RV-Archive.digest.vol-fe
August 11, 1998 - August 14, 1998
hacksaw)
Thanks
Stuart Hawksworth
RV8A Emp
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ronald Vandervort <rvanderv(at)linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us> |
| Subject: | Re: External power |
Hello Craig,
I put a ground power plug in on the bottom of the fuselage former just in
front of the instrument panel. With the lasar ignition system I will not
be able to hand prop a start if I have a dead battery, so the reason for
the ground power plug.
Therefore the plug in is in the cockpit just above the pilots knees, and
out of sight.
Ron Vandervort, RV-6Q
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Some questions |
>I saw the reference to a vixen file which I haven't heard of in England
- what
>is it?
>
>(just got my replacement HS810 - and bought a bandsaw - I'm useless
with a
>hacksaw)
>
>Thanks
>
>Stuart Hawksworth
>RV8A Emp
Stuart,
The Vixen file is...if I recall correctly, made in England! I bought
mine from Averytools in the good ole U.S. of A. It is a fabulous tool
for filing away large amounts of material in short order. I can't
imagine building an RV without one. So, walk..nay..RUN to your computer,
and order one online from Avery, or wherever else you may find them
offered. This is simply one of the finest tools I have ever owned, made
of high grade steel and is worth it's weight in gold.
Best of luck to you.
Brian Denk
RV8 #379
fuselage under way.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Holman" <bholman(at)fullcomp.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Stuck starter contactors . . . |
Hope you remember this seqence if you ever need to do an in the air
emergency start attempt while trying to get a Mayday call out !
----------
>
> Don't laugh, I essentially did this on my panel. I added
> an avionics master switch and made it a double-pole, double-throw
> switch. When the avionics master is in the off position, one side
> of the switch powers the starter switch. When in the on position,
> the other side powers the avionics bus. This way I must turn off
> the power to the radios to start the engine. Turning on the radios
> cuts off power to the starter.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MICHAEL <lottmc(at)datasync.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Zoche aero diesel |
I was planning on buying a Zoche diesel, but then I couldn't get
the whelen strobes I had my heart set on. I ended up hanging a
q-beam on the tail with a car flasher in line to make it flash.
I am still trying to figure out how to make it rotate. I wonder
if an anemometer type set up would work? Maybe a ring and brush
setup like on electric props would work. That way the cord
wouldn't get tangled. I'm staying up too late.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MLaboyteau(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Re: do it yourself strobes . . . |
> RVers,
> I agree with GV on this one. The infamous Laws of Physics say that
> you will see a 400cp strobe from TWICE the distance of a 100cp strobe. It
> is up to each builder to decide if this is good, bad, or needed for
> him/her. But with the density of traffic in the Los Angeles basin, I
> personally will go for strobes that can be seen by others at the greater
> distance. Twice the distance is a significant number ....
>
> ... just my thoughts .... Gil Alexander
>
After following this thread for a couple of weeks now, no one seems to
mention that for all aircraft Type Certificated before August 1971, they don't
have to meet the 400CP minimum standard set forth in FAR 23. If the FAA
thought that this was such an important safety issue, why haven't they
required that all aircraft have to upgrade to meet the 400CP standard? I agree
that the higher the output, the better the chances that someone will see you
from a farther distance. But has anyone with the Whelen system actually tested
the output of their system with a certified and calibrated tester? What about
after their system has been in use for some time, like maybe checking it at
every annual? Ok, now how long will it take for the average output to drop
below 400CP? How do you know that your Whelen system is REALLY putting out
>400CP? Just because they said so? Prove it to yourself. Test 'em.
Mark LaBoyteaux
RV-6A N106RV
MLaboyteau(at)aol.com
Broken Arrow, Ok
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | scott <acepilot(at)mwt.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Pitot Tube Placement |
Brian Holman wrote:
>
>
> I mounted the AN924-4d fitting up inside the wing, towards the top skin,
> then made a longer pitot tube to fit to it. It is accessable from the
> bellcrank access hole and only needs a 9/32" hole in the wing. It looks
> much neater without the draggy AN fitting sticking out. Also the wing then
> has nothing sticking out when you come to paint it or lay it down on a flat
> surface for storage.edited....
On a similar note, this weekend I saw a Sonerai that had the pitot tube
cut off flush with the leading edge of the wing about 1/2 way outboard.
Would this be accurate? Seems that the airsteam is already split to go
over the top and bottom of the wing by the time it hits the leading edge.
Any aeronautical engineer types care to explain?
Scott
setting up shop for RV4 empennage!
--
Gotta Fly or
Gonna Die !
--Ask me about my
Aeronca Super Chief--
amended 8-29-97: Now after feeling the "Need for Speed", building an
RV-4!
Tail kit arrived!! Somewhat regretfully, the Super Chief is now for
sale. $8500 :(
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com> |
| Subject: | second thoughts -Reply |
Thomas,
I concur with you an all you have stated. Van's design, less
structural issues, is sound, and can take a lot of abuse before it
actually fails. In fact, his design has been "tested" to it's limits in
other incidents where the legs have been bent to their breaking limits.
In any case, we'll wait for the metallurgy tests to tell their
tale.....
Fred Stucklen
N925RV RV-6A
E. Windsor, Ct
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Nguyen [SMTP:TNGUYEN(at)oss.oceaneering.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 1998 5:43 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV-List: second thoughts -Reply
>
>
>
> Fred,
>
> I am sorry to hear about your incident and hope that there are much
> to
> learn from this. This is sound like a typical fracture failure case
> from the
> engineering standpoint. The initial flaw (crack) may already exist
> on the
> gear when you receive it from the manufacturer and you not knowing
> about it. This crack may have been introduced to the gear during
> manufacturing and/or during the process of shipping it to you.
>
> The flaw size could be small initially and then when subjected to the
> operational loads (landing, taxi and etc..) , it growth until it
> reach its
> "critical length" and failure will soon follow. I would not consider
> this as
> a "classic OVERSTRESS failure" case.
>
> Lesson learned from this is that I will inspect my gears using dyn pen
> and/or magna flux prior to final installation. I know that I would
> not like
> for this to happen to me. My opinion on this is that the gear design
> is
> sound and will have no problem of flying my RV-6A when it is complete.
>
> When you receive the test results back from Van's, please post it to
> the
> list so everyone can learn from it.
>
> T.Nguyen, P.E
> Analysis Engineering Manager.
> RV-6A Fuselage
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com> |
Craig,
I mounted a standard Piper Aux Power Plug on the floor just behind
the battery box. Has saved my bacon twice now. I know Bob Nuckles would
disagree, but it's a hot hookup directly to the master contactor (load
side, not battery side). Typical Piper installations would have this
connection through a diode (polarity protection) and/or a separate
contactor. I choose not to do this as it added too much weight and
complexity. One just has to absolutely sure of the polarity prior to
plugging it external power....
Fred Stucklen
N925RV RV-6A
E. Windsor, Ct
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Craig Hiers [SMTP:craig-RV4(at)worldnet.att.net]
>Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 1998 12:31 AM
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Cc: craig-rv4(at)worldnet.att.net
>Subject: RV-List: External power
>
>
>Who in our group has provided some type of external power hookup
>for the inevitable dead battery?
>It would be nice to be able to plug in some power and fire it up.
>I should have planned for this a long time ago, now that I've got
>everthing stuffed in and around the battery area it will be tough
>to do.
>Any ideas?
>
>Craig Hiers
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
unsubscribe
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Pitot Tube Placement |
In a message dated 8/11/98 6:41:29 AM Central Daylight Time, acepilot(at)mwt.net
writes:
<<
On a similar note, this weekend I saw a Sonerai that had the pitot tube
cut off flush with the leading edge of the wing about 1/2 way outboard.
Would this be accurate? Seems that the airsteam is already split to go
over the top and bottom of the wing by the time it hits the leading edge.
Any aeronautical engineer types care to explain?
Scott >>
Easy to answer this one.....[ used to own a Sonerai ]
It's not flush with the leading edge,it's a removable 6"
piece of 1/4 " tubing.
A lot of Sonerai guy's pull the tube out & stick it in their
pocket, otherwise people walk into them all the time &
bend or break them off.
Jim Wendel....just sold my 4.....finishing the wings of my 8
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: second thoughts-nose gear |
| From: | smcdaniels(at)Juno.com (SCOTT R MCDANIELS) |
Maybe some talented builder out there
>could
>look into a after-market mod. for the trike geared Rv's. Such a shock
>dampened
>front gear could be a good thing for rough field ops. Just a thought
>--maybe
>there is some reason I am unaware of that may make this a very bad
>idea. JR
>
>
>
I'm not meaning to say that this would for sure be a bad idea, but since
the main gear legs are nearly identical in design to the nose gear leg,
does that mean a mod. is needed for the RV-4, RV-6 and RV-6A main gear
legs also?
Scott McDaniels
These opinions and ideas are my own
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
of my employer.
lumbing supply stores (Ace hardware was mentioned) sell 5-pound bricks.
Similar to this is "stick lead" used in welding.
6. One guy said he got his from the local cable TV company -- the use it
in repairs. I can only guess this must be crimping material.
One guy told me if he were going to do it all over again, he'd forget the
job of melting the stuff and just buy the precast from Van's. Several
guys offered me what they had left over if I dealt with shipping. I'll
be talking to one of the local guys about this one.
So, thanks everyone for your help.
-Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Thompson <michaelt(at)AUSVMR.VNET.IBM.COM> |
| Subject: | Talking During Restart, was Stuck starter contactors . . . |
News-Software: UReply 3.1
In a previous message, it was written:
>
>Cheryl:
>
>This sounds like a great idea! I can see only one situation where this
>might be a problem, but thankfully, it is not very likely to happen:
>
>If your engine quits in flight (for whatever reason), you may have to kill
>all of your avionics (including comm and transponder) to attempt a restart.
> In a situation where you need to both: restart your engine, and let
>someone know where you are and what is happening, there may not be enough
>time to do both, or to do either one very well.
On the other hand, if you have an engine out you should concentrate on
getting established at best glide, picking a landing spot, etc. then on
the restart procedure, rather than blabbing on the radio. After you've
taken care of business, then talk to somebody.
I also think it's a great idea. Will keep me from frying the radios.
I always had trouble remembering to flip the avionics switch when
restarting the motorglider.
Mike Thompson
Austin, TX
-6 Emp, wings on the waaayyy!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Craig-Stearman" <tcraigst(at)ionet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Pitot Tube Placement |
Ah, Jim Wendel's explanation helps. Yes, Scott, a flush leading edge pitot
location would be wildly inaccurate.
Tom Craig-Stearman
tcraigst(at)ionet.net
RV-4 64ST treading carefully through cowl-land
>
>In a message dated 8/11/98 6:41:29 AM Central Daylight Time,
acepilot(at)mwt.net
>writes:
>
><<
> On a similar note, this weekend I saw a Sonerai that had the pitot tube
> cut off flush with the leading edge of the wing about 1/2 way outboard.
> Would this be accurate? Seems that the airsteam is already split to go
> over the top and bottom of the wing by the time it hits the leading edge.
> Any aeronautical engineer types care to explain?
> Scott >>
>
>Easy to answer this one.....[ used to own a Sonerai ]
>It's not flush with the leading edge,it's a removable 6"
>piece of 1/4 " tubing.
>A lot of Sonerai guy's pull the tube out & stick it in their
>pocket, otherwise people walk into them all the time &
>bend or break them off.
>
>Jim Wendel....just sold my 4.....finishing the wings of my 8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | A20driver(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Pitot Tube Placement |
Suggest you read Vans short article on pitot tube placement---Pg 281,in 18
Years of the RV-Ator...available from RV Bookstore----Jim Brown (2-RV3s &
1-RV4)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Skinner <bskinr(at)trib.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Some questions |
>I saw the reference to a vixen file which I haven't heard of in England - what
>is it?
>Stuart Hawksworth
Stuart,
It's the file that sits in my tool chest and doesn't get any use, anymore.
since I discovered a quicker and easier method for stock removal.
First, the hand-held belt sander. I have a SandCat made by Skill. It's
the smallest and lightest that I've seen. This tool works very well on
straight runs, like smoothing down to a cut line on sheet. Use your snips
to cut outside the line and take it down to the line with the belt sander.
I also use the belt sander to smooth the rough, sheared edges of flat sheet
and ribs and bulkheads before using the "V" double edge deburring tool. The
tool seems to chatter less if smoothed before using the tool.
For getting into tight places, I use 2 and 3 inch diameter Scotch-Brite
sanding discs that I bought from Avery. You can also use the Scotch-Brite
discs on the same arbor. For getting into corners, I'll use a 3" sanding
disc on a 2" disc holder. You can start with a coarse sanding disc, work
through finer sanding discs and finish up with the Scotch-Brite discs. For
using the discs, I have a cheap, air driven, right angle drill (bought from
Harbor Freight---but it has worked fine for years--surprise). The sanding
discs and right angle air drill would work great when making the top and
bottom angles on the forward spar of the horizontal stab. Once you use it
for that application, you'll find that there are many places where these
tools can be used to speed things up considerably while doing a first rate job.
Bob Skinner RV-6 438 hrs. Buffalo, WY bskinr(at)trib.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Skinner <bskinr(at)trib.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: do it yourself strobes . . . |
>> I agree with GV on this one. The infamous Laws of Physics say that
>> you will see a 400cp strobe from TWICE the distance of a 100cp strobe. It
>> is up to each builder to decide if this is good, bad, or needed for
>> him/her. But with the density of traffic in the Los Angeles basin, I
>> personally will go for strobes that can be seen by others at the greater
>> distance. Twice the distance is a significant number ....
>>
>> ... just my thoughts .... Gil Alexander
And, I agree with both Gil and GV. I sure hate to spend more money but,
when safety is concerned, it does make it easier to part with some bucks. I
could have easily fitted my nav lights under the wing tip lenses and the
installation most likely would have passed inspection. But, when I though
of why they were required, for safety, I put them on the outside of the tips.
In addition to strobes, I'm very much in favor of pulsing landing/taxi
lights. In my experience, these show up even better during daylight hours
than do strobes. Of course, the coverage of these lights are limited. One
thing that has always stuck in my mind: I flew 60 miles with a 6A on the
north side of the Platte river and me on the south side, heading home from a
EAA chapter meeting one afternoon. We were at the same altitude and we both
had our strobes on. We talked back & forth on the radio and never saw each
other during the whole trip. Pretty spooky. Makes you wonder how many
airplanes we fly fairly close to but never see.
Bob Skinner RV-6 438 hrs. Buffalo, WY bskinr(at)trib.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gil Alexander <gila(at)flash.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: do it yourself strobes . . . |
Yes,
... and old VWs with 6 volt lighting system and DIM headlights are
still legal, but would you want to drive one on a windy, dark road at
night??? I'm just surprised that the standard seems to be "boy,
that's bright!" when observed inside the hangar. These lights are designed
for being seen from miles away, so at least do your eyeball checks from the
other end of the runway. Actually, older aircraft don't need any strobes,
but try spotting them in the traffic pattern at night at any metropolitan
airport.
Gil (do the range check) Alexander
>
>
>> RVers,
>> I agree with GV on this one. The infamous Laws of Physics say
that
>> you will see a 400cp strobe from TWICE the distance of a 100cp strobe. It
>> is up to each builder to decide if this is good, bad, or needed for
>> him/her. But with the density of traffic in the Los Angeles basin, I
>> personally will go for strobes that can be seen by others at the greater
>> distance. Twice the distance is a significant number ....
>>
>> ... just my thoughts .... Gil Alexander
>>
>
> After following this thread for a couple of weeks now, no one seems to
>mention that for all aircraft Type Certificated before August 1971, they
don't
>have to meet the 400CP minimum standard set forth in FAR 23. If the FAA
>thought that this was such an important safety issue, why haven't they
>required that all aircraft have to upgrade to meet the 400CP standard? I
agree
>that the higher the output, the better the chances that someone will see you
>from a farther distance. But has anyone with the Whelen system actually
tested
>the output of their system with a certified and calibrated tester? What about
>after their system has been in use for some time, like maybe checking it at
>every annual? Ok, now how long will it take for the average output to drop
>below 400CP? How do you know that your Whelen system is REALLY putting out
>>400CP? Just because they said so? Prove it to yourself. Test 'em.
>
>Mark LaBoyteaux
>RV-6A N106RV
>MLaboyteau(at)aol.com
>Broken Arrow, Ok
mailto:gila(at)flash.net
Gil Alexander,
Los Angeles, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: Zoche aero diesel |
Is there really
>150-200 cheap horse power out there?
>
> Hey, but then again you guys may have plenty of money.
>
>Jerry Isler
>This is My Soap Box and I'm Standing on it.
>Donalsonville, Ga.
>
Jerry,
Yeah, the Mazda 13B rotary will provide that kind of power and has
successfully done so in Tracy Crook's RV-4 for 600+ hours and counting.
Firewall forward cost of less than $6000 and overhaul cost in the $1000 -
$2000 range.
You had to know you were gonna get this kind of response from one of us
alternative engine crazies when you hit the send button. Fact is that a
purpose built aircraft engine will never have the necessary large market to
support cheap pricing. You gotta look at automotive engines to find a large
enough market to drive the price down.
Mike Wills
RV-4 fuse
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gamma Sigma Pvt Ltd <gammasig(at)pci.co.zw> |
| Subject: | COWLLING ASSEMBLY PROBLEMS |
HI THERE FROM ZIMBABWE,
MY NAME IS GRAHAM LEATHES, HAVE BEEN BUILDING AN RV 6 FOR THE LAST NEARLY
FIVE YEARS. ENGINE HUNG ( 0320 B1B FROM AN APACHE ) STILL WORKING ON
FIREWALL FORWARD STUFF.
MY HICK-UP AT THE MOMENT IS THAT HAVING COMPLETED THE COWLING, I AM HAVING A
REAL PROBLEM WHEN TRYING TO FIT THE TOP SECTION. THIS IS BECAUSE YOU CANNT
LINE UP THE HORIZONTAL HINGE SEGMENTS SIMILTANIOUSLY WITH THOSE HINGE
SEGMENTS AROUND THE TOP OF THE FUSELAGE. HAVE TRIED VAN'S ON THIS - HE SAYS
THAT IT'S A MATTER OF TECHNIQUE, BUT NO MATTRER WHAT WE TRY, IT'S ALWAYS A
HALF HOUR STRUGGLE AND IF WE HAD PAIT ON, IT WOULD NEED A RESPRAY AFTER
EVERY REMOVAL/REFIT.
I KNOW SOMEONE ELSE OUT THERE IN THE WORLD OF RV'S MUST OF HAD THIS SAME
PROBLEM, PLEASE HEEEEELP!!!!!!!!!
BEST REGARDS FROM SUNNY ZIMBABWE
P.S. RECENTLY BEEN JOINEDBY AN RV 6A BUILDER BY THE NAME OF JAN RIJKERS.
G. S. LEATHES
Gamma Sigma Pvt Ltd
e-mail: gammasig(at)pci.co.zw
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Harrill <KHarrill(at)osa.state.sc.us> |
| Subject: | Constant Speed Props |
Richard,
I recently bought a 1968 Mooney M20C salvage aircraft just for the
engine and prop. The engine is an O-360 A1D and the prop is the same
one Van sells, except the blades are 2" longer. I think the only
difference in the engine (from the O-360 A1A that Van sells) has to do
with the accessories, probably different mags. The governor is a
Woodward. This may not be the information you need, but maybe it will
help some.
Ken Harrill
RV-6, fuselage
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Bibb [mailto:rbibb(at)fore.com]
Sent: Monday, August 10, 1998 10:04 AM
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV-List: Constant Speed Props
OK after 150 hours I am ready to bite the bullet.
Instead of building an
new RV-8 I have decided to "upgrade" the -4 with a
constant speed prop and
180hp engine.
The engine search now begins and I have all the info
needed to determine
what engine will or won't work in the -4. But when it
comes to props I have
been unable to find a similar "decoder ring" to decipher
Hartzell's
numbering scheme. The archives asy "get a Mooney
prop"...
Does anyone have more info on whcih models are
appropriate? Any wisdom on
Hartzell vs. McCauley, Hartzel governors vs. Woodward?
I'm not gonna start this until I have all the parts as I
don't want to be
down forever so I am starting to look now.
Richard E. Bibb
RV-4 N144KT
Oak Hill, VA
rbibb(at)fore.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: Aeroflash strobes (& ice lights) |
I just divided $600 (approx cost of Learjet style strobe setup) by the number
of night flight hours in my logbook since I bought my Debonair six years ago.
The Deb actually has a quaint rotating beacon. The lighting would have cost
more than $200 per hour.
When I fly at night (rarely) I always have flight following or am IFR. I
believe this works better than "see and be seen" tho the combo is safest.
Don't get me wrong, I love the brilliant double flash strobes. I live two
miles from San Jose Intl and see lotsa everything come and go there. Some of
the easiest to see are the double flash four seaters.
And the airliners with ice lights. Shouldn't we install ice lights?
I am debating whether to continue installing my $80 WHELEN FAA APPROVED
halogen red/white beacon on the top of the Vstab. Not pretty.
Hal Kempthorne RV-6AQ -- Fitting canopy rear skirts
halk(at)sybase.com Santa Clara, CA. Debonair N6134V @ SJC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com |
| Subject: | Pressure checking hoses |
Since the latest RV accident, and because of a couple earlier accidents
mentioned in old RV-ators, I would like to get my oil lines pressure
checked. Originally, I had a friend who was an A&P mechanic make them. I
believe he did a good job, but don't know for sure how they were made or
how good they are since they were never tested.
Does anyone know how to go about testing them. Are there companies that
specialize in this type of thing where I can mail them to, or even visit
if I can find one near Denver?
Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Darrell Anderson" <d.l.anderson(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: do it yourself strobes . . . |
> Mark LaBoyteaux wrote:
> Ok, now how long will it take for the average output to drop
> below 400CP? How do you know that your Whelen system is REALLY putting out
> >400CP?
Can anyone enlighten me (pun?) on what causes the white deposit inside a strobe
lens?
This is NOT in the case of a failed strobe tube, as the strobe will still flash.
Does it decrease the CP output appreciably?
Darrell Anderson
RV-4 (wings w/Whelen strobes)
Montana
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Chernich" <Ron_Chernich(at)clmt.com> |
I'm going off-line for a while (visit home to Oz) and to prevent my email
clogging with the collective undisputed wisdom and wit of the group, I
followed the "unsubscribe" instructions. Unfortunately the list managment
program tells me I'm not a member of the list and the emails keep on
commin'! Suggestions welcome.
Ron Chernich (Portland, OR)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: OSH (DON'T make me say AirVenture) |
Hi all,
Don't get me started on either an OSHKOSH report or the name. Oh, ok.
Going there, I probably shoulda driven. TSTMS everywhere. No place for
amateur IFR. As I was zipping by Madison I called approach and they suggested
I check ATIS soonest as Oshkosh was said to be full! Here I had it figured I
would check in a Ripon at 2:45 - fifteen minutes before closing on the first
official day! So I diverted to Fon du Lac. Bummer, a flyin where you arrive
by shuttle bus. I see why the name change as this is not a flyin anymore. I
suppose if I had my priorities right, I'd retire and go to Oshkosh a week
ahead and leave a week late. I understand they had 12,000 fly in!
I got a demo ride in the blue RV6A. Never been flying in one before. What a
kick! At first, I moved the stick all around to get the feel but I think Tom
Green thought I was just having trouble with straight and level - like who
wants to do that? I may be dreaming but I feel like I looked straight up and
saw the little island in Lake W. Maybe it was just a greenish cloud.
I got my photos back - only shot three rolls - and started to show them to my
wife when I realized they were nearly all extreme closeups of various RV6
construction details. If you need one of these, let me know I'll reprint and
mail for costs. Maybe someone with a web page would post some? Mostly now,
canopy details.
I stayed in Camp Scholler in my friend, Jack Armstrong's camper which he built
himself. He needs to build an RV, it would be a show piece. Thanks, Jack.
Sure like my new Skymap!
Hal Kempthorne RV-6AQ -- Fitting canopy rear skirts
halk(at)sybase.com Santa Clara, CA. Debonair N6134V @ SJC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Bibb <rbibb(at)fore.com> |
| Subject: | Constant Speed Props |
Any info is appreciated...
Thanks.
RB
>
>Richard,
>
>I recently bought a 1968 Mooney M20C salvage aircraft just for the
>engine and prop. The engine is an O-360 A1D and the prop is the same
>one Van sells, except the blades are 2" longer. I think the only
>difference in the engine (from the O-360 A1A that Van sells) has to do
>with the accessories, probably different mags. The governor is a
>Woodward. This may not be the information you need, but maybe it will
>help some.
>
>
>Ken Harrill
>RV-6, fuselage
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Bibb [mailto:rbibb(at)fore.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 1998 10:04 AM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: Constant Speed Props
>
>
>
> OK after 150 hours I am ready to bite the bullet.
>Instead of building an
> new RV-8 I have decided to "upgrade" the -4 with a
>constant speed prop and
> 180hp engine.
>
> The engine search now begins and I have all the info
>needed to determine
> what engine will or won't work in the -4. But when it
>comes to props I have
> been unable to find a similar "decoder ring" to decipher
>Hartzell's
> numbering scheme. The archives asy "get a Mooney
>prop"...
>
> Does anyone have more info on whcih models are
>appropriate? Any wisdom on
> Hartzell vs. McCauley, Hartzel governors vs. Woodward?
>
> I'm not gonna start this until I have all the parts as I
>don't want to be
> down forever so I am starting to look now.
>
> Richard E. Bibb
> RV-4 N144KT
> Oak Hill, VA
> rbibb(at)fore.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Richard E. Bibb Direct: 703-245-4505
Vice President, Federal Operations Main: 703-245-4544
Fore Systems Federal, Inc. FAX: 703-245-4500
1595 Spring Hill Road Pager: 800-719-1246
5th Floor
Vienna, VA 22182
We're from Pittsburgh, we make networks that last.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: do it yourself strobes . . . |
>Yes,
> ... and old VWs with 6 volt lighting system and DIM headlights are
>still legal, but would you want to drive one on a windy, dark road at
>night??? I'm just surprised that the standard seems to be "boy,
>that's bright!" when observed inside the hangar. These lights are designed
>for being seen from miles away, so at least do your eyeball checks from the
>other end of the runway. Actually, older aircraft don't need any strobes,
>but try spotting them in the traffic pattern at night at any metropolitan
>airport.
Yeeeaaahhhh BUT. The increase from 100 to 400 CP in light output
is not all it's made up to be. Fortunately, the eye and supporting
firmware is a very logarithmic sensing device - fortunate for us
who use them or they'd be VERY hard to use over the range of
bright sunlight to starlight illumination levels. In a base 10
logarithmic scale, the increase from 100 to 400 would result in
only a few percent increase in perceived intensity . . . I forget what
the average human eye was scaled at but I think it's response
curve is steeper than a base 10 curve. Suffice it to say that
standing side by side at a couple miles distance, you would be
able to pick out the 400 CP device over a 100 CP device.
However, the notion that it's 4x more likely to get somebody's
attenion is pure wishing.
The annals of aviation tragedy are full of cases where airplanes
come together simply beause two or more pilots had their heads
down. Whether your strobes are 10, 100 or 400 CP, they won't be
seen if nobody is looking for them. This is one objection I have
to things like moving maps, engine analyzers, etc. Neat devices
from a performance/technolgy perspective but they can intrude
in dangerous ways upon a pilot's responsability to fly the airplane
and avoid hitting things.
IMHO, change to strobe rules was but another example of a group
of rule makers sitting around the table saying, "okay guys,
what shall we do THIS week?" On the face of it, they appear
to be doing good things. In reality, airplanes will continue
to hit things for reasons that regulation and punishment cannot
affect.
Heads up, enjoy the scenery, save systems diagnosis and repairs
for the hangar, and watch for they guy with the strobes built
from an article in a magazine . . . if you're looking for him,
you WILL see him.
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========o00o=(_)=o00o==========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randall Henderson <randall(at)edt.com> |
| Subject: | Re: COWLLING ASSEMBLY PROBLEMS |
> MY HICK-UP AT THE MOMENT IS THAT HAVING COMPLETED THE COWLING, I AM HAVING A
> REAL PROBLEM WHEN TRYING TO FIT THE TOP SECTION. THIS IS BECAUSE YOU CANNT
> LINE UP THE HORIZONTAL HINGE SEGMENTS SIMILTANIOUSLY WITH THOSE HINGE
> SEGMENTS AROUND THE TOP OF THE FUSELAGE. HAVE TRIED VAN'S ON THIS - HE SAYS
> THAT IT'S A MATTER OF TECHNIQUE, BUT NO MATTRER WHAT WE TRY, IT'S ALWAYS A
> HALF HOUR STRUGGLE AND IF WE HAD PAIT ON, IT WOULD NEED A RESPRAY AFTER
> EVERY REMOVAL/REFIT.
I went through the same thing, and actually I got the answer from Van's.
With their new S cowl they have a really nice new drawing that shows,
among other things, the horizontal hinge line being "tipped" so that at
the front, the hinge eyes are centered on the edge, but at the rear, the
bottom hinge eyes are completely exposed (i.e. above the level of the
edge) on the bottom cowl, and completely hidden on the top cowl. This
completely eliminates the problem.
When I got my cowl they didn't have this drawing done yet and I hadn't
heard of this technique, so I just drilled my hinges centered all the
way down. Soon after, I got the drawing and saw the technique and said
"DOH!". But by that time I had it all riveted on. Well, after a few
weeks of fighting with it I bit the bullet, drilled the hinges off and
re-aligned them, drilling new holes between the old ones. I filled the
old holes with epoxy/microbaloons. Now it comes on and off quite
easily. I'm very glad I made the change.
Randall Henderson, RV-6 (engine/finish)
Portland, OR
http://www.edt.com/homewing
randall(at)edt.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Corbitt" <donc(at)analogia.com> |
| Subject: | Lists of available N-numbers |
(Yes, I know this is large, but it is a good candidate for storing in the
archives. This list won't get used up very frequently)
I've seen a bunch of discussion about "what N-numbers are available". So I
decided to do something about it.
1) Download databases from FAA site
2) Strip out N-numbers from Master and Reserved databases
3) Load into SQL Server, fold, spindle, and mutilate
4) Select and sort, simple VB program to generate all possible numbers,
remove ones already in the database.
Here is a list of all 1, 2, and 3 character N-numbers that are _not_ on the
FAA database of in-use or reserved values. I also made a list of all 5
character IDs ending in RV - still a lot to choose from.
If you want a sorted list of available 4 character n-numbers, send email to
. You will get back a 400KB file listing all avail
numbers smaller than 5 characters.
Note that this list might be out of date, or I may have misunderstood how
the system works. But it seems to give good results in my simple testing.
I deleted the list of available 3 digit numbers from this email (about
17KB). If people think I should post it to the list for posterity I can do
that.
There are no "RV"'s left in 1, 2, or 3 character numbers, but there were 4
such patterns left in the 4 character list.
