RV-Archive.digest.vol-gg
January 20, 1999 - January 26, 1999
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com |
| Subject: | looking for Formation Flying book |
RV-ation bookstore is looking for a new formation flying book to replace
Frank Hampson's book "Flying in Formation" which is no longer available.
Any rcommendations would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Andy Gold
RV-ation Bookstore
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Arthur E. Glaser" <airplane(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | rv rear spar edge clearance problem |
I spoke to Vans today. They are designing a fix involving a spacer and
another aluminum spar plate that will sandwich the rear fitting coming
out of the fuselage. Drawings should be available soon. I also
proposed that it might be possible to replace this plate with one of 1/8
steel. Call them on the final design. I was told to try calling on
Monday. I hope this is a reasonably easy fix.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sylvain Duford" <sduford(at)hotmail.com> |
I hope you guys know what you are doing here. Strenghtening a spar is no
trivial task. Stress analysis should be performed first. It is very
crucial to maintain the rigidity/stress ratio along the spar. If you
reinforce the spar in some areas, you are likely to create a highly
concentrated stress point because of the higher rigidity.
I am no engineer, but I know for a fact that unless you do it right, you
will actually reduce the stength of your spar. Some past aircraft
builders have lost their life because of this kind of "strengthening".
I'd talk with Van's before flying it.
Just my two cents worth...
Sylvain Duford
Bellevue, WA
RV-8 #47, wings
N130RV Reserved
Moe,
You are not the first to think of this! I have modified my spars to
extend this reinforcement strip out several feet. I used 3/16"x 1.125"
2024 material on the top and 1/8"x 1.125" on the bottom. Leading edge
ribs had to be modified slightly. The whole job took a full day to
completely modify both spars. This modification made me feel more
comfortable.
Tom Clark 80525 wings in the jig
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Costello" <bcostello(at)mbsi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 spar mod? |
Hi Folks,
Boy, I would be SUPER careful about modifying spars. I am certainly not an
aeronautical engineer, but I have found out from good sources that spars are
designed to distribute and dissipate the load across the wing. If we make
something seemingly stronger by beefing it up, that might result in more of the
load being transmitted to another part of the spar (because it doesn't flex and
dissipate it) and this could overload that other part, causing failure.
This is meant in no way to criticize anyone, just, perhaps, to give you
something to think about.
Best regards,
Bill Costello
>>> "Clark, Thomas IFC" 01/20 4:08 PM >>>
Moe,
You are not the first to think of this! I have modified my spars to
extend this reinforcement strip out several feet. I used 3/16"x 1.125"
2024 material on the top and 1/8"x 1.125" on the bottom. Leading edge
ribs had to be modified slightly. The whole job took a full day to
completely modify both spars. This modification made me feel more
comfortable.
Tom Clark 80525 wings in the jig
________________________________________________________________________________
I just talked to XP Industries to get an update
on their O-360 clone project and thought I'd pass
it along. I've had so much trouble getting to
them, I thought they might have folded their
tent. They are still alive but aren't moving
very fast. Last I heard they were to have
pricing in Dec and product in Jan/Feb. Now,
they're saying pricing in 2-3 weeks and product
in June. They do have a web site now at
http://www.xpindustries.com so you can follow
their progress.
The web site shows a XP-360 Sport which is a
"kit" alternative (to the XP-360) with limited
availability. It has a used case, sump, accy
case, but new everything else, including crank
(non-certified I presume). It's $16,000
unassembled and without any accessories. If
that's any indication of their pricing for the
all new, complete XP-360, they're going to be way
over Van's price. IMHO it pretty much drops them
out of race before they even leave the gate.
Their June estimate (subject to more delays)
drops them off my list anyway since I want to get
an engine in the next couple of months.
Regards,
Greg Young
RV-6 N6GY (reserved) finishing kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Johnson" <scottj(at)ais.net> |
| Subject: | Re: batteries/starters 101 |
I had the same problem. It turned out my ground was not very good. After
placing another ground to the frame and engine and batter, I got
significantly better cranking.
-----Original Message-----
From: Louis Willig <larywil(at)home.com>
Date: Wednesday, January 20, 1999 2:17 AM
Subject: RV-List: batteries/starters 101
>
>
>Dear gang,
>
>My O-360, 180 hp RV-4 has never turned over quickly since I purchased it
>two months ago. When running, the panel volt meter shows nearly 14 volts. I
>checked the meter with my trusty Radio Shack multi meter with the plane at
>rest. They agree exactly. I decided to charge the battery, a one year old
>RG battery designed for wheelchair use. At rest, the battery shows 12.9
>volts. While on a slow, 2 amp , auto shut-off trickle charge, the panel
>volt meter was showing 14.9 volts. How can this be? Is my new battery
>charger overcharging? Can a fully charged RG battery ever show 12.9 volts?
>Meanwhile, when I tried to start the engine ( with fuel off), it still
>turns over very slowly....one half revolution at a time. The outside temp.
>is about 40+ degrees. Is my starter, a Nippon-Denso, not working well? How
>do I check it. Should I use my perfectly good auto battery with
>conventional jumpers to test the starter. I guess I am thinking of
>disconnecting the aircraft's battery from its cables and attaching my
>automobile's battery in its place via cables. I would then disconnect the
>alternator's field circuit- just for safety. Then, I would try to turn over
>the engine(again with no fuel) just to see how rapidly it turns over.
>
>Yes. Its true. I'm electronically challenged. Thanks in advance for any
>help you may be able to provide.
>
>
>Louis I. Willig , RV-4
>larywil(at)home.com
>(610) 668-4964
>Philadelphia, PA
>
>
>Louis I. Willig , RV-4
>larywil(at)home.com
>(610) 668-4964
>Philadelphia, PA
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Glenn & Judi <glenng(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: XP-360 Update |
Greg,
You mentioned that you were looking to get yourself an engine in the next couple
of months. For what it's worth, I just ordered my engine from Vans and they
gave me a 4 month estimated ship date.
-Glenn Gordon
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Busick <rbusick(at)netmagic.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
> > If the hole cannot be moved over while bringing it up to size then
> > IMHO the necessary pieces should be replaced.
>
> My thoughts exactly! It might be a lot of work, but it could save your hide
> someday.
Interstesting debate. One person relates that an RV has flown without
the rear spar attached (or even drilled for attachment) to the fuselage
and others recommend replacement of all parts affected.
On the RV-3 wing failures, Vans' thought that the failures were due to
improper edge clearance on the rear spars. But, this theory seemed to
have lost some of it's creditability after the Dr Mosley crash. (It is
all in the archives)
I am wondering if the load is in tension, compression or maybe a shear
load? I had always thought that the rear attachment was to keep the
wing from twisting when a rolling moment was applied to the wing by the
aileron, and to keep the wing from bending rearward during flight.
In the spirit of being helpfull and providing some educational
information, perhaps a structural engineer could explain the loads, and
quantify the failure limits based upon the various suggestions provided
on this subject.
Bob Busick
RV-6
Fremont CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aviation scanner |
The problem with most older scanners is that they were designed to pick up
only narrow-band FM transmissions which is what most
police/fire/ambulance/public service radios use. Our aviation radios are
an anachronism in that they still use AM. Modern scanners have both FM and
AM detectors and therefore will work on our VHF aviation bands (108-137
MHz).
With prices for a new scanner being on the order of $100 it makes those old
scanners, especially those that require a crystal for each frequency,
pretty undesirable.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6399 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax O-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: looking for Formation Flying book |
>
>RV-ation bookstore is looking for a new formation flying book to replace
>Frank Hampson's book "Flying in Formation" which is no longer available.
>
>Any rcommendations would be appreciated.
>
The T-34 Assocation's Formation manual is now accepted as the standard for
"Most" recognized formation groups.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
dougr(at)petroblend.com
www.petroblend.com/dougr
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Engines-Care and feeding of Lycomings |
>>I have always made it a rule to keep full throttle operation
>>to one minute max unless circumstances dictate otherwise.
>> Continue climb out at these settings until reaching desired altitude
>> starting to lean at 3500-4000 ft keeping well on the rich side of peak.
>On reaching cruiseing altitude level of and cruise at 2400 and 21-22 ins
>> manifold pressure for say 5 min to stabilize temps. Then lean to peak on
>> the hottest cylinder less 50 degrees on the rich side.
I agree with everything you said both before and after this but I do take
exception to the above.
