was checked and retorqued . Sorry Jim Ayers. May I remind you guys that there have been fatalities with IVOS and that info came from EAA. My IVO nearly came apart on my Kfox at 25 hrs.(Sp. 1996 and was not a Mag.) REPLY to the request for more info on my prior post. Jim RV4. (I am a A&P and can torque a bolt--give me that much) ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: What I Learned About Real IFR Today In My RV6A
From: smcdaniels(at)juno.com (SCOTT R MCDANIELS)
Date: Nov 02, 1997
I may be out of place adding an opinion since I never finished my instrum rating but I have done a lot of simulated IFR using a hood in my RV-6A. I recommend to people that ask me that the not consider any extended (other than punching up and out, or descending through and shooting an approach) IFR without at least a basic wing leveler autopilot. Flying in the crud often means flying in bumps. Most RV's have good pitch stability to ride out bumps but the RV responsiveness that we rave about means that with as little as 5 seconds of inattention the roll attitude can be quite different from what you remember it being only moments ago. The other factor that can come in to play is that (unlike airplanes that most people probably have experience flying IFR in) there is a control stick very close to you and a passengers legs. Which most of the time isn't a problem, but it is very easy to have to move a little in the cockpit (or have your passenger move to get out of your way) and have a leg just slightly put pressure on the stick. The stick forces are light enough that you don't even know it happened. I have had this happen flying VFR while looking for something in the cockpit. So I guess each pilot has to evaluate their own abilities/needs. I know it is easy for us to get to reliant on a lot of gadgets to where we get rusty with the basics, but my vote is that an RV has more of a need for an Auto pilot for IFR than a lot of other airplanes that they are typically used in ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
From: Ronald Vandervort <rvanderv(at)linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us>
Subject: Re: Quick Build without the tail?
Hello Jeff, I did what you are contemplating, i.e. built my own tail then bought a quickbuild. All is fine. There is no concern of matching pieces, and things move along at a very nice pace comparatively. I am generally happy with the quickbuild. I had serial #11 and found some corrosion. Hopefully Van has solved that problem. I have not seen any threads, on the list, about continued corrosion problems on the quickbuilds. I don't think you would regret going that direction. Ron Vandervort, RV-6Q, Mounting 0-360 engine Seattle area ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 1997
Subject: Re: August R-vator article on plexiglass
From: gasobek(at)juno.com (Gary A. Sobek)
I have been watching this thread grow. I purchased a $415 acrylic overlay that was custom engraved for my panel. I mount all my instruments through the panel and found out about expansion the hard way. When I called the supplier about the overlay, I was told to just glue it down with RTV and not worry about it. Well I worried about it and took pictures of the "unacceptable" expansion and lifting of the overlay. (I can e-mail attached copies of the digital images.) It raised about 3/32" between the 3 1/8" instrument screws with out the RTV glue during a 40 degrees F temperature rise. I did not raise the temperature higher than could be obtained my placing the panel in the cab of my truck with the heater on. The present panel that I am flying is the 0.063" panel that Van supplies. It was engraved locally for $130. I painted it and back filled the letters with a "lacquer stick." Smarter but poorer. Hope others do not make the same mistake. Gary A. Sobek RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell writes: >>So where does it all (thermal expansion) go when the plastic >> expands or contracts? Here's my thoughts and they may well be >wrong. >The >> canopy is curved. The greatest length is diagonal across the >relatively >> unsecured curve. As the plastic expands or contracts the curve radius >changes to >> take-up or make-up the length. Now this doesn't account for the length >> along the (slider) canopy bow. This is not as long, but is well >> secured. I wonder what happens here. > >Dan, what happens is that instead of the plexi moving relative to the steel >frame, stresses simply occur. For example, when the plexi tries to >thermally expand or contract, the steel, which only thermally expands or >contracts about 1/10th as much, essentially prevents the plexi from >expanding or contracting (the steel is much stiffer than the plexi). In >other words, when a material is cooled but not allowed to contract, it goes >into tensile stress. The only stress free state is when the temperature of >the canopy is the same as when it was assembled initially. Apparently, >with our canopies, the net result is that the material limits of the plexi >are not exceeded in normal temperature variations. The calculations to >determine actual numbers are relatively straightforward, but would cut into >my building time and cure insomnia for others. > >Alex Peterson >Maple Grove, MN 6A fuse ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James E. Clark" <James.E.Clark(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Quick Build without the tail?
Date: Nov 01, 1997
If you decide to go with the full QB, you will still need tokeep your rudder as you are required to build this with the QB. Quality is better than I know I would do. James RV6AQB ... wing closing ... slowly. > > I am completing the tail of my 6 (non-prepunched) and am considering going with > a QB for the rest of the kit. Is there any issue attaching the parts I have > built to the QB Fuse? Are people happy with the quality of the construction of > the QB. Would I be better off purchasing the entire kit and having my tail > feathers as spare parts or selling. Thanks in advance for the help. > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: CHRIS.BROWNE(at)bge.com
Date: Oct 31, 1997
Subject: Franklin Engine
For any of you fellow "alternative engine" folks who may be lurking out there, I am going out to Atlas Motors in Winchester, VA, tomorrow with my personal list of questions on the Franklin 6 cylinder. If anyone is still interested, feel free to E-mail me at Chris.Browne(at)BGE.COM with any specific questions you might have. My goal is to gather as much info as possible on the engine and see if this is going to be worth the time and/or effort. Interest in the Franklin on the RV list seemed cool to me, but ... Chris Browne -6a QB wannabe Chris.Browne(at)BGE.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: CHRIS.BROWNE(at)bge.com
Date: Oct 30, 1997
Subject: Double Flaring Tool
They are not cheap by any means, but some of the best flaring tools, both single and double, are sold by Snap-On. They have a flaring tool for stainless steel tubing which is perfect. I used it on the job installing HP air systems, after throwing away two or three cheapies in disgust. Another possible source is Grainger, if there is one in your area. Chris Browne Buying Tools for -6A, (incl. Snap-on Flaring and Bending Tools) Does anyone know of a source to purchase a "Double Flaring Tool" ? I used on once and it makes a much stronger flare on fuel lines than a regular one. Thanks in advance, Bob Reeves Building Bearhawk, Flying RV-4 Hidden River Airport, Sarasota, Florida | | "rv-list-request(at)matronics.com" | | & put the word "[un]subscribe" in the | | ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Michael Irwin" <pcpms(at)leadbelt.com>
Subject: Re: Newt comment---
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Please expound on this remark and tell us what makes you think this way. ---------- > > If Gore becomes president kiss homebuilding goodbuy. Michael Irwin Bonne Terre, MO Preparing workspace in the house for my -8 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: Denny Harjehausen <harje(at)proaxis.com>
Subject: Re: Gascolator