***** Available One Character N-numbers *****
***** Available Two Character N-Numbers *****
3Y, 6S, 82,
***** Available Three Character N-Numbers *****
10B, 117, 12H, 12S, 131, 138, 13N, 147, 14A, 14L, 14X, 161, 16B,
16H, 16Q, 16T, 17K, 17L, 183, 18W, 192, 196, 19E, 19S, 1A0, 1A1, 1A2, 1A3,
1A4,
1A5, 1A6, 1A7, 1A8, 1A9, 1AD, 1B0, 1B1, 1B2, 1B3, 1B4, 1B5, 1B6, 1B7, 1B8,
1B9,
1C0, 1C1, 1C2, 1C3, 1C4, 1C5, 1C6, 1C7, 1C8, 1C9, 1CG, 1D0, 1D1, 1D2, 1D3,
1D4,
1D5, 1D6, 1D7, 1D8, 1D9, 1E0, 1E1, 1E2, 1E3, 1E4, 1E5, 1E6, 1E7, 1E8, 1E9,
1EK,
[snip - too long a list - 17KB. Send email to to get
the entire list]
9XA, 9XE, 9XF, 9XG, 9XK, 9XM, 9XN, 9XS, 9XV, 9XW, 9Y0, 9Y1, 9Y2, 9Y3, 9Y4,
9Y5,
9Y6, 9Y7, 9Y8, 9Y9, 9YA, 9YC, 9YD, 9YE, 9YF, 9YG, 9YJ, 9YL, 9YM, 9YN, 9YQ,
9YU,
9YW, 9Z0, 9Z1, 9Z2, 9Z3, 9Z4, 9Z5, 9Z6, 9Z7, 9Z8, 9Z9, 9ZA, 9ZB, 9ZE, 9ZF,
9ZH,
9ZJ, 9ZK, 9ZL, 9ZN, 9ZP, 9ZQ, 9ZR, 9ZS, 9ZT, 9ZU, 9ZV, 9ZW, 9ZY,
***** Available Four Character N-Numbers *****
[Too long a list - 400KB. Send email to to get the
entire list]
***** Available Five Character N-Numbers ending in "RV" *****
102RV, 105RV, 109RV, 112RV, 115RV, 116RV, 120RV, 122RV,
124RV, 125RV, 128RV, 129RV, 130RV, 131RV, 132RV, 136RV,
137RV, 139RV, 140RV, 141RV, 142RV, 145RV, 147RV, 149RV,
151RV, 152RV, 153RV, 154RV, 156RV, 157RV, 158RV, 159RV,
162RV, 163RV, 165RV, 166RV, 167RV, 168RV, 169RV, 170RV,
172RV, 174RV, 175RV, 176RV, 179RV, 181RV, 183RV, 184RV,
186RV, 189RV, 190RV, 191RV, 192RV, 193RV, 197RV, 198RV,
202RV, 203RV, 204RV, 208RV, 209RV, 212RV, 213RV, 214RV,
216RV, 217RV, 218RV, 219RV, 220RV, 221RV, 223RV, 225RV,
226RV, 227RV, 228RV, 230RV, 231RV, 232RV, 233RV, 236RV,
237RV, 238RV, 239RV, 240RV, 241RV, 243RV, 245RV, 247RV,
250RV, 251RV, 252RV, 253RV, 254RV, 255RV, 256RV, 257RV,
258RV, 259RV, 260RV, 261RV, 263RV, 264RV, 265RV, 266RV,
267RV, 268RV, 269RV, 270RV, 272RV, 273RV, 274RV, 275RV,
276RV, 277RV, 278RV, 279RV, 280RV, 281RV, 282RV, 283RV,
285RV, 286RV, 287RV, 288RV, 289RV, 290RV, 291RV, 295RV,
296RV, 297RV, 298RV, 299RV, 301RV, 302RV, 303RV, 304RV,
305RV, 306RV, 307RV, 308RV, 309RV, 311RV, 312RV, 313RV,
314RV, 315RV, 318RV, 319RV, 320RV, 323RV, 325RV, 326RV,
327RV, 328RV, 329RV, 330RV, 331RV, 334RV, 335RV, 336RV,
337RV, 338RV, 339RV, 340RV, 341RV, 344RV, 347RV, 348RV,
349RV, 350RV, 351RV, 352RV, 353RV, 354RV, 355RV, 356RV,
357RV, 359RV, 361RV, 362RV, 363RV, 364RV, 366RV, 367RV,
369RV, 370RV, 371RV, 372RV, 373RV, 374RV, 375RV, 376RV,
377RV, 378RV, 379RV, 380RV, 381RV, 382RV, 383RV, 384RV,
385RV, 386RV, 387RV, 388RV, 389RV, 390RV, 391RV, 392RV,
393RV, 394RV, 395RV, 396RV, 397RV, 398RV, 399RV, 402RV,
403RV, 406RV, 407RV, 408RV, 409RV, 410RV, 411RV, 412RV,
413RV, 414RV, 415RV, 416RV, 417RV, 418RV, 419RV, 420RV,
424RV, 425RV, 426RV, 427RV, 428RV, 429RV, 430RV, 431RV,
432RV, 433RV, 434RV, 435RV, 436RV, 437RV, 438RV, 439RV,
440RV, 443RV, 445RV, 446RV, 447RV, 450RV, 451RV, 452RV,
453RV, 455RV, 456RV, 457RV, 458RV, 459RV, 460RV, 461RV,
462RV, 463RV, 464RV, 465RV, 467RV, 468RV, 469RV, 472RV,
473RV, 474RV, 475RV, 477RV, 478RV, 479RV, 480RV, 481RV,
482RV, 483RV, 484RV, 486RV, 487RV, 488RV, 489RV, 490RV,
491RV, 492RV, 493RV, 494RV, 495RV, 496RV, 497RV, 498RV,
499RV, 501RV, 502RV, 503RV, 504RV, 505RV, 507RV, 509RV,
510RV, 511RV, 512RV, 513RV, 514RV, 516RV, 517RV, 518RV,
519RV, 520RV, 521RV, 522RV, 523RV, 524RV, 525RV, 526RV,
527RV, 528RV, 529RV, 530RV, 531RV, 532RV, 534RV, 535RV,
536RV, 537RV, 538RV, 539RV, 540RV, 541RV, 542RV, 543RV,
544RV, 545RV, 546RV, 547RV, 548RV, 549RV, 552RV, 553RV,
554RV, 556RV, 557RV, 558RV, 559RV, 560RV, 561RV, 562RV,
563RV, 564RV, 565RV, 568RV, 569RV, 570RV, 571RV, 572RV,
573RV, 574RV, 575RV, 576RV, 577RV, 578RV, 579RV, 580RV,
581RV, 582RV, 583RV, 584RV, 585RV, 586RV, 588RV, 589RV,
590RV, 591RV, 592RV, 593RV, 594RV, 595RV, 596RV, 597RV,
598RV, 601RV, 602RV, 603RV, 604RV, 605RV, 606RV, 607RV,
608RV, 609RV, 610RV, 611RV, 612RV, 613RV, 614RV, 615RV,
616RV, 617RV, 618RV, 619RV, 620RV, 621RV, 622RV, 623RV,
624RV, 625RV, 626RV, 627RV, 628RV, 629RV, 630RV, 631RV,
632RV, 634RV, 635RV, 636RV, 637RV, 638RV, 639RV, 640RV,
643RV, 644RV, 645RV, 646RV, 647RV, 649RV, 650RV, 651RV,
652RV, 653RV, 654RV, 656RV, 657RV, 658RV, 659RV, 660RV,
661RV, 662RV, 663RV, 664RV, 665RV, 667RV, 669RV, 670RV,
671RV, 672RV, 673RV, 674RV, 675RV, 676RV, 677RV, 679RV,
680RV, 681RV, 682RV, 684RV, 685RV, 686RV, 687RV, 688RV,
689RV, 690RV, 692RV, 693RV, 694RV, 696RV, 698RV, 699RV,
701RV, 702RV, 703RV, 705RV, 706RV, 707RV, 708RV, 709RV,
710RV, 713RV, 716RV, 718RV, 719RV, 720RV, 721RV, 722RV,
724RV, 728RV, 730RV, 731RV, 735RV, 739RV, 740RV, 742RV,
743RV, 744RV, 745RV, 746RV, 748RV, 750RV, 751RV, 752RV,
753RV, 754RV, 755RV, 760RV, 761RV, 762RV, 763RV, 764RV,
765RV, 767RV, 768RV, 769RV, 770RV, 771RV, 772RV, 773RV,
778RV, 779RV, 780RV, 781RV, 782RV, 783RV, 784RV, 785RV,
786RV, 787RV, 788RV, 789RV, 790RV, 791RV, 792RV, 793RV,
794RV, 795RV, 796RV, 797RV, 798RV, 799RV, 802RV, 803RV,
804RV, 805RV, 806RV, 807RV, 809RV, 810RV, 812RV, 813RV,
814RV, 816RV, 817RV, 818RV, 819RV, 820RV, 821RV, 823RV,
824RV, 825RV, 827RV, 828RV, 829RV, 830RV, 833RV, 834RV,
836RV, 837RV, 838RV, 839RV, 840RV, 842RV, 843RV, 844RV,
845RV, 846RV, 847RV, 848RV, 849RV, 850RV, 851RV, 852RV,
853RV, 854RV, 855RV, 856RV, 857RV, 858RV, 859RV, 860RV,
861RV, 862RV, 863RV, 864RV, 865RV, 866RV, 867RV, 868RV,
869RV, 870RV, 871RV, 872RV, 873RV, 874RV, 875RV, 876RV,
877RV, 878RV, 879RV, 880RV, 881RV, 882RV, 884RV, 885RV,
886RV, 887RV, 890RV, 891RV, 892RV, 893RV, 895RV, 896RV,
897RV, 899RV, 901RV, 902RV, 903RV, 904RV, 905RV, 906RV,
907RV, 908RV, 909RV, 910RV, 912RV, 913RV, 916RV, 917RV,
918RV, 919RV, 922RV, 923RV, 924RV, 926RV, 927RV, 930RV,
931RV, 932RV, 933RV, 934RV, 935RV, 936RV, 937RV, 938RV,
940RV, 941RV, 942RV, 943RV, 944RV, 946RV, 947RV, 948RV,
949RV, 950RV, 951RV, 952RV, 953RV, 955RV, 956RV, 957RV,
958RV, 959RV, 960RV, 961RV, 962RV, 964RV, 965RV, 968RV,
969RV, 970RV, 971RV, 972RV, 973RV, 974RV, 975RV, 976RV,
977RV, 978RV, 979RV, 980RV, 981RV, 983RV, 984RV, 985RV,
987RV, 988RV, 989RV, 990RV, 992RV, 993RV, 997RV, 998RV,
--
Don Corbitt, donc(at)analogia.com
Experimental Avionics mailing list -
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randall Henderson <randall(at)edt.com> |
Sorry to bother the list with this...
If Ken Gray is on the list please contact me with your phone # or
email address -- a "Reply To" your email address bounced.
Thanks
Randall Henderson
randall(at)edt.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "chalkboy" <chalkboy(at)mweb.co.za> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: New member Re: Zoche Diesel |
-----Original Message-----
From: chalkboy <chalkboy(at)mweb.co.za>
Date: Friday, August 07, 1998 7:49 PM
Subject: New member Re: Zoche Diesel
(This is the second time I have sent this message, somehow it was not
posted!)
>This engine has been at OSH at least 13 years.
>Ask Herr Zoche why he was
>investigated by the German IRS.
>Engine looks great, seems to have all the answers.
>Don't hold your breath.
>Who has heard one run??
>CHALKIE. (So Africa)
>RV-6 Skinning wings, flt control surfaces done.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)miami.gdi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Pitot Tube Placement |
snipped
this weekend I saw a Sonerai that had the pitot tube
> cut off flush with the leading edge of the wing about 1/2 way outboard.
> Would this be accurate?
> Easy to answer this one.....[ used to own a Sonerai ]
> It's not flush with the leading edge,it's a removable 6"
> piece of 1/4 " tubing.
> A lot of Sonerai guy's pull the tube out & stick it in their
> pocket, otherwise people walk into them all the time &
> bend or break them off.
Has anyone tried this on an RV?
Charlie Kuss
RV-8 wings
Boca Raton, Fl.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Simpson" <Dave_Simpson(at)londonweb.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Europa_Mail: Re: do it yourself strobes . . . |
And they interfere with the radio.....
Dave Simpson
----------
> From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Europa_Mail: Re: do it yourself strobes . . .
> Date: 11 August 1998 14:16
>
> >Yes,
> > ... and old VWs with 6 volt lighting system and DIM headlights
are
> >still legal, but would you want to drive one on a windy, dark road at
> >night??? I'm just surprised that the standard seems to be "boy,
> >that's bright!" when observed inside the hangar. These lights are
designed
> >for being seen from miles away, so at least do your eyeball checks from
the
> >other end of the runway. Actually, older aircraft don't need any
strobes,
> >but try spotting them in the traffic pattern at night at any
metropolitan
> >airport.
>
>
> Yeeeaaahhhh BUT. The increase from 100 to 400 CP in light output
> is not all it's made up to be. Fortunately, the eye and supporting
> firmware is a very logarithmic sensing device - fortunate for us
> who use them or they'd be VERY hard to use over the range of
> bright sunlight to starlight illumination levels. In a base 10
> logarithmic scale, the increase from 100 to 400 would result in
> only a few percent increase in perceived intensity . . . I forget what
> the average human eye was scaled at but I think it's response
> curve is steeper than a base 10 curve. Suffice it to say that
> standing side by side at a couple miles distance, you would be
> able to pick out the 400 CP device over a 100 CP device.
> However, the notion that it's 4x more likely to get somebody's
> attenion is pure wishing.
>
> The annals of aviation tragedy are full of cases where airplanes
> come together simply beause two or more pilots had their heads
> down. Whether your strobes are 10, 100 or 400 CP, they won't be
> seen if nobody is looking for them. This is one objection I have
> to things like moving maps, engine analyzers, etc. Neat devices
> from a performance/technolgy perspective but they can intrude
> in dangerous ways upon a pilot's responsability to fly the airplane
> and avoid hitting things.
>
> IMHO, change to strobe rules was but another example of a group
> of rule makers sitting around the table saying, "okay guys,
> what shall we do THIS week?" On the face of it, they appear
> to be doing good things. In reality, airplanes will continue
> to hit things for reasons that regulation and punishment cannot
> affect.
>
> Heads up, enjoy the scenery, save systems diagnosis and repairs
> from an article in a magazine . . . if you're looking for him,
> you WILL see him.
>
>
> Bob . . .
> AeroElectric Connection
>
> ////
> (o o)
> ==========o00o=(_)=o00o==========
> < If you continue to do >
> < What you've always done >
> < You will continue to be >
> < What you've always been. >
> =================================
> ______________________________________________________________________
> The Europa List is supported by Aviators Network UK - info(at)avnet.co.uk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bradley Kidder, Jr." <sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lists of available N-numbers |
Sounds like a good chunk of work on the N-number database deal. The
samples that were in your posting have prompted me to remind you that,
according to reg, numbers don't follow letters, "I" and "O" are taboo, and
the first "0" (zero) must be preceded by a number. That should help reduce
your list somewhat.
Bradley W. Kidder, Jr.
sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net
ICQ# 11770815
URGENT MESSAGES: pagekidder(at)bigfoot.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lists of available N-numbers |
Don Corbitt,
Thanks for the list. On the landings .com page on N numbers it states,
"letters can not be followed by digits." If this is true, your list would
be pruned down substantially.
Ross Mickey
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Pressure checking hoses/alternate hose end supplier |
Listers:
Pressure checking can be done at an FAA approved repair station- they also
will have assy mandrels for those of you using aviation style ends. They
should test the assy up to its rated pressure- 1500 PSI on some. Some
industrial (tractor, loader, etc) hose assy facilities can assemble and test
hose assys also.
Alternate sources follow:
I have used Aeroquip auto style fittings and hose from Summit Racing (non-Part
23 approved) with good success on many airframes so far. I picked these
because I couldn't seem to get those 'approved' "aviation" cutter style ends
to stay on! The hose continually pushed out while I tightened the fitting
(this is cause for rejection of the assy). Very bad. And, certainly, my fault!
The auto style needs no mandrels for assy, and are rated the same pressure as
their aviation brethren. I've never had to re-do a hose end assy with this
type fitting. The only accident I know personally of (I was in the pattern
with a student and heard the mayday) was due to improper assy of aviation hose
ends (Part 23 approved). An RV-4, and it wound up on its top in a plowed
field. Ouch. Now, I've heard of others, but I KNOW of this one. I wonder if
the hose that let go on that -6 was the aviation style (you know- the
difficult-to-assemble ones with the Part 23 blessing)?
These auto style hose ends are not approved in Part 23, and they are cheaper,
(that's 2 strikes for those keeping track) but it might be that they are
better in this (amateur built hose assys) case? I understand these type ends
are sold through another non-Part 23 supplier: Van's Aircraft. GV: You pickin'
up what I'm layin' down?
Hose assy procedure: Clean them boys out as best you can! This statement
eliminates simply blowing air thru 'em- it's not good enough, amigo. Take a
tip from our NRA pals, and use a small pc of rag on a wire or similiar, and
pull the rag thru the hose until it comes out clean. A fellow Rocketman was
ready to ream the Airflow folks until he discovered that hose assy debris had
clogged his flow divider filter, causing his engine to lean out and virtually
stop. This event led him to leave his a/c many miles from OSH this year, and
hop in with with one of his mates. He and his a/c live to fly another day,
thankfully.
While I'm here:
If I have sold you a set of Aeroflash strobes, and you don't want them after
this strobe approval/Part 23 mixup, send 'em back for a cheerful refund.
Disclaimer: as you see in the auto parts stores, 'no refunds on installed
electrical equipment'. In other words: If you put 'em in, keep 'em. I won't
re-sell used parts. I will refer my next call for these units to you, and you
can make your best deal. I will also help with the transfer of the warranty.
Fair enough?
Check (we don't need no steenkeeng Part 23!!) six!
Mark
HR2 283 hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: do it yourself strobes . . . |
nge.lmcda.lmco.com>
>
>Bob Nuckolls wrote: Snip>
>> Plan on needing the dummy load to keep the system voltage from pulsing when
>>this size lamp is flashed. >Wouldn't it be simpler to use two lights one on the left wing and one on the
>>right. The Wiring could be configured such that the dummy load for one was
>>the light of the other i.e. one light is always on. The only voltage
>>fluctuation, apart from the high frequency transient, would be caused by the
>>differing hot to cold resistance of the filament.
Tried that . . . it WOULD have been nice. Problem was to control the
spheres of visability so that both lights were never visible at the
same time. If you could see them both, then from a distance beyond the
visual accuity limits for resolving them as a pair of lights, they
appeared as a single, always illuminated lamp . . . i.e. flashing
stopped. Turned out to be such a hassle that the resitor went in instead.
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========o00o=(_)=o00o==========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stuck starter contactors . . . |
>>Just a thought, and might not be worth the extra complexity, but how about
>>a starter master switch??
One builder responds . . .
>You'll probably have the starter on a fuse or a circuit breaker,
>right? (the wire that activates the solenoid, not the #2 wire to the
>starter!) If it you make the fuse/cb accessable, you should be able
>to pull it if the light goes on. That's what I'm doing.
Another reply . . .
> Don't laugh, I essentially did this on my panel. I added
>an avionics master switch and made it a double-pole, double-throw
>switch. When the avionics master is in the off position, one side
>of the switch powers the starter switch. When in the on position,
>the other side powers the avionics bus. This way I must turn off
>the power to the radios to start the engine. Turning on the radios
>cuts off power to the starter.
and yet another . . .
>THIS is a good idea. I like it, and electric Bob can't argue about it too
>much.
Sorry . . . no help here. The "stuck contactor" is one with
the main contacts welded together. Opening power to the coil
Turning off the battery master DOES shut it off . . . along
the stuck contactor, then having the alternate feed to an
essential bus per our published drawings gets needed goodies
back on line . . . the indicator light is still the
best warning, shutting off the battery master a few seconds
after the warning is the recommended action.
Had a reader melt down a 17 A.H. RG battery because he'd
wired his starter contactor to the hot side of the battery
contactor instead of the switched side . . . had NO way
to shut it off without parking airplane, opening the cowl
and unhooking the battery. Interestingly enough, the pilot
reported that the starter was STILL turning the prop when
he finally got to the wire to unhook it . . . he estimated
two minutes. Those RG batteries are sumpth'n . . .
Folks, this is failure mode effects analysis (FMEA). It's
GOOD that all the ideas get tossed up and either saluted
or shot down. I've done this stuff for a living for 30
years but if you are going to take your place in the sun
you acquire more than a few new skills. Keep up the good
conversation.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Greg Young <gyoung(at)bcm.tmc.edu> |
| Subject: | Lists of available N-numbers |
Good work but I believe the N-number rules preclude any trailing digits
after the letters - so your list will get considerably shorter. Must be
1-6 digits or 1-5 digits followed by 1 letter or 1-4 digits followed by 2
letters. Also the letters "I" and "O" are not allowed if memory serves.
Greg Young
RV-6 N6GY (reserved) finishing kit
> 1A5, 1A6, 1A7, 1A8, 1A9, 1AD, 1B0, 1B1, 1B2, 1B3, 1B4, 1B5, 1B6, 1B7,
1B8,
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Cocker <JCocker(at)ibm.net> |
My solution to this was to add an assessory power plug (remember when it
used to be called a cigarette lighter plug?) on the panel which is live all
the time. It has its own 15 amp fuse. This would not be enough power for a
jump start, but after 10 or fifteen minutes, it will charge, and warm the
battery enough for an attempt. It can also be used to plug in a solar power
unit.
In the winter, when it is way below zero, warming the battery is just as
important as having it charged up. In fact I have never had to use it, the
Lycoming starts so well, it rarely goes over two compressions before it
fires.
John Cocker RV6A 200 hours
PS Congratulations to Terry for the "Outstanding Workmanship Award" at
Oshkosh - It was well deserved.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Nose Gear Failures on 6A's |
Dye-checked mine today at 21 hrs TT but after several porpoised landings - and
have the pink-stained fingers to prove it! Fortunately no cracks showed up
except in the fiberglass wrap, which had split on the top side from the top
down a good 3 inches, due no doubt to gear leg flexing. The molded-on
fiberglass fairing interfered with inspection any farther down the leg than
1/2 inch below the "boss" on the aft side, and for about 1 and 1/2 in on the
fwd side. A call to Tom at Van's indicated that Fred's leg had failed in the
radius of the lower boss, so it turns out that the area of greatest concern
was accessible to visual inspection. That's good, since I didn't want to
grind away any fiberglass to get at the steel.
Tom's impression was that I didn't know how to fly this airplane yet if it was
porpoising, and if the nosewheel touched before the speed had bled off to
about 25, I was doing something sloppy. I fear he is right. This is where
being a taildragger pilot would come in handy, landing with the nose way high
and in full-stall. Holding a bit of power in the flair is also recommended.
Short field landings are best postponed until the ordinary landing is mastered
:-(
-BB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric Connection Turn Key Wiring Kits |
>
>Bob Nuckolls,
>
>In a recent post you mentioned...
>
>" A feature of one of our turn-key wiring kits will include solid state
>relays
> for nav, landing, taxi lights and pitot heat . . . no heavy currents
> through panel mounted switches."
>
>What are these kits? What do they include? How much do they cost?
>
>Ross Mickey
>
These are in the development stages now. They will be 90+ percent
of all the wiring for an electrical system including pre-assembled,
wired, backlighted switch panels for ALL switches. A power distribution
panel including main bus and essential busses tapped with rows of
ATC fuses, low voltage warn, alternator regulator (with end of charge
setback -and- temperature compensation (optional), ov protection,
transient protection, sold state relays for loads over 5 amps (landing,
taxi, nav, pitot heat). All connections made through Amp Metrimate
connectors with gold plated, crimped pins. Harness between switch
panel and power panel is pre-wired. Kit includes starter contactor,
battery contactor, alternator b-lead fuse/shunt assembly. There will
be plenty of protected bus taps for avionics, instruments, etc. The
kit takes care of the firewall penetrations with 5/16" brass
studs for starter feed and ground. Kit includes ground strap between
firewall and crankcase. Kit includes all "fat" wires with terminals
pre-installed. Tool for installing pins is included. Ground bus
is on the power distribution board.
These kits will be proofed on airplanes in George Orndorff's hangar
kit is installed, the only wires left will be individual strands
to nav lights, strobe suppply, landing/taxi lights, and pitot heat
(optional). Targeted installation time is 3 hours.
Don't know about costs yet . . . but much less expensive than you
could yourself for the same quality of components. These will be
the quietest electrical systems ever installed on a single engine
airplane. We'll proof the RV series kits first. Scaled down versions
are planned for KF, Europa, etc. Full up, dual-alternator versions
are planned for bigger Lancairs and Glasairs.
Been sketching these ideas out for over a year. Will get serious
on the CAD drawings as soon a Rev 8 goes to press. Would like to
proof the first kits sometime this winter. We're negotiating for
skilled assembly labor to put these together and need to be in
full production before OSH next year. Look for us in our own
booth.
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========o00o=(_)=o00o==========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rvator97(at)aol.com |
Re: electric flaps.... I am seriously considering changing to elec flaps on
my 6A.
Anybody done this conversion on a flying airplane? How difficult is it?
Walt.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Homebuilt Strobes |
I have but one questions regarding strobes. Will I be able to get my plane IFR
certified with cheap strobes? Anyone know?
Brian Eckstein
6A Fuse, $28. strobe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Kitz <jkitz(at)greenapple.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pressure checking hoses/alternate hose end supplier |
Mlfred(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Listers:
>
> Pressure checking can be done at an FAA approved repair station- they also
> will have assy mandrels for those of you using aviation style ends. They
> should test the assy up to its rated pressure- 1500 PSI on some. Some
> industrial (tractor, loader, etc) hose assy facilities can assemble and test
> hose assys also.
>
One on the largest hose and fitting manufacturers in the world is
Parker. They will have the hose you need in any pressure rating and any
fitting you might need. They will crimp fittings on at just the length
you need and pressure test them for you. Their catalog is also very
helpful in identifying the fitting you need. Most fittings are
available in steel, al, ss, and brass.
Contact the nearest Parker dealer in the world by calling
1-800-see parker and tell them the country you live in.
John Kitz
N721JK
Ohio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: cracks in cowl |
<< << Had some pretty ugly cracks develop on my lower cowl, (around the
airscoop)
after only 45hrs. Sanded the paint and filler off along the entire joint
area,
laid a couple of layers of glass over it, re-filled, sanded and had it re-
painted. Now, after only 3hrs it is doing it again! The crack is much
smaller
this time but there never the less.
Any thoughts as to why this is happening? Anyone else experience this? >>
>>
I just found my cracks today... in exactly the area you describe. Mine4
appear only gel-coat deep, and look spidery. They are on both sides, at the
lower inside "corner" of the cowl inlets. I'm hoping some reinforcement will
stave off further development of these cracks.
My setup is the O-320 with the FP Sensenich on the RV-6A.
-Bill Boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Prop Governor Pad Plate? |
Mitch,
Turns out the SI only applies to engines with two mags driven by a single drive
element (according to Lycoming). Doesn't apply to my O-360A1A.
Vans response to my request for help was "I am afraid this is a question for the
governor people... they have technical people that can handle this question and
it will guarantee a good install."
Lycoming said use the gasket with the screen (screen not reuqired but is "a good
idea"), and be sure to put a good gasket sealer on the gasket, since the governor
increases oil pressure up to about 200 psi. I really enjoyed Lycomings
descripting of bolting the governor to the engine... "use new nuts, and tighten
them as tight as you can." (This gives rise to visions of a 6 foot extension on
the
wrench....I think I'll just use the standard torque values.)
Woodward's number is (surprise) in GV's Yeller Pages. I'll give them a call
tomorrow.
Good luck.
Tim
On 10 Aug 98, at 11:52, Mitch Faatz wrote:
From: Mitch Faatz <mfaatz(at)sagenttech.com>
Subject: RE: RV-List: Prop Governor Pad Plate?
> Tim -
>
> Let me know what you find out about this! After looking at that plastic
> piece with the screen, I decided it didn't look like it belonged on the
> engine. That is, it looked like it was supposed to stay with the plastic
> temporary cap that came on the governor. I couldn't figure out what it
> was for, but it sure seemed like it was designed to stay on that plastic
> cap and not be taken off. So I just put the governor on the engine with
> the thin gasket already there (under the governor pad cap).
>
>
> - Mitch
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tim Lewis [SMTP:timrv6a(at)earthlink.net]
> > Sent: Saturday, August 08, 1998 8:03 PM
> > To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> > Cc: btobias(at)world-net.net; tobiasb(at)fsi020.flightsafety.com
> > Subject: RV-List: Prop Governor Pad Plate?
> >
> >
> > Listers,
> >
> > A recent EAA chapter newsletter pointed out Lycoming Service
> > Instruction
> > 1438, "Propeller Governor Pad Plate P/N LW-12347". The text of the SI
> > says that the use of the plate and two gaskets is necessary "with some
> > propeller
> >
> > governors to eliminate the possibility of oil leakage between the
> > propeller
> > governor and the accessory housing."
> >
> > On my O-360 A1A (from Van's) I've installed a Woodward governor (also
> > from Van's). The governor came with a single flexible gasket-looking
> > thing with an integral screen. How is one supposed to mount the prop
> > governor? I'd assumed that the gasket/screen thing was to go between the
> > governor and the accessory case. Now I'm wondering if I need the plate
> > that SI 1438 refers to, and/or the MS 9144-01 gasket or 72053 gasket
> > illustrated in SI 1438.
> >
> > Any experience to share?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Tim
> > _+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_
> > Tim Lewis
> > N47TD (reserved) RV-6AQ #60023 on gear, engine mounted
> > Springfield VA
> > http://home.earthlink.net/~timrv6a
> > timrv6a(at)iname.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_
Tim Lewis
N47TD (reserved) RV-6AQ #60023 on gear, engine mounted
Springfield VA
http://home.earthlink.net/~timrv6a
timrv6a(at)iname.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Installing Lightspeed Electronic Ignition |
On 8 Aug 98, at 23:54, Tim Lewis wrote:
> The other scary part was drilling and tapping the trigger bolts into the
> flywheel. I found it disconcerting to see how close the hole was to the
> edge of the "pulley flange" part of the starter ring. It turns out that
> one can drill a small (#40) hole from the outside of the ring into the
> interior of the ring, then drill and tap from the INSIDE of the ring. The
> beauty of this method is you don't have to drill all the way back out, so
> you don't have to drill the big (#21) hole all the way thru the "pulley
> flange" portion of the starter gear. (One only needs to tap about 3/8" of
> the inner portion of the hole.)
I discussed this with Klaus (the manufacturer) today. He said he doesn't
describe using this method in his instructions because if he did "one person in
10 would break the tap off in the flywheel" which would be very bad. He asked
me to tell the list that one should use a bottoming tap in this application. (I
didn't, I was just careful to STOP when the tap got to the end of the enlarged
section of the hole.).
Tim
_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_
Tim Lewis
N47TD (reserved) RV-6AQ #60023 on gear, engine mounted
Springfield VA
http://home.earthlink.net/~timrv6a
timrv6a(at)iname.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Finn Lassen <finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Zoche aero diesel |
How do you get these high numbers. More like $300 - $600, right?
Finn
Mike Wills wrote:
> Yeah, the Mazda 13B rotary will provide that kind of power and has
> successfully done so in Tracy Crook's RV-4 for 600+ hours and counting.
> Firewall forward cost of less than $6000 and overhaul cost in the $1000
> - $2000 range.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mitch Faatz <mfaatz(at)SagentTech.com> |
| Subject: | Pressure checking hoses/alternate hose end supplier |
>
>Contact the nearest Parker dealer in the world by calling
>1-800-see parker and tell them the country you live in.
Try 1-800-C-PARKER
Also, http://www.parker.com/maps/index.html lets you look up
locations by region, etc.
Mitchell Faatz N727MF (reserved) RV-6AQME
San Jose, CA Mounting emp and fitting control rods...
President/Newsletter Editor Bay Area RVators
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Zilik <zilik(at)excelgeo.com> |
| Subject: | Machine Countersink Question |
Listers,
Just spent the weekend fitting my instrument panel on my 6A slider.
Slow and tedious work. I made the panel removable using 509-8R8
screws. I am having problems with my 3 flute piloted countersink
chattering in the holes. I have tried boelube, slow speeds, high
speeds and other such things and it still chatters in the hole. How
the heck does one nice countersunk holes with no chattering?
Gary Zilik
RV-6A s/n 22993 (just ordered 0-360-A1A from Aero Sport Power,
Kamloops BC.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael L. Weller" <midibu(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Homebuilt Strobes |
22>
>
>I have but one questions regarding strobes. Will I be able to get my
plane IFR certified with cheap strobes? Anyone know?
>
>Brian Eckstein
>6A Fuse, $28. strobe
>
There is no requirement to have a strobe to get IFR certification.
That's a fact.
In IMC, you will probably want to turn it off.
Mike
Mike Weller
midibu(at)mindspring.com (preferred) or michael.l.weller(at)lmco.com
RV-8 (under construction)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MoeJoe <moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net> |
| Subject: | Re: second thoughts-nose gear |
Hiya Scott. What did you guys use to paint the inside of the cockpit of
the factory RV-8A at Oshkosh? It looked like it was holding up pretty
well to all the people climbing in and out. What did you prime it with?
Moe Colontonio
moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net
Check out my RV-8 page at:
http://members.bellatlantic.net/~moejoe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rimbold <rimbold(at)ntr.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Machine Countersink Question |
Gary Zilik wrote:
> screws. I am having problems with my 3 flute piloted countersink
> chattering in the holes. I have tried boelube, slow speeds, high
> speeds and other such things and it still chatters in the hole. How
> the heck does one nice countersunk holes with no chattering?
Have you got a sufficiently thick piece of stock to keep the pilot
centered? If not, you might want to clamp a piece of wood (or
something else) behind the hole. Drill an appropriately sized
hole in the wood, and use that to keep the pilot centered.
--
--------
Rob Rimbold
rimbold(at)ntr.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lott, Michael" <Michael.Lott(at)ssc.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | Aeroflash strobes (& ice lights) |
What's an "ice" light?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: halk(at)sybase.com [SMTP:halk(at)sybase.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 1998 12:46 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Aeroflash strobes (& ice lights)
>
>
> I just divided $600 (approx cost of Learjet style strobe setup) by the
> number
> of night flight hours in my logbook since I bought my Debonair six years
> ago.
> The Deb actually has a quaint rotating beacon. The lighting would have
> cost
> more than $200 per hour.
>
> When I fly at night (rarely) I always have flight following or am IFR. I
> believe this works better than "see and be seen" tho the combo is safest.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I love the brilliant double flash strobes. I live two
>
> miles from San Jose Intl and see lotsa everything come and go there. Some
> of
> the easiest to see are the double flash four seaters.
>
> And the airliners with ice lights. Shouldn't we install ice lights?
>
> I am debating whether to continue installing my $80 WHELEN FAA APPROVED
> halogen red/white beacon on the top of the Vstab. Not pretty.
>
>
> Hal Kempthorne RV-6AQ -- Fitting canopy rear skirts
> halk(at)sybase.com Santa Clara, CA. Debonair N6134V @ SJC
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Louis Willig <larywil(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: do it yourself strobes . . . |
<4a61205c.35d020ab(at)aol.com>
> The annals of aviation tragedy are full of cases where airplanes
> come together simply beause two or more pilots had their heads
> down. Whether your strobes are 10, 100 or 400 CP, they won't be
> seen if nobody is looking for them. This is one objection I have
> to things like moving maps, engine analyzers, etc. Neat devices
> from a performance/technolgy perspective but they can intrude
> in dangerous ways upon a pilot's responsability to fly the airplane
> and avoid hitting things.
Bob,
I wish you could have written the above paragraph in bright red, bold
letters for all of us to plaster onto our panels. I have been using a
Magellan, EC-10X G.P.S. for nearly three years. I purchased it because it
was, and still is, the largest and most detailed screen of all. After a few
flights, I de-selected most of the ground details because I could not
easily discern the image of my aircraft from the huge amount of details
presented on the screen (roads, railroads, power lines, towers, etc.) I
found myself spending too much time looking down rather than looking out. I
really feel that this G.P.S. unit is the greatest navigation device known
to man.....BUT IT IS GOING TO KILL ME UNLESS I GET MY HEAD UP. I nearly
always fly alone, and much of my flying is in Class B airspace. It has
been, and continues to be, very difficult to use a visual aid, such as a
moving map display, or graphic engine analyzer and still keep a good
vigilance.
I am redesigning an RV-4 panel. The new one will not have all of the super
stuff I have drooled over for so many years. Instead, all gauges and
instruments will be at a priority location and will be high quality analog.
I hope I'm not being old-fashioned. My experience just seems to lead me to
a KISS system. When this panel is finished, maybe I'll start working on a
HUD system :^) .
Louis
Louis I. Willig
larywil(at)home.com
(610) 668-4964
Philadelphia, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Edward Cole <emcole(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pressure checking hoses |
winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com wrote:
>
>
> Since the latest RV accident, and because of a couple earlier accidents
> mentioned in old RV-ators, I would like to get my oil lines pressure
> checked. Originally, I had a friend who was an A&P mechanic make them. I
> believe he did a good job, but don't know for sure how they were made or
> how good they are since they were never tested.