I have had several Lycoming engines run well past TBO. I maintain maximum
power (full throttle, max RPM) all the way to cruise altitude where I make
an RPM reduction and usually leave the throttle wide open (constant speed
prop). This ensures that the economizer valve in the carb is open to allow
additional fuel for cooling. If you make a throttle reduction you are, in
effect, leaning the engine at that point.
I have also found that, at least with all the carburated Lycs I have
operated, the EGT spread across all the cylinders is lowest with the
throttle valve wide open. This implies to me that the mixture is more
nearly equal on all the cylinders in that configuration.
I begin leaning down low and continue to adjust mixture to keep the EGT at
the full-throttle sea-level EGT all the way up to cruise. Once at cruise
lean until one cylinder reaches peak EGT and the enrichen until that
cylinder's EGT drops by 50 degrees. Yes, this is safe to do since all you
are doing is keeping the mixture constant as you climb instead of letting
it get richer. If it is rich enough at sea level for full power then that
is sufficiently rich for all altitudes.
> The Lycoming manual says not to operate at over 75% continuously this
>equates to around 2400 and 24 inches. The recommended TBO is 2000 and this
>can be achieved if the a/c is flown on a regular basis (at least every two
>weeks) and cruised at 65 %.
I have not seen the admonition to not run an O-320, O-360, or O-540 at over
75% in continuous operation. I am not saying that you are wrong, only that
I have never seen that admonition and I am religious about reading the
Lycoming engine manuals. I will go back and look for that entry.
I agree with you that regular running and regular oil changes are the best
things in the world to ensure that an engine makes it to TBO. I try to
ensure that my engines never go more than a week without getting at least
one hour of operation and I try to fly them every few days. The engines
that seem to make it to or past TBO are those that are in flight schools
where the airplane flys every day and receives regular maintenance. These
engines tend to be abused by students and low-time renter-pilots but they
still seem to make it to TBO.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6399 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax O-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Engines-Care and feeding of Lycomings |
>i have often wondered what the "approved procedure" is for doing a run-up
>when the oil temp is too low. we are taught to do run-ups into the wind to
>get the cooling airflow. but if you are trying to get the oil to heat up i
>would think that you would not want do that.
The cylinders heat up much faster than does the rest of the engine. You
need to keep the cylinders cool enough while the rest of the engine (bottom
end) warms up. That is why you still want to have plenty of cooling air
going through the engine. The oil temp gives you an indication of the
temperature of the bottom end of the engine only.
>is this ok? or is there some
>overriding reason to point the nose into the wind? also, at what oil temp
>(or is oil pressure more important?)can you start applying more than 1000
>rpm?
The key here is oil pressure and oil flow. If the oil is too "thick"
because it is cold, it will not flow well through the engine. This usually
manifests itself as high oil pressure on start-up in a Lycoming. (Lycoming
measures oil pressure at the output of the oil pump whereas Continental
measures it downstream.) In fact, if the oil is cold enough it can congeal
(turn into the consistency of Crisco) and not flow at all. So you want the
oil warm enough to flow easily through the engine and lubricate all the
parts. Lycoming lists a recommended minimum oil temperature for operation
in their engine book as I recall. They also indicate that, if you can open
the throttle rapidly without having the engine stumble or falter, it is
warm enough to fly.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6399 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax O-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: XP-360 Update |
Last night we held our monthly EAA Chapter 162 meeting and one of our
members said he had purchased the first XP-360, Serial number 1. He is
having a local mechanic assemble it I believe. He is building a modified
Long -EZ, his own fuselage design, and I suppose the engine is for this
ship. It will be interesting to here how this turns out. I did not hear
anything about the pricing issue.
-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Young <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
Date: Wednesday, January 20, 1999 5:18 PM
Subject: RV-List: XP-360 Update
>
>I just talked to XP Industries to get an update
>on their O-360 clone project and thought I'd pass
>it along. I've had so much trouble getting to
>them, I thought they might have folded their
>tent. They are still alive but aren't moving
>very fast. Last I heard they were to have
>pricing in Dec and product in Jan/Feb. Now,
>they're saying pricing in 2-3 weeks and product
>in June. They do have a web site now at
> http://www.xpindustries.com so you can follow
>their progress.
>
>The web site shows a XP-360 Sport which is a
>"kit" alternative (to the XP-360) with limited
>availability. It has a used case, sump, accy
>case, but new everything else, including crank
>(non-certified I presume). It's $16,000
>unassembled and without any accessories. If
>that's any indication of their pricing for the
>all new, complete XP-360, they're going to be way
>over Van's price. IMHO it pretty much drops them
>out of race before they even leave the gate.
> Their June estimate (subject to more delays)
>drops them off my list anyway since I want to get
>an engine in the next couple of months.
>
>
>Regards,
>Greg Young
>RV-6 N6GY (reserved) finishing kit
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: looking for Formation Flying book |
>
>RV-ation bookstore is looking for a new formation flying book to replace
>Frank Hampson's book "Flying in Formation" which is no longer available.
>
>Any rcommendations would be appreciated.
The FAST folks use the T-34 formation flying book as their bible. The
current version is "Formation Flight Manual, 4th Edition." Most of the
Warbird groups have adopted this book as the standard.
I would check with the T-34 Association, Inc., about resale availability.
Their secretary is:
Jim Nogle
1009 Wilshire Ct.
Champaign, IL 61821
I believe that this book is also available from Sporty's.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6399 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax O-
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Barnard(Sam James)Cowl and Sensenich Prop Extension Length? |
I am about to order a Sensenich prop and do not know which length prop
extension to order. Is there anyone out there using this combo? I assume it is
the longer extension, but would be nice to confirm it works before I order it.
Thanks,
Bernie Kerr, on the front end of 6A, (90% done and 90% to go) , SE Fla
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Thompson <grobdriver(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: looking for Formation Flying book |
---winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com wrote:
> RV-ation bookstore is looking for a new formation flying book to
replace
> Frank Hampson's book "Flying in Formation" which is no longer
available.
>
> Any rcommendations would be appreciated.
I have a 1987 printing of Formation Flying by Mike Keedy.
This "booklet" was published by the Comanche Flyer Foundation - don't
have any idea if it is still available or useful for you.
Pretty good read, all the basics.
Unfortunately there is no address/phone in the book. I suspect this
Foundation is well known.
Mike Thompson
Austin, TX
-6 N140RV (Reserved)
Preping wing ribs
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Painting Stripes |
Well I am almost done painting the body color on my RV-8, and it is time
to start thinking about the two color stripes. Question; What is the
procedure for painting stripes up the tail and across the control
surfaces? Am thinking I will need to hang the control surfaces, tape the
lines, then remove the control surfaces and wrap the tape around the
leading edges before paint? Or is there a way to just shoot the stripes
while the control surfaces are on?
Von Alexander
N41VA(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MICHAEL <lottmc(at)datasync.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Painting Stripes |
Take the control surfaces off to paint the stripes. Mark them
first, while they are still on. Then take them off to paint
them. It's the only way to do a good job. Good luck.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eustace Bowhay" <ebowhay(at)shuswap.net> |
Hi Brian:
Enjoy your posts on the lists, and it is obvious that you have a lot of
aviation background. Perhaps you can help answer some of the engine
question as you have tonight regarding running up into wind etc.
I am having a problem getting the time to do it properly and don't want to
get into long discussions on the technical points. Also as I have said
before my posts are what has worked for me and may not be for everybody.
A lot of my flying has been in the arctic and the sparsely settled areas of
the north were we tend to become very sensative to the condition of the
engines and how they are handled. It has been my observation over the years
that the pilots that use high power settings are usually the ones that have
engines problems over the long term.
As you would probaby agree the small Lycomings stand up the best in this
class and my experience has been the same as you mention that they will go
to TBO even in a flying school enviroment. I believe this is due mainly to
the fact they are flown everyday and have good maintenance. Could say that
small lyc's are the only ones that will take it without expensive repairs.
I guess I tend to lean to the conservative side (if you don't need it why
use it) and don't stray from my long term power settings. Regarding the 75%
max. power maybe I used the wrong words here. "Instead of do not use" it
should have been "recommended". In the operator's manual for the 0360
series on page 3-7 it states "Maximum power cruise" ( approx. 75%) and on
page 3-14 it shows Normal rated performance cruise is 75% and Economy
cruise at 65%. The manual recommends 150 degrees rich of peak for 75% and
over. In the warranty it states that violating the recommended (or words to
that effect) will void the warranty.