> ><< For those 4's out there, where are you locating your gascolator? > Besides putting it between the cross-over exhaust pipes, I'm not sure > where else you can put it. help! Chuck > >> >Chuck: >Consider not using the thing at all. Your tank drains are the low point. I and >others are using 3/8" inline filters in each tank outlet line, before the >selector valve. I've seen no evidence on my Matronics Fuel Scan of a pressure >drop on takeoff & climb, even with 30 GPH indicated flow. > >Check six! >Mark Right on Mark, gascolator will not detect water in our type of setup, it will act as a filter only. A inline filter for each tank as Mark suggests give one a possible second source in case of fuel contamination. Plus it eliminates another thing to cool under the hood. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "William G. Knight" <airshows1(at)msn.com>
Date: Nov 02, 1997
who ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)netins.net>
Subject: Re: Newt comment---
Date: Oct 29, 1997
charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> If Gore becomes president kiss homebuilding goodbuy. > Please, Stop, nothing good is going to come of this discussion, If some politician is promoting the ban on 100LL or trying to close your airport, That is fair game. But not just off hand comments like this. I love to argue about politics with democrats, but not here. Tailwinds, Doug Rozendaal dougr(at)petroblend.com www.petroblend.com/dougr ________________________________________________________________________________
From: FMark40(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Subject: Turtledeck
The RVAtor has a picture of the Bill Davis RV4 with Turtledeck. I have been told the transition aft of the canopy is a problem, aerodynamically speaking and I also have noticed the Harmon Rockets have the Turtledeck. If anyone has info on this modification as far as speed gains go, please post it to the list as I would like to do anything within reason to make my RV4 go fast. Mark McGee RV4 ... just closed out the rudder ... wings in late November ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: MoeJoe <moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net>
Subject: Re: Newt comment---
Before everyone jumps up and crushes the politics thread, I too would like to know what makes you think this. I believe this affects us all, and has everything to do with the RV's. Moe Colontonio -8 Emp Cherry Hill, NJ Michael Irwin wrote: > > > Please expound on this remark and tell us what makes you think this way. > ---------- > > > > > If Gore becomes president kiss homebuilding goodbuy. > > Michael Irwin > Bonne Terre, MO > Preparing workspace in the house for my -8 > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: Denny Harjehausen <harje(at)proaxis.com>
Subject: Re: Navaid Info.
Based on that view I would tend to >take advantage of the experimental status and consider the combination of >attitude and wing level indicator as adequate back up. I agree, I have no need anymore to get there inspite of the WX. Been there, done that, besides they aren't paying me to do that anymore :^( . But I would like to have a extra pair of hands while I look at the map when I run into WX inadvertently (it could happen even when I think I am being careful), so I think Navaid is worth the investment. > >Almost all these opinions are not based on experience or technical knowledge, >except the observation about pitch stability. Most of the autopilot problems I experienced were altitude hold "erratic or inop, test next leg", in the rather all different exotic equipment I was using. Agreed these autopilots were being used about 10 hrs. a day, day in and day out, but it was always altitude, not the tracking or intercept problems. >I would just like to stimulate a few more views on the autopilot question. It >is my view that more and more builders are looking to go that route, and it is >a decision best made early. Another thing I experienced after some long duty periods were that the more automatic features to the autopilot, the farther I felt out of the "loop". By that I mean it was harder to take over manually in case of a malfunction. This may not bother some of our more dexterous chaps. Some of the accident reports I read indicate that there is more than just a few that experience zone of confusion. IMHO I believe if the Navaid was used in place experienced Co-pilot for a helping hand it could save me on that day that I'm less than perfect. That day that I'm trying look at the map, talk on the radio, copy another clearance cause they don't want me in that sector, set a new transponder code, set the new altimeter setting, hand my wife the barf bag while looking like the intrepid aviator that I am and assuring her "there nothing to this, Honey.....what did ATC just say?...hold..., where, why? Let me see that map again, Dang, doesn't anything go right...Let's see 11 gallons left and is 22 minutes to the alternate, I can hold ah.."roger heading 060 down to 6 leaving 8 approach on 24.3, good day 1 delta hotel" ........ ;^) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: Denny Harjehausen <harje(at)proaxis.com>
Subject: Re: Newt comment---
> everyone jump up and crush the politics thread, ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: DJA <ahearns(at)bigfoot.com>
Subject: Re: What I Learned About Real IFR Today In My RV6A
Doug Rozendaal wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: DJA <bigfoot.com!ahearns(at)matronics.com> > > >Anyone else flying regular IMC in an RV? SNIP > > > I am an old frieght pilot and a bit of a hardhead, but I believe... If you > are not able to hand fly your airplane to the destination with raw data, (no > Autopilot, no HSI and no flight director) don't ask me to ride along. Just > my opinion. As soon as you believe you have to have it it will quit. > (Avionics Master or not ;-) ) > I'd go along with that, I suspect there is an economic, safe compromise between a scud running and a $15,000 autopilot. Having never really used even a wing leveler, I don't know what I'd do with one. In terms of raw data, what one can get from a GPS alone takes away so much of the interperatation of raw data you noted. I'm hoping all my RV will really need is a decent vacuum system, gps, ils, and a wing leveler for long xc would be nice. I'd rather spend the bucks on the prop/engine anyway Dan http://www.ntr.net/~ahearns/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- If this stops 1 spam...... WARNING: Unsolicited commercial e-mail: $500 per message: US Code, Title 47 Section 227 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.html ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Habbot2519 <Habbot2519(at)aol.com>
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Subject: Re: Newt comment---
Where can I find out more about Al Gore and his policy on homebuilding? My Christmas is to be a tailkit(was). ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Vanremog(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Subject: Re: Wing Root Fairing Rubber
Do most of you adhere the rubber sealing strip to the wing root fairing sheet metal using a contact adhesive or will it stay in place by just slipping it on with no adhesive? TIA, -GV ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: "les williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)classic.msn.com>
Subject: Gascolator
I sure don't want to argue with the experts here, but I found water in my first RV-6A's gascolator numerous times and developed a rust spot in the bowl too. This is after religously sampling the tank drains until no water appeared before each flight. This would seem to me to be evidence that the gascolator is indeed the last and final point to trap any water passing through the fuel system regardless of whether it is located above or below the tank drains. And it is why, after much deliberation, that I chose to install one in my present RV-6A project also. Les Williams/RV-6AQ/Tacoma WA > ><< For those 4's out there, where are you locating your gascolator? > Besides putting it between the cross-over exhaust pipes, I'm not sure > where else you can put it. help! Chuck > >> >Chuck: >Consider not using the thing at all. Your tank drains are the low point. I and >others are using 3/8" inline filters in each tank outlet line, before the >selector valve. I've seen no evidence on my Matronics Fuel Scan of a pressure >drop on takeoff & climb, even with 30 GPH indicated flow. > >Check six! >Mark Right on Mark, gascolator will not detect water in our type of setup, it will act as a filter only. A inline filter for each tank as Mark suggests give one a possible second source in case of fuel contamination. Plus it eliminates another thing to cool under the hood. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: Toad <toad(at)favorites.com>