>
> Does anyone know how to go about testing them. Are there companies that
> specialize in this type of thing where I can mail them to, or even visit
> if I can find one near Denver?
>
> Andy
>
>
Andy,
Try Sacramento Skyranch. They specialize in this area.
Ed Cole
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Holman" <bholman(at)fullcomp.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Machine Countersink Question |
You MUST have a close tolerance hole for the cutter guide the whole time it
is cutting. Therefore if you are countersinking a single sheet such as the
panel you must put something behind it which has a neat hole in it. This
can be clamped to the panel or clecoed or what ever means you like. Check
what is stamped on your cutters, ie some cutters are 3/32 and some are 40
or 41, they need a close fitting hole to avoid chattering. The same
variation could apply to larger cutters. Use slow speed, battery drill is
fine. Cheers, Brian
>
> Just spent the weekend fitting my instrument panel on my 6A slider.
> Slow and tedious work. I made the panel removable using 509-8R8
> screws. I am having problems with my 3 flute piloted countersink
> chattering in the holes. I have tried boelube, slow speeds, high
> speeds and other such things and it still chatters in the hole. How
> the heck does one nice countersunk holes with no chattering?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Hinch" <chinch(at)arl.co.nz> |
| Subject: | Machine Countersink Question |
Here's a lesson for newbies from the worlds biggest newbie builder, and a
bit of humour for the list.
I got to the HS814 and HS810 on my -8 empennage. Hmm I thought, I'll need to
buy a countersink and microstop gauge, just like George O in the videos.
Away went my order and after a wee while, back came the goods. Having never
used a countersink before, I practised. And practised. And practised. It
seemed like no matter what I did, I couldn't stop the bit from wandering or
chattering. And it seemed like I was countersinking forever, unlike George
who seemed to countersink a hole in less time than it takes to say it!
In the end I bit the bullet and did the 810 and 814. Three countersinks went
okay. Looking hopeful, maybe that practice paid off. Halfway though
countersinking the last hole, it wandered.
AARRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGH!!
(imagine scene from Ferris Buellers Day Out, scream bouncing around the
neigbourhood, people looking over the fence, Significantly Better Half comes
out to the workshop, asks what's wrong and why are you holding your foot
like that and why does the workbench have a foot shaped dent in it?)
For the first (and probably the last) time in this project, I was able to
fix the wander by sheer concentration, gritted teeth and removing *more*
metal. I cleaned up the chatters with 400/600 grit, and all was better.
Some time later, onto the Vert Stab rear spar. I looked at the stiffener
with some dread. Some two dozen holes requiring countersinking. The odds
didn't look good, either for my VS stiffener, toes or work bench.
So I took my countersink out to my local A&P and asked him what I was doing
wrong. He took one look at my countersink bit and said "That's not right.
Where's the pilot?" "Huh?" said I. "The pilot on the bit!" said he. "There
isn't one" I said, being somewhat slow to understand. "That's right!" said
the ever patient A&P.
He then showed me a countersink with a pilot. Doh! Back to the tool catalog
I went, and there they were. A whole page of them. Somehow I had managed to
miss a whole page of countersink bits with pilots, yet had found the
non-piloted countersink bit, buried away on page xxx, with the narrative
description "100 degree non piloted SUICIDE countersink bit".
Gee. I wonder why they call it that! As BWB at RAH would say,
BWWWWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAA!!
Chris Hinch
chinch(at)arl.co.nz
RV80630 (HS nearly complete, VS under construction while waiting for piloted
cs bits to arrive)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gil Alexander <gila(at)flash.net> |
| Subject: | Re: do it yourself strobes . . . |
<4a61205c.35d020ab(at)aol.com>
>
>>Yes,
>> ... and old VWs with 6 volt lighting system and DIM headlights are
>>still legal, but would you want to drive one on a windy, dark road at
>>night??? I'm just surprised that the standard seems to be "boy,
>>that's bright!" when observed inside the hangar. These lights are designed
>>for being seen from miles away, so at least do your eyeball checks from the
>>other end of the runway. Actually, older aircraft don't need any strobes,
>>but try spotting them in the traffic pattern at night at any metropolitan
>>airport.
>
>
> Yeeeaaahhhh BUT. The increase from 100 to 400 CP in light output
> is not all it's made up to be. Fortunately, the eye and supporting
> firmware is a very logarithmic sensing device - fortunate for us
> who use them or they'd be VERY hard to use over the range of
> bright sunlight to starlight illumination levels. In a base 10
> logarithmic scale, the increase from 100 to 400 would result in
> only a few percent increase in perceived intensity . . . I forget what
> the average human eye was scaled at but I think it's response
> curve is steeper than a base 10 curve. Suffice it to say that
> standing side by side at a couple miles distance, you would be
> able to pick out the 400 CP device over a 100 CP device.
> However, the notion that it's 4x more likely to get somebody's
> attenion is pure wishing.
I don't usually disagree with Bob ....:^)
...but, for a given eyeball sensitivity (doesn't matter what the
exact curve is, it still has a fixed threshold that will detect a low level
flash), those infamous Laws of Physics still say that a 400cp strobe will
be seen at twice the distance of a 100cp strobe with the same eyeball.
Bringing eyeball response curves into the picture is irrelevant to
my original twice the distance statement (and the Laws of Physics...:^)
Gil (all eyes are different, but...) Alexander
>
>
>
mailto:gila(at)flash.net
Gil Alexander,
Los Angeles, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JNice51355(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: second thoughts-nose gear |
In a message dated 8/11/98 5:35:55 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net writes:
<< What did you prime it with? >>
Shame on you Moe
Do you want to start another war using the P word?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stuck starter contactors . . . |
>
>Bob,
>
>I think I've mentioned this before, but as you know, the lightweight
>starters (converted automobile) have their own solenoids. Their solenoid
>coil is wired direct to the large terminal being powered from the firewall
>mounted A/C solenoid. I don't see any reason that a separate switch could
>not be installed inline (fused circuit) between the large starter terminal
>and the starter mounted solenoid coil terminal (1/4" spade connector on
>most) so that if the firewall mounted starter solenoid were to fail closed,
>then the switch could be used to shut down the starter.
What you propose is true . . . but make it FAT wire, like 14AWG or
so to avoid degrading the built in solenoid performance. See article
on my website about the built in starter contactors and what I learned
about them . . . the hard way.
> . . . This same circuit
>could be used to power a "stuck starter contactor" light. This might be
>particularly useful for IFR equipped birds WITHOUT AN ESSENTIAL BUSS as it
>would allow the master to stay on and maintain A/C electrical power until
>the flight was terminated.
Why would anyone want to NOT have an essential bus? Suppose the
master contactor is the device that failed? What will you do about
keeping essential goodies running? The alternator becomes unpredictable
without a battery on line.
Further, suppose the alternator does fail? A typical essential bus load
is a couple of amps . . . can run a LONG time on even a pretty soggy
battery. Why burden the battery with an ADDITIONAL amp just to keep a
battery master contactor closed? This is totally wasted energy that
would run a couple of radios.
> . . . Other than having a powered heavy starter wire
>running to the engine in a failure mode, and adding another wiring circuit
>and it's potential failure points, do you see any problem(s) with this? I
>believe that adding an essential buss and stuck contactor light would be a
>better alternative, but it might not be practical for some aircraft.
It's as practical as the owner wants to spend the time on it. It's a
very inexpensive thing to do, offers an order of system reliability
unparalleled in other segments of aviation . . . sorry, just can't buy
ANYONE's excuse, "it's just not practical." For the price of dinner and
movie tickets for two (and about the same amount of time) the necessary
modifications can be made to any amateur built airplane . . . now, if
you've got to call anyone to get a Form 337 mod working . . . it's another
matter.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael J. Robbins" <kitfox(at)gte.net> |
| Subject: | Re: External power |
>
>Who in our group has provided some type of external power hookup
>for the inevitable dead battery?
>>
>Craig Hiers
>
>
I designed a light weight external power jack for my Kitfox that works
quite well. If anyone is interested in seeing it I have a photo of it I
can scan. I ran two #6 wires from my battery in back of the seat and
forward into the cockpit. I soldered two "butt end" connectors to the
exposed wires, insolated and insulated them with clear plastic tubing
secured with heat shrink tubing and tie wraps. Then made a set of jumper
cables with battery clamps on one end and simply exposing about 1/2" of
bare wire and covering with solder at the other end. Rests coiled up
behind my seat when not in use, but one could design some sort of bracket
and fuselage mount it on the RV somewhere.
Mike Robbins
RV-8Q empennage (on hold for the summer)
Issaquah, WA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stuck starter contactors . . . |
>Having installed such a setup (high-output red LED with series dropping
>resistor connected to relay output and mounted in center of the pilot's side
>of the panel), I was at firsty very curious about the persistent LED glow
>after the starter was disengaged. The LED takes about 5 seconds to gradually
>extinguish... I wondered what sort of capacitance might exist inside the
>lightweight (Sky-tec) starter. Now I'm convinced I must be seeing the back-
>EMF from the starter as it winds down. Does that sound reasonable to you,
>Bob? Or have I got a goblin...?
No, you're exactly correct . . . there's a similar but shorter
and less obvious "spin down" on incandescent lamps too.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Bronson <TBronson(at)compuserve.com> |
Michael Lott asked:
"What's an "ice" light?"
Some aircraft have lights installed for the purpose of inspecting parts
of the aircraft (wings, engine inlets, etc.) for ice accumulation at night.
These are frequently used as additional "anti-collision" lights in
congested areas. Many airline crews also illuminate landing lights both
day and night below 10,000 feet in order to be seen more easily.
They also are good direction-of-flight lights, IMHO. If you can an see
an aircraft's landing lights, it's a pretty good bet that it's aimed in
your general direction. Much easier to interpret at a distance than the
"red-right-returning" of nav lights.
Tim
Pittsburgh
Still dehydrated from drooling at Oshkosh...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JRWillJR(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Zoche aero -not |
The Zoche Disel will never go into production--those guys have some kinda scam
going on--I having been seeing this Zoche thing since before I knew how to
walk--at this point I do not care anymore. We will be flying anti-gravity
vehicles and those guys will still be hauling those "prototypes" to the
SpaceVenture 2054. Bombardier's continued development of a 200HP shared
aluminum block V-6--Aero/Marine--engine may produce enough volume to keep
prices in the mid-teens--still not cheap but if this engine comes to pass at
least it will be modern. If this is to be a ski-boat/family boat EPA friendly
engine the boat/engine/trailer combo will have to price out below 20,000$. I
know this is a big streatch but surely the Aero version will at least be
competitve with current Lycoming OEM pricing. Sure wish Lyc. would offer a kit
engine like the Superior engine--a pretty good deal itself. JR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alex Peterson <alexpeterson(at)mci2000.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Machine Countersink Question |
I am having problems with my 3 flute piloted countersink
> chattering in the holes. I have tried boelube, slow speeds, high
> speeds and other such things and it still chatters in the hole. How
> the heck does one nice countersunk holes with no chattering?
Gary,
Grinding the rake angle on the cutter to be about 90 degrees will probably
cure your chattering problem. This is the same thing that causes ordinary
drills to crack plexiglas (see my post of 7/18/98 on plexi drilling). The
cutting edge needs to scrape material away without trying to auger or screw
itself in. Piloting into a nice hole will control it, but correcting the
rake angle will likely eliminate the cause. If my previous post isn't
clear on how to do this, find a machinist, they will know exactly how to
fix the rake angle.
Most of the countersinks I have have appropriate rake angles. The
exception was the hand deburring tool, which chattered until I ground the
rake angles to about 90 degrees.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN 6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: second thoughts-nose gear |
| From: | smcdaniels(at)Juno.com (SCOTT R MCDANIELS) |
>
>Hiya Scott. What did you guys use to paint the inside of the cockpit
>of
>the factory RV-8A at Oshkosh? It looked like it was holding up pretty
>well to all the people climbing in and out. What did you prime it
>with?
>
>Moe Colontonio
>moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net
>Check out my RV-8 page at:
>http://members.bellatlantic.net/~moejoe
>
>
>
I think Moe probably meant to send to me directly, but since he didn't I
will answer on the list.
The RV-8A interior is painted with Durethane (as is the exterior).
I think the color is called "light gray".
The entire airplane (interior included) is primed with Sherwin Williams
P60G wash primer.
Since the primer is usually well aged by the time that the interior color
is sprayed on we scuff the entire interior with fine scotchbright
and then clean very thoroughly before painting.
The interior is holding up very well.
Sorry we didn't get a demo flight for you at OSH Moe, try us again and
well make it next time. Better yet come out and visit us and well give
you a much better flight than you can get at OSH anyway.
Scott McDaniels
These opinions and ideas are my own
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
of my employer.
________________________________________________________________________________
Listers,
A local RV-6 builder had his hoses pressure checked by the local
mechanic and one failed. This prompted me to have mine checked and they
all passed. We pressure checked them to 4000 psi, and it was amazing me
what kind of pressures properly made hoses could withstand (the hoses
were completely extended and straight.) There are three important
considerations when putting your own hoses together: use oil very
liberally on the hose and the fittings, don't bottom out the fittings,
and don't stop turning when you are screwing the fittings into the hose.
The idea is to keep the threads of the fittings from slicing the id of
the hose while you're screwing them in. ALWAYS PRESSURE TEST. Its
cheap peace of mind.
Thanks,
Bob Japundza
Senior Technical Analyst, MCSE
ImageMax, Inc.
Carmel, IN
bjapundza@iis-intellect.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Leslie B. Williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: COWLING ASSEMBLY PROBLEMS |
In addition to what Randall had to say, you might be sure that you have
beveled the hinge eyes on the most curved sections of the rear hinges per
SK-99, manual Section 12.
Les Williams/RV-6AQ/Tacoma WA
>
>HI THERE FROM ZIMBABWE,
>
>MY NAME IS GRAHAM LEATHES, HAVE BEEN BUILDING AN RV 6 FOR THE LAST NEARLY
FIVE YEARS. ENGINE HUNG ( 0320 B1B FROM AN APACHE ) STILL WORKING ON
FIREWALL FORWARD STUFF.
MY HICK-UP AT THE MOMENT IS THAT HAVING COMPLETED THE COWLING, I AM HAVING A
REAL PROBLEM WHEN TRYING TO FIT THE TOP SECTION. THIS IS BECAUSE YOU CAN'T
LINE UP THE HORIZONTAL HINGE SEGMENTS SIMILTANIOUSLY WITH THOSE HINGE
SEGMENTS AROUND THE TOP OF THE FUSELAGE. HAVE TRIED VAN'S ON THIS - HE SAYS
THAT IT'S A MATTER OF TECHNIQUE, BUT NO MATTER WHAT WE TRY, IT'S ALWAYS A
HALF HOUR STRUGGLE AND IF WE HAD PAINT ON, IT WOULD NEED A RESPRAY AFTER
EVERY REMOVAL/REFIT.
I KNOW SOMEONE ELSE OUT THERE IN THE WORLD OF RV'S MUST OF HAD THIS SAME
PROBLEM, PLEASE HEEEEELP!!!!!!!!!
>BEST REGARDS FROM SUNNY ZIMBABWE
>
>P.S. RECENTLY BEEN JOINEDBY AN RV 6A BUILDER BY THE NAME OF JAN RIJKERS.
>G. S. LEATHES
>Gamma Sigma Pvt Ltd
>e-mail: gammasig(at)pci.co.zw
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Leslie B. Williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: unsubscribing |
I think you need to get the "who" list and see how you're subscribed,
exactly. Then try again!
Les Williams/RV-6AQ/Tacoma WA
>
>I'm going off-line for a while (visit home to Oz) and to prevent my email
>clogging with the collective undisputed wisdom and wit of the group, I
>followed the "unsubscribe" instructions. Unfortunately the list managment
>program tells me I'm not a member of the list and the emails keep on
>commin'! Suggestions welcome.
>
>Ron Chernich (Portland, OR)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Zeidman, Richard B" <Richard.Zeidman(at)PHL.Boeing.com> |
Have any other Listers received a circular for an RV forum in
Oswego County in New York on Sept 12? I haven't seen any other notices
about this fly-in, or seen it mentioned on the list. It's about a 2 hour
flight for me so I plan to go.(providing we get a VFR weekend).Maybe I
can finally get to ride in an RV.
PS. I have details /phone numbers, but not here. I can get them
tomorrow.
Rich Zeidman RV6A
Wings 3/4 complete
Fuselage on order
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com> |
Rich,
I have received a mailing and tentative schedule. I will attend (fourth
year in a row). See you there!
Steve Soule
Huntington, Vermont
Fitting baggage floors to me RV-6A
-----Original Message----- Have any other Listers
received a circular for an RV forum in
Oswego County in New York on Sept 12? I haven't seen any
other notices...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tony Partiain" <aviator(at)tseinc.com> |
For Sale 1995 RV-4 185TTSN , 0320 D1A 160 HP, 185TTSN , Hartzell C/S Prop
185 TTSN
Terra 760D Com ,Terra 250D xpdr ,Apollo 360 moving map GPS ,ELT , PSII 1000
intercom, Vertical card compass, Altimeter, VSI ,Electronics International
CHT EGT OAT , Oil Pressure, Fuel pressure, Amp/Volt meter, Electronic Tach,
Nav Lights, Strobes, Dual landing Lights, Electric Flaps,
Professional Paint Leather seats with Temper foam, Carpet , Firewall
insulation ,CD player
Cruise 187 mph @ 8.5 gph
Annual due 8/98
$56,000.00
Price includes 8/98 annual (yet to be inspected)
Tony Partain
314-894-0828
Saint Louis MO
________________________________________________________________________________
Listers:
I have need for a Lyc screen housing, less the vernatherm valve. If any of you
have one of these, or know of someone who has one for sale, please let me
know.
Thanks
Check six!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: do it yourself strobes . . . |
| From: | lm4(at)Juno.com (Larry Mac Donald) |
I am going to install strobes on my 6 and so I am concerned with this
thread. So I took a print out of all of the "strobe" posts of the other
day to my local friendly fsdo man and asked that he resolve the
Whelen/Aeroflash/400 debate, whereupon he promptly deferred the posts to
the fsdo's flight safety man. That man, Mr. Miller left an answer on my
machine. The answer was confusing and I don't think it was the answer to
my question. SO, Back to the fsdo. There I met Mr. Miller, sat with him
in his office, and began throwing arguments at him. Such as: Why 400cp
for a 350 mph airplane but not less than that for a slower plane? Why the
magic number 400 ? All said and done he blew me away with a little story.
Seems Grimes and Whelen beseeched the Faa that strobes were safer,
brighter etc. and the Faa would not here of it. Strobes were electric and
would fail. They couldn't put that kind of power thru a lamp for five
minutes before it would blow out. And besides, mechanical things fail far
less often. So, The companies went to the airplane manufactures and the
manufacturers went thru the stc processes and strobes began showing up on
airplanes. Then an airplane landed on top of another airplane in Dallas
in awful weather. When the smoke cleared the Faa reasoned that, if the
plane on the ground were strobe equipped the pilot of the other plane
would have seen it and would have had the time to spool up and go around.
Well, I thought we were talking about seeing another plane, at high
speeds, in bad weather etc. I never thought of ground collision. Now I'll
have to reevaluate the whole thing. And while those lights are really
bright. Maybe they aren't so bright.
Larry Mac Donald lm4(at)juno.com
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
On Tue, 11 Aug 1998 13:16:59 "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
IMHO, change to strobe rules was but another example of a group
of rule makers sitting around the table saying, "okay guys, what shall
we do THIS week?" On the face of it, they appear to be doing good things.
In reality, airplanes will continue to hit things for reasons that
regulation and punishment cannot
affect.
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Dimeo <Robert.Dimeo(at)digital.com> |
| Subject: | Machine Countersink Question |
Gary,
Also, if you've used the countersink on other than aluminum (especially
bad is fiberglass) you've ruined the cutting edges and need to get another
one.
The countersink should smoothly cut the holes. Get another one and try it.
Their cheap enough.
Regards,
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Henry S. (Hank) Eilts" <eilts(at)ti.com> |
| Subject: | Strobes, Aeroflash, FARs, etc. |
Hi all,
I've been watching the sometimes emotional debate on Aeroflash strobes,
and have seen some good points and some misinformation. Here is a pointer
to some additional info on strobes. The cessna pilot association at
http://www.cessna.org has a nice article on strobes at
http://www.cessna.org/strobes.html. It talks a bit about legalities and
gives a
history of how the FARs evolved to their current point relative to strobes.
That is all.
Hank Eilts
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe Drumm <jdrumm(at)dgs.dgsys.com> |
| Subject: | #40 vs #41 drill |
Hello everyone. I drilled my skins, etc., with a #40 drill before I
learned about the #41 tip. How loose will my rivets fit?
Also, I have moved on to my vertical stab since I temporarily am unable to
prime my HS parts before riveting. I didn't see any problems doing this a
bit out of order. Does this sound OK?
I saw a beautiful red RV4 the other day. Really makes you want to run
home and get back to building.
Thanks
Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: Zoche aero diesel |
Finn,
$300 - $600 would get you replacement of the seals/springs/gaskets but
little else. Most engine builders wouldnt consider that an "overhaul". I
assumed that anyone overhauling a 13B would also replace rotor housings and
surface the side housings, and possibly replace water pump, oil pump,
etc... Mazdatrix just up the road from me in the L.A. area prices a rebuilt
equipped as described for about $1700. David Atkins of Atkins Aviation is
selling 13Bs for about $3000 with various mods he feels are required for
aviation use. On the other hand I believe Tracy is flying on a $600
"spring/seal/gasket overhaul".
Its an experimental so do as much or as little as you feel necessary, but
my point was that a pretty thorough overhaul could be done for a fraction
of the cost of a Lyc overhaul.
Hows your project coming along? How close are you to flying?
Mike Wills
RV-4 fuse
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
>
>How do you get these high numbers. More like $300 - $600, right?
>
>Finn
>
>Mike Wills wrote:
>> Firewall forward cost of less than $6000 and overhaul cost in the $1000
>> - $2000 range.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
| Subject: | electronic engine analyzers |
<3.0.5.32.19980811081248.008b8800(at)pop.flash.net>
<4a61205c.35d020ab(at)aol.com>
Bob, Louis, All,
I note an objection from both of you to the growing use of engine
analyzers as a distraction from flying the airplane. The manufacturers
designing and selling these devices claim the opposite is true since they
provide high/low limit warnings both visually and aurally, of engine
parameters. I have never used one of these devices, but was planning on one
because I like the monitoring/warning provided and because it fits better
in the limited RV-4 panel.
Ive heard, understand, and agree with the argument in favor of the more
easily perceived advantage of analog instrumentation, but feel that the
advantages provided by an analyzer with monitoring outweighs its slightly
less visually agreeable display. I feel this advantage would be
particularly important in an alternative powered airplane which presumably
would be more extensively instrumented than a Lyc due to its more
experimental nature.
So please explain to me where my thinking/interpretation on this issue is
wrong?
Mike Wills
RV-4 fuse
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
>
This is one objection I have
>> to things like moving maps, engine analyzers, etc. Neat devices
>> from a performance/technolgy perspective but they can intrude
>> in dangerous ways upon a pilot's responsability to fly the airplane
>> and avoid hitting things.
>
>Bob,
>
It has
>been, and continues to be, very difficult to use a visual aid, such as a
>moving map display, or graphic engine analyzer and still keep a good
>vigilance.
>
>I am redesigning an RV-4 panel. The new one will not have all of the super
>stuff I have drooled over for so many years. Instead, all gauges and
>instruments will be at a priority location and will be high quality analog.
>
>Louis
>
>Louis I. Willig
>larywil(at)home.com
>(610) 668-4964
>Philadelphia, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ethereal(at)worldnet.att.net (uncle wiggly) |
| Subject: | Re: RV4 For Sale |
Will a guy 6'5" tall (250, broad shoulders) 36" inseam fit into your
RV?
>
>For Sale 1995 RV-4 185TTSN , 0320 D1A 160 HP, 185TTSN , Hartzell C/S Prop
>185 TTSN
To reply via email, remove the bananna!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Fogerson <rfogerson(at)baf.com> |
I also have an RV-6A with 0320 with a Sensenich FP prop and I got cracks
and then separation in the lower aft area of the airscoop at about 40
hours. I used the West epoxy system since for small jobs it was very
easy and I had thought up to now that it was do to that system. My
quick fix was to rivet that area and it seems to be holding. I then
started getting cracking and separation near the front of the scoop so
now I have rivited the whole scoop as a temporary measure until I can
decide what to do long term.
-----Original Message-----
From: SportAV8R(at)aol.com [mailto:SportAV8R(at)aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 1998 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: cracks in cowl
<< << Had some pretty ugly cracks develop on my lower cowl, (around the
airscoop)
after only 45hrs. Sanded the paint and filler off along the entire
joint
area,
laid a couple of layers of glass over it, re-filled, sanded and had it
re-
painted. Now, after only 3hrs it is doing it again! The crack is much
smaller
this time but there never the less.
Any thoughts as to why this is happening? Anyone else experience
this? >>
>>
I just found my cracks today... in exactly the area you describe. Mine4
appear only gel-coat deep, and look spidery. They are on both sides, at
the
lower inside "corner" of the cowl inlets. I'm hoping some reinforcement
will
stave off further development of these cracks.
My setup is the O-320 with the FP Sensenich on the RV-6A.
-Bill Boyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV6160hp(at)aol.com |
DrMotorhd(at)aol.com
is the email address for one of the chairman. It's been on the RV list
before.. yes it's the 4th annual, 2nd w/e in Sept. with a seminars on Sat with
a dinner and a pancake breakfast on Sun am.
Remember me, last year I gave the canopy building demo, with my first (YUP I
cracked it) scrap canopy : ( I think we'll have it there so any time
during the day you can all go and slice off a inch or so off the back end to
get a feel for it. As well as practice your drilling with poking some holes
in it.
This year I'm gonna try to tackle some fiberglassing hints.
Later David McManmon, Cicero NY- RV6 wiring and ready to mount engine
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fesenbek, Gary" <gfesenbek(at)Meridium.com> |
| Subject: | #40 vs #41 drill |
>>Hello everyone. I drilled my skins, etc., with a #40 drill
before I
>>learned about the #41 tip. How loose will my rivets fit?
If you are using the correct length they should fit okay. For
the difference in size you are speaking of remember that the rivet will
compress to fill the drill hole prior to making a shop head assuming you
are peening the head with high air pressure on your rivet gun. It's a
good idea to use the 41 on the ones you will dimple, but might want to
switch over to to 40 on the ones you will machine countersink.
>>Also, I have moved on to my vertical stab since I temporarily
am unable to
>>prime my HS parts before riveting. I didn't see any problems
doing this a
>>bit out of order. Does this sound OK?
Perfectly okay to do things this way, my VS was the best work
that I did because I did it last and had learned plenty about riveting
and plenty other things by then.
There is one important translation I should pass on about the
plans though...
If it says "Drill in assembly...."
That means "Don't drill it!!!!, until you put it on the
airplane"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bradley Kidder, Jr." <sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | AutoCAD RV Drawings |
Does anybody know if there are drawings available that are
AutoCAD-compatible? Has Van's got an electronic-based drawing set? If
not, maybe I'll start doing some.
// s //
Bradley W. Kidder, Jr.
sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net
RV-6A (empennage)
N188FW (reserved)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fesenbek, Gary" <gfesenbek(at)Meridium.com> |
>>I also have an RV-6A with 0320 with a Sensenich FP prop and I
got cracks
>>and then separation in the lower aft area of the airscoop at
about 40
>>hours.
I know Bill(SportAV8tr) is not using a plenum but are you folks with the
airscoop cracks using a plenum system? I'm not at the cowl point yet
but I'm pretty much sold on the idea of using a plenum for the intake.
I would like to hear any comments from actual field users pro or con.
Thanks,
Gary Fesenbek,
RV6A
Roanoke, VA Panel work
*************************************************
* Gary Fesenbek
*
* Meridium Inc.
*
* (540) 344-9205 x112
*
* gfesenbek(at)meridium.com
*
* http://www.meridium.com
*
*************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Acker" <roba(at)globalink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: electronic engine analyzers |
> Ive heard, understand, and agree with the argument in favor of the more
> easily perceived advantage of analog instrumentation, but feel that the
> advantages provided by an analyzer with monitoring outweighs its slightly
> less visually agreeable display.
Mike,
I bought an electronic analyzer for the explicit purpose of keeping my head
*outside* the cockpit. It scans everything (and monitors trend rates as
well) while I have my head outside the cockpit, instead of inside every few
minutes to look for needles in the green (and *hopefully* catching a bad
trend before things actually go bad).
In addition to the analyzer, I am also putting in idiot lights for the
"biggies" (low oil pressure, low voltage, starter engaged, etc.) as backup.
Rob Acker (RV-6Q).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Hyde <hyde(at)bcl.net> |
| Subject: | Re: electronic engine analyzers |
I seem to be an unusual pilot in this respect, but I tend to err on the
side of too often ignoring those boring little dials and looking out the
window. This is especially true of the gauges that are so often hidden in
unused corners of the panel on the rental spamcans I fly. If I do suddenly
decide to worry about the cylinder temp, I have to look all over the !@#$%
panel for the gauge before remembering that THIS PARTICULAR rental spamcan
only has an oil temp gauge.
I'm looking forward to building my own plane so that the instruments will
stay in the same place!
Personally, I plan on using an engine monitor. I would rather trust a
computer that has nothing more interesting to do than read the engine temps
once a second and check that they are OK, than my easily-distracted self,
who just might spend more time worrying whether that OTHER idiot in the
pattern is going to suddenly decide to turn around and head right toward
me. I think I would feel much more secure with a black box poised to
administer an appropriate dope slap when the engine starts to act up than
depending on myself noticing a little wiggle of a needle when I'm flying
over beautiful scenery or into unfamiliar and crowded airspace.
>
>Bob, Louis, All,
> I note an objection from both of you to the growing use of engine
>analyzers as a distraction from flying the airplane. The manufacturers
>designing and selling these devices claim the opposite is true since they
>provide high/low limit warnings both visually and aurally, of engine
>parameters. I have never used one of these devices, but was planning on one
>because I like the monitoring/warning provided and because it fits better
>in the limited RV-4 panel.
> Ive heard, understand, and agree with the argument in favor of the more
>easily perceived advantage of analog instrumentation, but feel that the
>advantages provided by an analyzer with monitoring outweighs its slightly
>less visually agreeable display. I feel this advantage would be
>particularly important in an alternative powered airplane which presumably
>would be more extensively instrumented than a Lyc due to its more
>experimental nature.
>
> So please explain to me where my thinking/interpretation on this issue is
>wrong?
>
>Mike Wills
>RV-4 fuse
>willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV4 For Sale- will it fit? |
<< Will a guy 6'5" tall (250, broad shoulders) 36" inseam fit into your
RV? >>
Nope, unless you have access to an industrial size container of Vaseline. You
need a Rocket. ;-)
Check six!
Mark
HR2 285 hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: do it yourself strobes . . . |
<3.0.5.32.19980811081248.008b8800(at)pop.flash.net>
<4a61205c.35d020ab(at)aol.com>
>
> I don't usually disagree with Bob ....:^)
>
> ...but, for a given eyeball sensitivity (doesn't matter what the
>exact curve is, it still has a fixed threshold that will detect a low level
>flash), those infamous Laws of Physics still say that a 400cp strobe will
>be seen at twice the distance of a 100cp strobe with the same eyeball.
>
> Bringing eyeball response curves into the picture is irrelevant to
>my original twice the distance statement (and the Laws of Physics...:^)
>
> Gil (all eyes are different, but...) Alexander
>
Sure, I'll buy the 2x distance at visual threshold for any one viewer but
what does that get you? Against a black sky we could be talking the
difference between 10 miles versus 20 miles? Who cares at this distance?
The real goal has always been to get someone's attention in poor
signal/noise ratios, i.e. viewing against city lights, coming at you out
of the haze, etc. It's the guy to appears "out of place" that gets
noticed first . . . this is the advantage of multi-flash strobes. Then
there's
the perinial problem - I'll bet most pilots never saw the airplane that got
them. The airplanes that scared the s**# out of me could have been seen
MUCH sooner had I been looking in their direction . . . and they all had
strobes of one kind or another going.
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========o00o=(_)=o00o==========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tony Partiain" <aviator(at)tseinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV4 For Sale |
I am 6'2" 215lbs and I fit just fine . You may need some lube !!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Excess freight charges |
I would like to get some feedback from some of you that have already been
through this. Just got a call that my finish kit was being delivered in a
couple of days and the freight was $624.16! Considering that my wing kit cost
$166.25 and my fuselage cost $107.54, does $624 seem reasonable for a finish
kit being delivered to the very same address? All three kits have been
delivered within about a 10 month period so we can't very well blame it on
inflation.
One person at Van's told me the rates should have been about the same and
another said the difference is because it is a different class (plastic parts
as opposed to aluminum sheet). I don't buy it. Anyone else had this problem?
Lloyd Morris
RV-6, Starting finish kit
Austin, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MoeJoe <moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net> |
| Subject: | Re: second thoughts-nose gear |
Sorry guys, I meant to send that directly to Scott, but forgot to paste
his email address. While we're on the subject though, is there some
"standard" interior paint? I'd like to use something that comes in a
spray can so touch ups are easy and I don't have to worry about mixing
in exactly the right ratio to get the exact color. I plan on using flat
grey.
Moe Colontonio
moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net
Check out my RV-8 page at:
http://members.bellatlantic.net/~moejoe
JNice51355(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 8/11/98 5:35:55 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net writes:
>
> << What did you prime it with? >>
> Shame on you Moe
> Do you want to start another war using the P word?
>
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: RV4 For Sale- will it fit? |
>
You
>need a Rocket. ;-)
>
>Check six!
>Mark
>HR2 285 hrs
We all need a Rocket. Some of us just dont know it yet.
Mike Wills
RV-4 fuse
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mikel(at)dimensional.com |
| Subject: | Re: Infinity stick grips - usage |
>I'm contemplating putting my flap switch on an infinity grip. I'm worried
>that excessive switch handling on the stick may result in somewhat
>erratic flight since the RV is so light on the controls. Is this a
>problem at all?