For those with the run up into wind question I would like to add to Brian's
post it will really help control propeller erosion and dust blowing back
over you and into the engine.
Seriously Brian your input on the engine questions would be a real help and
contribution.
Getting late for me so the spelling mistakes are at no extra charge.
Eustace Bowhay Blind Bay, B.C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Sears <sears(at)searnet.com> |
| Subject: | Antenna problems |
Listers,
I was doing a continuity check on the coax for my comm. The coax
is OK; but, I tried doing a continuity check from the center pin at the
comm down to the tip of the antenna. When I checked the whip
antenna, I got no continuity. Since I know nothing about this stuff, I
have this question. Should there be continuity from the center pin in
the connector on the antenna and the tip of the antenna? If there
should be, I have a break somewhere in the antenna. Alas, that
would add insult to injury since my Apollo SL60 has a short in it's
connector for the comm side. I have to send it back for repair today
and haven't even tried to let the smoke out yet! :-(
Jim Sears in KY
RV-6A N198JS (Wiring and frustrated.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ken" <klgray(at)txcyber.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Throttle/Mixture Springs |
A friend of mine has a RV-6A, and about 4 months ago his mixture cable broke
and it was surging a lot as he passed over the airport. He landed ok, and
replaced the cable. It was a standard installation, using Van's cable.
BTW, he did not put any springs on it. But I am.
Ken Gray
N69KG 433 hours of flying enjoyment
Bryan, Texas
Getting painted this spring.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cy Galley <cgalley(at)accessus.net>
Date: Tuesday, January 19, 1999 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Throttle/Mixture Springs
>
>Why do you think springs are necessary? Have you ever had a throttle or
>mixture break? Have you ever seen these springs on a production airplane?
>
>It would take a lot of ware and time for either control cable to break. If
>you are doing proper maintenance, you would catch it long before any
problem
>would develop. You do have the pivot bolts drilled and keyed, don't you?
>This is an FAA requirement.
>
>On both controls you want them to be set easily, a spring would tend to
undo
>you careful settings. The mixture control, unless you are using a vernier
>would always be creeping rich if you had a spring. You would have to
>tighten down the lock on your non-vernier throttle to prevent the same
>thing. This would produce more wear.
>
>On systems that don't use stiff cables, such as bicycle brake cables, then
>the flexibility might necessitate a return spring. Bert Rutan used it in
>the Vari Eze for example, due to very long controls. They were necessary
as
>the flexible cable only pulled and could not push like you controls. Is
you
>are using stiff wire control you should not have any reason to have the
>springs.
>
>If it was a good idea, the FAA would require it. They don't!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: n41va(at)Juno.com <n41va(at)Juno.com>
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Tuesday, January 19, 1999 10:13 AM
>Subject: RV-List: Throttle/Mixture Springs
>
>
>>
>>Since it would seem desirable, if not necessary, to install springs on
>>the throttle and mixture (throttle to full open, mixture to full rich),
>>how do I go about doing this? My Bart Lalonde engine does not have
>>springs on either, shouldn't this be standard?
>>Von Alexander
>>N41VA(at)juno.com
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)miami.gdi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
Moe,
Are you sure that the report said that this Chard RV-3 was following a
RV-8? (In 1995?)
Charlie Kuss
RV-8 wings
Boca Raton, Fl.
> Sorry folks, but I can't sleep. I went digging around on the internet and
> found the following attached to an RV-3 accident report. Was the RV-8
> mentioned N58RV?
>
> On October 8, 1995, approximately 1640 Pacific daylight time, an
> experimental Chard RV-3A, N27RV, experienced an inflight separation of the
> right wing.
snipped
> According to witnesses, the RV-3 followed an RV-8 in a steep climbing
> maneuver, and then initiated a level steeply banked turn. During this turn,
> which was described by witnesses on the ground as an extremely tight right
> turn, the right wing of the RV-3 was seen to depart the fuselage.
snipped
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: looking for Formation Flying book |
<< The T-34 Assocation's Formation manual is now accepted as the standard for
"Most" recognized formation groups.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal >>
I'm told that this will also be the bible for the new formation group to be
set up by Stu McCurdy, to be used for us amateurs who want to fly at airshows.
Check six!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: XP-360 Update |
Don't forget the ANGLE VALVE O-320 to be produced by ECI. I'm told 190 HP on
gas, or 205 on alchohol. IMHO, this will be a lighter engine, and maybe a bit
more efficient.
Heck, I'd never get anywhere with an alky powered ship- I'd drink all the
fuel! (While pretending to be a CAF colonel...) ;-)
Check six!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna problems |
>I was doing a continuity check on the coax for my comm. The coax
>is OK; but, I tried doing a continuity check from the center pin at the
>comm down to the tip of the antenna. When I checked the whip
>antenna, I got no continuity. Since I know nothing about this stuff, I
>have this question. Should there be continuity from the center pin in
>the connector on the antenna and the tip of the antenna? If there
>should be, I have a break somewhere in the antenna.
I would check with the manufacturer of the antenna. Radio frequency
energy can be piped through a lot of components not the least
of which is capacitors . . . they do not conduct DC current.
The other way to check is to push some energy into the antenna
with a transmitter and check standing wave ratio or you can
use a device like the antenna analyzer shown in the tools section
of our website catalog.
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: | Possibly bitten by the RV bug |
Greetings All
Two weeks ago I thought an RV was what I would buy when I retire one day and
travel the country staying at KOA campgrounds. Then I saw a link from
AvFlash to Van's web site regarding testing of the RV-8 wing. Otherwise, I
would not have discovered Vans. Immediately, I was captivated with the Vans
series of aircraft, read everything on the site, discovered Sam Buchanan's,
John Hovan's, Terry Jantzi's, Scott Johnson's, sites, etc, etc.
I am fighting the fever hard of wanting to build one of these myself!! Any
builders in the Pensacola, Florida area please contact me by email or by
phone. I would love to see a project in progress and talk with you. A ride
in one would also be great, but I am pretty sure that a Vans is the way to
go.
Also, one question --- when is the Southeast Wing of Vans Airforce going to
be created?? Looks like other parts of the country are getting ahead of us.
I am ready to join.
Regarding the lawsuit. I am very impressed with the way this has been
handled on the RV list. It is obvious many of you are very good at
assimilating your thoughts and communicating in a civil way.
This is my first reply on the list. Hope I don't mess it up some way.
Jack Rowell
Pensacola, Florida
850-444-7204
(currently in a cherokee)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed Wischmeyer <edwisch(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Barnard(Sam James)Cowl and Sensenich Prop Extension Length? |
> I am about to order a Sensenich prop and do not know which length prop
extension to order. Is there anyone out there using this combo? I assume it is
the longer extension, but would be nice to confirm it works before I order it.
As I understand it, because of the greater weight of the Sensenich prop, you
have to use the "short" extension. It comes with the prop...
Ed Wischmeyer
buying a used prop
RV-4 for sale
http://www.ath.tis.net/~sbuc/rv6/forsale.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Adrian Chick <adrianchick(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | [Fwd: Insurance Consequences of "Illegal" Maintenance on a Homebuilt |
Aircraft]
I asked Avemco, on the typical insurance policy, what effect would result from
the owner performing engine maintenance in violation of FAR's.
"Lauerman, Jim" wrote:
> Mr. Chick:
>
> Thank you for your e-mail of last Thursday regarding Avemco's policy wording
> regarding the performance of maintenance on a homebuilt aircraft by the
> owner of that aircraft that is in violation of the FAR's.......I also must say
> that it is always extremely difficult to deal with "what if" issues
> surrounding a loss. The circumstances surrounding that loss as they apply to
> the policy wording will determine whether or not coverage will bein force.
> Having said that, I do not believe there would be coverage for the situation
> you have described. Performing "illegal" maintenance would make the aircraft
> technically unairworthy. On our application for insurance our customers are
> required to warrant that the aircraft has a current and effective
> maintenance inspection. If illegal maintenance was being performed, the
> aircraft would not, in fact, be legal from an inspection standpoint and
> therefore the applicant for insurance would be making a material
> misrepresentation on the application. Material misrepresentation is, in most
> cases, grounds to rescind the policy and deny coverage for the loss.
>
> My strong recommendation would be for owners of amateur built aircraft to
> never knowingly violate any FAR. Applying this principle will not only help
> to avoid an uncovered loss, but will keep the owner out of trouble with the
> FAA as well.