Subject: Jig
Thanks Frank for putting your webpage together, it is being a great help to me as I begin this thing ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: "les williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)classic.msn.com>
Subject: Double Flaring Tool
Just make sure they're 37 degree flaring tools, single or double. They are not cheap by any means, but some of the best flaring tools, both single and double, are sold by Snap-On. They have a flaring tool for stainless steel tubing which is perfect. I used it on the job installing HP air systems, after throwing away two or three cheapies in disgust. Another possible source is Grainger, if there is one in your area. Chris Browne Buying Tools for -6A, (incl. Snap-on Flaring and Bending Tools) Does anyone know of a source to purchase a "Double Flaring Tool" ? I used on once and it makes a much stronger flare on fuel lines than a regular one. Thanks in advance, Bob Reeves Building Bearhawk, Flying RV-4 Hidden River Airport, Sarasota, Florida ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: "les williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)classic.msn.com>
Subject: Wing Root Fairing Rubber
Probably depends on the fit of the fairings, but mine stayed on without adhesive. Les Williams/RV-6AQ/Tacoma WA Do most of you adhere the rubber sealing strip to the wing root fairing sheet metal using a contact adhesive or will it stay in place by just slipping it on with no adhesive? TIA, -GV ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Subject: rv crybaby
From: spml(at)juno.com (shirley a lavigne)
i hate to sound like a cry baby, but i will. i currently own an aronca chief, i've been interested in rv-s for some time. i guess the need for speed got to me. i had it all setr up to heat my garage, and start on an empanage kit, with the thought of going for a quick build kit rv-6. i must be so nuts, or nucking futs, that dispite the $1000.00 bill for the annual on the chief, and a daughter in college , i thought i could still swing the rv progect. my wife told me in no uncertain terms "if i pursue this nonsense, hit the bricks" or in other words, "be happy with what you have". (the chief). i' ll continue to monotor the rv list ., and look for some solace or support. best wishes, Pat LaVigne (crybaby in Rochester,NY} ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: "les williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)classic.msn.com>
Subject: wing/tail jig
In this area, I'd follow Van's manual and plans. The 109" will work just fine. After finishing the tail kit, just remove the cross piece and use uprights for the wings. You not need to set this up twice like someone else alluded to do. Les Williams/RV-6AQ/Tacoma WA ---------- From: owner-rv-list(at)matronics.com on behalf of Toad Sent: Saturday, November 01, 1997 4:38 AM Subject: RV-List: wing/tail jig Hello, I am new to the list, and just bought my tailfeathers for the rv-6, I find in the drawing for the wing jig that it calls for a distance of 105"-109" inches between the up-rights, This seem like it is on the short side if any room is needed to work on the end ribs for the wing, Just wondering what yours measure and is it enough room if I set it at 109". thnx in advance Mel, Slightly confused but elated, in Utah. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: cliffd(at)mailhost.accesscom.net (Cliff Dominey)
Subject: Kellog-American Compressors
Greetings - I suppose more newbie comments on air compressors will have some listers screaming, but yesterday I saw something a bit different. It is a 2hp compressor, belt driven, "two stage" the seller says, oiled, on top of a 60 gallon tank. Nice and quiet, if big. Looks decades old, but if it works, and for 1/3 the price of a new one, I may go for it - if I can figure how to get it out of the back of a pickup. Anyone run across one of these before? Cliff Dominey RV-8A empennage in garage ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 03, 1997
Subject: Re: Double Flaring Tool
From: bob.char.reeves(at)juno.com (Robert L Reeves)
Has anyone used the Double Flaring Tool that Avery sells? His is just $95 compared with $300 or $400 for the others I've found. I'm inclined to buy from Avery cause his tools have been great in the past. Any comments will be appreciated. Bob Reeves Building Bearhawk, Flying RV-4 Sarasota, Florida ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mick_G" <micky_g(at)email.msn.com>
Subject: Re: Newt comment---
Date: Nov 02, 1997
What a silly thing to post. Mick -----Original Message----- From: aol.com!JRWillJR(at)matronics.com <aol.com!JRWillJR(at)matronics.com> Date: Saturday, November 01, 1997 9:49 PM Subject: RV-List: Newt comment--- > >If Gore becomes president kiss homebuilding goodbuy. > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 03, 1997
Subject: Re: Gascolator
From: bob.char.reeves(at)juno.com (Robert L Reeves)
I'm inclined to agree with the thought of not using a Gascolator on a RV-4, I've been flying mine for 7 years and have never seen water from the Gascolator on mine, only from the wing tank drains. And I had to replace the gasket on my Gascolator twice already for leaking. Bob Reeves Building Bearhawk, Flying RV-4 Sarasota, Florida ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 03, 1997
Subject: Re: rv crybaby
From: bob.char.reeves(at)juno.com (Robert L Reeves)
Sell your Chief and build the RV! Ya won't regret it! Bob Reeves Building Bearhawk, Flying RV-4 Sarasota, Florida ________________________________________________________________________________
From: DougMel(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Subject: dumping acid/alodine rinse bucket
I read with interest a comment from a lister about how he takes his acid/alodine rinse bucket outside to dump it. I was concerned with doing this or dumping it down the drain due to environmental concerns and came up with a method which minimizes th e rinse water. Instead of filling a bucket with water to rinse and then dumping, I use a old spray bottle (i.e. windex) filled with fresh water. After the part is treated I squirt the part with the fresh water over a empty bucket. This works just as well as dipping (or even better since the rinse water is always fresh) and creates very little waste water. What waste water there is I set aside and let evaporate. No Dumping!! You can use the same waste bucket for etching and aloding. This method works very well for me on most parts ( the bigger the part the more difficult this method is). The only drawback is that your wrist can get worn out squezing the squirt bottle if you do lots of parts at once. I just bought the $10 pressured spray bottle that harbor freight sells and will try that instead of the windex bottle. Just my 2 cents DougMel(at)aol.com rv6 waiting for wings ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: What I Learned About Real IFR Today In My RV6A
>So I guess each pilot has to evaluate their own abilities/needs. >I know it is easy for us to get to reliant on a lot of gadgets to where >we get rusty with the basics, but my vote is that an RV has more of a >need for an Auto pilot for IFR than a lot of other airplanes that they >are typically used in Years ago, Mooney (the hot-rod of the period) had a standard offering in their airplanes called "PC" or "positive control". It was nothing more than a pneumatic wing leveler (Brittian as I recall) that tied the turn coordinator to the ailerons via very simple, "juice can" actuators. The whole thing ran off of vacuum pump (except turn coordinator which was electric). This system was always on. It could be momentarily diabled by punching a button on the wheel but if one chose to simply override it and put the airplane back on course, there were no smoking motors, squealing clutches or sweating pilots. I've always had a soft spot in my heart for those actuators. While bulky, they were light. They had only two moving parts. With modern materials, they could be built to expect extremely long service life . . . probably never touched over lifetime of an airplane. If the volumes were high enough, there's no reason a modern incarnation of that system should sell for more than 5-600 dollars. IMHO the basic wing-leveler is as important as your VOR/ILS system in any suite of IFR equipment. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= | | | Go ahead, make my day . . . . | | Show me where I'm wrong. | ================================= <http://www.aeroelectric.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: Bud Newhall <bud(at)softcom.net>