Mitch: I have the Inifinity grip (which I really like) and have it switched
for several differernt functions, but not flaps. However, there is NO
problem with stick control while using the switches and you should not be
worried about bouncing the airplane around while running the switches. There
are two reasons for this:
1. Your hand is on the stick, which will keep it from moving.
2. Don't confuse sensitive with responsive; they're different. The
RV's are RESPONSIVE on the controls, but not sensitive. You will not fly
many other airplanes whose control harmony is so well balanced. The stick
has a very solid feel when flying, of course less so at slower speeds but
not to the point of being such that you jerk the airplane around by moving
switches. Unless you are really ham-fisted anyway.
I recently posted a note indicating how little stick movement was required
to produce large results. I didn't say, however, there is excellent stick
feedback that increases as the movement of the stick increases to give you a
VERY good indication as to what is happening at the other end of the
controls. Again, responsive, not sensitive, sensitive being a lack of
control force feedback, as found on some aircraft. Yet another great feature
of a well designed airplane.
Did I mention how much you are going to like this airplane?
Michael
RV-4 N232 Suzie Q
Responsively flying: 130+ hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Dimeo <Robert.Dimeo(at)digital.com> |
| Subject: | electronic engine analyzers |
Master warning (annunciator) panels have been on commercial jets and many
high end twins for years. This does not replace the analog or digital gauges
however.
I'm not up on the regs for instrumentation on Experimentals yet (haven't
gotten that far ) but I wonder if there is a requirement to have actual
gauges for the engine instrumentation. There is for certificated airplanes.
Regards,
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Wills [SMTP:willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 1998 11:48 AM
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV-List: electronic engine analyzers
Bob, Louis, All,
I note an objection from both of you to the growing use of engine
analyzers as a distraction from flying the airplane. The
manufacturers
designing and selling these devices claim the opposite is true since
they
provide high/low limit warnings both visually and aurally, of engine
parameters. I have never used one of these devices, but was planning
on one
because I like the monitoring/warning provided and because it fits
better
in the limited RV-4 panel.
Ive heard, understand, and agree with the argument in favor of the
more
easily perceived advantage of analog instrumentation, but feel that
the
advantages provided by an analyzer with monitoring outweighs its
slightly
less visually agreeable display. I feel this advantage would be
particularly important in an alternative powered airplane which
presumably
would be more extensively instrumented than a Lyc due to its more
experimental nature.
So please explain to me where my thinking/interpretation on this
issue is
wrong?
Mike Wills
RV-4 fuse
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
>
This is one objection I have
>> to things like moving maps, engine analyzers, etc. Neat devices
>> from a performance/technolgy perspective but they can intrude
>> in dangerous ways upon a pilot's responsability to fly the
airplane
>> and avoid hitting things.
>
>Bob,
>
It has
>been, and continues to be, very difficult to use a visual aid, such
as a
>moving map display, or graphic engine analyzer and still keep a
good
>vigilance.
>
>I am redesigning an RV-4 panel. The new one will not have all of
the super
>stuff I have drooled over for so many years. Instead, all gauges
and
>instruments will be at a priority location and will be high quality
analog.
>
>Louis
>
>Louis I. Willig
>larywil(at)home.com
>(610) 668-4964
>Philadelphia, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fesenbek, Gary" <gfesenbek(at)Meridium.com> |
| Subject: | Excess freight charges |
>>Considering that my wing kit cost $166.25 and my fuselage cost
$107.54,
>>does $624 seem reasonable for a finish
>>kit being delivered to the very same address?
I had the same problem and like you I ordered my kits close together.
For those prices you must be closer to Oregon than I am.
I live in Roanoke, VA. Anyway, it was finally resolved that the
shipping companies have several rates. Make sure they are giving you
the "Van's" rate. That was the problem in my case. It turned out to be
about one-third of what they otherwise would have charged me. Yes
initially they gave me the BS about fiberglass parts and laminates and
such, I kept going up the line until I finally got a high school
educated person to straighten the mess out. Then about three months
later I got a bill for what I already paid. Go figure?
G. Fesenbek
Roanoke, VA
*************************************************
* Gary Fesenbek
*
* Meridium Inc.
*
* (540) 344-9205 x112
*
* gfesenbek(at)meridium.com
*
* http://www.meridium.com
*
*************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Fogerson <rfogerson(at)baf.com> |
RV-6A, 0320, Sensenich FP and Van's standard design with engine baffles
and air box taking air thru the air intake below the prop. Don't know
what the plenum is?
>>I also have an RV-6A with 0320 with a Sensenich FP prop and I
got cracks
>>and then separation in the lower aft area of the airscoop at
about 40
>>hours.
I know Bill(SportAV8tr) is not using a plenum but are you folks with the
airscoop cracks using a plenum system? I'm not at the cowl point yet
but I'm pretty much sold on the idea of using a plenum for the intake.
I would like to hear any comments from actual field users pro or con.
Thanks,
Gary Fesenbek,
RV6A
Roanoke, VA Panel work
*************************************************
* Gary Fesenbek
*
* Meridium Inc.
*
* (540) 344-9205 x112
*
* gfesenbek(at)meridium.com
*
* http://www.meridium.com
*
*************************************************
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: do it yourself strobes . . . |
Enuf Already?
I must confess that I jumped on the AeroFlash bargain with in flash when
they became available. Call me biased.... But...... To those who say I
have sacrificed safety, You must remember that I had nothing before. Have
you never flown a Tri-Pacer with a red beacon on it in the day time?
What about those who fly without a Transponder? Would you propose to ban
them from all airports where airplanes with TCAS operate? That would
include my home airport of MCW, no tower, no radar, no nothing except
commuters with TCAS. Should we not allow the Cubs and Champs to fly here
any more with out Strobes or Mode C? I think not!
I chose the Aero Flash because I had a better use for the $300 difference.
I did not know about the power difference, but would still have went for the
Aero flash. I want to put the 300 clams toward a vacuum pump, so I can stop
scud running, a far greater danger than getting hit.
One quick story... About a month ago I was flying X/C in the panther north
of MSP. I was at 5500 VFR and using MSP Center flight following. It was
about 8:30 am so the sun was fairly low in the east when a shadow crossed
me. Startled, I looked sunward and about 20 ft above me and 100 ft
horizontally an A-36 Beech passed. I was heading just east of a north
heading and the beech was just east of a south heading, so we were both at
the correct altitude. After I got my wind back I call center and queried
why they had not issued a traffic alert. Their response was, What traffic.
I am quite certain the Bonanza had 400 cps strobes, evidently it did not
have an operating transponder......
Those of you who believe that we have breached some horrible standard of
safety by flying with our fairly priced strobe lights had better not let me
find you in an airplane with out a operating mode C transponder. As for me
I will reserve, and fight to preserve, my right to fly a Cub with out any
lights or transponder and my RV with what ever lights I choose.
Tailwinds, RV-4 the pink panther
Doug Rozendaal
dougr(at)petroblend.com
http://www.petroblend.com/dougr
PS Electric Bob and Lou Willig smacked the nail squarely a few days ago in
a post about "too many toys" in this same thread. I will spare you all
editorial on that subject.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terrence C. Watson" <tcwatson(at)pstbbs.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AutoCAD RV Drawings |
-----Original Message-----
>
>Does anybody know if there are drawings available that are
>AutoCAD-compatible? Has Van's got an electronic-based drawing set? If
>not, maybe I'll start doing some.
>// s //
>Bradley W. Kidder, Jr.
>sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net
>RV-6A (empennage)
>N188FW (reserved)
I'm quite sure I downloaded an AutoCAD drawing of the RV-8 exterior plan and
profile, but I don't see it on my hard disc. I understand the the -8 is the
first one they have drawing in CAD, so the -6 might not be available.
I would love to have a 3D model of the -8 in CAD, and may try to do it one
of these days if Van's doesn't make one available.
Terry Watson
RV-8 # 729
Seattle, -- Rudder underway
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wndwlkr711(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Excess freight charges |
Lloyd,
I had a similar problem with my wing kit. The shipping was nearly doubled if
they had to use a subcarrier. I just had mine delivered to a friends house an
hour away but near the shipping hub. Then I picked it up and brought it home.
Vans, or the major carrier, can explain the differences prior to shipping.
George Stanley
Desert Center, CA
RV-6A Wings
Fuselage on order
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Thomas Gummo <tgummo(at)orion.csci.csusb.edu> |
All these new toys like moving maps displays and electronic engine analyzers
are what I call Face Magnets. They tend to draw your face to them and
won't let go. It is real easy to get sucked into them.
What you have to do is to learn to use a cross check scan like an
instrument pilot does, or, for example, low level flying at 100 feet AGL
at 480 knots GS (like I did in the F-4G). The rule is to take a quick
look inside the cockpit and check JUST ONE ITEM. Then it is back
outside looking. The same is for switch changes. You don't have to keep
you head down while you change the radio freq, IFF squawk, switch fuel
tanks, and update the GPS just because they all need to be changed at the
same time. Fly the plane, check outside, change ONE switch, fly the
plane, check outside, change ONE switch, etc. etc. Like most things it
just takes alittle practice and soon it will be just part of your flying.
I would like to second the thought that they are designed to make the
work load easier. It is just a matter in learning how to do that.
Again, just an old military pilot thoughts and 2 cents worth.
I am closing the wings and have recieved the fuselage kit. Can't wait to
fly and hope to take N563FS (reserved) to Oshkosk 99.
Tom
Thomas L. Gummo
Major, USAF Retired, Society of Wild Weasels # 1573
http://web.csusb.edu/public/csci/tgummo/home.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fesenbek, Gary" <gfesenbek(at)Meridium.com> |
A plenum intake chamber is totally enclosed and does not use the top of
the cowl as part of the cooling chamber. The theory is that using a
plenum will reduce stress on the cowl as well as possibly giving you
better performance. I heard that guys with the plenums have less hinge
cracking and other problems and wanted to know what the "real" poop is.
Gary Fesenbek
RV6AQ
Roanoke, VA
*************************************************
* Gary Fesenbek
*
* Meridium Inc.
*
* (540) 344-9205 x112
*
* gfesenbek(at)meridium.com
*
* http://www.meridium.com
*
*************************************************
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Fogerson [SMTP:rfogerson(at)baf.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 1998 4:17 PM
> To: 'rv-list(at)matronics.com'
> Subject: RE: RV-List: cracks in cowl
>
>
>
>
> RV-6A, 0320, Sensenich FP and Van's standard design with engine
> baffles
> and air box taking air thru the air intake below the prop. Don't know
> what the plenum is?
>
>
>
> >>I also have an RV-6A with 0320 with a Sensenich FP prop and I
> got cracks
> >>and then separation in the lower aft area of the airscoop at
> about 40
> >>hours.
>
> I know Bill(SportAV8tr) is not using a plenum but are you folks with
> the
> airscoop cracks using a plenum system? I'm not at the cowl point yet
> but I'm pretty much sold on the idea of using a plenum for the intake.
> I would like to hear any comments from actual field users pro or con.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gary Fesenbek,
> RV6A
> Roanoke, VA Panel work
>
> *************************************************
> * Gary Fesenbek
> *
> * Meridium Inc.
> *
> * (540) 344-9205 x112
> *
> * gfesenbek(at)meridium.com
> *
> * http://www.meridium.com
> *
> *************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Greg Young <gyoung(at)bcm.tmc.edu> |
| Subject: | Excess freight charges |
I'm in Houston and just got my finishing kit on the Monday before OSH, 2
hrs before I planned to depart (yes, I picked it up before I left). I had
it sent to the freight house in Houston for pick-up and freight was $274,
which was more than previous kits. It is significantly cheaper (about
$100) to pick it up , but not what you're showing. The bill showed a
charge of almost $600 then discounted to $274, I assume because of Van's
volume. Maybe they just read the wrong line on the waybill. FWIW this
shipment used Roadway and previous kits were via ABF.
Greg Young
RV-6 N6GY (reserved) finishing kit
On Wednesday, August 12, 1998 1:53 PM, SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com
[SMTP:SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com] wrote:
>
> I would like to get some feedback from some of you that have already been
> through this. Just got a call that my finish kit was being delivered in a
> couple of days and the freight was $624.16! Considering that my wing kit
cost
> $166.25 and my fuselage cost $107.54, does $624 seem reasonable for a
finish
> kit being delivered to the very same address? All three kits have been
> delivered within about a 10 month period so we can't very well blame it
on
> inflation.
>
> One person at Van's told me the rates should have been about the same and
> another said the difference is because it is a different class (plastic
parts
> as opposed to aluminum sheet). I don't buy it. Anyone else had this
problem?
>
> Lloyd Morris
> RV-6, Starting finish kit
> Austin, TX
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bradley Kidder, Jr." <sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net> |
If any of you are ICQ users and would care to exchange numbers, here's
mine. Thanks.
Bradley W. Kidder, Jr.
sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net
ICQ# 11770815
URGENT MESSAGES: pagekidder(at)bigfoot.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Orear" <jorear(at)mari.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AutoCAD RV Drawings |
Hi Brad:
I started to input the bulkheads for the fuselage for an RV6A into a program
called DesignCad 2D when I was seriously thinking of building a 1/3rd scale
RC model of one. I didn't get very far, as I started to build a real one
(lucky me!)
It was fairly easy to input the drawings, as there are coordinates on each
of the plans for each part.
Give me a holler if you need any other info.
Regards,
Jeff Orear
RV6A 25171
Wing Spars
Peshtigo, WI
-----Original Message-----
From: rv-list(at)matronics.com <rv-list(at)matronics.com>
Date: Wednesday, August 12, 1998 1:16 PM
Subject: RV-List: AutoCAD RV Drawings
>
>
>Does anybody know if there are drawings available that are
>AutoCAD-compatible? Has Van's got an electronic-based drawing set? If
>not, maybe I'll start doing some.
>// s //
>Bradley W. Kidder, Jr.
>sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net
>RV-6A (empennage)
>N188FW (reserved)
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bradley Kidder, Jr." <sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net> |
If any of you are ICQ users and would care to exchange numbers, here's
mine. Thanks.
(I think I've sent this twice... sorry)
// s //
Bradley W. Kidder, Jr.
sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net
ICQ# 11770815
RV-6A (empennage)
N188FW (reserved)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Craig-Stearman" <tcraigst(at)ionet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: do it yourself strobes . . . |
'Listers,
I have followed this strobe thread for a while and can no longer resist
jumping in. For background, I purchased a single Whelen strobe for the
vertical stab. I had not heard of the Aeroflash strobes at the time.
As a T-37 instructor and Functional Check Flight pilot I have joined up on
many a Tweet sporting both strobes and rotating beacons. In the daytime I
have never seen the strobes first. The first thing the eye sees is a black
silhouette against a lighter sky or (much closer) a painted airplane moving
against the static ground. As I recall, we used the first sight of the
strobes and beacons to estimate about 800 feet distance during the rejoin.
That is feet, not miles or yards. Forget the strobes as an anti-collision
device during the day.
At night, the strobes do attract the eye first. There we are talking about
a flashing light against a dark sky or (much worse) a moving flashing light
against a backdrop of slower-moving ground lights. In this instance, the
difference between more powerful strobes and less powerful strobes is
debatable.
Bob Nuckolls is right that the airplane you hit will be the one that you
don't see, not because is lacks powerful strobes, but because you are not
looking at it. The most dangerous traffic is that on a steady intercept
course with no angular rate of change relative to the pilot's eyes. Place
that unmoving, growing dot behind a canopy bow or other structure (e.g.
under the wing tip on a converging course while you are descending) and you
have a problem that strobes won't solve.
I wouldn't have a cow over a homebuilder installing lower-powered strobes.
Keep that head swiveling,
Tom Craig-Stearman
tcraigst(at)ionet.net
RV-4 64ST installing the cowl
>
>Enuf Already?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: electronic engine analyzers |
Mike wrote:
>I note an objection from both of you to the growing use of engine
>analyzers as a distraction from flying the airplane.
First, there are personal differences that make some prefer analog etc.
Second, there are poorly designed systems that require too much attention and
looking at to get information needed with the result that the pilot's head is
not where it should be.
The computerized information systems (new types of digital instruments/panels)
*SHOULD* allow the pilot to spend more time looking out the window and using his
brain for things that machines cannot do. Frequent looking at the oil pressure
indicator to see if it is still the same is a poor use of a human brain. Most
of us don't look often enough for it to be of much value anyway. A burst hose
and the engine will become the annunciator with a clattering alarm.
None of us would accept an "idiot light" panel but I can't imagine anyone
opposing them to advise us to check the instrument. Personally, I don't have
any use at all for graphic "clock like" digital instruments. We in the computer
industry push that stuff because it looks neat and helps sell more powerfull
hardware to run it. When my oil pressure annunciator light comes on I want to
look down at the instrument and get a number. I really don't see the need for
a
clock display. I must be missing something.
Hopefully, in the future we will be able to enter our destination identifier and
the system will take us there safely even if we are unconscious. I think it
could be done with today's technology. Of course, we would still want to be
able to hand fly it.
An old salt pilot told me one time that the IFR instruments need to be familiar
enough to you that you can fly heavy weather while one passenger gropes for his
dropped cigarette and the chubby lady behind you is throwing up. I don't
imagine the oil pressure gets much notice at such times!
Hal Kempthorne RV-6AQ -- Fitting canopy rear skirts
halk(at)sybase.com Santa Clara, CA. Debonair N6134V @ SJC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Olson <lolson(at)doitnow.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AutoCAD RV Drawings |
If you guys find/get cad drawings please post them.
Prefer 6 but 8 as well...
Larry Olson
RV6 - starting right wing
Cave Creek, AZ
>>Does anybody know if there are drawings available that are
>>AutoCAD-compatible? Has Van's got an electronic-based drawing set? If
>>not, maybe I'll start doing some.
>I'm quite sure I downloaded an AutoCAD drawing of the RV-8 exterior plan and
>profile, but I don't see it on my hard disc. I understand the the -8 is the
>first one they have drawing in CAD, so the -6 might not be available.
>
>I would love to have a 3D model of the -8 in CAD, and may try to do it one
>of these days if Van's doesn't make one available.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RICHGREER(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | RV-List:F677/676 |
Suggestions please.
Where the F676/677 and the F678 join at F606 I did not leave the required
distance for a second row of rivets. What are my options? Replace F676/677
and do it right. Put a double in at that point and be glad that it is on the
bottom or double the rivets along the F606. I am building a 6A and this area
would not recieve the stress area that a 6 would and is a double row
necessary? Thanks for any input.
R. Lindberg
RV6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randall Henderson <randall(at)edt.com> |
| Subject: | second thoughts-nose gear) |
>...is there some
> "standard" interior paint? I'd like to use something that comes in a
> spray can so touch ups are easy and I don't have to worry about mixing
> in exactly the right ratio to get the exact color.
How about taking it from the other direction. Go buy a spray can of
gray Krylon or whatever color/brand you like, take it to an auto paint
place, and have them mix to match.
This is kind of the reverse of what I did. I went in to the local
auto paint place that sells Ditzler, and asked them for "your standard
gun-metal gray". They said there isn't any such "standard" color, and
gave me a huge book of paint chips. I just picked one that looked
about right and they mixed it. Later on I found out to my delight
that Gray Krylon matches it almost perfectly. I can touch up small
nicks and such by just spraying some into a paper cup and using an
artists brush.
Randall Henderson, RV-6 (engine/finish)
Portland, OR
http://www.edt.com/homewing
randall(at)edt.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Machine Countersink Question |
> Grinding the rake angle on the cutter to be about 90 degrees will probably
> cure your chattering problem. This is the same thing that causes ordinary
> drills to crack plexiglas (see my post of 7/18/98 on plexi drilling). The
> cutting edge needs to scrape material away without trying to auger or screw
> itself in. Piloting into a nice hole will control it, but correcting the
> rake angle will likely eliminate the cause. If my previous post isn't
> clear on how to do this, find a machinist, they will know exactly how to
> fix the rake angle.
>
> Most of the countersinks I have have appropriate rake angles. The
> exception was the hand deburring tool, which chattered until I ground the
> rake angles to about 90 degrees.
>
Guys, I`ve been a machinist for 40 yrs, and the one countersink that
doesn`t chatter is a single flute. I dont know ofhand where you will find one
but it works .
Fred LaForge RV-4, We put the wings on
today....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Dimeo <Robert.Dimeo(at)digital.com> |
| Subject: | Excess freight charges |
I just got a call from roadway about my wing kit. I came clear across
country to NH and the charges are $178.99 delivered. $600+ sounds really
excessive.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Young [SMTP:gyoung(at)bcm.tmc.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 1998 6:16 PM
To: 'rv-list(at)matronics.com'
Subject: RE: RV-List: Excess freight charges
I'm in Houston and just got my finishing kit on the Monday before
OSH, 2
hrs before I planned to depart (yes, I picked it up before I left).
I had
it sent to the freight house in Houston for pick-up and freight was
$274,
which was more than previous kits. It is significantly cheaper
(about
$100) to pick it up , but not what you're showing. The bill showed
a
charge of almost $600 then discounted to $274, I assume because of
Van's
volume. Maybe they just read the wrong line on the waybill. FWIW
this
shipment used Roadway and previous kits were via ABF.
Greg Young
RV-6 N6GY (reserved) finishing kit
On Wednesday, August 12, 1998 1:53 PM, SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com
[SMTP:SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com] wrote:
>
> I would like to get some feedback from some of you that have
already been
> through this. Just got a call that my finish kit was being
delivered in a
> couple of days and the freight was $624.16! Considering that my
wing kit
cost
> $166.25 and my fuselage cost $107.54, does $624 seem reasonable
for a
finish
> kit being delivered to the very same address? All three kits have
been
> delivered within about a 10 month period so we can't very well
blame it
on
> inflation.
>
> One person at Van's told me the rates should have been about the
same and
> another said the difference is because it is a different class
(plastic
parts
> as opposed to aluminum sheet). I don't buy it. Anyone else had
this
problem?
>
> Lloyd Morris
> RV-6, Starting finish kit
> Austin, TX
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | YBoulais1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV4 For Sale- will it fit? |
If you want a RV-6 I have a nice one for sale.
Click here to see it
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randall Henderson <randall(at)edt.com> |
Regarding cracks in the cowl: I have been told, and have seen on
several planes (not just RVs) that gel-coat is prone to cracking in
inside corners, especially in areas of vibration such as cowl inlets
and scoops. The recommended fix was to sand off the gel-coat in these
areas and re-fill with microbaloons/resin. Evidently the cracking is
normally only gel-coat deep.
Randall Henderson, RV-6 (engine/finish)
Portland, OR
http://www.edt.com/homewing
randall(at)edt.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Erdos" <erdos(at)intranet.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Infinity stick grips - usage |
Folks,
Just a thought about putting a flap switch on the grip: if it's right there
under your fingers, there's always the possibility of inadvertant flap
extension at high speed. Most aircraft put the flap handle in a "less
convenient" location for the deliberate reason that you have to reach for it
to activate the flaps. There's some sense in that...
Rob Erdos
RVAtor-2B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Skinner <bskinr(at)trib.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Machine Countersink Question |
Avery sells a single flute, piloted coutersink in #40 and #30 for $10.00
each. I much prefer these to the conventional countersinks.
Bob Skinner RV-6 438 hrs. Buffalo, WY bskinr(at)trib.com
> Guys, I`ve been a machinist for 40 yrs, and the one countersink that
>doesn`t chatter is a single flute. I dont know ofhand where you will find one
>but it works .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Prop Governor Pad Plate? |
I spoke to Woodward tech support today regarding installing their governor on
an O-360A1A. Woodward said I should use the gasket/screen that came with
the governor, DON'T use gasket sealer (opposite of what Lycoming said).
Woodward said to use a release agent (sticky stuff that comes on the gasket
from Woodward) so the gasket will come off when you pull the unit for service
several years from now. Also, be sure to tighten bolts in an "X" pattern.
On a different subject, Grand Rapids Technology says the EIS engine monitor
will be available in a model that monitors all 4 CHT and all 4 EGT simultaneously
around the end of the year (current unit monitors 2 CHT and 2 EGT at a time).
Tim
_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_
Tim Lewis
N47TD (reserved) RV-6AQ #60023 on gear, engine mounted
Springfield VA
http://home.earthlink.net/~timrv6a
timrv6a(at)iname.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Mack" <donmack(at)flash.net> |
ICQ 16679225
Don Mack
RV-6A Fuselage
Ercoupe 415-D
donmack(at)flash.net
icq 16679225
http://www.flash.net/~donmack
-----Original Message-----
From: Bradley Kidder, Jr. <sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Wednesday, August 12, 1998 7:40 PM
Subject: RV-List: ICQ
>
>If any of you are ICQ users and would care to exchange numbers, here's
>mine. Thanks.
>(I think I've sent this twice... sorry)
>
>// s //
>Bradley W. Kidder, Jr.
>sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net
>ICQ# 11770815
>RV-6A (empennage)
>N188FW (reserved)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Parker43rp(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | First flight of N84RP |
Listers--
My Rv-6, N84RP finally severed its earthly bonds, and flew exactly as
predicted. Here are some of its specs:
Empty weight--1024 lbs.
Lyc. O-320 160
Hartzell C/S
Ellison carb
Skytec starter
35 amp alt.
Vetterman ex.--Robbins muffs
Kx-125
AT-150, encoder
Ameriking elt
Gyro panel
Full swivel t-wheel
Sliding canopy
Battery on aft side of firewall
Centari paint
No upholstry or carpet
Strobe power supply under vert.stab
Empty CG (with oil) 69.5 or 9.5 in. aft of wing leading edge.
Ray Parker, Ocala FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Owens" <owens(at)Aerovironment.com> |
| Subject: | RV-6/A ACAD Drawings |
Hi all,
I just happen to have ACAD lite r12 3 views of a slider 6 and 6A. They were scaled
up off the drawings in the info pack, so there not 100% accurate, but good
enough for most things. They were .dxf'ed from another 2D drawing program, so
I'm not sure how they'll work in acad. I would be glad to share them with someone
who can put them up on a web site.
PLEASE only email me back if you can put them somewhere where everybody else can
view them. Since I monitor this list at work I really don't want several hundred
requests for these files. (Call me paranoid). Let me work this off line
first, then if I can't find somewhere to put them, I'll entertain the idea
of making them available on a one by one basis.
Any takers, email me at "owens(at)aerovironment.com"
Laird
RV-6 #22923 finishing kit, just got my 0-360 from Vans..whoopee...
BTY - AeroVironments "Pathfinder" Solor Powered Flying Wing flew to 80,400 feet
last week over Hawaii (strobes don't do a lot of good up a that altitude) setting
a new propeller driven altitude record. We had the last record at 71,300.
Were shooting for 100,000 feet next summer with a new airplane, called Centurion,
that were taking to Edwards for flight testing next month. Boy, I'm going
to miss working on my -6 while I'm up there, but it'll be fun to work next
to the SR-71. Let's see.....30mph or Mach 3........hmm.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | pagan <pagan(at)CBOSS.COM> |
| Subject: | Aileron pushrod hole |
Enlarging the aileron pushrod hole in the rear spar on my RV-8 wing I find
that I'm going to get into the rivet at the top end of the hole. Has
anyone else had this problem? It seems the hole has to be enlarged quite a
bit.
Bill Pagan
80555 worried about testing the fuel tanks:'(
spendin too much time messin around on the net
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/9749/william.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "M.Mckenna" <mmckenna(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stuck starter contactors . . . |
> >
> >Just a thought, and might not be worth the extra complexity, but how about
> >a starter master switch??
>
>
I believe a fail-safe way to deal with the possibility of a stuck starter contactor
might be to connect two of them in series. Connect the contacts so they are in
series
with the starter load and the energizing coils in parallel with the starter switch.
This
way they must both be energized to engage the starter, but after starting, if one
of
them sticks the other will still open the circuit. Lights could still be used to
indicate a failure so maintenance could be performed when able. Some problems with
this
arrangement might be: (1) Twice the current through the ignition switch - can it
handle
this? (2) If your battery is weak this will be even more of a load on it while
trying to
start. (3) Added weight - probably worth it. Am I missing anything here?
Mike Mckenna (mmckenna(at)bellsouth.net)
RV8 - building
Ga.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terrence C. Watson" <tcwatson(at)pstbbs.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AutoCAD RV Drawings |
>If you guys find/get cad drawings please post them.
>Prefer 6 but 8 as well...
>
Van's website, under internet resources, downloads, list the 3 view drawing
of the RV-8 as downloadable in either .dwg (AutoCAD) or .dfx (AutoCAD
exchange) formats. This is what I have.
Terry Watson
RV-8 Rudder
Seattle
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Louis Willig <larywil(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: electronic engine analyzers |
<3.0.1.16.19980811131659.2e4faf76(at)dtc.net>
<3.0.5.32.19980811081248.008b8800(at)pop.flash.net>
<4a61205c.35d020ab(at)aol.com>
>Bob, Louis, All,
> I note an objection from both of you to the growing use of engine
>analyzers as a distraction from flying the airplane. The manufacturers
>designing and selling these devices claim the opposite is true since they
>provide high/low limit warnings both visually and aurally, of engine
>parameters. I have never used one of these devices, but was planning on one
>because I like the monitoring/warning provided and because it fits better
>in the limited RV-4 panel.
> Ive heard, understand, and agree with the argument in favor of the more
>easily perceived advantage of analog instrumentation, but feel that the
>advantages provided by an analyzer with monitoring outweighs its slightly
>less visually agreeable display. I feel this advantage would be
>particularly important in an alternative powered airplane which presumably
>would be more extensively instrumented than a Lyc due to its more
>experimental nature.
>
> So please explain to me where my thinking/interpretation on this issue is
>wrong?
>
>Mike Wills
Mike,
I read most of the replies to your post prior to replying myself. Here are
my thoughts based on my personal experience, and limitations:
First..There are some pilots who are privileged to have extremely rapid
visual/mental computational abilities. These pilots might feel at ease
with a digital Airspeed Indicator, digital Tachometer, and maybe even a
digital compass. Most of us, however, respond faster to an analog gauge.
Many analog gauges become much better when backed up with digital
information. Many of the "Electronics International" gauges do just this.
On the other hand, a pure graphical engine analyzer makes you look for
several long seconds to read its display. Second.. Visual and audio
annunciators are
a "must have" on my new panel. But don't confuse the need to have
annunciators with the need to have digital displays. There are ways to
sense a "condition red" without a digital instrument. Third.. A digital
engine analyzer with annunciators IS a great instrument, whereas, a graphic
analyzer is not so great. Electric Bob did not use the term "graphic engine
analyzer"as I did. ButI think that's what he was referring to. To me, a
graphic engine analyzer is not the same as an analog EGT or CHT such as the
quality "Alcor" gauges. The subject of engine analyzers is where I have
made a compromise with my dream vs. actual panel. I do believe that a
digital, multi-cylinder, annunciator equipped engine analyzer is better
than a single EGT/CHT gauge. But I just don't have a screaming need for it.
If I find that I do, I will easily find a spot for it on my panel.
Fourth.. I hope to install Matt's FuelScan fuel flow/totalizer gauge. This
is a digital instrument and has no equal analog competitor.
In effect, my desire/need for analog gauges is directed to those gauges
that I need to read quickly, and that I want to place in my scan mode.
This whole subject is a very personal one, and I'm sure that you will get
different opinions... especially from the guys with the Rocky Mountain
Instruments micromonitor. I won't argue with them. Hell, that's one of the
units that I have always dreamed about(But I have a hard time cutting
rectangular holes in my panel). Seriously, I have spent much time thinking
about this subject while flying and currently believe I will prefer a
basically analog panel.
Louis I. Willig
larywil(at)home.com
(610) 668-4964
Philadelphia, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rvator97(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: electronic engine analyzers |
<< This is one objection I have
>> to things like moving maps, engine analyzers, etc. Neat devices
>> from a performance/technolgy perspective but they can intrude
>> in dangerous ways upon a pilot's responsibility to fly the airplane
>> and avoid hitting things. >>
After 50+ hours in my RV, using EI engine monitors and a moving map GPS, I
would tend to disagree. The engine monitors have warning lights that will let
you know of a problem. With this function I feel that I can keep my eyes
outside the cockpit more than with conventional guages that I have to
constantly scan. Also, with the route pre-programmed into the GPS, cross
country flying is much easier; just a glance every so often and you can see
that you are on course, note your groundspeed, ETE, etc. All the info is right
there! No more flipping through sectionals and playing with flight computers
more time to scan for other aircraft and enjoy the view.
Walt. RV-6A N79WH
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MoeJoe <moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AutoCAD RV Drawings |
I also noticed that on the 6 plans, there is a cutaway view of a
completed aircraft, but no such drawing in the 8 plans. I'd like to have
one to put up on my shop wall, anyone know where I could find one?
--
Moe Colontonio
moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net
Check out my RV-8 page at:
http://members.bellatlantic.net/~moejoe
> >Does anybody know if there are drawings available that are
> >AutoCAD-compatible? Has Van's got an electronic-based drawing set?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aileron pushrod hole |
In a message dated 8/12/98 8:49:03 PM Central Daylight Time, pagan(at)CBOSS.COM
writes:
<< Enlarging the aileron pushrod hole in the rear spar on my RV-8 wing I find
that I'm going to get into the rivet at the top end of the hole. Has
anyone else had this problem? It seems the hole has to be enlarged quite a
bit. >>
I questioned the same thing. I checked out Van's -8A and the hole was larger
than where the rivet goes. There was no aditional rivets added to replace the
one cut out when the hole was enlarged.
Alan Kritzman
Priming Fuselage bulkheads
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: AutoCAD RV Drawings |
There are AutoCad 3 views of the 8 on Van's WWW site. Go to
http://www.vansaircraft.com/sections/download.htm
There are 3 view graphics of the other models in various formats, but not
AutoCad.
Kevin Horton RV-8 80427 (wings)
khorton(at)cyberus.ca stuck in Wichita instead of home working
on the RV :-(
>
>If you guys find/get cad drawings please post them.
>Prefer 6 but 8 as well...
>
>Larry Olson
>RV6 - starting right wing
>Cave Creek, AZ
>
>>>Does anybody know if there are drawings available that are
>>>AutoCAD-compatible? Has Van's got an electronic-based drawing set? If
>>>not, maybe I'll start doing some.