>
> Again, thank you for your question. I hope that I have answered it to your
> satisfaction
>
> Jim Lauerman
> Executive Vice President
> Avemco Insurance Company
From: "Lauerman, Jim" <jlauerman(at)ave.com>
Subject: Insurance Consequences of "Illegal" Maintenance on a Homebuilt Ai
rcraft
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:15:13 -0500
Mr. Chick:
Thank you for your e-mail of last Thursday regarding Avemco's policy wording
regarding the performance of maintenance on a homebuilt aircraft by the
owner of that aircraft that is in violation of the FAR's.
First, I want to go on record that we never encourage pilots or owners to
knowingly violate the FAR's. Doing so is not only illegal but unwise.
I also must say that it is always extremely difficult to deal with "what if"
issues surrounding a loss. The circumstances surrounding that loss as they
apply to the policy wording will determine whether or not coverage will be
in force.
Having said that, I do not believe there would be coverage for the situation
you have described. Performing "illegal" maintenance would make the aircraft
technically unairworthy. On our application for insurance our customers are
required to warrant that the aircraft has a current and effective
maintenance inspection. If illegal maintenance was being performed, the
aircraft would not, in fact, be legal from an inspection standpoint and
therefore the applicant for insurance would be making a material
misrepresentation on the application. Material misrepresentation is, in most
cases, grounds to rescind the policy and deny coverage for the loss.
My strong recommendation would be for owners of amateur built aircraft to
never knowingly violate any FAR. Applying this principle will not only help
to avoid an uncovered loss, but will keep the owner out of trouble with the
FAA as well.
Again, thank you for your question. I hope that I have answered it to your
satisfaction
Jim Lauerman
Executive Vice President
Avemco Insurance Company
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Antenna problems |
| From: | n5lp <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net> |
>
>
>Should there be continuity from the center pin in
>the connector on the antenna and the tip of the antenna?
Yes
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6Q N441LP Induction System
Pacer N8025D For Sale http://www.carlsbadnm.com/n5lp/index.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Anderson Ed" <anderson_ed(at)bah.com> |
| Subject: | Illegal Maintenance of Homebuilt aircraft |
Dear Mr. Lauerman,
I saw your reply to Chick Adrian concerning "Illegal Maintenance" on
homebuilt aircraft. I have no issue with your reply which appeared
reasonable for an insurance company's viewpoint, although all may not
agree.
However, I would like to ask a question from the view point of
Maintenance. As you are aware, the FAA will issue a "Limited"
repairmans certificate to an individual who actually builds an
experimental aircraft in the amateur (homebuilt) category. So far as I
understand the FAR, that permits me to do all required maintenance on
the my aircraft soley, not any other even similar aicraft.
Now, I am certain that the "Limited" repairmans certificate does not
authorized me to doing maintenance on a certified aircraft engine.
However, a certified engine is not required for a homebuilt to be issued
an airworthiness certificate. In fact, my RV-6A is insured by AVEMCO
and its powerplant is an auto conversion of a Mazda Wankel Rotary
engine, not exactly a certified engine. However, a number of homebuilts
do use "uncertified" aircraft engines.
I recognize I pay higher premiums due to the nature of my powerplant and
I find that not unreasonable given the lack of substantial statistical
data on the risk (which may not be any higher in reality than certified
aircraft engines) about auto conversions. I now have 16 hours flying
time on the airframe and 55 hours on the engine (40 hrs spent on a test
stand).
The question to you is - in my case in particular, am I actually
covered, as I do (and no A&P would) perform all maintenance on my Wankel
engine.
If I am not covered then I certainly need to know that. Clearly the
issue of whether any maintenance I may perform is moot legally in that I
am FAR legal to do so. Now my understanding is that if I make a Major
change to the airframe or engine to put it in a different configuration
than that on which the airworthiness certificate is issued, then I would
again need to be inspected and enter into a test phase (with what ever
restrictions the inspector saw deemed necessary) to verify that work.
However, I also realize that being FAR legal is a necessary but not
necessarily sufficient condition to make a situation or incident de
facto covered by insurance. Am I covered by your insurance if (and I
will) do maintenance on my non-certifed engine. What types of
maintenance can I perform on airframe/engine and still remain covered by
my insurance???
Your views on this matter would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks for taking the time to clarify these insurance related questions
Ed Anderson
RV-6A N494BW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Fasching" <fasching(at)amigo.net> |
----------
From: John Fasching <fasching(at)amigo.net>
Subject: Coverage
Date: Thursday, January 21, 1999 9:50 AM
Jim, I have Avemco insurance for liability for my hangar and my
experimental aircraft. I read your reply on the internet to Mr. Chick (I
believe it was) regarding no coverage if the aircraft is not technically
"airworthy." Jim, the simple truth is that the FAR's and the convoluted
interpretations by various FAA people make it such a morass that I doubt I
could fly one trip around the pattern without violating some obscure
FAA/FAR regulation. As to maintenance, there is such rampant confusion
among FAA inspectors about what can and cannot be done by a builder who
holds a Repairman Certificate that as insureds we have no rational way of
knowing if we would be covered by Avemco or not in case of an accident. I
would bet you a goodly sum that NO aircraft is 100.0% in compliance with
every obscure FAR/FAA rule. The truth is that we have no way of knowing if
we are actually insured by Avemco or not until AFTER an accident.
This is not very comforting!
John W. Fasching
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Wiesel <dan(at)interlinkrecruiting.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Illegal Maintenance of Homebuilt aircraft |
I am disturbed by this thread. My understanding was that as experimenters
we could get insurance, and especially from Avemco. They direct their
advertisements towards us, take our money, assure us on the phone that we
are insured, (of course we never read the fine print if even if we could
understand it), and then a representative from the company writes a letter
renouncing their exposure.
We need to have some authoritative response from Avemco regarding this
matter. I'm really getting tired of insurance brokers promising something
or representing something and then we find out about all the loopholes when
a tragedy occurs.
wrote:
>
>Dear Mr. Lauerman,
> I saw your reply to Chick Adrian concerning "Illegal Maintenance" on
>homebuilt aircraft. I have no issue with your reply which appeared
>reasonable for an insurance company's viewpoint, although all may not
>agree.
>
>However, I would like to ask a question from the view point of
>Maintenance. As you are aware, the FAA will issue a "Limited"
>repairmans certificate to an individual who actually builds an
>experimental aircraft in the amateur (homebuilt) category. So far as I
>understand the FAR, that permits me to do all required maintenance on
>the my aircraft soley, not any other even similar aicraft.
>
> Now, I am certain that the "Limited" repairmans certificate does not
>authorized me to doing maintenance on a certified aircraft engine.
>However, a certified engine is not required for a homebuilt to be issued
>an airworthiness certificate. In fact, my RV-6A is insured by AVEMCO
>and its powerplant is an auto conversion of a Mazda Wankel Rotary
>engine, not exactly a certified engine. However, a number of homebuilts
>do use "uncertified" aircraft engines.
>
>I recognize I pay higher premiums due to the nature of my powerplant and
>I find that not unreasonable given the lack of substantial statistical
>data on the risk (which may not be any higher in reality than certified
>aircraft engines) about auto conversions. I now have 16 hours flying
>time on the airframe and 55 hours on the engine (40 hrs spent on a test
>stand).
>
> The question to you is - in my case in particular, am I actually
>covered, as I do (and no A&P would) perform all maintenance on my Wankel
>engine.
>
>If I am not covered then I certainly need to know that. Clearly the
>issue of whether any maintenance I may perform is moot legally in that I
>am FAR legal to do so. Now my understanding is that if I make a Major
>change to the airframe or engine to put it in a different configuration
>than that on which the airworthiness certificate is issued, then I would
>again need to be inspected and enter into a test phase (with what ever
>restrictions the inspector saw deemed necessary) to verify that work.
>
> However, I also realize that being FAR legal is a necessary but not
>necessarily sufficient condition to make a situation or incident de
>facto covered by insurance. Am I covered by your insurance if (and I
>will) do maintenance on my non-certifed engine. What types of
>maintenance can I perform on airframe/engine and still remain covered by
>my insurance???
>
>Your views on this matter would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Thanks for taking the time to clarify these insurance related questions
>
>Ed Anderson
>RV-6A N494BW
>
>
>
Dan Wiesel
RV6a QB starting finishing kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Bowen <lcbowen(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Possibly bitten by the RV bug |
Bet you could get a ride @ Sun-N-Fun, if you get there early.