Subject: Re: Wing Root Fairing Rubber
aol.com!Vanremog(at)matronics.com wrote: > Do most of you adhere the rubber sealing strip to the wing root > fairing sheet > metal using a contact adhesive or will it stay in place by just > slipping it > on with no adhesive? > > TIA, > -GV Gary After a few flights one of mine came loose. The noise kinda scares the heck out of you. Not real loud but you know something is wrong. I glued mine on with RTV. Just the bottom end under the wing, the top can't come loose. You must be getting close. Looking forward to seeing it fly. -- Bud Newhall bud(at)softcom.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JRWillJR(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Subject: Re: Newt comment---
I agree that this list is no place for general politics and would as soon stop this thread know before ruffeling any more feathers. Why, however not jump on the fellow who made the original anti-Newt comment back up the list aways. I do not have time to be terribly specific, however , during the Bush/Clinton camp. Al Gore made a speech in Houston which I attended where he bashed the oil companies and made a comment to the effect that individual use of petroleum for trasportation uses wuold have to come to an end and further commented that many in the petroleum industry should start looking for new jobs. Lets see, Phillips Pet provides us with AVGAS, so does Chevron and Texaco and EXXON. I think our motor boats and sport planes are going to be considered non-essential polluters. Spoke to a RV builder at Copperstate from California who said the state EPA had a goal to become more feared than the IRS. They were having problems painting their aircraft. This is not really politics it is the survival of those home hobbist that build hot rods planes boats cookout in their backyards that our goverment is slowly beginning to cast as bad guys who pollute the enviroment. We have enough problems with the FAA much less the EPA. We must constatly write our elected officials Demo and Repub. when our sports and interest are threatened. Lets stop this here . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Ivoprop VP Magnum prop (was Ivoprop cheap shot)
36-37,40-43
From: less_drag(at)juno.com (James E Ayers)
Date: Nov 02, 1997
writes: > >The propeller was installed by a Certified Rotax Mechanic and was checked and >retorqued . Sorry Jim Ayers. May I remind you guys that there have been >fatalities with IVOS and that info came from EAA. My IVO nearly came apart on >my Kfox at 25 hrs.(Sp. 1996 and was not a Mag.) REPLY to the request for >more info on my prior post. Jim RV4. (I am a A&P and can torque a bolt--give >me that much) Testy today, aren't we. I never questioned your properly torquing the prop bolts. I had asked about the re-torquing schedule, not realizing you were discussing the Ivoprop ULTRALIGHT prop. If you put a Ivoprop Ultralight prop on a four cylinder four cycle engine, the result you obtained is expected. The Ivoprop ULTRALIGHT prop lasts for two (2) hours on a Lycoming O-290. If it is on a smaller four cylinder four cycle engine it "should" last a little longer. 25 hours is good. 65 hours is even better. IMHO, the Ivoprop ULTRALIGHT prop SHOULD NOT be on a four cylinder four cycle engine. The Ivoprop ULTRALIGHT prop WAS NOT designed for a four cylinder four cycle engine. Please remember that this discussion is supposed to be about the IVOPROP VP MAGNUM prop. A prop that is specifically designed for the four cylinder four cycle engine. Unless someone on the RV-list is using a two cycle engine, or a six cylinder engine, of 100 horsepower or less; the Ivoprop ULTRALIGHT prop (and its history) should be of no interest to this list. JIm Ayers Less_Drag(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 03, 1997
From: Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.su.OZ.AU>
Subject: Re: What I Learned About Real IFR Today In My RV6A
> >I decided to get an instrument compentency check today in my RV6A. The >first hour was spent under the hood performing holding patterns, climbing >and descending turns etc. Things went very well so we decided to shoot some >instrument approaches in real IMC. >My impressions: > >1.) I would not fly an RV6A in IMC without 2 attitude indicators ( 1 >electric and 1 vacuum ). I believe it would be very marginal to attempt to >fly on a partial panel with moderate turbulence in an RV6A. In my opinion, >the RV6A yaws back and forth to much in significant turbulence to the point >where it doesn't inspire a whole lot of confidence in trying to average the >turn coordinator. >3.) I would not fly an RV in IMC faster than about 140 mph if there was any >turbulence, or significant cockpit workload going on. It becomes to hard to >fly precisely at speeds above that. Just a moments in-attention to the >gauges while copying clearances etc. could result in an upset. The RV is >significantly more control sensitive at 191 mph ( my normal VFR cruising >speed, yes the landing gear fairings and wheel pants do add a lot ! ) than >at 140 mph. > >4.) I do not plan on doing any hard IFR over long intervals. However, to go >through a cloud deck to get on top, or as an emergency to get back down, I >feel very confident in my airplane and my experience to do that. > >*** Even though I passed the instrument competency check today after having >flown numerous different approaches to different airports in real IMC >conditions in Chicago today, I plan on getting lots more hood practice with >check pilots. To me, the challenge of precision IFR is probably the same as >those fellow RVers who love doing aerobatics. > >I would be interested in comments from others who have flown IFR in RV's as >this is of course new territory in my flight testing. Does anybody use a >wing leveler in IFR in an RV ? > > >Scott Johnson rvgasj(at)mcs.com Scott, I was very interested in your post. I am building my 6A to be IFR capable. I have a few hours at the stick of a 6 and my impression was that the lightness of control pressures and respone rate in roll would make IFR flight hard work. Your observations and those of others on the list would seem to confirm this. For this reason I have opted for an S-Tec single axis system. Even in docile aeroplanes (182 RG for instance) I find the wing leveller reduces my fatigue rate enormously. I would be very interested to hear from anyone who has experience with an RV in IFR who has fitted such a system. Leo (going with the wing leveller) Davies RV 6A (engine bay) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: Bud Newhall <bud(at)softcom.net>
Subject: Re: Double Flaring Tool
bge.com!CHRIS.BROWNE(at)matronics.com wrote: > > They are not cheap by any means, but some of the best flaring > tools, > both single and double, are sold by Snap-On. They have a flaring > tool > for stainless steel tubing which is perfect. I used it on the > job > installing HP air systems, after throwing away two or three > cheapies > in disgust. Another possible source is Grainger, if there is one > in > your area. > > Chris Browne > Buying Tools for -6A, (incl. Snap-on Flaring and Bending Tools) The tools you refer to are probably 45 degree flare. Aircraft fittings require 37 degree flare Bud Newhall bud(at)softcom.net ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "William G. Knight" <airshows1(at)msn.com>
Subject: $$$ For RV-6/Slider/180Hp/C-S Prop
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Want 95% completed or finished RV-6 w/slider/180 Hp anfd C/s prop. Want factory new or reman engine and new or fresh o'h on prop. Please call Bill at 561-278-8369. Thanks, you all. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Double Flaring Tool