>
>>I'm quite sure I downloaded an AutoCAD drawing of the RV-8 exterior plan and
>>profile, but I don't see it on my hard disc. I understand the the -8 is the
>>first one they have drawing in CAD, so the -6 might not be available.
>>
>>I would love to have a 3D model of the -8 in CAD, and may try to do it one
>>of these days if Van's doesn't make one available.
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: #40 vs #41 drill |
In a message dated 8/12/98 10:57:29 Central Daylight Time,
jdrumm(at)dgs.dgsys.com writes:
<< Hello everyone. I drilled my skins, etc., with a #40 drill before I
learned about the #41 tip. How loose will my rivets fit? >>
When you set your rivets in the dimpled #40 holes, the rivet shank will expand
to fit the hole as the bucktail is forming. Your rivets will not be loose once
they are driven. The #41 drill simply makes the rivet fit more snugly in the
dimpled hole, leaving less chance that it will fall out before it is driven.
<>
The sequence that you build in, is a matter of personal choice, rather than
being chiseled in stone. I believe that the Stabilizers and their flight
controls are probably among some of the most difficult to build items, and
that building them first gives you all the practice you need to complete the
rest of the kit.
Why is it that you are not able to prime your HS parts before you rivet them
together? I am using Zinc Chromate primer on my airplane, and you can buy Zinc
Chromate in spray cans. Can you not get your primer type in spray cans?
Regards
Wendell WBWard(at)AOL.COM
Rebuilding the "Junkyard Dog" RV-4 Kit
Memphis, Tennessee
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Excess freight charges |
In a message dated 8/13/98 1:33:01 AM, you wrote:
<< I just got a call from roadway about my wing kit. I came clear across
country to NH and the charges are $178.99 delivered. $600+ sounds really
excessive.
Bob
>>
I am going to send a fax to Van tomorrow and ask him to see if there was a
mistake. $624 for freight on a finish kit seem awfully high. Heard from one
person in Houston that just got theirs for $274. That is actually a little
further away than we are. Even spoke to the person at Roadway who was the
shipper. She said it sounded out of line to her. Almost $2.00 per pound. Will
let you know if Van helps get it straightened out.
Lloyd Morris
RV-6
Austin, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Hiers <craig-RV4(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Infinity stick grips - usage |
Robert Erdos wrote:
>
>
> Folks,
>
> Just a thought about putting a flap switch on the grip: if it's right there
> under your fingers, there's always the possibility of inadvertant flap
> extension at high speed. Most aircraft put the flap handle in a "less
> convenient" location for the deliberate reason that you have to reach for it
> to activate the flaps. There's some sense in that...
>
> Rob Erdos
> RVAtor-2B
>
The flap switch on the infinity stick grip is a single pole, double
throw. The flaps down side side of the switch is momentary so you
will have to hold it down to lower the flaps. JD set it up like this
so you cannot just bump the switch by accident and lower the flaps.
Craig Hiers
RV-4 N143CH
Tallahassee,FL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mick_G" <micky_g(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: First flight of N84RP |
Congratulations!
Mick
-----Original Message-----
From: Parker43rp(at)aol.com <Parker43rp(at)aol.com>
Date: Wednesday, August 12, 1998 6:11 PM
Subject: RV-List: First flight of N84RP
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gar Pessel <pessel(at)ptialaska.net> |
| Subject: | SW primer source |
Geez, I hate to bring up the p word but I have a supply problem. I have
been using Napa 7220 self-etching primer, which, from the archives, I
understand is the same as Sherwin Williams wash primer. My local Napa
store now tells me that they cannot get any more for an undetermined
period. Oh well, I am in Fairbanks AK, so supply is not real good. I
checked in Anchorage and they are negative 12 cans for inventory, and I am
informed that Seattle has a negative 35 cans in inventory. Anyone know
where I can order the stuff- Sherwin Williams supply maybe? We do not have
an SW store in Fairbanks. Please reply direct to kill the thread.
Gar Pessel, Fairbanks, AK (HS finished, working on rudder and VS)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Captain Steven DiNieri" <capsteve(at)wzrd.com> |
http://www.web-flight.com/486/eaarvforum.htm
this is the eaa chapter 486 homepage. unfortunately some links are
inoperative.
Capsteve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Finn Lassen <finnlass(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Zoche aero diesel |
Funny you should ask. I'm actually in the process of mounting engine
accessories: radiator, oil cooler, carbs, starter, etc.
I'm still debating whether to final mount everything and then test the
engine, or whether to tear down the engine and check specs and replace
gaskets, seals, etc. I'll probably do the teardown.
Even with Tracy's manual and photos of his RV-4 there sure are a lot of
details to consider: where exactly to place the radiators, how to
support them, etc. etc.
Finn
Mike Wills wrote:
> Hows your project coming along? How close are you to flying?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Bibb <rbibb(at)fore.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV4 For Sale |
For what it is worth I am 6'5", 36 inseam and I fit in my RV-4 OK. I moved
the front seat back 3/4" - otherwise standard. I don't use much of a seat
cushion but my head does not hit the canopy....
At 04:13 PM 8/12/98 GMT, you wrote:
>
>Will a guy 6'5" tall (250, broad shoulders) 36" inseam fit into your
>RV?
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>For Sale 1995 RV-4 185TTSN , 0320 D1A 160 HP, 185TTSN , Hartzell C/S Prop
>>185 TTSN
>
>To reply via email, remove the bananna!
>
>
>
>
>
>
Richard E. Bibb Direct: 703-245-4505
Vice President, Federal Operations Main: 703-245-4544
Fore Systems Federal, Inc. FAX: 703-245-4500
1595 Spring Hill Road Pager: 800-719-1246
5th Floor
Vienna, VA 22182
We're from Pittsburgh, we make networks that last.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe Drumm <jdrumm(at)dgs.dgsys.com> |
Last night, I was playing around with the rudder just to see how it went
together. I didn't have much time to do any real work, so I was just
studying the plans, etc. I noticed on my rudder spar, it doesn't line up
with the rudder skin on the top hole. There are two holes at the top of
the skin, and neither lines up with the top hole in the rudder spar. If I
move it to line up with one of them, none of the other pre-drilled holes
line up. Is this normal? If so, I would have to drill a third hole in
the skin near the top, and it seems to me it would be too close to the
other holes. Or does the top hole in the rudder spar not rivet to the
skin? It was late, so maybe I missed something simple.
Thanks
Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris & Tammy Edwards <cte(at)csi.com> |
"'rv-list(at)matronics.com'"
| Subject: | First flight of N84RP |
What was the model of the O-320, I am installing a 0-320-H2AD 160 and was curious
if the cowl had to be modified and which cowl was used?
Thanks,
Chris Edwards
N364TS
RV-8-160 QB
#80231
cte(at)csi.com
Listers--
My Rv-6, N84RP finally severed its earthly bonds, and flew exactly as
predicted. Here are some of its specs:
Empty weight--1024 lbs.
Lyc. O-320 160
Hartzell C/S
Ellison carb
Skytec starter
35 amp alt.
Vetterman ex.--Robbins muffs
Kx-125
AT-150, encoder
Ameriking elt
Gyro panel
Full swivel t-wheel
Sliding canopy
Battery on aft side of firewall
Centari paint
No upholstry or carpet
Strobe power supply under vert.stab
Empty CG (with oil) 69.5 or 9.5 in. aft of wing leading edge.
Ray Parker, Ocala FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <steve.nichols(at)stoneweb.com> "Steve D Nichols" |
| Subject: | Re: AutoCAD RV Drawings |
AS I STUDIED THE PREVIEW PLANS FOR THE -4 I WONDERED THE SAME THING. TO GET A
COMPLETE SET OF CAD DRAWINGS OF ANY ONE PLANE WOULD BE A BIG UNDERTAKING
HOWEVER I AM SURE THERE ARE PLENTY OF PEOPLE IN THIS FORUM THAT COULD SPLIT
THE WORK. THE ONLY OTHER PROBLEM WOULD BE COPYRIGHT LAWS ?
ANYONE ELSE HAVE IDEAS ?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com> |
| Subject: | First flight of N84RP |
Chris & Tammy,
I just flew a friends -6A last night that used the -H2AD engine. He
had to put two bumps, one on either side of center just behind the
spinner face on the top cowl. I don't know which cowl he had (short Vs
long).
Fred Stucklen
N925RV RV-6A
E. Windsor, Ct
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris & Tammy Edwards [SMTP:cte(at)csi.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 1998 6:35 AM
> To: 'Parker43rp(at)aol.com'; 'rv-list(at)matronics.com'
> Subject: RE: RV-List: First flight of N84RP
>
>
> What was the model of the O-320, I am installing a 0-320-H2AD 160 and
> was curious if the cowl had to be modified and which cowl was used?
>
> Thanks,
> Chris Edwards
> N364TS
> RV-8-160 QB
> #80231
> cte(at)csi.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
Joe,
This sounds like the same problem I thought I had the first time I clecoed
the rudder spar and skin together. Then I noticed on the plans that the
rudder skin goes two rivet holes past the end of the spar. Once I clecoed
it together correctly, everything was OK.
Kevin Horton RV-8 80427 (wings)
khorton(at)cyberus.ca stuck in Wichita instead of home working
on the RV :-(
>
>Last night, I was playing around with the rudder just to see how it went
>together. I didn't have much time to do any real work, so I was just
>studying the plans, etc. I noticed on my rudder spar, it doesn't line up
>with the rudder skin on the top hole. There are two holes at the top of
>the skin, and neither lines up with the top hole in the rudder spar. If I
>move it to line up with one of them, none of the other pre-drilled holes
>line up. Is this normal? If so, I would have to drill a third hole in
>the skin near the top, and it seems to me it would be too close to the
>other holes. Or does the top hole in the rudder spar not rivet to the
>skin? It was late, so maybe I missed something simple.
>
>Thanks
>
>Joe
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | OrndorffG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron pushrod hole |
Bill,
The hole has to be big enough not to interfer with the pushrod. All the
RVs have a funny shaped hole in that area. Sounds like the rivet will have to
go.
George Orndorff
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: COWLLING ASSEMBLY PROBLEMS |
Graham,
If you don't mind the display, you can use screws along the top of the
cowling. It is what I did. Placed them about each six inches, into angle
brackets ( with anchor nuts beneath) that I had placed on the firewall.
Used polished stainless steel screws with built on washers. Made it much
easier to remove/replace the top cowling and to me the screw heads were
rather nice looking once the job was completed.
John C Darby Jr.
RV6 sold, Cessna 210 bought
Stephenville TX
>REAL PROBLEM WHEN TRYING TO FIT THE TOP SECTION. THIS IS BECAUSE YOU CANNT
>LINE UP THE HORIZONTAL HINGE SEGMENTS SIMILTANIOUSLY WITH THOSE HINGE
>SEGMENTS AROUND THE TOP OF THE FUSELAGE. HAVE TRIED VAN'S ON THIS - HE SAYS
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Pressure checking hoses |
Andy,
Here in this small town, we have two auto parts houses that build up and
then test hyd. lines (admittedly they are usually for tractors) but they
were able to test my lines. I asked them to test them to 1500 pounds and
there was no problem for them to do it. In fact, they didn't charge me
anything. But then I had in the past bought much dollars of truck parts
from them.
Certainly in Denver? they must have someone so that you wouldn't have to
send them to Timbuctoo to have them checked out by some expert aircraft shop
that usually charges 45.00/ hr plus.
John C Darby Jr.
RV6 sold, Cessna 210 bought
Stephenville TX
>mentioned in old RV-ators, I would like to get my oil lines pressure
>checked. Originally, I had a friend who was an A&P mechanic make them. I
>Does anyone know how to go about testing them. Are there companies that
>specialize in this type of thing where I can mail them to, or even visit
>if I can find one near Denver?
>
>Andy
________________________________________________________________________________
Walt,
I did it on mine. No problems other than the tool I needed at the airport
was at home in the shop etc.
John C Darby Jr.
RV6 sold, Cessna 210 bought
Stephenville TX
>Re: electric flaps.... I am seriously considering changing to elec flaps
on
>my 6A.
>Anybody done this conversion on a flying airplane? How difficult is it?
>Walt.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVosberg(at)uhc.com |
| Subject: | Excess freight charges |
To all builders:
When they inform you that your shipment has arrived, get the total
charges AND a breakdown of all the charges over the phone, so that you
can dispute any discrepancies or overcharges BEFORE you recieve the
shipment and pay the bill. I was overcharged also but didn't discover
this until after I paid, picked up the shipment and then read the
reciept after I was at home. While I was at roadway I speciffically
asked them if I was given a discount for picking up the package myself
instead of paying the full price for home delivery. They said yes I
was given the discount. After I read the reciept at home and
deciphered it, I discovered that I was charged for home delivery. The
next day I went back and called them on it and they said "oops, we'll
send you a refund request form in the mail". That was a month ago and
I'm sure I won't be able to get the form or the refund before my next
kit. That is when I will deduct my "refund" from the next shipping
charges :-)
Roy Vosberg
Twin Cities, MN
RV-6 wings
>>Considering that my wing kit cost $166.25 and my fuselage cost
$107.54,
>>does $624 seem reasonable for a finish
>>kit being delivered to the very same address?
I had the same problem and like you I ordered my kits close together.
I live in Roanoke, VA. Anyway, it was finally resolved that the
shipping companies have several rates. Make sure they are giving you
the "Van's" rate. That was the problem in my case. It turned out to
be about one-third of what they otherwise would have charged me. Yes
initially they gave me the BS about fiberglass parts and laminates and
such, I kept going up the line until I finally got a high school
educated person to straighten the mess out. Then about three months
later I got a bill for what I already paid. Go figure?
G. Fesenbek
Roanoke, VA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron pushrod hole |
><< Enlarging the aileron pushrod hole in the rear spar on my RV-8 wing I find
> that I'm going to get into the rivet at the top end of the hole. Has
> anyone else had this problem? It seems the hole has to be enlarged quite a
> bit. >>
On my kit #587, the center doubler has the old rectangular hole, and the spar
itself has a much larger odd shaped hole. The odd shaped hole appears closer to
what the actual final shape should be, and it's cut out where the rivet in
question would be. In other words, the doubler still has a rivet hole, but
there's no spar there to rivet to.
Russell Duffy
Navarre, FL
Kolb SlingShot N8754K (for sale)
RV-8A, 80587 (wings)
rad(at)pen.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Dimeo <Robert.Dimeo(at)digital.com> |
Joe,
Kevin is right. Look close at the drawings. The extra holes are for
attaching the assembly for the counter weights. Start at the bottom and
everything lines up.
Regards,
Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Dimeo <Robert.Dimeo(at)digital.com> |
Here's my ICQ #
12590884
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Don Mack [SMTP:donmack(at)flash.net]
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 1998 8:55 PM
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: ICQ
ICQ 16679225
Don Mack
RV-6A Fuselage
Ercoupe 415-D
donmack(at)flash.net
icq 16679225
http://www.flash.net/~donmack
-----Original Message-----
From: Bradley Kidder, Jr. <sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net>
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Wednesday, August 12, 1998 7:40 PM
Subject: RV-List: ICQ
>
>If any of you are ICQ users and would care to exchange numbers,
here's
>mine. Thanks.
>(I think I've sent this twice... sorry)
>
>// s //
>Bradley W. Kidder, Jr.
>sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net
>ICQ# 11770815
>RV-6A (empennage)
>N188FW (reserved)
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael_Markert(at)vul.com (Michael Markert) |
| Subject: | Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
The other night I was dimpling the HS skin with the C-frame tool and the
results are disappointing. The actual dimple looks fine, but there is a "wavy"
area around the dimple.
I was using a regular rubber mallet. I just purchased a a 28 oz deadblow
hammer, but haven't tried it yet.
When I used the hand squeezers on the perimeter holes there is no "wavy" area.
Is there a trick to dimpling with the C-frame tool?
Is this a non-issue because the skin may be all "wavy" anyway from riveting?
Mike Markert
RV-6A Empenage
Baton Rouge LA
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Prop Governor Pad Plate? |
| From: | smcdaniels(at)Juno.com (SCOTT R MCDANIELS) |
>Woodward said to use a release agent (sticky stuff that comes on the
>gasket
>from Woodward) so the gasket will come off when you pull the unit for
>service
>several years from now.
In the shop at Van's we use fuel lube for all engine accessory gaskets.
Scott McDaniels
These opinions and ideas are my own
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
of my employer.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Fogerson <rfogerson(at)baf.com> |
I know a guy (Andy Harris I think) who was at least 6' 5" and 250 pounds
that built a single seater from an RV-4 kit. You could convert this to
a single if you didn't have to have a two seater.
At 04:13 PM 8/12/98 GMT, you wrote:
>
>Will a guy 6'5" tall (250, broad shoulders) 36" inseam fit into your
>RV?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stuck starter contactors . . . |
> I believe a fail-safe way to deal with the possibility of a stuck
starter contactor
>might be to connect two of them in series.
. . . but you already have another contactor in series with the starter
contactor . . . most people call it the Battery Master contactor . . .
If your "stuck contactor" light stays on after cranking the engine,
you'd simply shut everything down and get out your toolbox . . .
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Dimeo <Robert.Dimeo(at)digital.com> |
| Subject: | Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
Mike,
I actually found the C frame tool superior to other methods of dimpling.
My skins had absolutely no waves. (riveting is another matter).
I supported the skin around the C frame with twoby's set to just below the
die using the female die in the bottom and striking the mail die.( The C
frame tool was at the edge of a table). I started with a small ball pene but
move to a 16oz dead blow. One strike is all that is needed and not a very
hard one at that. Get someone to help as the key is to have the skin flat on
the die.
Good luck
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael_Markert(at)vul.com [SMTP:Michael_Markert(at)vul.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 1998 9:48 AM
To: rvlist(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV-List: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing?
Markert)
The other night I was dimpling the HS skin with the C-frame tool
and the
results are disappointing. The actual dimple looks fine, but there
is a "wavy"
area around the dimple.
I was using a regular rubber mallet. I just purchased a a 28 oz
deadblow
hammer, but haven't tried it yet.
When I used the hand squeezers on the perimeter holes there is no
"wavy" area.
Is there a trick to dimpling with the C-frame tool?
Is this a non-issue because the skin may be all "wavy" anyway from
riveting?
Mike Markert
RV-6A Empenage
Baton Rouge LA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Craig-Stearman" <tcraigst(at)ionet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
Mike,
I assume you are using the Avery C-frame tool and dimple dies. These are
"spring-back" dies which over-dimple the hole slightly to allow for
spring-back in the aluminum. This makes for smoother fit once the rivet is
driven. It does look a little wavy before you drive the rivet. I think you
will be very pleased with the appearance after you rivet.
Tom Craig-Stearman
tcraigst(at)ionet.net
RV-4 64ST mounting the cowl
>
> The other night I was dimpling the HS skin with the C-frame tool and the
> results are disappointing. The actual dimple looks fine, but there is a
"wavy"
> area around the dimple.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mikel(at)dimensional.com |
| Subject: | Re: Infinity stick grips - usage |
>Just a thought about putting a flap switch on the grip: if it's right there
>under your fingers, there's always the possibility of inadvertant flap
>extension at high speed.
The other option is to have a FLAP ON/OFF switch on the panel and have it
part of your check list (you DO have a check list, don't you) to turn it on
and off for the flight/landing. Then you can use the switch when you need to
keep your hands on the stick in the pattern.
Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken Harrill <KHarrill(at)osa.state.sc.us> |
| Subject: | Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
(Michael Markert)
The other night I was dimpling the HS skin with the
C-frame tool and the
results are disappointing. The actual dimple looks
fine, but there is a "wavy"
area around the dimple.
Mike,
You are probably hitting the ram too hard or using a
hammer that is too heavy. You are actually stretching the metal. A
wooden mallet works best. Hit it only hard enough to make a good
dimple, no harder.
I hope this helps.
Ken Harrill
RV-6, fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: electronic engine analyzers |
>
>First, there are personal differences that make some prefer analog etc.
The analog devices are engine operational data and generally
referenced only while you're twisting knobs or moving levers.
"Analyzers" are adjuncts to operational displays that purport
to alert you to impending problems . . . generally VERY rare
and somthing else would probably prompt you to look at the
analyzer after the problem surfaces.
>Second, there are poorly designed systems that require too much attention
and
>looking at to get information needed with the result that the pilot's head
is
>not where it should be.
IMHO any diversion, operational or diagnostic should be evaulated
for flight safety issues. I think the J-3 with a bare panel
is probably one of the safest airplanes there is to fly.
OTOH, you must have some instruments to do some essential tasks.
It's a personal issue with individual builders to decide how
much stuff is necessary/useful and then disipline himself on
how much he/she will allow it to intrude on his primary responsabilities
while airborne.
>The computerized information systems (new types of digital
instruments/panels)
>*SHOULD* allow the pilot to spend more time looking out the window and
using his
>brain for things that machines cannot do. Frequent looking at the oil
pressure
>indicator to see if it is still the same is a poor use of a human brain.
Most
>of us don't look often enough for it to be of much value anyway. A burst
hose
>and the engine will become the annunciator with a clattering alarm.
EXACTLY my point. In my forums I ask pilots how many times they've
had an engine incident where some advanced monitoring/diagnostics
capability was useful while still in the air. I almost never
get an affirmative response.
>None of us would accept an "idiot light" panel but I can't imagine anyone
>opposing them to advise us to check the instrument.
What's wrong with an annunciator panel? It depends on what's driving
the lights. If they are calibrated, predictable sensors, then I see
a great advantage in reducing pilot workloads by saying if the light
is out, the parameter is okay. Idiot-lights in cars have limited
sensing capability and have given smart-lights a bad name.
> . . . Personally, I don't have
>any use at all for graphic "clock like" digital instruments. We in the
computer
>industry push that stuff because it looks neat and helps sell more powerfull
>hardware to run it. When my oil pressure annunciator light comes on I
want to
>look down at the instrument and get a number. I really don't see the need
for a
>clock display. I must be missing something.
Not at all . . . If we get into the instrument business our first
product will be to combine all engine instrumentation into a single
display, called up and labled by pushbutton and dead-front annuncator
that includes caution/warning lights for out-of-spec parameters. You'll
plug a lap-top into it to set warning points -and- download history
data. We can put 8 instruments of capability into 6 square inches
of panel space. "Clock" faces were a good idea and driven mostly
by military mentality of having to deal with systems issues while
you were shooting at somebody and they were shooting back at you.
Unless you plan to hang "twin 50s" on your RV, I'll suggest some
modern thinking is not out of order.
>Hopefully, in the future we will be able to enter our destination
identifier and
>the system will take us there safely even if we are unconscious. I think it
>could be done with today's technology. Of course, we would still want to be
>able to hand fly it.
That's what the AGATE airplane proposes to do. I'll go on record as
predicting it will never happen. (1) like the pilots in "The Right Stuff"
the reason I climb into the machine is to fly the thing. (2) I also
accept the notion that life IS a risky business and everything I
do has some possibility that I woun't live to see the sun go down
and (3) those kinds of airplanes will get so much help from Washington
that nobody will be able to afford one.
>An old salt pilot told me one time that the IFR instruments need to be
familiar
>enough to you that you can fly heavy weather while one passenger gropes
for his
>dropped cigarette and the chubby lady behind you is throwing up. I don't
>imagine the oil pressure gets much notice at such times!
Good thinking. We can really spend a lot of time worrying about
the low order risks and not enough time maintaining skills to
deal with high order risks. We could learn a lot from insurance
companies who study risk managment and make money at it. In our
case, we need to acquire reasonable skills at risk managment so
that we live to fly another day.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
<<
I was using a regular rubber mallet. I just purchased a a 28 oz deadblow
hammer, but haven't tried it yet. >>
Mike,
There is some black magic here with dimpling. We have tried a number of
different techniques to eliminate the distress of the skin around the dimple.
We have used a small hand pneumatic squeezer and actually dimpled skin and rib
at the same time with excellent results. Many experts said this would not
work,but it did and I think you get the added benefit of the inner and outer
dimple being exactly lined up. We have tried the large pneumatic clamp
squeezer for the holes away from the edge with disappointing results. After I
talked to Scott McDaniels last year about how he did the 8's horizontal stab
without the first sign of distress, he told me he used an avery c-clamp. When
I tried it I got varying results until one day I noticed that it all depended
on which small ballpen hammer I used. The only difference that I could see was
that the hammer which did good had a rounded head. Now for my theories. If you
work the aluminum at a slow rate, ie with soft hammers or pnuematic c-clamps
that bend considerably while doing the hole, you will end up with a rounded
dimple radius rather than a nice crisp conical hole. Maybe the skin has a
chance to work harden while it is being shaped. I think you want to hit it
with a light swift blow and one that is on the sweet spot of the hammer. This
sweet spot would be considerably larger on a rounded hammer than on a flat
headed hammer. Try some things on scrap parts until you find the correct
combination. We tried 3 different manufacters dies w/o seeing anything
significant.
Good luck,
Bernie Kerr, rv6A fuselage, SE FLA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gar Pessel <pessel(at)ptialaska.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
>
> The other night I was dimpling the HS skin with the C-frame tool and the
> results are disappointing. The actual dimple looks fine, but there is a
"wavy"
> area around the dimple.
>
snip
> Mike Markert
> RV-6A Empenage
> Baton Rouge LA
>
As something of a beginner, I have just had the same experience. The .032
skin on the HS takes a fair amount of force to dimple on the C-frame. My
original dimples were "wavy" after dimpling with the wooden mallet. I
re-dimpled with a 16 oz. deadblow, and everything flattened out (yeah, some
hundreds of dimples). I also use a platform (saw it on somebody's web
site) to hold the skin level with the dimple die, which I think helps. The
.016 skins on the controls will not take near this much effort, and I think
you can easily over dimple. The 28 oz hammer sounds a bit heavy to me.
When riveting the .032 skin, using Orndorff's trick of a light turn on the
deburring tool helps the rivet sit nice and flush. Masking tape over the
rivet or the set will also help final appearance. Yeah, now that I have
done it once, I could do it better next time. Ain't it always so. Gar
Pessel Fairbanks, AK (HS done, working on rudder and VS)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RBusick505(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Stuck starter contactors . . . |
Based upon the large amount of email on this subject, one might conclude that
stuck starters are a major aircraft design concern and an everyday occurance!
Does anyone have the real failure rates, or an estimated failure rate per
number of hours of operation or the number of times the starter is engaged?
If this is in fact such a big problem, then it might be worth considering not
using a starter at all.
Question: Is the starter essential or nonessential equipment?
Bob Busick
RV-6
Fremont CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vince S. Himsl" <himsl(at)mail.wsu.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
hello,
I had same problem. I am using the dead blow hammer but I think your
problem is that the skin is not perpendicular to force of the dimple die.
I eventually purchased a 4x8 section of 3/4 inch particle board, cut to 2 x
8, and cut a hole in it for the C frame tool. This way the positioning
of the skin is taken care of and I can concentrate on hitting the die
square and making sure I don't add extra holes to the HS. I used this on
the rudder and elevators and the results were much better. Those who are
really good at using the tool would say that is all you need, but as a
beginner I found that the squeezer did the best job. What I find works
best for me regarding the C tool is to 'touch up' the dimples with the
counter sink tool.
I found my mistake(s) on the Horizontal Stabilizer to be therapeutic as I
realized and accepted that I wasn't going to build an Oshkosh grand
champion. Without that stress, things became easier and definitely more
relaxed.
Regards,
Vince Himsl
RV8 wings
Moscow, ID USA
At 06:47 AM 98.08.13 , you wrote:
>
> The other night I was dimpling the HS skin with the C-frame tool and the
> results are disappointing. The actual dimple looks fine, but there is a
"wavy"
> area around the dimple.
>
> I was using a regular rubber mallet. I just purchased a a 28 oz deadblow
> hammer, but haven't tried it yet.
>
> When I used the hand squeezers on the perimeter holes there is no "wavy"
area.
>
> Is there a trick to dimpling with the C-frame tool?
> Is this a non-issue because the skin may be all "wavy" anyway from riveting?
>
>
> Mike Markert
> RV-6A Empenage
> Baton Rouge LA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vince S. Himsl" <himsl(at)mail.wsu.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron pushrod hole |
Hello,
My kit is the same, square holed doubler plate with odd shape hole in
spar. The rivet hole near top of doubler plate butts up against the hole.
I will enlarge the doubler plate hole with a dremel tool .
I used the 52 3/4" spar edge to doubler edge distance to position the
doubler plate so that the ribs would line according to the plans.
Has everyone else done likewise?
Vince Himsl
RV8 wings
Moscow, ID USA
At 06:34 AM 98.08.13 , you wrote:
>
>><< Enlarging the aileron pushrod hole in the rear spar on my RV-8 wing I
find
>> that I'm going to get into the rivet at the top end of the hole. Has
>> anyone else had this problem? It seems the hole has to be enlarged quite a
>> bit. >>
>
>
>On my kit #587, the center doubler has the old rectangular hole, and the spar
>itself has a much larger odd shaped hole. The odd shaped hole appears
closer to
>what the actual final shape should be, and it's cut out where the rivet in
>question would be. In other words, the doubler still has a rivet hole, but
>there's no spar there to rivet to.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randall Henderson <randall(at)edt.com> |
| Subject: | Schroth Harnesses |
Listers,
Some of you may recall some postings a while back from Dan Morris
regarding the Schroth Harnesses that he sells. I have seen one of
these harnesses in person and was quite impressed.
Dan has said he can get a quantity discount if he gets enough orders.
So since I am interested in purchasing a set, it's in my interest if
more people purchase them!
Since he doesn't have a web site I told him I'd put his info up on my
site. It's at http://www.edt.com/homewing/morris.html. Please feel
free to take a look and contact Dan if you are interested.
Dan's email address is Morristec(at)icdc.com.
Randall Henderson, RV-6 (engine/finish)
Portland, OR
http://www.edt.com/homewing
randall(at)edt.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stuck starter contactors . . . |
>Based upon the large amount of email on this subject, one might conclude that
>stuck starters are a major aircraft design concern and an everyday occurance!
>Does anyone have the real failure rates, or an estimated failure rate per
>number of hours of operation or the number of times the starter is engaged?
In 1000+ hours personal experience, never seen it happen. While we
owned an airport, never saw it happen in approx 1200 hours operations
of the fleet we supervised. Had plenty of OTHER starter problems tho . . .
>If this is in fact such a big problem, then it might be worth considering not
>using a starter at all.
Good point . . . it isn't a big problem. But have one aerobatic pilot
tear up a ring gear after a 10g maneuver at OSH or publish a few
incident reports on the Internet and these things take on a life
of their own.
>Question: Is the starter essential or nonessential equipment?
Necessary for the good health of those who would otherwise
stand out front and do the "laying on of hands" . . . otherwise,
no big deal.
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========o00o=(_)=o00o==========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randall Henderson <randall(at)edt.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
> The other night I was dimpling the HS skin with the C-frame tool and
the > results are disappointing. The actual dimple looks fine, but
there is > a "wavy" area around the dimple. > > I was using a regular
rubber mallet. I just purchased a a 28 oz deadblow > hammer, but
haven't tried it yet.
Don't use a rubber mallet. You need more force than that. Your
dimples are almost certainly under-done. This results in a "fish-eye"
area around the hole where it isn't flat. Hit it again once or twice
with a regular hammer (try some scrap first of course). And be sure
not to OVER-dimple either, as this will cause stretching of the metal
and similar "wavyness". With a little practice you will get a feel
for how much force to use to get it right.
On a related note, I must admit I don't know why all the fuss over
"dead-blow" hammers. I've used a regular 16oz hammer for my whole
project, and my dimples came out as good or better than most. Sure
this is my opinion but I do have dozens of RV projects in my area to
compare to so I think I'm not just blowing smoke.
Admittidly, I have never tried a dead-blow hammer, and I hate it when
someone knocks some tool or idea that they've never used. Maybe
someone who has one of these can explain what's so much better about
using one?
Randall Henderson, RV-6 (engine/finish)
Portland, OR
http://www.edt.com/homewing
randall(at)edt.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | donspawn(at)Juno.com |
>Suggestions please.
> Where the F676/677 and the F678 join at F606 I did not leave the
>required distance for a second row of rivets. What are my options?
Replace
>F676/677 and do it right.
>R. Lindberg
>RV6A
Ask the factory, Starting over wonuldn't be that much $.
Don Jordan ~ 76DJ ~ 6A fuselage ~ Arlington,Tx ~ donspawn(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
<< I was using a regular rubber mallet. I just purchased a a 28 oz deadblow
hammer, but haven't tried it yet. >>
That rubber smacker won't do the job. The 28 oz job (if rubber) won't do it
either. Geo Orndorff sells a WOODEN hammer that does a nice (and quieter) job.
Get one.
The skin should be flat around the dimple, and maybe just a tiny bit proud.
This is the 'springback' mentioned in the die adverts.
Check six!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
Cadieman(at)aol.com
| Subject: | Stuck starter contactors . . .I had one |
Listers:
I actually had a starter contactor stick on me once, and things slowly went
dead on the flight home. Cycling the master only cycled the starter- the
contacts were welded! I later found out that the installed part was a master
type, not a starter type. Now, this wasn't my a/c either, so don't flame me
for being an idiot builder. I will admit it wasn't the smartest thing to fly
an a/c that may have been a little too...."massaged"....by an...aggie. ;-)
Sorry- I couldn't resist!
The owner and I actually hopped that particular ship on a 2500+ mi/20 flight
hrs x-cy later, and had no problems. On that trip, I got to give my dad a ride
in a "home-made" plane, and he had a ball. I never did get to give him a ride
in one I had built myself, tho. My mom (also a rated pilot) was more brave,
and later, I got to hop her in the Rocket. She thought it was "different".
Oddly, I had never noticed her gift for understatement before...
Check six!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stuck starter contactors . . . |
>
>>Based upon the large amount of email on this subject, one might conclude
that
>>stuck starters are a major aircraft design concern and an everyday
occurance!
>>Does anyone have the real failure rates, or an estimated failure rate per
>>number of hours of operation or the number of times the starter is
engaged?