I vote for a SE wing based in NC!
-Larry
RV-8 emp./wings
http://larry.bowen.com
[snip, snip]
> I am fighting the fever hard of wanting to build one of these
myself!! Any
> builders in the Pensacola, Florida area please contact me by email
or by
> phone. I would love to see a project in progress and talk with you.
A ride
> in one would also be great, but I am pretty sure that a Vans is the
way to
> go.
>
> Also, one question --- when is the Southeast Wing of Vans Airforce
going to
> be created?? Looks like other parts of the country are getting ahead
of us.
> I am ready to join.
>
> Jack Rowell
> Pensacola, Florida
> 850-444-7204
> (currently in a cherokee)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)accessus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: Insurance Consequences of "Illegal" Maintenance on |
a Homebuilt Aircraft]
How pray tell can one do "illegal" maintenance on a homebuilt engine????
-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Chick <adrianchick(at)home.com>
Date: Thursday, January 21, 1999 9:48 AM
Subject: RV-List: [Fwd: Insurance Consequences of "Illegal" Maintenance on a
Homebuilt Aircraft]
>
>
>I asked Avemco, on the typical insurance policy, what effect would result
from
>the owner performing engine maintenance in violation of FAR's.
>
>"Lauerman, Jim" wrote:
>
>> Mr. Chick:
>>
>> Thank you for your e-mail of last Thursday regarding Avemco's policy
wording
>> regarding the performance of maintenance on a homebuilt aircraft by the
>> owner of that aircraft that is in violation of the FAR's.......I also
must say
>> that it is always extremely difficult to deal with "what if" issues
>> surrounding a loss. The circumstances surrounding that loss as they apply
to
>> the policy wording will determine whether or not coverage will bein
force.
>> Having said that, I do not believe there would be coverage for the
situation
>> you have described. Performing "illegal" maintenance would make the
aircraft
>> technically unairworthy. On our application for insurance our customers
are
>> required to warrant that the aircraft has a current and effective
>> maintenance inspection. If illegal maintenance was being performed, the
>> aircraft would not, in fact, be legal from an inspection standpoint and
>> therefore the applicant for insurance would be making a material
>> misrepresentation on the application. Material misrepresentation is, in
most
>> cases, grounds to rescind the policy and deny coverage for the loss.
>>
>> My strong recommendation would be for owners of amateur built aircraft to
>> never knowingly violate any FAR. Applying this principle will not only
help
>> to avoid an uncovered loss, but will keep the owner out of trouble with
the
>> FAA as well.
>>
>> Again, thank you for your question. I hope that I have answered it to
your
>> satisfaction
>>
>> Jim Lauerman
>> Executive Vice President
>> Avemco Insurance Company
>
>
> (InterMail v4.00.03 201-229-104) with ESMTP
> for ;
>From: "Lauerman, Jim" <jlauerman(at)ave.com>
>To: "'adrianchick(at)home.com'"
>Subject: Insurance Consequences of "Illegal" Maintenance on a Homebuilt Ai
> rcraft
>Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:15:13 -0500
>
>Mr. Chick:
>
>Thank you for your e-mail of last Thursday regarding Avemco's policy
wording
>regarding the performance of maintenance on a homebuilt aircraft by the
>owner of that aircraft that is in violation of the FAR's.
>
>First, I want to go on record that we never encourage pilots or owners to
>knowingly violate the FAR's. Doing so is not only illegal but unwise.
>
>I also must say that it is always extremely difficult to deal with "what
if"
>issues surrounding a loss. The circumstances surrounding that loss as they
>apply to the policy wording will determine whether or not coverage will be
>in force.
>
>Having said that, I do not believe there would be coverage for the
situation
>you have described. Performing "illegal" maintenance would make the
aircraft
>technically unairworthy. On our application for insurance our customers are
>required to warrant that the aircraft has a current and effective
>maintenance inspection. If illegal maintenance was being performed, the
>aircraft would not, in fact, be legal from an inspection standpoint and
>therefore the applicant for insurance would be making a material
>misrepresentation on the application. Material misrepresentation is, in
most
>cases, grounds to rescind the policy and deny coverage for the loss.
>
>My strong recommendation would be for owners of amateur built aircraft to
>never knowingly violate any FAR. Applying this principle will not only help
>to avoid an uncovered loss, but will keep the owner out of trouble with the
>FAA as well.
>
>Again, thank you for your question. I hope that I have answered it to your
>satisfaction
>
>Jim Lauerman
>Executive Vice President
>Avemco Insurance Company
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: Insurance Consequences of "Illegal" |
Maintenance on a Homebuilt Aircraft]
>
>
>I asked Avemco, on the typical insurance policy, what effect would result
from
>the owner performing engine maintenance in violation of FAR's.
Adrian,
This is all very interesting but... isnt this the answer you expected if
the question posed specifically stated that you intended to violate FARs in
performing maintenance on your engine? Just what kind of maintenance are we
talking about here that you would be doing? As I understand it, with a
repairmans certificate in hand I can perform maintenance on my RV without
violating any FARs. This includes engine maintenance, though as I
understand it my engine would no longer be considered "certified". So could
you please explain what kind of maintenance you would do which would
violate FARs and void your insurance?
Mike Wills
RV-4 fuse out of the jig
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Corbitt" <donc(at)analogia.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Illegal Maintenance of Homebuilt aircraft |
"Don't Panic" :-)
He said if you are not legal to do your own maintenance you might have an
insurance problem. So make sure you are legal to do your own maintenance.
No surprises there. (If you want insurance on an aircraft that isn't
airworthy (aka legal to fly) you're going to have to pay a bit more, if you
can find it at all.)
--
Don Corbitt, donc(at)analogia.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Wiesel <dan(at)interlinkrecruiting.com>
>I am disturbed by this thread. My understanding was that as experimenters
>we could get insurance, and especially from Avemco. They direct their
>advertisements towards us, take our money, assure us on the phone that we
>are insured, (of course we never read the fine print if even if we could
>understand it), and then a representative from the company writes a letter
>renouncing their exposure.
[snip]
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Al Mojzisik <prober(at)iwaynet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: Insurance Consequences of "Illegal" |
Maintenance on a Home built Aircraft]
Adrian,
I don't know how you worded your question but if you used the term
"illegal" as he noted below then the answer should come as no surprise to
you. It's like asking, "If I fly an airplane "illegally" can the FAA bust
me?" If something is predetermined to be illegal than you are breaking a
law and all bets are off. On the other hand if you were to ask if you did
maintenance on the non-certified (i.e.:experimental) engine on the aircraft
for which you have the repairmans certificate are you covered by your
policy? I am sure you would get an answer that said, "As long as the
maintenance was performed in accordance with the FAA Regs. for experimental
aircraft. There in lies the dilemma! AL
>
>
>I asked Avemco, on the typical insurance policy, what effect would result
from
>the owner performing engine maintenance in violation of FAR's.
>
>"Lauerman, Jim" wrote:
>
>> Mr. Chick:
>>
>> Thank you for your e-mail of last Thursday regarding Avemco's policy
wording
>> regarding the performance of maintenance on a homebuilt aircraft by the
>> owner of that aircraft that is in violation of the FAR's.......I also
must say
>> that it is always extremely difficult to deal with "what if" issues
>> surrounding a loss. The circumstances surrounding that loss as they
apply to
>> the policy wording will determine whether or not coverage will bein force.
>> Having said that, I do not believe there would be coverage for the
situation
>> you have described. Performing "illegal" maintenance would make the
aircraft
>> technically unairworthy. On our application for insurance our customers are
>> required to warrant that the aircraft has a current and effective
>> maintenance inspection. If illegal maintenance was being performed, the
>> aircraft would not, in fact, be legal from an inspection standpoint and
>> therefore the applicant for insurance would be making a material
>> misrepresentation on the application. Material misrepresentation is, in
most
>> cases, grounds to rescind the policy and deny coverage for the loss.
>>
>> My strong recommendation would be for owners of amateur built aircraft to
>> never knowingly violate any FAR. Applying this principle will not only help
>> to avoid an uncovered loss, but will keep the owner out of trouble with the
>> FAA as well.