From: lm4(at)juno.com (Larry Mac Donald)
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Has anyone used the Double Flaring Tool that Avery sells? His is just $95 compared with $300 or $400 for the others I've found. I'm inclined to buy from Avery cause his tools have been great in the past. Any comments will be appreciated. Bob Reeves Bob, I own one of the flairing tools Avery sells, as a matter of fact I recommended it to Avery. It's ruggedly made, does several sizes, comes in a hard plastic case and does both single and double flairing. I havn't used mine much but I really like the way it works. It has an eccentric in the handle so you may adjust the amount of pressure you want on the material your gripping. As far as considering a $400.00 tool for such a job, I'd have it done in a shop first. Larry Mac Donald lm4(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: "les williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)classic.msn.com>
Subject: Avionics Master Switch
After all the discussion on this subject, I think I will still go with one. However, I will provide a fused alternate power source direct from the unswitched terminal on the battery contactor through an on-on switch to the avionics bus and the turn coordinator/auto pilot. The other side of the on-on switch will be powered off the main bus. (I know that I could use a blocking diode arrangement instead of an on-on switch, but then I trust a seldom used switch more than a constantly used diode arrangement that may also fail and burn out the alternate feed fuse as soon as you turn on the alternate feed switch.) If either the master contactor or avionics master switch fails, I will still be able to power the avionics bus. Along with this, I will have battery back-up to both the Micro-Encoder (airspeed, altimeter, compass, vertical speed, and encoder functions) and Micro-Monitor (engine and fuel info). I think that this will provide a fairly good (and not too complicated) system for my expanded VFR equipped airplane as I don't consider any other electrical item essential. Comments/questions welcome. Thanks. Les Williams/RV-6AQ/Tacoma WA ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Subject: Re: Wing Root Fairing Rubber
<345CC4F5.B8F0D3(at)softcom.net>
From: gasobek(at)juno.com (Gary A. Sobek)
I also glued mine on. I had a friend have his come of on his RV-4 during test flying and it made a LOT of noise also. I did not want to take the chance. Used 3M 77 I think. Gary A. Sobek RV-6 O-320 Hartzell writes: > >aol.com!Vanremog(at)matronics.com wrote: > >> Do most of you adhere the rubber sealing strip to the wing root >> fairing sheet >> metal using a contact adhesive or will it stay in place by just >> slipping it >> on with no adhesive? >> >> TIA, >> -GV > >Gary >After a few flights one of mine came loose. The noise kinda scares the >heck out of you. Not real loud but you know something is wrong. >I glued mine on with RTV. Just the bottom end under the wing, the top >can't come loose. > >You must be getting close. Looking forward to seeing it fly. >-- >Bud Newhall >bud(at)softcom.net > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "kevin lane" <n3773(at)worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Quick Build without the tail?
Date: Nov 01, 1997
> The construction of the QB is excellent! I understand that the people in the > Philippines who build them used to work on F16s before Mt Pinatubo blew up > and they closed the AF Base there. that's odd, it's my understanding that the Philippine craftsmanship was bad so the whole thing got moved to Malaysia where they are now turning out very nice QB's. kevin 6A, made in OR. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Newt comment---
From: wstucklen1(at)juno.com (Frederic w Stucklen)
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Listers, I second that motion. If you all want to talk politics, do it off the list.... Fred Stucklen RV-6A N925RV (Working on second RV-6A - Chevy Powered!) wstucklen1(at)juno.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: Frank Smidler <smidler(at)dcwi.com>
Subject: Re: Gascolator
Mlfred wrote: > > Consider not using the thing at all. Your tank drains are the low point. I and > others are using 3/8" inline filters in each tank outlet line, before the > selector valve. I've seen no evidence on my Matronics Fuel Scan of a pressure > drop on takeoff & climb, even with 30 GPH indicated flow. > > Check six! > Mark I plan to use fuel filters before the selector valve as you suggested. My problem is deciding which type of filter to use. What are you? Frank Smidler RV-6 with wings and landing gear on but still in the basement. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: Avionics Master Switch
> . . . . >However, I will provide a fused alternate power source direct from the >unswitched terminal on the battery contactor through an on-on switch to the >avionics bus and the turn coordinator/auto pilot. . . . And perhaps some minimal panel lighting . . . a one-bulb flood?? > The other side of the on-on switch will be powered off the main bus. The problem with a single switch is that it's a SINGLE switch. One failure kills both paths. >(I know that I could use a blocking diode arrangement instead of an on-on >switch, but then I trust a seldom used switch . . . What is your basis for this judgment? As I write these words, I have a consulting customer who is suffering hundreds of failures of brand new switches every month; rolling belly up because they are too LIGHTLY used. There's a really cheap, 69-cent rocker switch in my desk drawer. If I handed you this switch and asked you if you thought it was an "aircraft quality part" you'd probably laugh at me. Well, it came out of an airplane, a 1968 model Cessna 150. It died after nearly 30 years and was the FIRST switch to fail in the airplane. It was also the most lightly-loaded and least used. It controlled the DOME light. Please don't fall victim to the notion that wear and tear is the only cause of switch failure. >more than a constantly used diode arrangement that may also fail and >burn out the alternate feed fuse as soon as you turn on the alternate feed >switch.) I use 20 amp diodes in a circuit that's loaded to about 5 amps. The semiconductor diode is the oldest piece of semiconductor technology on the surface of the planet and is 100 times more reliable than mechanical switches . . . if used within their ratings. A failue in the diode is pre-flight detectable. If you're basing your judgment about diodes on tales of woe about alternator diodes, keep in mind that 95% of alternators flying on single engine airplanes were designed in the 60's . . . the replacment parts are conformed to original designs by FAA mandate. There's no reason for parts selected 30 years later to suffer the same defects. > If either the master contactor or avionics master switch fails, Even if the avionics switch is a single device? How about the wire and all installing hardware between switch and avoinics bus. How about the switch's internal mechanism? These all constitute single points of failure . . . you can design them out of your system. >I will still be able to power the avionics bus. Along with this, I will have >battery back-up to both the Micro-Encoder (airspeed, altimeter, compass, >vertical speed, and encoder functions) and Micro-Monitor (engine and fuel >info). I think that this will provide a fairly good (and not too complicated) >system for my expanded VFR equipped airplane as I don't consider any other >electrical item essential. I'd recommend two switches . . . normal path "avionics master" and alternate path switches and leave the diode in place to prevent inadvertent overload of alternate path fuse by having both switches closed. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection //// (o o) ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========= | | | Go ahead, make my day . . . . | | Show me where I'm wrong. | ================================= <http://www.aeroelectric.com> ________________________________________________________________________________
From: donspawn(at)juno.com
Subject: Re: Navaid Info.