>
> In 1000+ hours personal experience, never seen it happen. While we
> owned an airport, never saw it happen in approx 1200 hours operations
> of the fleet we supervised. Had plenty of OTHER starter problems tho . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Dimeo <Robert.Dimeo(at)digital.com> |
| Subject: | Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
I found the dead blow hammer doesn't bounce after the hit. I feel I can
modulate the hits to the surface better and I only have to hit something
once.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Randall Henderson [SMTP:randall(at)edt.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 1998 12:45 PM
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing?
> The other night I was dimpling the HS skin with the C-frame tool
and
the > results are disappointing. The actual dimple looks fine, but
there is > a "wavy" area around the dimple. > > I was using a
regular
rubber mallet. I just purchased a a 28 oz deadblow > hammer, but
haven't tried it yet.
Don't use a rubber mallet. You need more force than that. Your
dimples are almost certainly under-done. This results in a
"fish-eye"
area around the hole where it isn't flat. Hit it again once or
twice
not to OVER-dimple either, as this will cause stretching of the
metal
and similar "wavyness". With a little practice you will get a feel
On a related note, I must admit I don't know why all the fuss over
"dead-blow" hammers. I've used a regular 16oz hammer for my whole
project, and my dimples came out as good or better than most. Sure
this is my opinion but I do have dozens of RV projects in my area to
compare to so I think I'm not just blowing smoke.
Admittidly, I have never tried a dead-blow hammer, and I hate it
when
someone knocks some tool or idea that they've never used. Maybe
someone who has one of these can explain what's so much better about
using one?
Randall Henderson, RV-6 (engine/finish)
Portland, OR
http://www.edt.com/homewing
randall(at)edt.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Lauritsen" <clevtool(at)tdsi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Machine Countersink Question |
>
>I made the panel removable using 509-8R8
>screws. I am having problems with my 3 flute piloted countersink
>chattering in the holes.
Gary,
Listen to the advise in the other posts about the "backer" with the correct
size hole in it (#19). We also sell a "high hook" or "single flute"
countersink cutter with a #19 pilot on it. The advantage of the single
flute is that there is only one cutting surface on the metal. These leave
no chatter marks, but are very aggressive. Don't lean on them like you have
to with the 3-flute. Apply just enough pressure to keep them on the metal
and let them do the work. They do an outstanding job. $9.00 each and with
all of our products send it back if your not satisfied with the results.
Thanks,
Mike Lauritsen
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
2225 First St.
Boone, IA 50036
1-800-368-1822 orders
1-515-432-6794 questions
1-515-432-7804 FAX
clevtool(at)tdsi.net
http://www.cleavelandtool.com
name="Cleaveland Aircraft Tool.vcf"
filename="Cleaveland Aircraft Tool.vcf"
BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:2.1
N:Tool;Cleaveland Aircraft
FN:Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
ORG:Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
TEL;WORK;VOICE:515-432-6794
TEL;WORK;FAX:515-432-7804
ADR;WORK:;;2225 First St.;Boone;Iowa;50036;USA
Iowa 50036=3D0D=3D0AUSA
URL:
URL:http://www.cleavelandtool.com
EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:clevtool(at)tdsi.net
REV:19980813T183847Z
END:VCARD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Lauritsen" <clevtool(at)tdsi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling: C Frame Tips |
> The other night I was dimpling the HS skin with the C-frame tool ... there
is a "wavy"
> area around the dimple.
> I was using a regular rubber mallet.
Mike,
First off, did you use the male and female dies for the same sized rivet?
(Don't laugh, you would be amazed how often this happens)
The rubber mallet is most likely the worst problem. We used a 16oz. claw
hammer on most of our airplane. Deadblows are nice because they don't
bounce, but are not necessary. 12oz is the most common size of hammer. I
have tried wood or rawhide mallets and they have advantages. First is that
you can "feel" what you are doing better with the wood. Second it is not as
loud when you hit the ram. The disadvantage is that you never will form
quite as crisp of a dimple with a wood hammer.
If you are using our c-frame there should have been a set of plans included
to build a false tabletop around the c-frame to support the skins. This
should be done regardless of the c-frame manufacturer. Build the table with
a carpeted top to come out just below the surface of the bottom die. This
will support the skin and keep it square with the ram when you dimple.
(make sure that you adjust the table so that it is square with the ram in
both directions)
If you are using a "return spring" to lift the ram back off the skin make
sure that you grab the ram and hold it down on the skin before you hit it
with a hammer. Hit the ram at least twice. When you bend any piece of
metal will spring back toward it's original position somewhat, and it will
do the same thing when you bend it down in to the dimple. Hitting it the
second time will seat the dimple properly. The c-frame will "ping" slightly
when the dimple is complete. It will "thud" if it is not yet complete. And
it will "clang" if it is overdone. If the dimple is overdone there will be
a crushed ring just on the outside of the dimple (not on the outside of the
die). If it is incomplete it will look like the metal just curves down into
the hole. When correct you should be able to make a row of dimples and hold
a long straight edge across them. The skin should be touching the
straightedge everywhere except at the dimple and if you drop a rivet in the
hole it should be ever so slightly recessed (.002") and it will raise up
when bucked.
You should never have to touch up a dimple with a countersink cutter. Dies
make all the difference in the world, if you are not using ours try them.
If you don't like them better send them back. Hundreds of builders have
told me that our dies have made a significant improvement in their work.
Good luck,
Mike Lauritsen
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
2225 First St.
Boone, IA 50036
1-800-368-1822 orders
1-515-432-6794 questions
1-515-432-7804 FAX
clevtool(at)tdsi.net
http://www.cleavelandtool.com
name="Cleaveland Aircraft Tool.vcf"
filename="Cleaveland Aircraft Tool.vcf"
BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:2.1
N:Tool;Cleaveland Aircraft
FN:Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
ORG:Cleaveland Aircraft Tool
TEL;WORK;VOICE:515-432-6794
TEL;WORK;FAX:515-432-7804
ADR;WORK:;;2225 First St.;Boone;Iowa;50036;USA
Iowa 50036=3D0D=3D0AUSA
URL:
URL:http://www.cleavelandtool.com
EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:clevtool(at)tdsi.net
REV:19980813T191644Z
END:VCARD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Corsair" <tinckler(at)axionet.com> |
I have a wing and tail kit for 6 or 6A for sale. Phlogiston spar. Tail
almost done, wing unstarted. $4500. Please contact direct for more info,
not to list.
Located in Pacific Northwest near Seattle.....Thanks......
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Stuck starter contactors . . . |
Sorry to post this again, but only part of it came thru???? so here goes
again....
>
>
>
>>
>>>Based upon the large amount of email on this subject, one might conclude
>that
>>>stuck starters are a major aircraft design concern and an everyday
>occurance!
>>>Does anyone have the real failure rates, or an estimated failure rate per
>>>number of hours of operation or the number of times the starter is
>engaged?
>>
>> In 1000+ hours personal experience, never seen it happen. While we
>> owned an airport, never saw it happen in approx 1200 hours operations
>> of the fleet we supervised. Had plenty of OTHER starter problems tho . .
>.
>>
>
>
>I had it happen on a Twin Beech ONCE. It was not because of welded
>contacts, but shorted switch. I took off IFR into the deep dark night and
>after about 15 min later it was dark inside too! Read the story here:
>http://www.petroblend.com/dougr/litesout.htm
>
>There was a second switch that would have saved me, but I missed it. A
>starter engaged lite would have saved me too.
>
>I have had the Feather pump contacts weld several times. The same relay,
>albiet different than the ones on most RV's. The old AN relays style can
be
>opened up easily and pryed apart with a jack knife. Then you can fly home
>and get it fixed there!
>
>When was the last time you heard about it happening to a car? They have
>essentially the same contactor in most of them.
>
>Tailwinds,
>Doug Rozendaal
>dougr(at)petroblend.com
>http://www.petroblend.com/dougr
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Hyde <hyde(at)bcl.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
I found that hitting the C-frame a little harder makes less wavy areas
around the dimples. With the Avery dimple dies, that then tends to produce
a little ring around the dimple, but this seems to be less annoying than
the waviness. The waviness seems to be due to the fact that the area
around the dimple gets dented in while forming the dimple, and hasn't been
completely squeezed down flat by the flat part of the dies surrounding the
dimple itself.
I have gotten to where I can tell by the sound when I've hit it hard enough
-- there's a little kling sound when the two halves of the dimple die smash
all the way together, and more of a clunk when they don't.
When I discovered I needed a handful of 1/8" dimples, I bought that die
from Cleveland (sp?), and DJ Lauritsen there was quite emphatic telling me
that their dies were better because they were polished better. At the
time, I hadn't done many dimples yet, and didn't appreciate what she was
talking about. It does seem that the Cleveland die leaves less of a ring
when it is pressed or whacked hard enough to make a sharp dimple.
You should be able to go back and whack the wavy ones again and they will
flatten out. The big hammer might help, too, if you're having trouble
whacking hard enough. Another thing I found helpful was clamping the
C-frame so that it hangs over the edge of the bench. That way you can put
the male die on top so you can see what you're doing, and the other side of
the skin will hang down toward the floor out of your way.
>
> The other night I was dimpling the HS skin with the C-frame tool and the
> results are disappointing. The actual dimple looks fine, but there is a
"wavy"
> area around the dimple.
>
> I was using a regular rubber mallet. I just purchased a a 28 oz deadblow
> hammer, but haven't tried it yet.
>
> When I used the hand squeezers on the perimeter holes there is no "wavy"
area.
>
> Is there a trick to dimpling with the C-frame tool?
> Is this a non-issue because the skin may be all "wavy" anyway from riveting?
>
>
> Mike Markert
> RV-6A Empenage
> Baton Rouge LA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joe P. Larson" <jpl(at)platinum.com> |
| Subject: | Stinky Job Alert |
I'm about to start the Stinky Job (ie: assemble my fuel tanks). If anyone
has some profound words of wisdom (such as: seek professional help), I would
be happy to hear them.
-Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Thomas Nguyen <TNGUYEN(at)oss.oceaneering.com> |
| Subject: | RV-List:F677/676 -Reply |
Richard,
I concurr with Don Spawn that it is best to replace both F-676 & F-677
to have the required edge distance at the lap joint. I checked the
price list and found out that the total replacement cost is about $50.
I think it worth the cost. If cost is a factor then the doubler idea in not
bad since it is located on the bottom of the fuselage.
T.Nguyen, P.E
Analysis Engineering Manager
RV-6A Fuselage
>>> 08/12/98 06:06pm >>>
Suggestions please.
Where the F676/677 and the F678 join at F606 I did not leave the
required
distance for a second row of rivets. What are my options? Replace
F676/677
and do it right. Put a double in at that point and be glad that it is on the
bottom or double the rivets along the F606. I am building a 6A and this
area
would not recieve the stress area that a 6 would and is a double row
necessary? Thanks for any input.
R. Lindberg
RV6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stuck starter contactors . . . |
>>When was the last time you heard about it happening to a car? They have
>>essentially the same contactor in most of them.
Actually, the contactors that seem to stick the worse are the
external contactors (Old RBM Controls / now White-Rogers-Stancore)
used on Cessnas and Pipers to control starters that use
Bendix and/or over-run drives. The BEST way to make these
contactors vulnerable to sticking is to allow the stud to
rotate even the tiniest amount when doing final tightening
on the wire nut.
We've seen a couple of cases where built-in contactors have
stuck on B&C starters where contactor is part of pinion
engagement solenoid. Both cases occured when builder was
trying to USE the built in contactor and failed to wire
it for the un-anticipated inrush requirements. This caused
a soft engagment of the contact that seems to be more abusive
and prone to welding the contacts.
It's not difficult to use these contactors for their orignal
intended purpose but there are design considerations.
See <http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/strtctr.pdf>
In our experience with several thousand installations of
the B&C starter, the most reliable architecture is to use
the recommended external contactor . . . the one supplied
by B&C and now by AeroElectric is immune from "stud twist"
cited earlier.
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========o00o=(_)=o00o==========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Hawkins <jah(at)Adobe.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Stinky Job Alert |
Hi Joe,
Building the fuel tanks is not that hard. My advice is to be prepared by
having
all the tools you need on hand as well as some lacquer thinner for
cleaning the
tools as you work and when your done.
Take your time and clean everything after each step. I found that the
suggestion
in the construction manual of riveting in three steps works very well.
I found the latex gloves to work the best too. The vinyl gloves are a
real
pain because they are not tight and the thinner eats them.
Mix the sealant in small batches. You can always make more. I never had
a problem with it starting to cure before I was finished with a part. Be
careful though, the stuff is quite stringy so make sure you watch for
the
strings otherwise they will be all over the parts. This is not a real
problem
however, because it wipes off with the thinner very easily before it
cures.
Make sure you pick your oldest cleco's for this job. You might consider
using
a coffee can full of thinner as you work so you can toss your dirty
cleco's
right into the can. You can then clean them last once you have cleaned
your
tool etc.
Good luck and have fun. It's not as bad as the list sometimes makes it
out to be.
-Jeff Hawkins
RV-8 #563
Suwanee, GA
Joe P. Larson wrote:
>
>
> I'm about to start the Stinky Job (ie: assemble my fuel tanks). If anyone
> has some profound words of wisdom (such as: seek professional help), I would
> be happy to hear them.
>
> -Joe
>
________________________________________________________________________________
dear listers,
putting together the 606 a-b-c parts, i'm confused about the 606 c, the 3/4 x
3/4 angle. after the unit is installed does the angle get rivited to the skin
only, or is it supposed to get rivited with the skin & root rib flange, all
together. i noticed on the plans there is a slight bend in the 606b plate,
that would put it out of line on the root rib flange. what type of rivits
hould be used since i see no way of getting a bucking bar in there
thanks in advance
scott
"winging it" in tampa
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Stinky Job Alert |
- It's not as bad as it's made out to be.
- Don't skimp on Proseal
- Buy lots of gloves
- Take your time, focus on every rivet
- Build a fixture to hold the tank at least somewhat securely
- Clean everything perfectly
----------
>
>
> I'm about to start the Stinky Job (ie: assemble my fuel tanks). If anyone
> has some profound words of wisdom (such as: seek professional help), I would
> be happy to hear them.
>
> -Joe
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Costello" <bcostello(at)mbsi.net> |
| Subject: | Dimpling with the C-frame |
I think it is very important to have the material flat (perpendicular to the die
shaft). Cleaveland has plans that they deliver with their C-frame (which I
purchased) for building a short 'table', shaped something like a skid for moving
material with a fork lift. It is covered with with thin carpet on which the
aluminum rests. One side has a slot for the neck of the C-frame and the opposite
side has a hole through which the female die sits. Actually, it fits flush
with the carpet which covers the top surface of the table. This is probably
clear as mud, but the plans make it easy to build and it works great.
Bill Costello
bcostello(at)mbsi.net
RV-6 still on the wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric Connection Turn Key Wiring Kits |
Bob,
I just want to mention that I'm very interested in this. Please keep us informed
Brian Eckstein
6A Fuselage
----------
>
>
>
> >
> >Bob Nuckolls,
> >
> >In a recent post you mentioned...
> >
> >" A feature of one of our turn-key wiring kits will include solid state
> >relays
> > for nav, landing, taxi lights and pitot heat . . . no heavy currents
> > through panel mounted switches."
> >
> >What are these kits? What do they include? How much do they cost?
> >
> >Ross Mickey
> >
>
> These are in the development stages now. They will be 90+ percent
> of all the wiring for an electrical system including pre-assembled,
> wired, backlighted switch panels for ALL switches. A power distribution
> panel including main bus and essential busses tapped with rows of
> ATC fuses, low voltage warn, alternator regulator (with end of charge
> setback -and- temperature compensation (optional), ov protection,
> transient protection, sold state relays for loads over 5 amps (landing,
> taxi, nav, pitot heat). All connections made through Amp Metrimate
> connectors with gold plated, crimped pins. Harness between switch
> panel and power panel is pre-wired. Kit includes starter contactor,
> battery contactor, alternator b-lead fuse/shunt assembly. There will
> be plenty of protected bus taps for avionics, instruments, etc. The
> kit takes care of the firewall penetrations with 5/16" brass
> studs for starter feed and ground. Kit includes ground strap between
> firewall and crankcase. Kit includes all "fat" wires with terminals
> pre-installed. Tool for installing pins is included. Ground bus
> is on the power distribution board.
>
> These kits will be proofed on airplanes in George Orndorff's hangar
> kit is installed, the only wires left will be individual strands
> to nav lights, strobe suppply, landing/taxi lights, and pitot heat
> (optional). Targeted installation time is 3 hours.
>
> Don't know about costs yet . . . but much less expensive than you
> could yourself for the same quality of components. These will be
> the quietest electrical systems ever installed on a single engine
> airplane. We'll proof the RV series kits first. Scaled down versions
> are planned for KF, Europa, etc. Full up, dual-alternator versions
> are planned for bigger Lancairs and Glasairs.
>
> Been sketching these ideas out for over a year. Will get serious
> on the CAD drawings as soon a Rev 8 goes to press. Would like to
> proof the first kits sometime this winter. We're negotiating for
> skilled assembly labor to put these together and need to be in
> full production before OSH next year. Look for us in our own
> booth.
>
>
> Bob . . .
> AeroElectric Connection
>
> ////
> (o o)
> ==========o00o=(_)=o00o==========
> < If you continue to do >
> < What you've always done >
> < You will continue to be >
> < What you've always been. >
> =================================
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shelbyrv6a(at)mindspring.com (Shelby Smith) |
| Subject: | Re: electronic engine analyzers |
>> . . . Personally, I don't have
>>any use at all for graphic "clock like" digital instruments. We in the
>computer
>>industry push that stuff because it looks neat and helps sell more powerfull
>>hardware to run it. When my oil pressure annunciator light comes on I
>want to
>>look down at the instrument and get a number. I really don't see the need
>for a
>>clock display. I must be missing something.
>
> Not at all . . . If we get into the instrument business our first
> product will be to combine all engine instrumentation into a single
> display, called up and labled by pushbutton and dead-front annuncator
> that includes caution/warning lights for out-of-spec parameters. You'll
> plug a lap-top into it to set warning points -and- download history
> data. We can put 8 instruments of capability into 6 square inches
> of panel space. "Clock" faces were a good idea and driven mostly
> by military mentality of having to deal with systems issues while
> you were shooting at somebody and they were shooting back at you.
> Unless you plan to hang "twin 50s" on your RV, I'll suggest some
> modern thinking is not out of order.
>
> Bob . . .
> ////
> (o o)
> ===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
> < If you continue to do >
> < What you've always done >
> < You will continue to be >
> < What you've always been. >
> =================================
I take exception to the notion that digital readouts are just as easy to
read as the dial types. I know everyone remembers all the automakers' rush
to digital readouts. Mercedes-Benz researched this extensively and you'll
notice that even on the most expensive models they have VERY simple round
gauges, white on black background with orange arrows. Read very quickly and
easily. Some if not all of the digital readouts I have seen are take much
more time to discern. Of course Mercedes has idiot lights and warning as
well.
Shelby in Nashville.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV6junkie(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Stinky Job Alert |
In a message dated 8/13/98 4:27:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jpl(at)platinum.com
writes:
<< I'm about to start the Stinky Job (ie: assemble my fuel tanks). If anyone
has some profound words of wisdom (such as: seek professional help), I would
be happy to hear them. >>
Wear multiple pairs of non-latex (no powder) gloves. As a glove gets gooped-
up, remove to expose a fresh glove. Put the Proseal in a caulk gun for easy
application. Work fast.
Gary Corde
RV-6 N211GC - NJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | pagan <pagan(at)CBOSS.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Stinky Job Alert |
Joe,
I just finished sealing my tanks about a week ago. If I had it to do all
over again I'd seriously consider letting(paying) someone else to do it.
I'm really bad at messy stuff which is probably one of the main reasons I
didn't even consider a fiberglass/composite airplane. I'm trying to figure
out now a good method to test them.
Bill Pagan
80555 wing stuff
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/9749/william.html
>
>
>I'm about to start the Stinky Job (ie: assemble my fuel tanks). If anyone
>has some profound words of wisdom (such as: seek professional help), I would
>be happy to hear them.
>
>-Joe
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric Connection Turn Key Wiring Kits |
22>
<199808102231.RAA00475@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com>
<3.0.1.16.19980811172423.0877f5f6(at)dtc.net>
>
>Bob,
>I just want to mention that I'm very interested in this. Please keep us
informed
>
>Brian Eckstein
>6A Fuselage
RVs will be the first kits to be fabricated and proofed. Given
the popularity of the kits and proximity of George and Becky's
place for doing the proofing, how could I go any other way?
You guys will be the first to know. . .
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========o00o=(_)=o00o==========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: electronic engine analyzers |
>I take exception to the notion that digital readouts are just as easy to
>read as the dial types. I know everyone remembers all the automakers' rush
>to digital readouts. Mercedes-Benz researched this extensively and you'll
>notice that even on the most expensive models they have VERY simple round
>gauges, white on black background with orange arrows. Read very quickly and
>easily. Some if not all of the digital readouts I have seen are take much
>more time to discern. Of course Mercedes has idiot lights and warning as
>well.
I don't THINK anyone said that . . . I'd offer that all systems gages
show you information of interest when you're twisting knobs, and
pulling levers (1% of the time) and when trying to get your attention
when something is wrong (0.1% of the time). Given the high percentage
of time they display nothing of interest (and tend to be ignored as a
human factors issue for the 0.1% you REALLY want to read them) why
not (1) build in some automation for the .1%, (2) display only one
parameter at a time for the 1% and then use the valuable panel space
for other things that you use more intensively (like navigation aids).
In terms of usablity, yes, it will take some re-training. I still moan
when I find that one digit out of a 18-digit, 21-keystroke waypoint
entry has an error in it (happened to me just last night - Dee and
I had a $65 steaks in Hutchinson, Ks). With due attention to
inconveniences and new tricks taught to old dogs, I have to suggest
the tradeoffs may be worth it. It's an individual call but coming back
from Hutch last nigh after dark and in the haze, I couldn't help
thinking how much STUFF was out there to look at and monitor while
all I REALLY needed was a couple of dials right in front of me
and the $100 GPS up on the cowl deck . . .
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========o00o=(_)=o00o==========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Costello" <bcostello(at)mbsi.net> |
| Subject: | Dimpling with the C-frame (correction) |
Oops. I think I said the female die sits in the bottom and is flush with the carpet.
Actually, they recommend the MALE die sits in the bottom. I use it this
way and find it works well. Sorry about that.
Bill Costello
bcostello(at)mbsi.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Olson <lolson(at)doitnow.com> |
Scott,
Save yourself a lot of frustration. Download Will Cretsinger's builders notes.
they are at http://www.flash.net/~gila parked behind the red RV-6A.
Step by step and he doesn't leave anything out.
(If I could just get him write fuselage notes!!)
Larry Olson
RV6 - Right Wing
Cave Creek, AZ
>
>dear listers,
>putting together the 606 a-b-c parts, i'm confused about the 606 c, the 3/4 x
>3/4 angle....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aileron pushrod hole |
> I used the 52 3/4" spar edge to doubler edge distance to position the
>doubler plate so that the ribs would line according to the plans.
>
>Has everyone else done likewise?
>
>Vince Himsl
>RV8 wings
>Moscow, ID USA
Exactly what I did.
Rusty
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)traveller.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
As mentioned by other listers, a "dimpling table" is a great help. Here
are some ideas:
http://www.ath.tis.net/~sbuc/rv6/odd-ends.html
http://www.ath.tis.net/~sbuc/rv6/tips.html
Sam Buchanan
"The RV Journal" http://www.ath.tis.net/~sbuc
Michael Markert wrote:
>
>
> The other night I was dimpling the HS skin with the C-frame tool and the
> results are disappointing. The actual dimple looks fine, but there is a "wavy"
> area around the dimple.
>
> I was using a regular rubber mallet. I just purchased a a 28 oz deadblow
> hammer, but haven't tried it yet.
>
> When I used the hand squeezers on the perimeter holes there is no "wavy" area.
>
> Is there a trick to dimpling with the C-frame tool?
> Is this a non-issue because the skin may be all "wavy" anyway from riveting?
>
>
> Mike Markert
> RV-6A Empenage
> Baton Rouge LA
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
In a message dated 8/13/98 2:30:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time, randall(at)edt.com
writes:
<< Admittidly, I have never tried a dead-blow hammer, and I hate it when
someone knocks some tool or idea that they've never used. Maybe
someone who has one of these can explain what's so much better about
using one?
>>
I built my RV-6 with a regular old claw hammer and the dimples looked just
fine. I used a dead blow hammer on my RV-8 and can't tell a difference. I
initially used a rubber/plastic faced dead blow on the -8's horizontal stab
and had the wavy problem mentioned earlier. I was glad the skins were pre-
punched; the replacements fit perfectly. I'm convinced if you use a good
quality (Avery/Cleaveland) die with the C-frame tool on a solid surface,
you'll get a quality dimple. You'll get a much better dimple than any
squeezing tool can provide.
Rick McBride
RV-6N523JC
RV-8 80027
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Haan <bhaan(at)easystreet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tank bldg tips, was Stinky Job Alert |
Joe,
We found the following ideas very helpful. Some appear insignificant but
all of them contributed to making fuel tank building easier, quicker, and
the results better.
1. Before you dimple the tank skin and the rib flanges, scuff the inside
surface of the tank skin and the outside surface of the rib flanges where
the rib flange and tank skin contact so that the proseal gets a better
grip. This is much easier to do before the dimples get in the way.
2. Mark the location of all the rib flanges on the inside of the tank skin
and then mask off all the rib locations where the proseal will go using
masking tape. This is not so much to have a very neat inside but rather to
make application of the proseal easier, quicker, and cleaner. This masking
is easiest to do for all the ribs before any ribs are riveted.
3. Cut paper towel into about 3 inch squares; about 30 squares needed per
rib. This does not sound significant. Try it you will like it.
4. Put a piece of scotch tape on the outside of the tank skin over every
rivet hole for the rib that you are about to assemble.
5. Put on disposable gloves.
6. Get an artist's spatula at an art supply store for about $4.00. From
the side it looks "z" shaped. If it is the right shape, it can be set down
on the handle with the spatula and the material to be applied suspended up
in the air. Use this spatula to apply a thick coating of proseal to the
area between the masking tape where the rib flanges contact the tank skin.
The shape of the spatula handle definitely helps keep the proseal from
getting on your knuckles and then transferred all over the work area. The
scotch tape on the outside of the tank skin keeps the proseal from coming
out on the skin.
7. Slide the rib into place. We did not put any proseal on the rib flange.
8. Insert the clecoes through the scotch tape. Do not remove the scotch
tape until you are about to insert a rivet.
9. Pull a cleco, drop it in a jar of lacquer thinner, remove the scotch
tape, insert a rivet, set the rivet, etc.
10. If any proseal gets on anything, immediately remove it with the paper
towel squares and lacquer thinner. Use a paper towel square once and
immediately put it in a paper bag.
11. When all the rivets have been set, remove the masking tape from inside
the tank.
12. Put proseal on the shop heads inside the tank using the spatula.
13. Clean the proseal off the clecoes that have been soaking in the lacquer
thinner.
Bob
>
>I'm about to start the Stinky Job (ie: assemble my fuel tanks). If anyone
>has some profound words of wisdom (such as: seek professional help), I would
>be happy to hear them.
>
>-Joe
Bob Haan
bhaan(at)easystreet.com
Portland, OR
RV6A 24461 Working on Canopy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)ee.cit.ac.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: Stinky Job Alert |
[Good advice snipped]
> I found the latex gloves to work the best too. The vinyl gloves are a
> real
> pain because they are not tight and the thinner eats them.
Maybe your lacquer thinners was different from mine, but it ate my latex
gloves. Worst problem was cleanup -- during the sealing/rivetting
everything worked well, but the gloves just dissolved once I started
wiping things clean with the thinners. On the bright side, the black stuff
soon comes off from round your fingernails, and lasts only a few days
under them. Just until you're ready to do your next session, IIRC. :-)
> Make sure you pick your oldest cleco's for this job. You might consider
> using
> a coffee can full of thinner as you work so you can toss your dirty
> cleco's
> right into the can. You can then clean them last once you have cleaned
> your
> tool etc.
I kept a set of clecoes separate from the rest just for sealing the tanks.
AFAICT, they're now no worse than ones which haven't touched sealant. I
did throw them into a jar of thinners at the end of a session, and wipe
the remaining sealant off them the next day. Some clecoes I left in for a
couple of days (holding rear baffle to skin to help the pegs) -- I sprayed
them with CRC beforehand, and they seem to be as good as new too.
Anyone working on tanks (or about to) might like to read
http://members.xoom.com/frankv/bunny2c.htm -- The Bunny's Guide main
index can be found at http://members.xoom.com/frankv/bunny.htm
Frank.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Harris" <johnh(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | contemplating RV Start |
I am contemplating building an RV4 or 6 and would be interested in meeting
and or swapping phone numbers with owners/builders in Apex/Cary, NC area.
BTW, I had the pleasure of my first ride at Cox Aerodrome last weekend...if
you're on-line, Tom, thanks for the most fun I've had since the T-33. I
think I'm hooked.
Please reply directly to johnh(at)bellsouth.net
John Harris
Apex, NC
A gleam in my eye.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Dixon" <ssdixon(at)ibm.net> |
OK, I give. What's ICQ?
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Dimeo <Robert.Dimeo(at)digital.com>
Date: Thursday, August 13, 1998 11:57 AM
Subject: RE: RV-List: ICQ
>
>Here's my ICQ #
>
> 12590884
>
> Bob
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don Mack [SMTP:donmack(at)flash.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 1998 8:55 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: ICQ
>
>
> ICQ 16679225
>
> Don Mack
> RV-6A Fuselage
> Ercoupe 415-D
> donmack(at)flash.net
> icq 16679225
> http://www.flash.net/~donmack
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bradley Kidder, Jr. <sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Wednesday, August 12, 1998 7:40 PM
> Subject: RV-List: ICQ
>
>
>
> >
> >If any of you are ICQ users and would care to exchange numbers,
>here's
> >mine. Thanks.
> >(I think I've sent this twice... sorry)
> >
> >// s //
> >Bradley W. Kidder, Jr.
> >sparksnmagic(at)earthlink.net
> >ICQ# 11770815
> >RV-6A (empennage)
> >N188FW (reserved)
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Wootton" <wcw(at)calweb.com> |
ICQ = I Seek You
It is a small TSR program that runs when you are on line. It allows quick
messaging and direct chat lines. It will also alert you of when your
subscribed friends are on line.
If you want to know more, contact me off line.
Bill Wootton
RV6 wings.
>
>OK, I give. What's ICQ?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerry calvert <calverjl(at)flash.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Machine Countersink Question |
Ferdfly(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > Grinding the rake angle on the cutter to be about 90 degrees will probably
> > cure your chattering problem. This is the same thing that causes ordinary
> > drills to crack plexiglas (see my post of 7/18/98 on plexi drilling). The
> > cutting edge needs to scrape material away without trying to auger or screw
> > itself in. Piloting into a nice hole will control it, but correcting the
> > rake angle will likely eliminate the cause. If my previous post isn't
> > clear on how to do this, find a machinist, they will know exactly how to
> > fix the rake angle.
> >
> > Most of the countersinks I have have appropriate rake angles. The
> > exception was the hand deburring tool, which chattered until I ground the
> > rake angles to about 90 degrees.
> >
> Guys, I`ve been a machinist for 40 yrs, and the one countersink that
> doesn`t chatter is a single flute. I dont know ofhand where you will find one
> but it works .
Fred LaForge RV-4, We put the wings on
> today....
>
>
I use a single flute that I bought from Averys. On the subject of
countersinks, when you countersink the aileron counterbalance "water
pipe", does it leave the countersink trashed out for use on aluminum??
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok Wings -6a
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Olson <lolson(at)doitnow.com> |
I Seek You. (ICQ)
Lets 1 member know when another member is online. Kind of a personal real
time e-mail.
You see them type, they see you type, etc.
>
>OK, I give. What's ICQ?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerry calvert <calverjl(at)flash.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
Michael Markert wrote:
>
>
> The other night I was dimpling the HS skin with the C-frame tool and the
> results are disappointing. The actual dimple looks fine, but there is a "wavy"
> area around the dimple.
>
> I was using a regular rubber mallet. I just purchased a a 28 oz deadblow
> hammer, but haven't tried it yet.
>
> When I used the hand squeezers on the perimeter holes there is no "wavy" area.
>
> Is there a trick to dimpling with the C-frame tool?
> Is this a non-issue because the skin may be all "wavy" anyway from riveting?
>
>
> Mike Markert
> RV-6A Empenage
> Baton Rouge LA
>
> +
Mike,
I use a light weight wood mallet. It doesn't take much of a wack to
dimple, especially on .016 skins. Multiple light taps sometimes work
better. Just a guess, but waves may be from stretching of the skin from
too hard of blows. Try lighter blows and be sure the skin is parallel
to the top of the dimple die.
Good luck,
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok -6a wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
| From: | smcdaniels(at)Juno.com (SCOTT R MCDANIELS) |
>I found that hitting the C-frame a little harder makes less wavy areas
>around the dimples. With the Avery dimple dies, that then tends to
>produce
>a little ring around the dimple, but this seems to be less annoying
>than
>the waviness.
This is for all of the novice builders on the list...
If you don't leave a small ring the same diameter as the dimple die when
you dimple you are not forming the dimple completely.
for new builders this happens most often on the thicker skins (.032, .040
etc.).
When I dimple using a C-frame tool I use 2 hits. The first one does 90%
of the forming, and the second hit (if the first one was done correctly)
has a high pitched ring to it which makes you know that the dimple is
done correctly.
I tip I learned from our quick build assemblers while I was in the
Philippines was to put a single layer of masking tape over the male
portion of the die. After doing just 1 or 2 dimples the tape will
tightly pack down smooth and flat and will still form perfect dimples.
If you don't like that little ring that is made by the dies (if you
dimple correctly) the tape will make prevent the ring from happening.
Make sure you are up to having a good dimpling technique before you do
this though.
And in support of Randall...