>>
>> Again, thank you for your question. I hope that I have answered it to your
>> satisfaction
>>
>> Jim Lauerman
>> Executive Vice President
>> Avemco Insurance Company
>
>
> (InterMail v4.00.03 201-229-104) with ESMTP
> for ;
>From: "Lauerman, Jim" <jlauerman(at)ave.com>
>To: "'adrianchick(at)home.com'"
>Subject: Insurance Consequences of "Illegal" Maintenance on a Homebuilt Ai
> rcraft
>Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:15:13 -0500
>
>Mr. Chick:
>
>Thank you for your e-mail of last Thursday regarding Avemco's policy wording
>regarding the performance of maintenance on a homebuilt aircraft by the
>owner of that aircraft that is in violation of the FAR's.
>
>First, I want to go on record that we never encourage pilots or owners to
>knowingly violate the FAR's. Doing so is not only illegal but unwise.
>
>I also must say that it is always extremely difficult to deal with "what if"
>issues surrounding a loss. The circumstances surrounding that loss as they
>apply to the policy wording will determine whether or not coverage will be
>in force.
>
>Having said that, I do not believe there would be coverage for the situation
>you have described. Performing "illegal" maintenance would make the aircraft
>technically unairworthy. On our application for insurance our customers are
>required to warrant that the aircraft has a current and effective
>maintenance inspection. If illegal maintenance was being performed, the
>aircraft would not, in fact, be legal from an inspection standpoint and
>therefore the applicant for insurance would be making a material
>misrepresentation on the application. Material misrepresentation is, in most
>cases, grounds to rescind the policy and deny coverage for the loss.
>
>My strong recommendation would be for owners of amateur built aircraft to
>never knowingly violate any FAR. Applying this principle will not only help
>to avoid an uncovered loss, but will keep the owner out of trouble with the
>FAA as well.
>
>Again, thank you for your question. I hope that I have answered it to your
>satisfaction
>
>Jim Lauerman
>Executive Vice President
>Avemco Insurance Company
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry" <jerry(at)flyinghi.demon.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Europa_Mail: Re: Antenna problems |
DO NOT USE YOUR RADIO TO TRANSMIT UNTIL YOU ARE SURE THE ANTENNA IS OK.
We have sold Icom handhelds for 7 years and the biggest cause of damage to
the sets is poor or broken antennas. It blows the output amp and sometimes
the driver as well.
Jerry
Flying Hi - Wish I was
jerry(at)flyinghi.demon.co.uk
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Date: 21 January 1999 13:42
Subject: Europa_Mail: Re: Antenna problems
>>I was doing a continuity check on the coax for my comm. The coax
>>is OK; but, I tried doing a continuity check from the center pin at the
>>comm down to the tip of the antenna. When I checked the whip
>>antenna, I got no continuity. Since I know nothing about this stuff, I
>>have this question. Should there be continuity from the center pin in
>>the connector on the antenna and the tip of the antenna? If there
>>should be, I have a break somewhere in the antenna.
>
> I would check with the manufacturer of the antenna. Radio frequency
> energy can be piped through a lot of components not the least
> of which is capacitors . . . they do not conduct DC current.
> The other way to check is to push some energy into the antenna
> with a transmitter and check standing wave ratio or you can
> use a device like the antenna analyzer shown in the tools section
> of our website catalog.
>
>
> 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. >
> ================================
> <http://www.aeroelectric.com>
>______________________________________________________________________
>The Europa List is supported by Aviators Network UK - info(at)avnet.co.uk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Anderson Ed" <anderson_ed(at)bah.com> |
| Subject: | [Fwd: Illegal Maintenance of Homebuilt aircraft] |
For those on the list interested, Jim Lauerman gave me permission to
post his response to my question concerning effect of my Mazda power
plant in an RV-6A. He did state he would probably not be able to
respond to a diluge of e mail on the topic. I found his response
reasonable.
Ed Anderson
RV-6A N494BW Mazda Powered
by mclean-mail.usae.bah.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.61)
with ESMTP id AAA3FB2 for <000149@mclean-mail.usae.bah.com>;
From: "Lauerman, Jim" <jlauerman(at)ave.com>
Subject: RE: Illegal Maintenance of Homebuilt aircraft
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1999 12:37:01 -0500
Dear Mr. Anderson:
Thank you for your note and for being an Avemco customer. We genuinely
appreciate your business and I hope that our service has measured up to your
expectations.
I must say that your comments and questions were very well-reasoned and
exhibited an excellent grasp of many of the issues that we face as insurers
and you face as an aviation insured.
I do, however, need to set your mind at ease regarding your performing the
maintenance on your RV-6A. Our policy has no "blanket" exclusion for
violating the FAR's. From a maintenance standpoint you need to certify on
your application that the aircraft has a current annual/periodic inspection
at the time you sign the application. If the FAA considers what you are
doing as constituting an acceptable periodic inspection, then the fact is
that your engine is, in fact, certified for use in your aircraft. Thus the
fact that you have the Mazda Wankel Rotary engine does not, by itself, cause
any coverage problems for your Avemco insurance.
I must, of course, state a disclaimer that the coverage that would apply to
any particular loss depends upon the circumstances surrounding that loss. It
is impossible to cover all possibilities surrounding a hypothetical
situation. Never the less, please rest assured that the fact that you have a
Mazda Wankel engine and that you perform the required maintenance on that
engine does not violate your policy.
I again thank you for your business and wish you good flying in your RV-6A!
Jim Lauerman
Executive Vice President
-----Original Message-----
From: Anderson Ed [SMTP:anderson_ed(at)bah.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 1999 11:34 AM
To: Jim Lauerman
Cc: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Illegal Maintenance of Homebuilt aircraft
Dear Mr. Lauerman,
I saw your reply to Chick Adrian concerning "Illegal
Maintenance" on
homebuilt aircraft. I have no issue with your reply which appeared
reasonable for an insurance company's viewpoint, although all may
not
agree.
However, I would like to ask a question from the view point of
Maintenance. As you are aware, the FAA will issue a "Limited"
repairmans certificate to an individual who actually builds an
experimental aircraft in the amateur (homebuilt) category. So far
as I
understand the FAR, that permits me to do all required maintenance
on
the my aircraft soley, not any other even similar aicraft.
Now, I am certain that the "Limited" repairmans certificate does
not
authorized me to doing maintenance on a certified aircraft engine.
However, a certified engine is not required for a homebuilt to be
issued
an airworthiness certificate. In fact, my RV-6A is insured by
AVEMCO
and its powerplant is an auto conversion of a Mazda Wankel Rotary
engine, not exactly a certified engine. However, a number of
homebuilts
do use "uncertified" aircraft engines.
I recognize I pay higher premiums due to the nature of my powerplant
and
I find that not unreasonable given the lack of substantial
statistical
data on the risk (which may not be any higher in reality than
certified
aircraft engines) about auto conversions. I now have 16 hours
flying
time on the airframe and 55 hours on the engine (40 hrs spent on a
test
stand).
The question to you is - in my case in particular, am I actually
covered, as I do (and no A&P would) perform all maintenance on my
Wankel
engine.
If I am not covered then I certainly need to know that. Clearly the
issue of whether any maintenance I may perform is moot legally in
that I
am FAR legal to do so. Now my understanding is that if I make a
Major
change to the airframe or engine to put it in a different
configuration
than that on which the airworthiness certificate is issued, then I
would
again need to be inspected and enter into a test phase (with what
ever
restrictions the inspector saw deemed necessary) to verify that
work.
However, I also realize that being FAR legal is a necessary but not
necessarily sufficient condition to make a situation or incident de
facto covered by insurance. Am I covered by your insurance if (and
I
will) do maintenance on my non-certifed engine. What types of
maintenance can I perform on airframe/engine and still remain
covered by
my insurance???
Your views on this matter would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks for taking the time to clarify these insurance related
questions
Ed Anderson
RV-6A N494BW
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna problems |
>
>Listers,
>
>I was doing a continuity check on the coax for my comm. The coax
>is OK; but, I tried doing a continuity check from the center pin at the
>comm down to the tip of the antenna. When I checked the whip
>antenna, I got no continuity. Since I know nothing about this stuff, I
>have this question. Should there be continuity from the center pin in
>the connector on the antenna and the tip of the antenna? If there
>should be, I have a break somewhere in the antenna.
The short answer is "maybe." Some antennas have capacitor coupling and
will appear to be "open" at DC, i.e. to your continuity tester. Some have
inductors to help "tune" the antenna and will appear shorted to ground.