Date: Nov 02, 1997
>It is very simple to put an Auto Pilot Disconnect Switch on the stick, >Charles: I understand the Navaid is about $1300. What do I get & where do you install each item? Is the Turn & bank part as good as a normal Turn & bank? Don Jordan, RV-6A, Arlington,Tx ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 03, 1997
From: Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Chatter: Re: Root Fairing Rubbers
juno.com!gasobek(at)matronics.com wrote: > I also glued mine on. You *glue* your rubbers on???? > I had a friend have his come off on his RV-4 during > test flying and it made a LOT of noise also. It's never happened to me (thank God) but I'd guess a rubber coming off in use would cause a lot of excitement. > >> Do most of you adhere the rubber sealing strip to the wing root > >> fairing sheet > >> metal using a contact adhesive or will it stay in place by just > >> slipping it > >> on with no adhesive? > > > >After a few flights one of mine came loose. The noise kinda scares the > >heck out of you. Not real loud but you know something is wrong. > >I glued mine on with RTV. Just the bottom end under the wing, the top > >can't come loose. Sorry guys and gals, I said to myself 'Be strong' (as I usually say to my rubbers) but the parallels between wing rubbers coming off in flight and, rubbers coming off in, um, flight, were too funny and I couldn't resist posting. 8-D Frank. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "B&S Eckstein" <eckstein@net-link.net>
Subject: Re: Double Flaring Tool
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Has anyone modified one of the many fine 45 degree flaring tools to do = 37 degrees? ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: Steve Kennedy <skennedy(at)flash.net>
Subject: Re: Mazda Rotary Engine (NZ Connection)
Frank van der Hulst wrote: > > > Some time ago, some-one posted to the list a reference to some-one in > New Zealand who is into Mazda rotaries in aircraft. FWIW, Given the > > I emailed him, asking whether he'd be interested in doing a rotary for > the RV... here's his reply (his reply in CAPITALS). > > THANK YOU FOR YOUR ENQUIRY ABOUT MAZDA 20B, 3 ROTOR, ROTARY ENGINES. > > WE HAVE AVAILABLE PICTURES OF THE MAZDA 20B ENGINE A TRIPLE ROTOR, > > TWIN TURBO, ROTARY ENGINE SHOULD YOU REQUIRE AN INFORMATION PACK. Frank: Please post an E-Mail address for Grant Nicholls Thanks, Steve Kennedy (finishing tail kit-6) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Mlfred(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Subject: Re: Turtledeck
<< The RVAtor has a picture of the Bill Davis RV4 with Turtledeck. I have been told the transition aft of the canopy is a problem, aerodynamically speaking and I also have noticed the Harmon Rockets have the Turtledeck. If anyone has info on this modification as far as speed gains go, please post it to the list as I would like to do anything within reason to make my RV4 go fast. Mark McGee RV4 ... just closed out the rudder ... wings in late November >> This mod was evidently started by Sam James & Bill Davis. I heard from Sam that they taped a false turtledeck onto a -4, and picked up 6-8 MPH. The design changes started shortly after that. Call Sam and ask him about the details. I will say that the Rocket bulkhead tops will fit your bird, with v few mods. Your canopy design will have to be changed also..... Let me know if I can help! Check six! Mark ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 03, 1997
From: Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Mazda Rotary Engine (NZ Connection)
> > Some time ago, some-one posted to the list a reference to some-one in > > New Zealand who is into Mazda rotaries in aircraft. FWIW, Given the > Please post an E-Mail address for Grant Nicholls Oops... thought it was on that message. Anyway, it's GNICHOLLS(at)compuserve.com Frank. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 02, 1997
From: Scott Gesele <scottg(at)icsnet.com>
Subject: Re: Double Flaring Tool
>Has anyone modified one of the many fine 45 degree flaring tools to do 37 degrees? > > This isn't meant as a flame, but what are you smoking? Use the right tool for the right job. There are many critical flared joints in an RV. Loose brakes and you loose steering, 100LL is quite volatile, etc. Just my $.02 Scott Gesele N506RV -Flying (when the weather permits) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: W B Ward <WBWard(at)aol.com>
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Subject: Re: Newt comment---
<< Al Gore and his policy on homebuilding >> Al Gore is an environmentalist........Ever hear of a catalytic converter on an O-320, or O-360? How about leaded gasoline?? 100LL is "Low Lead" not unleaded. Ever hear of unleaded fuel with sufficient anti knock capabilities to handle a high compression 4 cylinder engine, without detonation problems?? How do you dispose of your used alodine?? MEK?? Fiberglass Resins?? Unused Proseal?? Don't answer those questions!!! Regards Wendell WBWard(at)AOL.COM Slave to the "Junkyard Dog" RV-4 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: W B Ward <WBWard(at)aol.com>
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Subject: Re: rv crybaby
<< i currently own an aronca chief >> Ever thought of selling the Chief, and using the proceeds to buy the 6 kit?? Regards Wendell WBward(at)AOL.COM Slave to the "Junkyard Dog" RV-4 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: W B Ward <WBWard(at)aol.com>
Date: Nov 02, 1997
Subject: Re: Gascolator
If you've never found water in your gascolator, it may mean that your wing sumping techniques are adequate for the flying you do. However, the gascolator was put on most airplanes, to give somewhat less than responsible individuals an indication that their wing tank sumping techniques may not be measuring up. I haven't seen this word on the RV List, very often, but safety is the prime concern. I'll use a gascolator on the "Junkyard Dog," simply because I, Like every other human animal I know, am not perfect. Regards Wendell WBWard(at)AOL.COM ________________________________________________________________________________
From: W B Ward <WBWard(at)aol.com>
Date: Nov 03, 1997
Subject: Re: Newt comment---
<< Spoke to a RV builder at Copperstate from California who said the state EPA had a goal to become more feared than the IRS. >> For those of you who don't know it, the EPA and OSHA, both have more power than the IRS. They can enter company premises, or, "YOUR" property for an inspection, and they don't have to ask your permission. Even the FBI has to get a search warrant, and have probable cause. Read a book called "Whatever Happened to the American Dream," by Larry Burkett, and then pick up a copy of "The Death of Common Sense," by Phillip K. Howard. In these two books, yo may see what the EPA, and OSHA, are doing to those of us who are pursuing the American Dream. Al Gore likes the EPA, real good. Regards Wendell WBWard(at)AOL.COM ________________________________________________________________________________