I to have successfully used a number of different hammers and they all
worked great if the correct technique was used, but in the shop at Van's
we use a dead blow hammer because of 3 reasons. It is quieter (though we
still always use hearing protection... and I'm sure you all do too don't
you?), it is easier on your body because it doesn't have any bounce or
rebound to it, and it is easier on your tools (it wont mess up the top of
the C-frame arbor or the hammer itself because it's not steel on steel).
Scott McDaniels
These opinions and ideas are my own
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
of my employer.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Corsair" <tinckler(at)axionet.com> |
| Subject: | Note sent in error |
My God I sent this out to the world. Please disregard. Can't hit the right
keys.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Corsair" <tinckler(at)axionet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Kit for sale |
----------
> From: Corsair <tinckler(at)axionet.com>
> To: Martin Shorman
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Kit for sale
> Date: Thursday, August 13, 1998 5:59 PM
>
>
>
> > I assume this is a kit you have been working on. The work so far is
> > good? Would you be able to crate it for shipment to north west Iowa?
> > What would the crate dimensions and weight be?
> >
> > We haven't heard of any of your recent travels lately?
> >
> > martin shorman
> > lawton, ia
> Hello Martin,
> Nice to hear from you. I do remember your name.
> The crate dimensions & weight are somewhere in Van's website and I can
get
> them later. The spar looks beautiful and is still in plastic wrap. The
wing
> has not been started but all is alodined and primed. The tail was all
done
> but I bought it from some one else and had to do a lot over since it was
> not up to snuff for me.
> I will be straight up with you and tell you that I wrote the
> ad when I was pretty down. I believe I have had an emotional breakdown
and
> had lost all my sense of optimism and sense of joy of flying and
building.
> I was going to sell everything, tools and all, get the hell out of
> aviation, sick of being broke and so on.
> I went to see and help my only son whom I love dearly and spent a week
> there. I found that the babe he has living with him was a controlling,
> devious person who worked to isolate me from my boy and made me feel like
a
> prisoner. I felt that he was at risk of losing everything he has due to
> possession rights etc. when two people reside together. I began to fall
> into the depths of despair for my son and had to leave with all speed. I
> then found myself crying and unable to stop. Something I have never done
in
> lo these many years. I lost all sense of purpose and hope and wanted to
> sweep the surface clear as one would if you swept your arm across the
table
> top of life to cast the objects there away and start anew when hope
> returns. Please forgive this rambling as it is not over yet for me and I
> need to let some time pass.
> As for the stories, I sit here looking at some air to air photos
we
> did and it gives me solace between my weeping. There is a good tale about
> this evening flight and tapestry of light and shadow as we swept down low
> along the wide river homeward bound. One day it may come out. If I can
see
> well enough through the blur that is present now, and I manage to lift my
> heart, you will hear from me
> again.........................................
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rvator97(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: First flight of N84RP |
Congratulations!
Welcome to the club! Isn't it GREAT!
Walt RV-6A N79WH
First flight: 2/28/98 52hrs now.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alex Peterson <alexpeterson(at)mci2000.com> |
| Subject: | Re: electronic engine analyzers |
> I take exception to the notion that digital readouts are just as easy to
> read as the dial types. I know everyone remembers all the automakers'
rush
> to digital readouts. Mercedes-Benz researched this extensively and you'll
> notice that even on the most expensive models they have VERY simple round
> gauges, white on black background with orange arrows. Read very quickly
and
> easily. Some if not all of the digital readouts I have seen are take much
> more time to discern. Of course Mercedes has idiot lights and warning as
> well.
I intend to put a electronic engine all-in-one instrument in my plane, not
because of how quickly or slowly I can read it, but solely because it will
watch important parameters for me, constantly and without complaining. I
will have a redundant analog gauge on the oil, because that is the lone
engine parameter that could convince me to make a precautionary landing on
a field or road.
Editorial/entertainment:
If automobile gauges are actually designed with technical reasoning in
mind, they would be the only thing on the car not driven by marketing. :-)
(I drove a car from 1981 to 1992 with a digital speedometer. Without
question, I could glance for a much shorter period of time, without
changing from distant focus, to learn my speed than I could with any analog
speedometer. Clearly, we all have different perceptions. Over those 11
years I had lively discussions on the topic, but virtually everyone who
disagreed with me on this had never driven a car with a digital speedometer
for any length of time.)
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove MN 6A finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Patrick Kelley <patk(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stinky Job Alert |
I'd echo the advice that you'll find by looking through the archives.
However, if I had to emphasize anything, it would be 'take small
steps'. I've done my tanks in four steps each (misc fittings, inboard
ribs, outboard ribs, baffle), so that each step is unhurried. That
means I had plenty of time to do a neat job and correct small mistakes.
If you try to do so much that you rush yourself, you will be slinging
ProSeal everywhere.
By the way, I change gloves often. By the time I am done with a
session, there are usually ten or so pairs of gloves in the trash.
Gloves are cheap, so I change them anytime I get them sticky.
Good luck.
PatK - RV-6A
Joe P. Larson wrote:
>
> I'm about to start the Stinky Job (ie: assemble my fuel tanks). If anyone
> has some profound words of wisdom (such as: seek professional help), I would
> be happy to hear them.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Huffaker <huffaker(at)utw.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Machine Countersink Question |
On Thu, 13 Aug 1998, jerry calvert wrote:
>
> I use a single flute that I bought from Averys. On the subject of
> countersinks, when you countersink the aileron counterbalance "water
> pipe", does it leave the countersink trashed out for use on aluminum??
>
Don't know about the single flute ones, but broke the pilot off my
3-flute one trying to counter sink that yesterday. Oh well, been wanting
to try the single flute anyway. Don't remember having a problem on the
first aileron tho.
Brian Huffaker, DSWL (huffaker(at)utw.com)
President and Founder Friends of P-Chan
RV-8 80091 Working on second aileron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Douglas G. Murray" <dgmurray(at)telusplanet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling: C Frame vs. Squeezing? |
> On a related note, I must admit I don't know why all the fuss over
> "dead-blow" hammers. I've used a regular 16oz hammer for my whole
> project, and my dimples came out as good or better than most. Sure
> this is my opinion but I do have dozens of RV projects in my area to
> compare to so I think I'm not just blowing smoke.
>
> Admittidly, I have never tried a dead-blow hammer, and I hate it when
> someone knocks some tool or idea that they've never used. Maybe
> someone who has one of these can explain what's so much better about
> using one?
>
Randall - I have used a dead-blow hammer for all my C-frame dimpling and a 16 oz.
works best. A light tap to start the set and another good tap will produce a great
looking dimple. The dead-blow hammer will not have the tendency to mushroom the
top end of the tool because it is made of plastic with a powdered lead weight in
the head. The steel hammer has a bounce to it when you hit and thus doesn't
transmit all the energy to the work intended. The dead blow hammer on the other
hand strikes the object and a fraction of a second later the lead weight 'catches
up' and effectively counter balances the normal bounce you would get with a normal
hammer - thus the dead blow hammer will deliver more force with less input effort.
Hope this helps
DGM - RV-6 finish kit in various mini-jobs :-))
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Craig-Stearman" <tcraigst(at)ionet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stinky Job Alert |
Joe,
On my next project I will happily pay for professionally finished fuel
tanks. It wasn't particularly difficult to do, but made a horrible mess. I
still have pro-seal on clecos and rivet sets.
Tom Craig-Stearman
tcraigst(at)ionet.net
RV-4 64ST drilling the bottom cowl half
>
>I'm about to start the Stinky Job (ie: assemble my fuel tanks). If anyone
>has some profound words of wisdom (such as: seek professional help), I
would
>be happy to hear them.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | EAA- chapter 179 <eaa-179(at)swcp.com> |
| Subject: | Re: wrong email address |
>
>Jim Brown,
>
>
>Saw your message but before I could reply we had a typical Florida power
>interuption and it wiped out my memory. send me another off list to
>rvpilot(at)juno.com.
>
>
>
>Regards, Bill Davis, N66WD
>
>
>
>
>
>
eaa-179(at)swcp.com
Check out our new -still under construction- Website!
http://www.swcp.com/~eaa-179/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Bend over & shut up |
A lot of list members have e-mailed me about my post on excess shipping
charges on a finish kit. They asked me to let them know how it went on trying
to get the charges adjusted. Well, here it is.
Just a word to the wise - You better watch your wallet when dealing with
Van's. Just got the following response to my fax asking them to get Roadway to
adjust the $624 charge for shipping a finish kit. Remember it was delivered to
the very same address that the wings ($166.25 shipping) and fuselage ($107.54
shipping) were delivered to. It is a single 330 pound box and probably the
lightest of the three. Van's response was, "We ship FOB which means that once
it leaves our shop, we have nothing to do with it. Any dispute is between the
customer and the trucker."
Looks like their position is WE GOT OUR MONEY, WE CAN SHIP HOW WE PLEASE, TOO
BAD IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE RATE WE ACCEPTED FOR YOU. So much for customer
service! If you think someone from Vans will call you prior to shipping if the
rate is three times what it should be, think again. As a matter of fact I
asked them that. Their response, "We don't have time to call everyone to
discuss shipping arrangements."
By the way, the low rates on the wings and fuselage were charged by ABF. The
$624 on finish kit was Roadway. I also asked Vans why they didn't ship the
finish kit ABF since it was so much cheaper. Their reply was, "We alternate
shippers." Looks like I got in the wrong sequence!
Two other builders from Texas have responded to my initial post asking for
comparable fees with the following charges on their finish kits: $274 to
Houston, and $261 to El Paso. Anyone got a suggestion on what I should do
about this. Of course the easy thing is to pay it and forget about it. I can
tell you I have a much lower opinion of Vans Aircraft today than I did
yesterday.
Lloyd Morris
RV-6, Starting finish kit
Austin, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | chester razer <razer(at)midwest.net> |
| Subject: | King Transponder |
How do you remove the light bulb which resides behind the amber lense on
a King KT76A transponder once the face plate has been removed from the
unit. Mine is burned out and in need of replacement. This is the bulb
that flickers when the unit is being interrogated by ATC and burns
steady when you IDENT.
chet
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JNice51355(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Bend over & shut up |
In regards to the shipping charges fiasco, I think that some correspondence
with Van's is important by more of us at this time. I realize that he has his
hands full with other problems, but this should also be a concern of Van's,
since they are not "held" to use any one means of shipment. They can tell
Roadway to "pack sand" if they wish to, or, they can just not call to use
their services. They have computers at Van's, and it would not be that hard
for them to notate somewhere on the invoice any special considerations to be
dealt with on a customer to customer basis, such as who ships the kits. Also,
I think that it might be helpful to contact Roadway's headquarters and at
least voice our displeasure.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bend over & shut up |
SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com wrote:
>
*snip*
> Just a word to the wise - You better watch your wallet when dealing with
> Van's. Just got the following response to my fax asking them to get Roadway to
> adjust the $624 charge for shipping a finish kit.
> *snip*
> Looks like their position is WE GOT OUR MONEY, WE CAN SHIP HOW WE PLEASE, TOO
> BAD IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE RATE WE ACCEPTED FOR YOU. So much for customer
> service!
I can certainly understand your being upset about the unreasonable shipping
rate but it seems to me that before you make the statements that you did
you would have talked to a live person on the phone rather than sending a
fax.
I know that is the way I would have handled it. I would suggest that you
call and talk to Bill Benedict and if you don't get any satisfactory
answers
from him ask to speak to Van himself. He is probably one of the most honest
people in the business, and quite frankly it pisses me off when I see a
post
that "you better watch your wallet when dealing with Van's" maybe you
better
sell the RV and buy something from Jim Bede. Your beef is with the fright
company not Van's
--
Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS First flight July 14, 1989 :-) Hillsboro, OR
jsflyrv(at)ix.netcom.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JamesCone(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: electronic engine analyzers |
In a message dated 8/13/98 10:08:42 PM Central Daylight Time,
alexpeterson(at)mci2000.com writes:
<< I will have a redundant analog gauge on the oil, because that is the lone
engine parameter that could convince me to make a precautionary landing on
a field or road. >>
Rather than an analog gauge as a backup, why not just add a low oil pressure
light. That would take up a lot less space, weigh less, cost less, and be
easier to install. It would also get your attention quicker than an analog
gauge if the oil pressure really was out of limits.
Jim Cone
RV-6A QB coming
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mick_G" <micky_g(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bend over & shut up |
Sorry to but in but being a person who has had some dealings with sort of
thing. I think you are being a little harsh on Van's, your complaint is with
the shipper. FOB means legally and every other way, your complaint is with
Roadway, not with Van's. See what they say about the charges, there just
might be a simple mistake somewhere and someone with them could help you
out. Now mind you I think Van's could of handled it a little more
diplomaticly, but yes it is out of their hands.
Mick
-----Original Message-----
From: SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com <SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com>
Date: Thursday, August 13, 1998 7:33 PM
Subject: RV-List: Bend over & shut up
>
>A lot of list members have e-mailed me about my post on excess shipping
>charges on a finish kit. They asked me to let them know how it went on
trying
>to get the charges adjusted. Well, here it is.
>
>Just a word to the wise - You better watch your wallet when dealing with
>Van's. Just got the following response to my fax asking them to get Roadway
to
>adjust the $624 charge for shipping a finish kit. Remember it was delivered
to
>the very same address that the wings ($166.25 shipping) and fuselage
($107.54
>shipping) were delivered to. It is a single 330 pound box and probably the
>lightest of the three. Van's response was, "We ship FOB which means that
once
>it leaves our shop, we have nothing to do with it. Any dispute is between
the
>customer and the trucker."
>
>Looks like their position is WE GOT OUR MONEY, WE CAN SHIP HOW WE PLEASE,
TOO
>BAD IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE RATE WE ACCEPTED FOR YOU. So much for customer
>service! If you think someone from Vans will call you prior to shipping if
the
>rate is three times what it should be, think again. As a matter of fact I
>asked them that. Their response, "We don't have time to call everyone to
>discuss shipping arrangements."
>
>By the way, the low rates on the wings and fuselage were charged by ABF.
The
>$624 on finish kit was Roadway. I also asked Vans why they didn't ship the
>finish kit ABF since it was so much cheaper. Their reply was, "We alternate
>shippers." Looks like I got in the wrong sequence!
>
>Two other builders from Texas have responded to my initial post asking for
>comparable fees with the following charges on their finish kits: $274 to
>Houston, and $261 to El Paso. Anyone got a suggestion on what I should do
>about this. Of course the easy thing is to pay it and forget about it. I
can
>tell you I have a much lower opinion of Vans Aircraft today than I did
>yesterday.
>
>Lloyd Morris
>RV-6, Starting finish kit
>Austin, TX
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Note sent in error |
In a message dated 8/13/98 10:20:23 Central Daylight Time,
tinckler(at)axionet.com writes:
<< My God I sent this out to the world. Please disregard. Can't hit the right
keys. >>
So tell me, What's up?
Regards
Wendell
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bend over & shut up |
In a message dated 8/13/98 10:22:45 Central Daylight Time, SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com
writes:
<< Just got the following response to my fax asking them to get Roadway to
adjust the $624 charge for shipping a finish kit. >>
Sounds like you have a problem with Roadway, rather than with Van's. Van's
does not set Roadway's pricing, Roadway does.
Van's has been very fair with me, so far. If Roadway charges too much to ship,
then I'll contact Roadway, not Van's.
Maybe you should have requested they ship it FedEX, or UPS.
Regards
Wendell
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DAVENDANA1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: King Transponder |
Remove the 4 screws on the faceplate and slide it STRAIGHT off. The only
problem is it is a lamp you'll have to get from a dealer, and if I remember
correctly, it's soldered in...Also be sure not to lose the ident button . It
is not held in by anything.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bend over & shut up |
| From: | daviddla(at)Juno.com (Blah ba Blah) |
I don't often respond but I have to throw my two cents in over the
shipping problems. I believe that the only way you can find the best
shippers are by dealing with the different companys that are in your
area. I saw someone put down Roadway and I must say after being in court
over damage caused by another shipper it was refreshing to do business
with Roadway. I live in Southern CA. I believe it is the people who run
the local offices that make or break the reputation of the company.
Please be aware that you can request the shipper you want vans to use and
that you can talk to the shipper about the least expensive way to ship.
David Ahrens, Bakersfield, Ca. Still winging it- RV-6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Marty Sailer <mwsailer(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Excess freight charges |
SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com wrote:
>
Just got a call that my finish kit was being delivered in a
>
Hi Lloyd,
I see you received the canopy info. Thanks for the note.
I picked up my finishing kit at the Roadway Terminal in my area June
15. The bill showed $654. -disc $346. total shipping cost $307.
There was no explanation for the discount. The box was 4'W X 8'L X 3'H.
Marty Sailer RV-6A
near Allentown, Pa.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wntzl(at)execpc.com (David M Wentzell) |
| Subject: | Dimpling Solution |
Hello,
I think what you hit it with is of secondary importance, just so you use
the correct amount of force. I am convinced that the most important thing
is total support of the skin for ALL holes ,- level, and at the correct
height. I use the Avery Dimpler on a special table that I built. The
dimpler sits in a chanel so that it can slide forward and backward so that
the table supports the skin for ALL the hole positions. When the dimpler is
in the rear position, I place a piece of wood in front of it same height as
the table (in fact I have a couple of pieces as I move the dimpler only a
couple inches at a time) I did not build this when I did the HS. I realized
that I needed something like this, spent the time to make it, and have been
extremely glad that I did. I'm looking forward to using it on the elevators
and flaps also, and I'm not sure where else it will come in handy, but I'm
sure it will. BTW, when the dimpler is all the way back, it needs a leg for
support (I discovered this the hard way!, I remember someone writing
previously about how the Avery Tool can get into a vertical dive very
quickly when droped - yep, it sure does!)
Good Luck
Get that dimpler table made! You'll be glad you did.
DW RV6 Wings
Racine, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aileron pushrod hole |
| From: | smcdaniels(at)Juno.com (SCOTT R MCDANIELS) |
>On my kit #587, the center doubler has the old rectangular hole, and
>the spar
>itself has a much larger odd shaped hole. The odd shaped hole appears
>closer to
>what the actual final shape should be, and it's cut out where the
>rivet in
>question would be. In other words, the doubler still has a rivet
>hole, but
>there's no spar there to rivet to.
>
>Russell Duffy
>
This was an enhancement that we made to the kit later after we had built
through a couple of sets of wings in our shop to be sure that the
computer modeled hole cutout for the pushrod actually worked in real
life, and it does.
It is still possible that a builder might have to remove a very small
amount because of the actual installed position of there aileron but
it should be very minor.
After correctly positioning the doubler, mark and trim the doubler hole
to match the one in the rear spar.
Scott McDaniels
These opinions and ideas are my own
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
of my employer.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Imhof" <imhof(at)2xtreme.net> |
| Subject: | Looking for a 200 hp engine |
I'm looking for a 200hp engine for my RV-8. VANS wants 28,250 for an IO-360
engine. There's got to be a better deal out there. Where can I look?
I want to stick with an engine that will mount on on a Dynafocal mount (I
don't want any auto conversions).
Paul
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Thomas Velvick <rver(at)caljet.com> |
>
>dear listers,
>putting together the 606 a-b-c parts, i'm confused about the 606 c, the 3/4 x
>3/4 angle. after the unit is installed does the angle get rivited to the
skin
>only, or is it supposed to get rivited with the skin & root rib flange, all
My plans shows it riveted to the root rib flange and skin both.
>together. i noticed on the plans there is a slight bend in the 606b plate,
>that would put it out of line on the root rib flange.
If I am reading his iJustice's instructions correctly, they say to bend the
606b to line up square with the root rib flange while keeping the front of
the 606b slightly twisted to line up with the 606a piece.
>what type of rivits should be used since i see no way of getting a bucking
bar in there
My plans show to use CS4 blind rivets.
Regards,
Tom Velvick
Peoria, AZ USA
rv-6a finishing wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Moshe Lichtman" <moshe_lichtman(at)hotmail.com> |
Hi all,
The published limits are +/- 6G at approx. 1370lbs. So for practical
reasons, doing aerobatics with two people on board can be a bit tricky.
Anybody knows what're the weight limitations assuming +/- 4G? Is there a
more detailed G-limit envelope somewhere?
Thanks,
Moshe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carol Knight <cknight(at)rmci.net> |
| Subject: | RV Aircraft Upholstery |
RV Builders
I have been in the upholstery business for 26 years and have been making
upholstery products for kitplanes for 14 years. I have interior kits
available for RV-4, RV-6, RV-6A, and RV-8. I also have cabin covers and
other items. I am the supplier of upholstery products for several kitplane
manufacturers. A list of other kitplane interior products available upon
request.
For more information, call Knight Aircraft Interiors, Inc., at (208)
342-2602 or e-mail me at cknight(at)rmci.net. Photos available upon request.
Sincerely,
KNIGHT AIRCRAFT INTERIORS, INC.
"Fly by Knight" Upholstery Products
Sam Knight
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Anderson Ed" <anderson_ed(at)bah.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stinky Job Alert |
Bill, I tested my wing tanks by placing a ballon over the fuel outlet fitting and
then using an aircompressor (set very low) to put air into the tank thru the fuel
tank vent fitting sufficient to inflate the ballon. Closed off the fuel vent
line and let it set for a week. If it goes down overnight you have a leak and
can
use the traditional soapy water to find the leak. Fortunately neither of my tanks
leaked (of course given the amount of proseal spread around the Titanic probably
would not have sunk). The balloons remained inflated for several weeks until they
apparently died from old age.
Using the balloon keeps the tank pressure below 1 1/2 psi, if you put too much
air
in the balloon simply pops before damage is done to the tank. But, don't fill
the
tank with the pressure setting at 90psi, 5 - 10 psi is more than enough.
Worked for me.
Ed
pagan wrote:
> I'm trying to figure
> out now a good method to test them.
>
> Bill Pagan
> 80555 wing stuff
> http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/9749/william.html
>
> >
> >
> >I'm about to start the Stinky Job (ie: assemble my fuel tanks). If anyone
> >has some profound words of wisdom (such as: seek professional help), I would
> >be happy to hear them.
> >
> >-Joe
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com> |
| Subject: | King Transponder |
Chester,
Had a local friend take his to an avionics shop. Cost him $50.00 for
a $.05 light bulb because, according to them, they had to extensively
disassemble the unit...
Fred Stucklen
N925RV RV-6A
E. Windsor, Ct
> -----Original Message-----
> From: chester razer [SMTP:razer(at)midwest.net]
> Sent: Friday, August 14, 1998 12:04 AM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: King Transponder
>
>
> How do you remove the light bulb which resides behind the amber lense
> on
> a King KT76A transponder once the face plate has been removed from the
> unit. Mine is burned out and in need of replacement. This is the
> bulb
> that flickers when the unit is being interrogated by ATC and burns
> steady when you IDENT.
>
> chet
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James K. Hurd" <hurd(at)riolink.com> |
| Subject: | Slider Questions 6A |
Being uncomfortable with the idea of squeezing pop rivets into my
canopy, I have drilled and tapped all plexi-to-frame contacts for #6
screws with countersunk washers. Here're my questions:
Will 4" spacing suffice for screws on the longitudinal tube where the
plans show 2" rivet spacing? (Screws are called out 4" on rollover bar.)
Can I omit the two aluminum strips which sandwich the longitudinal tube?
I can't figure any structural function but I'll sure keep 'em if there
is one.
BTW, tapping those holes was a piece of cake.
Jim So. New Mexico 6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Patrick Kelley <patk(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A G-limits? |
You are not the first to look at the difference between the aerobatic
and non-aerobatic gross. I spent a good deal of time at this past
Oshkosh talking to people and this is what I found out.
First, officially from Van, he has no plans at this point to revise the
limits. Despite rumors that the RV-6 spar tests were encouraging, he
feels that there has not been enough testing and further testing has not
been scheduled. Van's has other irons in the fire more important to
them than this. Considering Van's reputation as conservative and
honest, this is more than fair - the limits work for the plane as
designed by him.
However, the non-aerobatic gross should be much higher if calculated
solely on G-load for, say, Utility category. From builders (not Van's;
they would not discuss it), I am given to understand that the limit is
due to the load the gear can support. Builders have increased their
declared gross by a small amount without apparent problems. Certainly,
the airframe can take it as long as you stay out of the aerobatic
envelope, but it would be wise to keep an eye on the landing gear -
especially in the light of the recent failure.
It might be possible to operate with a higher gross by using a landing
weight, like some other aircraft use. However, I know of no data that
demonstrates the safe maximum gross for take-off other than Van's
number, so you would definitely be experimenting. Also, in the event of
an aborted departure, you would have a higher risk of bending your
plane.
All this said, I intend to declare my gross so that I can take two
people, baggage and fuel. I will put a checklist item in that reminds
me that I am over the design limit, to help me operate the aircraft
accordingly. I will also watch for signs of fatigue and will inspect
more often. Perhaps if all those flying over Van's limit would do this
an keep us updated on their results, we would know a little more about
the consequences of this decision.
PatK - RV-6A - Wings done, fuselage next. Anyone got a jig?
Moshe Lichtman wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> The published limits are +/- 6G at approx. 1370lbs. So for practical
> reasons, doing aerobatics with two people on board can be a bit tricky.
> Anybody knows what're the weight limitations assuming +/- 4G? Is there a
> more detailed G-limit envelope somewhere?
>
> Thanks,
> Moshe
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Jory" <rickjory(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bend over & shut up |
Hate to agree with Vans . . . actually, I don't hate to agree with Vans, but
like many people probably on this list, I have my own small business that
ships products all over the world . . . all shipments FOB our factory. We,
too, can't handle each shipment customer-by-customer . . . and if there is a
problem, it is truly with the carrier and the one receiving the shipment.
Having said this, if there is a particular carrier that creates problems, it
is simple for Vans to just not use them any more.
My advice is to continue working up the chain of command with the carrier.
Find out why the apparent "double standards" exist when comparing similar
shipments. Good luck.
Rick Jory
Highlands Ranch, CO
Potential RV-8 or 8a builder
-----Original Message-----
From: SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com <SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com>
Date: Thursday, August 13, 1998 8:33 PM
Subject: RV-List: Bend over & shut up
>
>A lot of list members have e-mailed me about my post on excess shipping
>charges on a finish kit. They asked me to let them know how it went on
trying
>to get the charges adjusted. Well, here it is.
>
>Just a word to the wise - You better watch your wallet when dealing with
>Van's. Just got the following response to my fax asking them to get Roadway
to
>adjust the $624 charge for shipping a finish kit. Remember it was delivered
to
>the very same address that the wings ($166.25 shipping) and fuselage
($107.54
>shipping) were delivered to. It is a single 330 pound box and probably the
>lightest of the three. Van's response was, "We ship FOB which means that
once
>it leaves our shop, we have nothing to do with it. Any dispute is between
the
>customer and the trucker."
>
>Looks like their position is WE GOT OUR MONEY, WE CAN SHIP HOW WE PLEASE,
TOO
>BAD IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE RATE WE ACCEPTED FOR YOU. So much for customer
>service! If you think someone from Vans will call you prior to shipping if
the
>rate is three times what it should be, think again. As a matter of fact I
>asked them that. Their response, "We don't have time to call everyone to
>discuss shipping arrangements."
>
>By the way, the low rates on the wings and fuselage were charged by ABF.
The
>$624 on finish kit was Roadway. I also asked Vans why they didn't ship the
>finish kit ABF since it was so much cheaper. Their reply was, "We alternate
>shippers." Looks like I got in the wrong sequence!
>
>Two other builders from Texas have responded to my initial post asking for
>comparable fees with the following charges on their finish kits: $274 to
>Houston, and $261 to El Paso. Anyone got a suggestion on what I should do
>about this. Of course the easy thing is to pay it and forget about it. I
can
>tell you I have a much lower opinion of Vans Aircraft today than I did
>yesterday.
>
>Lloyd Morris
>RV-6, Starting finish kit
>Austin, TX
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Bend over & shut up |
In a message dated 8/14/98 4:32:02 AM, you wrote:
<>
Got news for you buddy, I have talked on the phone with these jokers until I
am blue in the face. I also have a stack of correspondence a quarter of an
inch thick. I went directly to Van and was passed off to Barbara. She is the
one who made the mistake on the shipment in the first place. The problem
started with Van's. They are the ones who didn't shop for the best rate. It is
very easy for them to be careless when spending OPM (other people's money).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Acker" <roba(at)globalink.net> |
| Subject: | Odyssey Dry Cell Battery |
Any opinions on the new Odyssey dry cell battery Van's is now carrying?
Claimed advantages:
7 lbs. lighter than comparable RG25
8 year design life, 3-8 year service life (2 year factory replacement
warranty)
Long storage life, maintains 50% charge after two years
100% deep cycle capacity
Also wondering how it fits into Bob N./Aeroelectric design philosophy
(which I intend to base the majority of my electrical system on).
Rob Acker (RV-6Q).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Al Mojzisik <prober(at)iwaynet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling Solution |
Okay, I'll have to weigh in here too. Freight rates are negotiated. I'll
bet a dime to a dollar that you were charged the "standard" rate by
Roadway. This is a somewhat generac rate the is charged by the comodity
shipped, i.e. plastic, steel, scrap paper,etc..... These rates are usually
negotiated down by the shipper and frt. co. so the freight company can get
and hold the business.With other listers saying they have seen the word
"Discount" on there freight bills I believe there is a negotiated rate for
VAN's various kits with these two trucking companies. What you have to do
is call the trucking company (Roadway) and tell them that there is a
negotiated rate and that you will only pay that amount so they better check
their records for it. Van's has obviously mishandeled this issue but then
again you probably only faxed to some office clerk who really isn't aware
of the process. I would suggest as Jerry S. did that you speak to a warm
body via phone and make it Bill Benedict or Van. They will help you. How
do I know what I'm talking about? I used to have tens of thousands of tons
of scrap paper shipped into the paper mill I was the purchasing agent for
and when we got a several million dollar frt. bill for the "standard scrap
paper rate" back dated, I found out about negotiated rates and there
fileing with trans. dept. or some such agency. (Been years since it
happened) Never did pay the additional standard rate charges either...... Al
M Wentzell)
>
>Hello,
> I think what you hit it with is of secondary importance, just so you use
>the correct amount of force. I am convinced that the most important thing
>is total support of the skin for ALL holes ,- level, and at the correct
>height. I use the Avery Dimpler on a special table that I built. The
>dimpler sits in a chanel so that it can slide forward and backward so that
>the table supports the skin for ALL the hole positions. When the dimpler is
>in the rear position, I place a piece of wood in front of it same height as
>the table (in fact I have a couple of pieces as I move the dimpler only a
>couple inches at a time) I did not build this when I did the HS. I realized
>that I needed something like this, spent the time to make it, and have been
>extremely glad that I did. I'm looking forward to using it on the elevators
>and flaps also, and I'm not sure where else it will come in handy, but I'm
>sure it will. BTW, when the dimpler is all the way back, it needs a leg for
>support (I discovered this the hard way!, I remember someone writing
>previously about how the Avery Tool can get into a vertical dive very
>quickly when droped - yep, it sure does!)
> Good Luck
> Get that dimpler table made! You'll be glad you did.
> DW RV6 Wings
> Racine, WI
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bend over & shut up |
<< ust got the following response to my fax asking them to get Roadway to
adjust the $624 charge for shipping a finish kit. >>
You will have to deal with Roadway. Van's is out of the loop on this one.
Sorry.
My dealings with trying to get a refund for shipping overcharges have met with
dismal results. This is with Yellow, who has handled most of my sliding canopy
kit shipping. Strangely enough, Fedex is very competitive even with a package
as large as 5'x 3' x 2'! Fedex is more service oriented, too.
What are the consequences with simply refusing the shipment? I'd hate to stick
Van's with return shipping- there could be some backlash from this. This
(shipment refusal) could be a negotiation lever for dealing with Roadway,
however. At least escalate to a higher manager.
Check six! Roadway might be behind you!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Al Mojzisik <prober(at)iwaynet.net> |
| Subject: | Freight rates Standard Vs. Negotiated |
Sorry, I sent this under the wrong subject before.
>
>Okay, I'll have to weigh in here too. Freight rates are negotiated. I'll
>bet a dime to a dollar that you were charged the "standard" rate by
>Roadway. This is a somewhat generac rate the is charged by the comodity
>shipped, i.e. plastic, steel, scrap paper,etc..... These rates are usually
>negotiated down by the shipper and frt. co. so the freight company can get
>and hold the business.With other listers saying they have seen the word
>"Discount" on there freight bills I believe there is a negotiated rate for
>VAN's various kits with these two trucking companies. What you have to do
>is call the trucking company (Roadway) and tell them that there is a
>negotiated rate and that you will only pay that amount so they better check
>their records for it. Van's has obviously mishandeled this issue but then
>again you probably only faxed to some office clerk who really isn't aware
>of the process. I would suggest as Jerry S. did that you speak to a warm
>body via phone and make it Bill Benedict or Van. They will help you. How
>do I know what I'm talking about? I used to have tens of thousands of tons
>of scrap paper shipped into the paper mill I was the purchasing agent for
>and when we got a several million dollar frt. bill for the "standard scrap
>paper rate" back dated, I found out about negotiated rates and there
>fileing with trans. dept. or some such agency. (Been years since it
>happened) Never did pay the additional standard rate charges either......
Al
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Besing <rv8er(at)doitnow.com> |
| Subject: | Solution to "Bending Over" |
Vans has done us a great service that will explain the "discount" discussed
in an earlier post.
If one were to call roadway and say,
"I have a shipment that weighs 1100 pounds shipping from North Plains, OR
to Phoenix, Arizona."
"How much will it cost?"
Roadway will tell you about $1400
If you tell them it is coming from Van's, it will suddenly be $687.
(this is what I did when I got my QB)
When I inquired about the difference in price, Roadway told me that Van's
negotiated a 50% discount with them to save the builders money.
Now, it seems to me that Roadway (who had been very helpful, careful, and
supportive with my delivery, BTW)
is telling me that Van's is HELPING us with the charges, not hurting us.
I have absolutely no problem with Roadway, or Vans, and if one were to ask
a couple of questions, then they may find out that they do not have to
"bend over & shut up." Whatever has transpired with the shipments for
anyone, I am pretty sure that you will forget about "bending over and
shutting up" when you take that first flight in a wonderful machine
designed by an aeronautical genius, and frankly, the fairest in the industry.