The bottom line is, if you don't know the exact construction of the
individual antenna, you can't troubleshoot it using a continuity tester.
You either need to insert forward/reflected wattmeter and pump in some
signal or use one of the newfangled test sets that actually generates its
own signal in order to measure the antenna characteristics at the
frequencies where it is supposed to work.
>Alas, that
>would add insult to injury since my Apollo SL60 has a short in it's
>connector for the comm side. I have to send it back for repair today
>and haven't even tried to let the smoke out yet! :-(
Be careful there too. It is perfectly normal for a transmitter's antenna
terminal to appear to be shorted at DC. Again, you need something that
will actually measure the signal coming out when you key the transmitter.
On the other hand, if it really DID produce smoke, you have a valid reason
to suspect that it may be performing in a manner other than that for which
it was designed. ;
)
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6399 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax O-
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Possibly bitten by the RV bug |
<< I am fighting the fever hard of wanting to build one of these
myself!! Any
> builders in the Pensacola, Florida area please contact me by email
or by
> phone. I would love to see a project in progress and talk with you.
A ride
> in one would also be great, but I am pretty sure that a Vans is the
way to
> go.
snip
>
> Jack Rowell
> Pensacola, Florida
> 850-444-7204
> (currently in a cherokee)
VFR conditions prevailing in Southern Florida, I'll be travelling thru your
area on Saturday AM and returning thru on Sunday. That's two chances we can
use (or lose). I'll carry your phone # with me- how close to the airport are
you? I suppose which airport would be good info, too.
Of course, I'll be flying a ROCKET, but them's the breaks...
Check six!
Mark
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Illegal Maintenance of Homebuilt aircraft |
Yes, you may legally do maintenance on your engine in an experimental:
amateur-built aircraft even if you do not have the repairman's certificate.
It just requires that an A&P sign off the annual condition inspection. If
you have any questions then you need to read the operating limitations
letter that goes with your conditional airworthiness certificate. They are
the final authority about what you may and may not do under your
conditional airworthiness certificate.
Now let's talk common sense. If you are not 100% comfortable about doing
your own engine maintenance then get an A&P to guide and assist you. My
16-year-old son and I put the O-320 in our RV-4 together from scratch but
then I am familiar and comfortable doing so even tho' I don't have an A&P
certificate myself. Since I didn't build the aircraft and I don't have the
repairman's certificate I had one of the local A&P's look over our
shoulder. He was sufficiently confident in our work that he signed off the
engine as having received a field overhaul. Next year I will have him look
over my shoulder as I do the annual condition inspection and sign off the
log on that too. I am confident that I am 100% within the rules.
So, do go looking for trouble and don't try to second guess the rules. Be
very literal and, if you aren't 100% sure of yourself, get an A&P to help.
Remember, common sense is at the bottom of the FAA regs even if some of the
idiots who work there occasionally forget it. (Actually, most of the FAA
people are pretty good but, like the rest of society, there are a few
idiots in the mix with whom we will sometime have to deal.)
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6399 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax O-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
>
>Hi Brian:
>
>Enjoy your posts on the lists, and it is obvious that you have a lot of
>aviation background. Perhaps you can help answer some of the engine
>question as you have tonight regarding running up into wind etc.
You are clearly a gentleman.
>It has been my observation over the years
>that the pilots that use high power settings are usually the ones that have
>engines problems over the long term.
This is a question with which I have struggled over the years also. It
seems to me that people who "baby" their engines, either by not using full
power or by reducing power very quickly after take-off, end up having more
top end problems than people who just leave the knobs full forward. On the
other hand, it stands to reason that the harder you work a piece of
machinery, the sooner it will wear out and/or break.
>As you would probaby agree the small Lycomings stand up the best in this
>class and my experience has been the same as you mention that they will go
>to TBO even in a flying school enviroment. I believe this is due mainly to
>the fact they are flown everyday and have good maintenance. Could say that
>small lyc's are the only ones that will take it without expensive repairs.
We certainly agree here. A properly maintained and regularly flown O-320,
O-360, or O-540 is a *very* reliable powerplant, so much so that I have
been willing to bet my butt on them while flying over hostile terrain
(mountains and oceans).
>I guess I tend to lean to the conservative side (if you don't need it why
>use it) and don't stray from my long term power settings. Regarding the 75%
>max. power maybe I used the wrong words here. "Instead of do not use" it
>should have been "recommended". In the operator's manual for the 0360
>series on page 3-7 it states "Maximum power cruise" ( approx. 75%) and on
>page 3-14 it shows Normal rated performance cruise is 75% and Economy
>cruise at 65%. The manual recommends 150 degrees rich of peak for 75% and
>over. In the warranty it states that violating the recommended (or words to
>that effect) will void the warranty.
I agree with that. Also Lycoming does not place a time limitation for the
use of full power so I don't feel a strong urge to pull the power back
right away.
When one takes off and climbs to 8500 feet, the manifold pressure reduces
itself to where, by the time you are at cruise, the power is already back
to something like 75%. Make an RPM reduction and you are probably at 70%
or so. I like to cruise up high, around 10,000-12,000 feet where I get
best efficiency. At that altitude the engine is back to about 65% anyway.
So I guess we are saying the same thing, i.e. once you reach cruise, reduce
the power to 70% or less.
I think that the point where we might disagree is whether or not to make a
power reduction during the climb. Since it only takes about 5-6 minutes
for our RV's to reach 8,000 feet from sea level, I think the automatic
reduction in MAP takes care of things.
>For those with the run up into wind question I would like to add to Brian's
>post it will really help control propeller erosion and dust blowing back
>over you and into the engine.
Good point too.
>Seriously Brian your input on the engine questions would be a real help and
>contribution.
And my advice is worth every penny the listers pay for it. ;
)
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6399 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax O-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Illegal Maintenance of Homebuilt aircraft |
Oops.
>So, do go looking for trouble and don't try to second guess the rules. Be
don't
Sorry for any confusion.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6399 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax O-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Craig-Stearman" <tcraigst(at)ionet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
I will give this one a shot.
Remembering back to aero classes some ten years ago (BS Aeronautical
Engineering, US Air Force Academy, 1989; NOT an expert):
As I recall, standard practice was to size the main spar to carry bending
loads, aft spar to carry drag loads, and skin to resist torsion loads.
The aft spar in the RVs is a pinned joint, free to rotate about the attach
bolt. This suggests that it is not designed to resist bending or torsion,
leaving drag loads as described above. The rear spar attachment should
therefore be loaded in shear.
Comments from other aero types?
Regards,
Tom Craig-Stearman
RV-4 64ST FINALLY finished with the baffles, sent off for anodizing
>
>Interstesting debate. One person relates that an RV has flown without
>the rear spar attached (or even drilled for attachment) to the fuselage
>and others recommend replacement of all parts affected.
>
> I am wondering if the load is in tension, compression or maybe a shear
>load? I had always thought that the rear attachment was to keep the
>wing from twisting when a rolling moment was applied to the wing by the
>aileron, and to keep the wing from bending rearward during flight.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
Hi Mark,
> Remember: this is a pivot joint! These parts will move in relation to each
> other.
Really??? How does it pivot with the bolt tightened?? Are we talking about the
same thing? A 5/16 torqued bolt clamping one piece of aluminum between two
others won't easily pivot.
>You can over-build the fuse attach without too much worry.
What?
>Remember the story of the scratch-built -4 that flew with no fastener in this
>hole?
No, I never heard that one but it gives some comfort.
Sounds like we are talking about the same thing - where the rear wing spar
attaches to the two bars on the side of the fuselage. I'd sure like to more
about the pivot bit.
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 spar mod? |
Moe wrote:
> I helped another 8 builder rivet the leading edges on his wings last Friday,
> and looking at his front spar, I have a question. Along the back of the spar
> is the "waffle" plate that extends the entire length. On the front are the
> two pieces of barstock, starting at the inboard end of the spar and
> extending to about 8" past the fuel tanks. These bars are machined down
> about 1/8" at a time, until they terminate, making a kind of "step" effect.
> Now my question: Why don't they just extend the bars all the way to the end
> of the wing??
Maybe if they did the wing would break more inboard. Beech has been criticized
for making tails that come off under abnormal loads. But it has been said by
knowledgeable ones that if the tail were just slightly stronger, the wings would
go first.
The designer strengthens everything just enough and then stops as it could go on
forever. Furthermore, calculations of strength don't always work out in
practice and the history of engineering is full of stories about it.