From: W B Ward <WBWard(at)aol.com>
Date: Nov 03, 1997
Subject: Re: Avionics Master Switch
I'm going to have to agree with Bob on this one. If the avionics gear is so fragile as to succumb to spikes from starting a small 4 cylinder engine, even with a low battery, my question would be---WHY? With the advancements in technology today, it should be possible for the manufacturers of such equipment to provide adequate protection to their many marvels, without us having to install an antiquated device such as a rudimentary "switch" with which to perform this function. Bob made a comment about us being smarter consumers. Products are existant, because of the rules of supply and demand. If we demand adequate protection, without the addition of a switch, you'd think some of these brilliant people could come up with such a solution. Regards Wendell WBWard(at)AOL.COM PS. Bob, I know you really get no challenge from someone who agrees with you, but in this case, I simply could not help myself. The American consumer gets what he gets, simply because he is willing to put up with the B.S. that the American Manufacturer wants to sell him. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: W B Ward <WBWard(at)aol.com>
Date: Nov 03, 1997
Subject: Re: $$$ For RV-6/Slider/180Hp/C-S Prop
<< Want 95% completed or finished RV-6 w/slider/180 Hp anfd C/s prop. Want factory new or reman engine and new or fresh o'h on prop. >> You didn't use enough dollar signs in your subject area. Regards, and good luck. Wendell WBWard(at)AOL.COM ________________________________________________________________________________
From: JRWillJR(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 03, 1997
Subject: Re: Ivoprop VP Magnum prop (was Ivoprop cheap shot)
Jim Ayers, the propeller I posted about from the Kfox Newsletter was an IVO MAGNUM installed by a Certified Rotax Mechanic and was reported to have began vibrating severly at 56hrsTT. It was also reported that others have had the back plates crack after the new Knurled plates were installed. I repeat this was an IVO MAGNUM not the smaller UL prop I had installed on my KFOX that nearly flung apart at 25 hrTT. May I also say that the prop on my Kfox was the type recommended by IVO to me. Again back to the MAGNUM incident the propeller was properly installed and was rechecked as recommended. Galling, cracks, and hole elongation were noted upon removal and money was refunded promptly by IVO. It is true that some people have success with the IVOprops at least on the surface, however, the more I talk to people who run them the more I find disturbing---as in some of these success stories have installed multiple Ivos after having numerous problems. Is the Ivo prop you are running the original installation Jim? --just curious. I am not trying to run you down Jim but I am convinced these Ivos are dangerous and do not want to have someone hurt even if in keeping them from buying one others get angry with me. I have seen pictures of your airplane and you are clearly a good mechanic. Maybe this is why you are able to run the Ivo. Not every one is going to be as careful in installation and maintenance as yourself and I think the Ivos are not going to be very tolerent. Our machines need to have a certain Abuse Tolerence built into them and I fear the Ivos are not up to the job in the longhaul. JR. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 03, 1997
From: "les williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)classic.msn.com>
Subject: Re: Avionics Master Switch
Bob, I knew I would get a response from you on this. 1. I've already provided for panel lighting along with clock power through a direct 1 amp fused circuit. 2. I agree that a single switch is single failure point. However, I do use MS grade switches, not cheap hardware or automotive type. It would also carry the normal avionics load, which is more than either an essential bus switch or second source switch would normally do. Of course either could be periodially exercised to prevent contact oxidation, etc., as is recommended. 3. I guess you agree that diodes do fail. And like you said, the only way your going to know that is by doing a preflight check, just like you could a switch. 4. I quess you got me. I can't come up with a way to connect every electrical item with switches, wires, bus bars, etc, that doesn't constitute some single failure point in any system. Better send me your diodes and I'll do the best I can to wire up those switches so I CAN HAVE AN AVIONICS MASTER! Many thanks for clearing this up. Les Williams/RV-6AQ/Tacoma WA > . . . . >However, I will provide a fused alternate power source direct from the >unswitched terminal on the battery contactor through an on-on switch to the >avionics bus and the turn coordinator/auto pilot. . . . And perhaps some minimal panel lighting . . . a one-bulb flood?? > The other side of the on-on switch will be powered off the main bus. The problem with a single switch is that it's a SINGLE switch. One failure kills both paths. >(I know that I could use a blocking diode arrangement instead of an on-on >switch, but then I trust a seldom used switch . . . What is your basis for this judgment? As I write these words, I have a consulting customer who is suffering hundreds of failures of brand new switches every month; rolling belly up because they are too LIGHTLY used. There's a really cheap, 69-cent rocker switch in my desk drawer. If I handed you this switch and asked you if you thought it was an "aircraft quality part" you'd probably laugh at me. Well, it came out of an airplane, a 1968 model Cessna 150. It died after nearly 30 years and was the FIRST switch to fail in the airplane. It was also the most lightly-loaded and least used. It controlled the DOME light. Please don't fall victim to the notion that wear and tear is the only cause of switch failure. >more than a constantly used diode arrangement that may also fail and >burn out the alternate feed fuse as soon as you turn on the alternate feed >switch.) I use 20 amp diodes in a circuit that's loaded to about 5 amps. The semiconductor diode is the oldest piece of semiconductor technology on the surface of the planet and is 100 times more reliable than mechanical switches . . . if used within their ratings. A failue in the diode is pre-flight detectable. If you're basing your judgment about diodes on tales of woe about alternator diodes, keep in mind that 95% of alternators flying on single engine airplanes were designed in the 60's . . . the replacment parts are conformed to original designs by FAA mandate. There's no reason for parts selected 30 years later to suffer the same defects. > If either the master contactor or avionics master switch fails, Even if the avionics switch is a single device? How about the wire and all installing hardware between switch and avoinics bus. How about the switch's internal mechanism? These all constitute single points of failure . . . you can design them out of your system. >I will still be able to power the avionics bus. Along with this, I will have >battery back-up to both the Micro-Encoder (airspeed, altimeter, compass, >vertical speed, and encoder functions) and Micro-Monitor (engine and fuel >info). I think that this will provide a fairly good (and not too complicated) >system for my expanded VFR equipped airplane as I don't consider any other >electrical item essential. I'd recommend two switches . . . normal path "avionics master" and alternate path switches and leave the diode in place to prevent inadvertent overload of alternate path fuse by having both switches closed. Bob . . . AeroElectric Connection ________________________________________________________________________________