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
Waiting on Finish Kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russell Duffy" <rad(at)pen.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Excess freight charges |
> I picked up my finishing kit at the Roadway Terminal in my area June
>15. The bill showed $654. -disc $346. total shipping cost $307.
>There was no explanation for the discount. The box was 4'W X 8'L X 3'H.
My wing kit came to Florida via Roadway and the bill was $400.23 - $212.17 (53%
discount rate) + $37.00 (some non-commercial delivery fee) = $225.16. I assumed
that 53% was the negotiated discount that Roadway gives Van's for being a good
customer. I would make sure Roadway understand that this shipment came from a
customer that gets a discount. It seems like they just forgot to give the
discount rate for some reason that could be as simple as a typo in the customer
number.
Good luck,
Russell Duffy
Navarre, FL
Kolb SlingShot N8754K (for sale)
RV-8A, 80587 (wings)
rad(at)pen.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chat Daniel" <cdaniel(at)fnbbaldwin.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A G-limits? |
I think you will find the G limits are +6 and -3 (with a 50% safety factor
built in) at the aerobatic weight for a -6 which is 1375lbs. The key word
here is weight. 6 X 1375 lbs. equals 8,250 lbs. If you change the
weight, you change the G's the plane can take. For example, if you load
the plane to 1550 lbs., the G limit would be 8250 / 1550 or 5.32 G's. To
answer your question, theoretically, to lower the G limt to 4, you would
have to weigh 8250/4 or 2062.5 lbs. (don't do it)
Two good points here. No RV has a +6 and -3 G limit at gross weight, and
second, have you ever pulled 6 G's? I have, and if you're not used to it,
you don't want to do it. Most people get uncomfortable at about 4.
Chat Daniel
RV8 N678RV (reserved)
----------
> From: Moshe Lichtman <moshe_lichtman(at)hotmail.com>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: RV-6A G-limits?
> Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 3:05 AM
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> The published limits are +/- 6G at approx. 1370lbs. So for practical
> reasons, doing aerobatics with two people on board can be a bit tricky.
> Anybody knows what're the weight limitations assuming +/- 4G? Is there a
> more detailed G-limit envelope somewhere?
>
> Thanks,
> Moshe
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chat Daniel" <cdaniel(at)fnbbaldwin.com> |
Please send me the ICG software
Thanks,
Chat
----------
> From: Robert Dimeo <Robert.Dimeo(at)digital.com>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV-List: ICQ
> Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 8:35 AM
>
>
>
> Larry,
>
> ICQ is a messaging system that allow for direct connection between
users.
> (Like a chat session) only in this case, the system monitors all users
and
> you can tell who is on-line and who is off line. The chats are set up
> one-to-one and only if authorized by the parties at the time. There is no
> need for Netscape or explorer as ICQ is its own portal.
> If you're behind a firewall though, ICQ might now work. That happens
with
> me at work so I can only use it when logging into my ISP from home.
> If you like, I can send you the software (Any ICQ user can do this) and
> you can try it out.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Bob
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Olson [SMTP:lolson(at)doitnow.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 1998 8:22 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: ICQ
>
>
> I Seek You. (ICQ)
>
> Lets 1 member know when another member is online. Kind of a personal
> real
> time e-mail.
> You see them type, they see you type, etc.
>
> >
> >OK, I give. What's ICQ?
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: electronic engine analyzers |
>Rather than an analog gauge as a backup, why not just add a low oil pressure
>light. That would take up a lot less space, weigh less, cost less, and be
>easier to install. It would also get your attention quicker than an analog
>gauge if the oil pressure really was out of limits.
I've not had time to do some real searching on accurate pressure
switches that can be depended on to close at about 40 PSI and
below. ALL automotive switches I've found are more interested
in electric fuel pump control and switch at 1-5 psi . . . too
low to be practical for LOW OILP warning. The few switches I
am aware of are NASA grade devices and cost more than a decent
gage. If anyone runs across some liklely candidates out there
I'd like to hear about them. Got an upcoming chapter on pressure
measurement/sensing to publish, I'd like to include this tid-bit.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Thompson <michaelt(at)AUSVMR.VNET.IBM.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: electronic engine analyzers |
News-Software: UReply 3.1
In a previous message, it was written:
>
>Editorial/entertainment:
>If automobile gauges are actually designed with technical reasoning in
>mind, they would be the only thing on the car not driven by marketing. :-)
>(I drove a car from 1981 to 1992 with a digital speedometer. Without
>question, I could glance for a much shorter period of time, without
>changing from distant focus, to learn my speed than I could with any analog
>speedometer. Clearly, we all have different perceptions. Over those 11
>years I had lively discussions on the topic, but virtually everyone who
>disagreed with me on this had never driven a car with a digital speedometer
>for any length of time.)
One thing about speedometers vrs airplane engine instruments - speedos are
constantly changing. Once you're in cruise, your engine instruments
are likely to continue reading the same thing until something breaks.
In the P-3s we had of course four sets of engine instruments for TIT,
pressures, feed rates, etc. The entire ceiling was covered with little
round guages. One trick the military uses that we can't because the
bezels that I've looked at don't rotate is to adjust the display so that
normal engine parameters are all at the 12 o'clock position. One glance
tells all, regardless the instrument. All needles pointed up = all
engines happy.
WRT to digital readouts - I'm not sure we care what the specific number
is rather than is it within limits. An analog display is better for that
by far - IMHO. :)
Mike Thompson
Austin, TX
-6 Emp, closing rudder, wings on the waayyy!
________________________________________________________________________________
unsubscribe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Leslie B. Williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | RV-6/6A Type S Cowl |
FWIW, I've finished my type S cowl as far as I want to for now, except for a
little scoop to air box fiberglass finishing. The fitting went really well
and it is very solid and a lot lighter compared to the polyester one. The
lack of any written instructions other than on the drawing made for a little
more head scratching on procedures because you don't do it exactly the same
as the normal cowl. The lower cowl has molded in lap joints at the spinner
that are not to be removed, thus trimming the top overlap has to be done
very carefully when fitting the bottom and before trimming it at the rear.
I opted to leave the moulded on lap joints on the sides also and have
drilled them for #8 truss head screws and platenuts for now at approximately
4" spacing (either #8 countersunk screws with washers or 2700 series camlocs
later). I also decided to install 4000 series (large) camoc fasteners to
attach the upper rear. In doing the latter, I discovered that I had to
remove part of the foam filled core surrounding the honeycomb where the
camloc base mounting tabs that I made project out from the firewall flange.
This has caused a bit of extra work in sealing and filling those areas with
fiberglass cloth and resin to get them to the same level as the coreless
area. Installing a flange for screws might also result in this
interference. I would also caution positioning the forward top skin any
further forward than the SS firewall flanges, and according to plans,
because then the hinges would likely have to trimmed to get them to fit
without sitting on the core edges. At least it would have on my cowl which
ended up with about a 1/4" gap between the spinner backing plate and cowl,
as specified. I believe that the core could be located a little more
forward and the coreless area at the top rear a lot shorter. As it is
currently produced it would probably fit the straight up firewall of older
planes okay as I had to trim away over 2" of coreless material on the top.
The other thing that is different is the scoop mounting. The cowl is made
with a molded in recess for the scoop which pretty much limits any shifting
of it to fit it to the carb air box. Trimming it to fit the recess took a
little time but it came out mating to the carb air box (which was installed
according to the instructions) about like others have described the 0-360
carb to scoop fit. On the scoop inlet, I layed up a 1 1/4" long fiberglass
lip which is belled out quite a bit at the bottom to fair in well with the
snout of the carb air box, the top of which has about a 3/4" rise to
intersect the scoop inlet lip. I will be flying without paint for a while,
so I have decided to use #6 truss head screws and platenuts to attach the
scoop for now which will allow easier inspection and access to that area
during the flight test period and maybe permanently.
Les Williams/RV-6AQ/Tacoma WA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Samuel Steele <steele(at)loyno.edu> |
unsubscribe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6A G-limits? |
<< I intend to declare my gross so that I can take two
people, baggage and fuel. I will put a checklist item in that reminds
me that I am over the design limit, to help me operate the aircraft
accordingly. I will also watch for signs of fatigue and will inspect
more often. Perhaps if all those flying over Van's limit would do this
and keep us updated on their results, we would know a little more about
the consequences of this decision. >>
One of the things that concerns me, in light of Fred's recent nose gear
fracture, is the great similarity between the RV-6A nose gear and the main
gear (4, 6, 6A). My view is that his gear failure was a preexisting (although
I have no proof) gear leg defect that was exacerbated by time (cycles) and
loading (bumpy strips).
If I take the conservative view, and with the similarity of the tapered rod
gear designs, I would suggest an early (in the service life) dye penetrant
check of ALL the gear legs, particularly if one sets higher gross weights than
Van's publishes. I may do this at the first annual just to satisfy myself
that all is as it should be and no preexisting defects are visible.
BTW, my empty weight (with all the goodies) is 1160 lb. I set my utility
gross at 1900 lb. Van's publishes 1375 lb aerobatic weight (8250 lb effective
at 6g). I fly smooth positive g aerobatics with 10 gal of fuel, two 190 lb
people on board and 4g absolute limit (6400 lb effective at 4g). If I am
going to do abrupt maneuvers up to 4g, I limit weight to 10 gal fuel with one
180 lb pilot (5600 lb effective). I feel that the 6A is easily capable of
this with a reasonable safety margin. My aerobatics occupy about 2% of my
total flying hours and I equipped it with all the goodies primarily for cross-
country.
-GV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | caummisa(at)arn.net (Richard Caummisar, CSP) |
| Subject: | Re: Stinky Job Alert |
Check the archive at: http://www.matronics.com/rv-list/index.htm
This subject was discuss at length about 1 1/2 years ago.
>
>> I'm trying to figure
>> out now a good method to test them. [tanks]
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Lauritsen" <clevtool(at)tdsi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Bend over & shut up |
Disclaimer: I am not professing to know who is at fault, who is to blame,
or who to call next. Below is simply what happened to me with a freight
company, and the lesson it taught me.
We had some product shipped to us from a few hundred miles away and the
freight bill was $1500 for a 300# crate. I refused to sign for the thing
until the driver could tell me why it was so much. After many phone calls
it turns out that they missed shipped the crate out to the west coast then
sent it back to the original hub, then to us. They were charging me for the
whole trip and didn't subtract the discount either. I signed for it when
the corrected bill read $175. I now read every waybill that comes in the
door before anyone signs for it. And I always send freight collect to avoid
unexpected bills later by the shipper.
$.02,
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com> |
GV,
I agree with your assessment below. I plan on dye checking the mains
before I fly the plane again....... Better to be more careful than not
careful enough......
Fred Stucklen
N925RV RV-6A
E. Windsor, Ct
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Vanremog(at)aol.com [SMTP:Vanremog(at)aol.com]
>Sent: Friday, August 14, 1998 12:35 PM
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: RV-6A G-limits?
>
>
>One of the things that concerns me, in light of Fred's recent nose gear
>fracture, is the great similarity between the RV-6A nose gear and the main
>gear (4, 6, 6A). My view is that his gear failure was a preexisting
>(although
>I have no proof) gear leg defect that was exacerbated by time (cycles) and
>loading (bumpy strips).
>
>If I take the conservative view, and with the similarity of the tapered rod
>gear designs, I would suggest an early (in the service life) dye penetrant
>check of ALL the gear legs, particularly if one sets higher gross weights
>than
>Van's publishes. I may do this at the first annual just to satisfy myself
>that all is as it should be and no preexisting defects are visible.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Hiers <craig-RV4(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: electronic engine analyzers |
Mike Thompson wrote:
> round guages. One trick the military uses that we can't because the
> bezels that I've looked at don't rotate is to adjust the display so that
> normal engine parameters are all at the 12 o'clock position. One glance
> tells all, regardless the instrument. All needles pointed up = all
> engines happy.
>
A few years back I was cruising around the garage area at Daytona
and I noticed that is what some of the Winston Cup cars were doing.
I guess if you are going 200 MPH 6 inches from another car looking
down and analyzing each instrument is not a option. Racing is like
flying, you need to be looking out the window.
Craig Hiers
RV-4 N143CH
Tallahassee,FL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Leslie B. Williams" <lesliebwilliams(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-6/6A Type S Cowl |
One thing I forgot to mention. I had planned on putting a heat muff
(Robbins) on the left side exhaust (#1 & #2, Vetterman SS crossover type)
straight section below the swivel connection. However, it appears that the
exhaust proximity to the cowl (less than 1/2" in it's optimum position) on
my 0-360A1A will be too close to do that, particularly since the engine
hasn't settled in the mounts from running yet. Has anyone else had
experience with this and any solutions, like maybe using the straight
section by the sump for the standard heat muff as well as the carb heat
muff?
Thanks,
Les Williams/RV-6AQ/Tacoma WA
>FWIW, I've finished my type S cowl as far as I want to for now, except for
a
>little scoop to air box fiberglass finishing.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Bend over & shut up |
In a message dated 8/14/98 3:41:25 PM, you wrote:
<>
I talked to Roadway this morning and they said any adjustment would have to
come from the shipper's end. Oh Well. I have a feeling refusing shipment would
just get your credit card hit for the return freight. Besides, I might go into
withdrawal if I had to go that long without building.
Lloyd Morris
RV-6
Lago Vista, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Dimeo <Robert.Dimeo(at)digital.com> |
| Subject: | Solution to "Bending Over" |
People,
Here's what was on my shipping papers from Roadway on my wing kit just
delivered (YIPPEE!!!!!!!).
2 pcs Aluminum sheet Charges $380.82. Discount 53%.$ 201.83- , total
charges delivered $178.99 collect. I'd say that was reasonable for 395 lbs.
from Oregon to New Hampshire.
Bob RV8 #423
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Stinky Job Alert |
In a message dated 8/14/98 6:38:08 PM, you wrote:
<<> I'm trying to figure
>> out now a good method to test them. [tanks]>>
Secure a balloon over the fuel inlet. Duct tape over the vent tube and also
over the fuel caps. Inflate with very low pressure through the drain valve
until the balloon expands a little. Spray the outside surface with soapy
water. Very simple.
Lloyd Morris
RV-6, Finish kit
Lago Vista, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank construction ? |
I missed a rib while drilling my fuel tank skins as a result I have an extra
hole right next to a rib. I was going to use bondo to patch it but my EAA
tech counselor said it would affect the adhesion of the Pro Seal. Any
solutions out there? So while I am waiting to fix that problem I am riveting
my tank reinforcing ring to inboard fuel tank rib; Do I dimple die the thinner
rib and machine countersink the .063 ring so everything fits together tight?
Since I will probably get an intro to Pro Seal tomorrow I need to know proper
mixing ratios; a experienced friend says mix it by color [dark gray] and it
will work fine as he did so and his tanks are sealed well any other opinions
out there? Thanks in advance for the help and I appreciate the comments about
fuel tank posted in the last few days as I need all the help I can get.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeremy William Benedict <jwb(at)europa.com> |
| Subject: | RV-8 Static Load Test Results |
On Aug. 12, 1998 an amateur built RV-8 wing structure successfully passed
a rigorous static load test. A complete load analysis was developed by an
independent, FAA certified, Designated Engineering Representative (DER).
The wing was inspected by a Designated Airworthiness Representative (DAR),
initially to verify structural compliance with RV-8 construction drawings.
Then during and after the testing, for structural deformation.
The test was conducted under the direct supervision of the DER to the
standards required of an acrobatic, FAR Part 23 certified aircraft. The
structure was tested at condition A and condition D, the two conditions
that the DER found to be critical for this aircraft. The wing structure
was loaded to, and successfully withstood with no objectionable
deformation, simulated flight design limit loads of 6Gs positive. The wing
structure was then loaded to 150% of the limit load, under both
conditions, and withstood these loads for the required 3 seconds and did
not fail. Both the DER and DAR personnel noted that the deformation
sustained was minimal.
Van's Aircraft has commissioned a DER for a Flutter Analysis and GVT
(Ground Vibration Test). While in-flight flutter testing has been
successfully accomplished, and the visual and microscopic lab analysis of
the RV-8 (N58RV) airframe wreckage showed no evidence of flutter, all
possibilities are being investigated.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bend over & shut up |
<< I talked to Roadway this morning and they said any adjustment would have to
come from the shipper's end.
Bull. Escalate. And escalate again if necessary. And again. I smell somebody
trying to cover their butt on this one.
Oh Well. I have a feeling refusing shipment would
just get your credit card hit for the return freight.
You can have unsolicited charges removed from your card very easily.
Besides, I might go into
withdrawal if I had to go that long without building.
Now this I understand!
How about we all specifically NOT use Roadway, and get our shipping charges
confirmed up front? That ought to get someone's attention...
Check six!
Mark
Lloyd Morris
RV-6
Lago Vista, TX >>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Buckwalter <Sales(at)AvioniKits.com> |
| Subject: | Free Avionics Brochure |
To all RV-listers,
Our new color brochure, featuring products designed to allow anyone to
install their own avionics and instruments, is ready. For a free copy,
e-mail, or call toll-free (888) 833-KITS Monday-Friday, 8 AM to 6 PM
EDT, or leave a message evenings and weekends. Thank you.
David Buckwalter
Avionics Systems
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Randall Henderson <randall(at)edt.com> |
| Subject: | First flight of N84RP) |
> What was the model of the O-320, I am installing a 0-320-H2AD 160 and was
curious if the cowl had to be modified and which cowl was used?
I haven't seen much response to this so even though I don't have any
direct experience with that engine, I have some observations based
on looking at a couple of friends' RVs with them installed.
First off there is the front mounted prop governor pad which means you
have to re-contour the top of the cowl (i.e. add some pretty big
bumps). Also the oil dipstick comes straight up out the top center,
so if you have the new epoxy cowl at least, you can't use the
formed-in recess for the oil door. This location for the oil door
also makes it harder (impossible?) to use the oil door for access to
the hinge pins for installation/removal as designed since the engine
mount is in the way at that point. The engine mount has to be
different also, but evidently Vans provides an 'H' engine mount.
I think there were some other issues but don't remember them now. I
would recommend to anyone who is considering an "H" engine to try to
track down some other RV builders who have installed them and make
sure they know what they're getting into as far as installation issues
are concerned. They are not insurmountable obviously but they are
not trivial either.
Randall Henderson, RV-6 (engine/finish)
Portland, OR
http://www.edt.com/homewing
randall(at)edt.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | caummisa(at)arn.net (Richard Caummisar, CSP) |
| Subject: | Re: Dimpling Solution |
Any chance you can get a picture of your setup posted on a homepage?
Maybe get a picture scanned and email it to someone with an
existing page and let the list know where it is?
I'm pretty good at building something once I get a look at it.
M Wentzell)
>
t. I use the Avery Dimpler on a special table that I built. The
>dimpler sits in a chanel so that it can slide forward and backward so that
>the table supports the skin for ALL the hole positions. When the dimpler is
>in the rear position, I place a piece of wood in front of it same height as
>the table (in fact I have a couple of pieces as I move the dimpler only a
>couple inches at a time)
> Get that dimpler table made! You'll be glad you did.
> DW RV6 Wings
> Racine, WI
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
Where can I find the accepted word correspondence of the alphabet....you
know A=Alpha, B=Bravo...etc. I have spent enough time searching the FAR's
and AIM that I am willing to face the embarrassment of not knowing where
these are printed.
Ross Mickey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | caummisa(at)arn.net (Richard Caummisar, CSP) |
New information posted yester day on Van's Homepage:
8-14-98: STATIC LOAD TEST RESULTS
On Aug. 12, 1998 an amateur built RV-8 wing structure
successfully passed a rigorous static load
test. A complete load analysis was developed by an
independent, FAA certified, Designated
Engineering Representative (DER). The wing was inspected
by a Designated Airworthiness
Representative (DAR), initially to verify structural
compliance with RV-8 construction drawings. Then
during and after the testing, for structural deformation.
The test was conducted under the direct supervision of
the DER to the standards required of an
acrobatic, FAR Part 23 certified aircraft. The structure
was tested at condition A and condition D,
the two conditions that the DER found to be critical for
this aircraft. The wing structure was loaded
to, and successfully withstood with no objectionable
deformation, simulated flight design limit loads of
6Gs positive. The wing structure was then loaded to 150%
of the limit load, under both conditions,
and withstood these loads for the required 3 seconds and
did not fail. Both the DER and DAR
personnel noted that the deformation sustained was minimal.
Van's Aircraft has commissioned a DER for a Flutter
Analysis and GVT (Ground Vibration Test).
While in-flight flutter testing has been successfully
accomplished, and the visual and microscopic lab
analysis of the RV-8 (N58RV) airframe wreckage showed no
evidence of flutter, all possibilities are
being investigated.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "TOMMY E. WALKER" <twsurveyor(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank construction ? |
-----Original Message-----
From: JFW9855(at)aol.com <JFW9855(at)aol.com>
Date: Friday, August 14, 1998 2:34 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Fuel Tank construction ?
>
>I missed a rib while drilling my fuel tank skins as a result I have an
extra
>hole right next to a rib.
>>Since I will probably get an intro to Pro Seal tomorrow I need to know
proper
>mixing ratios; a experienced friend says mix it by color [dark gray] and it
>will work fine as he did so and his tanks are sealed well any other
opinions
>
>Make a "patch" 1" x 1" or so, out of .016, and pro seal it over the hole
from the inside. Then pro seal the entire area (over the patch, rib and
inside of the tank skin). After its all dry and the tank is compleated I
don't think a little bondo on the outside of the skin would hurt the
adhision of the pro seal on the #40 hole. I think that the mixing of pro
seal is one of the most over-rated things in the RV building business. Just
mix it by volumn as instructed on the can. I used a cheap set of mixing
measures from the Dollar store. No Big Deal!
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "J. Farrar" <fourazjs(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: second thoughts-nose gear |
Moe, I know this is a few days late and someone might have already answered
but I like the color and finish of Marhyde primer. It is about the same
color as the RV8A interior. You can get it at an automotive paint store.
Jeff Farrar, RV8A, Empennage complete, QB due in Nov., Chandler, AZ
-----Original Message-----
From: MoeJoe <moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net>
Date: Wednesday, August 12, 1998 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: second thoughts-nose gear
>
>Sorry guys, I meant to send that directly to Scott, but forgot to paste
>his email address. While we're on the subject though, is there some
>"standard" interior paint? I'd like to use something that comes in a
>spray can so touch ups are easy and I don't have to worry about mixing
>in exactly the right ratio to get the exact color. I plan on using flat
>grey.
>
>Moe Colontonio
>moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net
>Check out my RV-8 page at:
>http://members.bellatlantic.net/~moejoe
>
>JNice51355(at)aol.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 8/11/98 5:35:55 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>> moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net writes:
>>
>> << What did you prime it with? >>
>> Shame on you Moe
>> Do you want to start another war using the P word?
>>
>--
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey Dry Cell Battery |
>Any opinions on the new Odyssey dry cell battery Van's is now carrying?
>
>Claimed advantages:
>7 lbs. lighter than comparable RG25
>8 year design life, 3-8 year service life (2 year factory replacement
>warranty)
>Long storage life, maintains 50% charge after two years
>100% deep cycle capacity
>
>Also wondering how it fits into Bob N./Aeroelectric design philosophy
>(which I intend to base the majority of my electrical system on).
Found this battery on the web. I'll invite you all to check out
<http://www.hepi.com/home.htm> which is the Hawker Energy
Products home page. These are the folk that took over the
Gates Energy Products line of RG batteries dating back over
20 years. If anyone should have a leg up on this market's
leading edge in technology, it should be Hawker.
The spec sheets for the Odyssey line are downloadable from
<http://www.hepi.com/products/sli/odyspecs.htm>. The most noteworthy
improvements are deep cycle life of 400-500 cycles.
Their earlier Genesis batteries (as are other manufacturers)
are rated at 80-100 cycles.
Charging recommendations are found at:
<http://www.hepi.com/products/sli/odycharg.htm> and I note they
are unchanged from the Genesis recommendations of
14.4 - 14.7 volts for "cyclic" or "fast charge" service
and 13.6 - 13.8 volts for "floating" or "standby"
service.
I'm a little unhappy to see them call these "drycell" batteries,
they MUST have water in the electrolyte, but like all other
RG batteries, it's contained in 80-90% saturated glass mats
which, if you open the battery up, appear to be dry.
The 7 pound weight savings noted in the orignal post is a
bit misleading . . . If you check the data sheet you'll see
that there are two batteries in the 13-14 pound range that
will deliver a "reserve capacity" of 27-28 minutes. The
notes for the data sheet say this is to support a 25A load
down to 10.5 volts. Extrapolating this out: 25 x 28 is
700 ampere-minutes divided by 60 yields 11.6 ampere-hours
at the 25 amp rate (impressive by the way). The next battery
size up is rated at 24 pounds to deliver 22 A.H. at the
25 amp rate. These weight to capacity ratios are right
in line with the rest of the industry. If Van's battery
is 7 pounds lighter, it has to be that he's offering a 12
AH battery in place of a 22 AH battey . . . a perfectly
good thing to do in light of the advanced performance of
RG over flooded technologies. B&C has offered batteries
in the 15-17 AH range at 15 pounds for several years.
The 7-milliohm internal resistance values cited for the
12 AH battery tracks along with the industry pretty well
too. I noted also that they speak of a metal jacket on
these batteries . . . I wonder if they've figured out a
way to do lined steel cases to replace the more expensive
injection molded plastic cases. I'll have to dig around
and ask about this.
All told, nothing really earth shaking here, the King
of RG Batteries is holding a lead with what appears to
be an improvement in cycle-life and chronological life.
Performance in the market place has yet to be gaged.
If you were going to bet on anyone's success, you
could do worse than backing Hawker.
Bob . . .
AeroElectric Connection
////
(o o)
==========o00o=(_)=o00o==========
< If you continue to do >
< What you've always done >
< You will continue to be >
< What you've always been. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SAVOYINTL(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Bend over & shut up |
Just wanted to send a quick message to all you guys on the RV List and tell
you how much I have appreciated all your words of support on this problem.
There has been an awful lot of good advice and help coming this way. A lot of
it has been direct to us so many of you on the list have not seen it all.
There actually may be some light at the end of the tunnel thanks to Jim Kitz
and his connections at Roadway. Will keep you posted on the outcome and
possible ways for others to avoid this type of problem. It may be next Monday
or Tuesday, but when and if it gets resolved I will definitely post a message
here for all to see.
In the mean time, thank you again for your support. It really means a lot!
Lloyd Morris
RV-6
Lago Vista, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Paul Besing <rv8er(at)doitnow.com> |
Here it is, print this out!
alpha
bravo
charlie
delta
echo
foxtrot
golf
hotel
india
juliet
kilo
lima
mike
november
oscar
papa
quebec
romeo
sierra
tango
uniform
victor
whiskey
yankee
zulu
>
>Where can I find the accepted word correspondence of the alphabet....you
>know A=Alpha, B=Bravo...etc. I have spent enough time searching the FAR's
>and AIM that I am willing to face the embarrassment of not knowing where
>these are printed.
>
>Ross Mickey
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Al Mojzisik <prober(at)iwaynet.net> |
Ross,
Try your AIM = Airmans information Manual
My 1992 edition show it on page 4-37 As Phonetic Alphabet under section 2
Radio Communications Phraseology and Techniques.
Al Col. Ohio
>
>Where can I find the accepted word correspondence of the alphabet....you
>know A=Alpha, B=Bravo...etc. I have spent enough time searching the FAR's
>and AIM that I am willing to face the embarrassment of not knowing where
>these are printed.
>
>Ross Mickey
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe Larson <jpl(at)showpg.mn.org.showpg.mn.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank construction ? |
>
> I missed a rib while drilling my fuel tank skins as a result I have an extra
> hole right next to a rib.
Fill it with a rivet. Use proseal like you would all the other rivets.
> So while I am waiting to fix that problem I am riveting
> my tank reinforcing ring to inboard fuel tank rib; Do I dimple die the thinner
> rib and machine countersink the .063 ring so everything fits together tight?
Yes, that's what I did. I think that's what the plans tell you to do.
> Since I will probably get an intro to Pro Seal tomorrow I need to know proper
> mixing ratios; a experienced friend says mix it by color [dark gray] and it
> will work fine as he did so and his tanks are sealed well any other opinions
> out there?
By weight or by volume appears to be the accepted practice. Some of the
guys are using measuring tools, some using a small scale. Most of the
people who have advised me told me they swiped a small measuring cup or
measuring spoon from their wifes (and made me promise not to tell on them).
The directions on the bottles of gunk should tell you the correct ratio.
-Joe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KBoatri144(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank construction ? |
JFW9855(at)aol.com asked:
>I missed a rib while drilling my fuel tank skins as a result I have an extra
hole right next to a rib.
Depending on how close the hole is to the rib, try one of the following..
1) If the hole isn't right against the web, dimple it and drive a rivet.
2) If the hole is immediately adjacent to the web, dimple it then put one of
the closed -end pop rivets in it. This will seal your tank, but will give you
an ugly rivet to look at.
3) Another less than beautiful solution would be to fabricate an external
patch out of thin aluminum - maybe .016 or .020, drill, dimple, and rivet it
on, using proseal liberally to seal it.
If you use solution 2 or 3, you'll probably want to hide them when you finish
the airplane... good luck. If the mistake is on the bottom of the tank, I
wouldn't worry about trying to hide the problem.
KB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | pagan <pagan(at)CBOSS.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Tank construction ? |
>
>
>I missed a rib while drilling my fuel tank skins...
>
Can you just put a rivet in the extra hole, pro-seal it and be done with it?
Also, you should mix the pro-seal as per the instruction on the can. 10-1
by weight(thats what I did). Tested my tanks yesterday with no leaks.
Bill Pagan
-8A fuselage kit ordered
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/9749/william.html
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RBusick505(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Free Avionics Brochure |
Please send a copy of Brochure to:
Bob Busick
691 Sunrise Dr
Fremont CA 94539
Thankyou
Bob Busick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RBusick505(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Free Avionics Brochure |
Sorry about the last message, I had an idiot attack!
Bob Busick
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey Dry Cell Battery |
This sounds a bit steep in price (Van's $160) given Bob's read on the amps
(11.6)
B&C prices:
12 AH $120
17AH $84 14.3 lb
25AH $143 22.5 lb
28AH $99
32AH $110 26.5 lb
Don't know the warranty on these.
I am planning a dual electrical system with two of the 17 AH which will
cost the same as one of these from Van's.
Ross Mickey
----------
> Any opinions on the new Odyssey dry cell battery Van's is now carrying?
>
> Claimed advantages:
> 7 lbs. lighter than comparable RG25
> 8 year design life, 3-8 year service life (2 year factory replacement
> warranty)
> Long storage life, maintains 50% charge after two years
> 100% deep cycle capacity
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MICHAEL <lottmc(at)datasync.com> |
| Subject: | Re: N58RV Update |
Just curious. Are test like these expensive?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Flap actuator bracket rv-4 |
I'm ready to rivet my flap actuator bracket( FL 404 R/L & FL 406 A, B, C
together.I' can't figure out the correct sequence to proceed so that the
subsequent rivet heads are accessable. I'm off now to try to look in the
archives. Thanks. Brian, working on the wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)pec.co.nz> |
| Subject: | Swing Down Panel & Tail Tie Down Photos |
Hi All,
Just to let you know that I've finally scanned Cecil's photos and
booklet. Thanks to Cecil for sending these to me. They can be found via
the "Bunny's Guide to RV Building" at
<http://members.xoom.com/frankv/bunny.htm> -- click on the 'Project
Photos' link, then choose 'Fuselage' and "Cecil Hatfields's Photos".
I've been lazy and haven't tried to identify what each one is of, so
they're just named A-W. If anyone wants a more detailed scan (these are
all scanned at 100dpi and saved as 75% quality JPEGs), let me know and
I'll redo them. Also there are B&W scans of the booklet Cecil sent to me
which describe what some of the photos mean.
Hope these are useful to someone,
Frank.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JRWillJR(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: N58RV Update |
YES--Tests like these are expensive of man hours to build the wings and test
fixtures and to hire the engineers to veriify the results. I am happy to hear
that good results have been achieved --a load off the minds of RV-8 builders I
am sure. Also pleased to see Van's continue to search for causes so as to
leave no stone unturned for all the RV-8 builders future safety. Could we have
expected any less of the First Class Van's bunch--I think not. JR A&P
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Olson <lolson(at)doitnow.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Looking for a 200 hp engine |
Paul,
Try Edward Cole he might be able to help you.
>
>I'm looking for a 200hp engine for my RV-8. VANS wants 28,250 for an IO-360
>engine. There's got to be a better deal out there. Where can I look?
>
>I want to stick with an engine that will mount on on a Dynafocal mount (I
>don't want any auto conversions).
>
>Paul
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerry Springer <jsflyrv(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bend over & shut up |
SAVOYINTL(at)AOL.COM wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 8/14/98 4:32:02 AM, you wrote:
>
> < rate but it seems to me that before you make the statements that you did
> you would have talked to a live person on the phone rather than sending a
> fax.
> I know that is the way I would have handled it. I would suggest that you
> call and talk to Bill Benedict and if you don't get any satisfactory
> answers
> from him ask to speak to Van himself. He is probably one of the most honest
> people in the business, and quite frankly it pisses me off when I see a
> post
> that "you better watch your wallet when dealing with Van's" maybe you
> better
> sell the RV and buy something from Jim Bede. Your beef is with the fright
> company not Van's>>
>
> Got news for you buddy, I have talked on the phone with these jokers until I
> am blue in the face. I also have a stack of correspondence a quarter of an
> inch thick. I went directly to Van and was passed off to Barbara. She is the
> one who made the mistake on the shipment in the first place. The problem
> started with Van's. They are the ones who didn't shop for the best rate. It is
> very easy for them to be careless when spending OPM (other people's money).
>
WELL BUDDY you did not say that in your original post you said you faxed
them.
Like I said sell your worthless POS RV that you bought from a bunch of
jokers
and buy a really good airplane from someone like BEDE.
--
Jerry Springer RV-6 N906GS First flight July 14, 1989 :-) Hillsboro, OR
August 11, 1998 - August 14, 1998
RV-Archive.digest.vol-fe