From: WBWard(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 03, 1997
Subject: Re: Ivoprop VP Magnum prop (was Ivoprop cheap shot)
<< Our machines need to have a certain Abuse Tolerence built into them >> Sorry, but I do not agree. There is no room for "abuse tolerance" in the aviation industry. If you want to abuse something, build a sprint car, not an airplane. Regards Wendell WBWard(at)AOL.COM ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 03, 1997
From: DJA <ahearns(at)bigfoot.com>
Subject: Re: Newt comment---
I'm in the oil business and deal with the EPA and DEP routinely. While I'm no fan of government agencies I can tell you that I have a good working relationship with them. Do I like their power NO, do I enjoy paying consultants to keep them off my back, of course not. Most importantly I don't lay awake at night worrying about their next move. This is the perfect thread for alt.paranoid.whatever. I'd just assume get back to RV's Dan W B Ward wrote: > > > << Spoke to a RV builder at Copperstate from > California who said the state EPA had a goal to become more feared than the > IRS. >> > > For those of you who don't know it, the EPA and OSHA, both have more power > than the IRS. They can enter company premises, or, "YOUR" property for an > inspection, and they don't have to ask your permission. Even the FBI has to > get a search warrant, and have probable cause. > > Read a book called "Whatever Happened to the American Dream," by Larry > Burkett, and then pick up a copy of "The Death of Common Sense," by Phillip K. > Howard. In these two books, yo may see what the EPA, and OSHA, are doing to > those of us who are pursuing the American Dream. > > Al Gore likes the EPA, real good. > > Regards > > Wendell WBWard(at)AOL.COM > > -- http://www.ntr.net/~ahearns/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- If this stops 1 spam...... WARNING: Unsolicited commercial e-mail: $500 per message: US Code, Title 47 Section 227 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.html ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 03, 1997
From: "Gary A. Sobek" <gasobek(at)flash.net>
bkcooper(at)pacbell.net, francist(at)flash.net, Ferdfly(at)aol.com, gila(at)flash.net, Texas_custom(at)why.net, mheisenmann(at)juno.com, Cozybldr(at)juno.com, PTidball(at)macsource.com, ptidball(at)batnet.com, rnoyes(at)svl.ems.lmco.com, rbarton137(at)juno.com, SLedGeMaC(at)aol.com, 102733.3172(at)compuserve.com, vmazda(at)aol.com, rvator97(at)aol.com
Subject: High Oil Temp and Engine missing.
Subject: High Oil Temp and Engine missing. RV List and friends: This weekend, I took an RV-6 builder that will be flying in the next few months for a ride. We made the short 5-10 minute flight to Flo's at Chino airport for lunch. After lunch we began the long taxi and wait for Chino Tower to clear us for take off. When cleared to depart runway 3, my oil temp had reached 104 C (219 F). When I advanced the throttle, the engine missed. I pulled back on the throttle, and notified the towed that I was aborting the take off and cancel my departure clearance. Told ground off the runway that the engine missed and was returning to the run up area to try again. The run up missed a little and then cleared. We waited some more for a clearance and then it came. I do not remember what the oil temp was now but I believe that it was above 108 C (226 F). The engine missed but cleared when the tail came up. I continued to accelerate and the engine appears to make full power. (2700 RPM) Still enough runway left to abort and elected to climb out and go home. There were 2 or 3 misses on the short hop home. The installation of my oil cooler is on the firewall. I use a custom made adapter to the oil cooler as Van's did not sell one when I made the installation. I keep the boost pump on when the engine is hot as recommended by Lycoming in their "Reprints of the Lycoming Flyer." I rebuilt the engine to NEW specs with Superior cylinders. Everything is instrumented with the RMI microMonitor. Oil Temp is calibrated at 100 C (212 F) and is off one degree C at ambient when calibrated at 100 C. What should have been a 20 minute round trip flight was 0.8 hours. This is the 2nd time that I have had problems on the ground with high ambient and oil temperatures. It was reported to be 99 F on Saturday. Forgot to look at my OAT. I have two of them. The first time was at Edward's AFB after waiting 45 minutes for departure. I believe that I am experiencing Vapor Lock and that the fuel is getting hot inside the mechanical fuel pump. The installation uses fire sleave on all fuel lines. My installation is not tolerant to high temperatures and long ground runs. Review of the problem was though to be a non-problem with the installation and a problem with me the operator. After talking to a retired Lockheed Test Pilot, he use to be the department manager, I have come to suspect that the oil cooler airflow may be the problem. He believed that I was operating the engine correctly and should shut down or increase airflow through the oil cooler. I calculated that the 3" duct has an area of 7 sq. inches. Most RV's with oil coolers mounted on the baffles have the entire 3 X 5 oil cooler open to air flow. This calculates to 15 sq. inches. A 4 inch duct would have an area of 12.5 sq. inches. Parts will be ordered today to change the duct to oil cooler arrangement. I am ordering material to allow the installation of two 3" ducts or one 4" duct. In memory of one of my friends (former AeroJet employee) who had a fatal crash in his RV-4 when the engine quit on departure, I have grounded my -6 from operation in high ambient temperatures until a change is made to improve oil cooling. Hopefully the lower oil temperate will relieve what I believe to be vapor lock from occurring on the ground. BTW, 150 Kt cruise speeds yields 85 - 88 C (185 - 190 F) oil temperatures. CHT has never been above 200 C (392 F). This is a little warmer than what the guys who have the oil cooler mounted on the baffle. Gary A. Sobek RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell FAA A & P EAA Tech Counselor ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com>
Subject: Newt comment---


October 29, 1997 - November 03, 1997

RV-Archive.digest.vol-dp