Hal Kempthorne RV-6AQ -- Hangar H-4 at SCK - Wings on for fitting
halk(at)sybase.com Santa Clara, CA. Debonair N6134V @ SJC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: Insurance Consequences of "Illegal" Maintenance on |
a Homebuilt
My question about insurance is: what percentage of claims is coverage denied for
some
reason or other??
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
Tom C-S wrote:
> The aft spar in the RVs is a pinned joint, free to rotate about the attach
> bolt. This suggests that it is not designed to resist bending or torsion,
> leaving drag loads as described above. The rear spar attachment should
> therefore be loaded in shear.
How is it free to rotate clamped by the bolt?
If it is to be able to pivot maybe it would better be made with a collar to keep
the bolt from clamping the parts. That would also put less stress on the
aluminum parts, I would think.
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Besing, Paul" <PBesing(at)pinacor.com> |
| Subject: | Cutting hole for Tip up weldment |
I am installing the weldment that latches the canopy closed, and would like
to know how some of you have cut the slot in F-605 for the points of the
weldment to reach into. Any suggestions?
Thanks..
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://www.doitnow.com/~rv8er
Finish Kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | WCruiser1(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 spar mod? |
I agree with Sylvian,
I had an experience in strengthening production bicycle frames and the result
was an overload condition at another interface on the frame. Product failures
were chased to the next weak point in the frame until the entire struecture
was redesigned.
It's not airframe experience, just my real life $.02.
Gary Gembala
RV8 Empennage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Adrian Chick <adrianchick(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Illegal Maintenance of Homebuilt aircraft |
I visited the FAA today and spoke with an inspector. Same thing. He stated
there was nothing illegal about doing the maintenance without A&P cert. and, as
you said, the repairman's cert. allows you to do the conditional inspection. I
also verified this in the regs, Part 43.1(b) specifically excludes experimental
aircraft. Sorry for the confusion that I started. I spoke with Avemco too
today. They are supposed to send me a policy so I can look at it. Avemco also
told me that you can save 20% on your rates by participating in the EAA
counselor program and joining a local chapter. bye.
Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
> Yes, you may legally do maintenance on your engine in an experimental:
> amateur-built aircraft even if you do not have the repairman's certificate.
> It just requires that an A&P sign off the annual condition inspection. If
> you have any questions then you need to read the operating limitations
> letter that goes with your conditional airworthiness certificate. They are
> the final authority about what you may and may not do under your
> conditional airworthiness certificate.
>
> Now let's talk common sense. If you are not 100% comfortable about doing
> your own engine maintenance then get an A&P to guide and assist you. My
> 16-year-old son and I put the O-320 in our RV-4 together from scratch but
> then I am familiar and comfortable doing so even tho' I don't have an A&P
> certificate myself. Since I didn't build the aircraft and I don't have the
> repairman's certificate I had one of the local A&P's look over our
> shoulder. He was sufficiently confident in our work that he signed off the
> engine as having received a field overhaul. Next year I will have him look
> over my shoulder as I do the annual condition inspection and sign off the
> log on that too. I am confident that I am 100% within the rules.
>
> So, do go looking for trouble and don't try to second guess the rules. Be
> very literal and, if you aren't 100% sure of yourself, get an A&P to help.
> Remember, common sense is at the bottom of the FAA regs even if some of the
> idiots who work there occasionally forget it. (Actually, most of the FAA
> people are pretty good but, like the rest of society, there are a few
> idiots in the mix with whom we will sometime have to deal.)
>
> Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
> brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
> http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
> +1.530.676.6399 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax O-
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KBoatri144(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
>> The aft spar in the RVs is a pinned joint, free to rotate about the attach
>> bolt. This suggests that it is not designed to resist bending or torsion,
>> leaving drag loads as described above. The rear spar attachment should
> > therefore be loaded in shear.
>How is it free to rotate clamped by the bolt?
>If it is to be able to pivot maybe it would better be made with a collar to
keep
>the bolt from clamping the parts. That would also put less stress on the
>aluminum parts, I would think.
>hal >>
Here's my $0.02 worth...
The rear spar bolt is **probably** designed to handle both drag loads and a
shear load to keep the wing at the correct angle of incidence. The pinned
connection can (and probably does) support a very small bending moment (just
because of the friction in the assembly), but that load is so small that it
doesn't even figure into the failure mode for this assembly.
Kyle Boatright
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)accessus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
Free to rotate is right even though the bolt is tightly clamped. Look at
the long lever arm of the wing. It the front spar did not or failed to take
the the bending moment, one bolt would not stop it. It is more of an
engineering concept. The friction of the bolt clamping is considerable, but
with that long lever, it would rotate.
Now if there were two bolts, then it would not be free to rotate. The rear
carry through is probably not set up take the bending moment, thus the
single bolt.
Think of the bolt not being tight at all. The friction just raises the
torque required.
-----Original Message-----
From: Hal Kempthorne <halk(at)sybase.com>
Date: Thursday, January 21, 1999 5:26 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer!
>
>Tom C-S wrote:
>
>> The aft spar in the RVs is a pinned joint, free to rotate about the
attach
>> bolt. This suggests that it is not designed to resist bending or
torsion,
>> leaving drag loads as described above. The rear spar attachment should
>> therefore be loaded in shear.
>
>How is it free to rotate clamped by the bolt?
>
>If it is to be able to pivot maybe it would better be made with a collar to
keep
>the bolt from clamping the parts. That would also put less stress on the
>aluminum parts, I would think.
>
>hal
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)traveller.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cutting hole for Tip up weldment |
Paul,
I used a high speed cutter in a Dremel tool to hog out a 3/8" hole to a
slot. The cutter works very quickly and is useful several times in
construction. If new builders have not yet bought a Dremel or one of the
clones, it should be seriously considered as an addition to the tool
box.
One item concerning the weldment that I forgot to address until it was
mounted is the extra "tab" on the right "end" of the piece; It can be
trimmed off since there is no latch pushrod to attach on the right side
of the cabin.
Sam Buchanan (engine, panel, fiberglass.....)
"The RV Journal" http://www.ath.tis.net/~sbuc/rv6
"Besing, Paul" wrote:
>
>
> I am installing the weldment that latches the canopy closed, and would like
> to know how some of you have cut the slot in F-605 for the points of the
> weldment to reach into. Any suggestions?
>
> Thanks..
>
> Paul Besing
> RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
> http://www.doitnow.com/~rv8er
> Finish Kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JNice51355(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
In a message dated 1/21/99 4:11:49 PM Pacific Standard Time,
cgalley(at)accessus.net writes:
<< Think of the bolt not being tight at all. The friction just raises the
torque required. >>
Pardon the stupid question but, "Wouldn't this condition cause galling?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Derek Reed" <dreed(at)cdsnet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Illegal Maintenance of Homebuilt aircraft[EAA membership] |
. Avemco also
>told me that you can save 20% on your rates by participating in the EAA
>counselor program and joining a local chapter. bye.
>
Can we join just the 'local' or does the EAA require that we join the
National organisation before joining a local chapter?
Derek Reed OR. 6A Fus.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)accessus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
Yes but this has nothing to do with the engineering description of the
fastener. The "free to rotate" is a description of the fastener, not of
what will happen. It is kept from rotation by the design of the front spar
attachment. I am in perfect agreement that it won't, but as an engineering
description where in you assign force vectors... It is free to rotate
attachment point.
Now if the front attachment fails, this single bolt attachment will
collapse (rotate) at that point or bend very close by. And if it rotates,
it might gall. When the galling occurs at that time, it would be the least
of your worries.
-----Original Message-----
From: JNice51355(at)aol.com <JNice51355(at)aol.com>
Date: Thursday, January 21, 1999 7:38 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer!
>
>In a message dated 1/21/99 4:11:49 PM Pacific Standard Time,
>cgalley(at)accessus.net writes:
>
><< Think of the bolt not being tight at all. The friction just raises the
> torque required. >>
>Pardon the stupid question but, "Wouldn't this condition cause galling?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary A. Sobek" <rv6flier(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: [EAA membership] |
>
> . Avemco also
> >told me that you can save 20% on your rates by participating in the
EAA
> >counselor program and joining a local chapter. bye.
> >
>
> Can we join just the 'local' or does the EAA require that we join the
> National organisation before joining a local chapter?
>
> Derek Reed OR. 6A Fus.
>
Derek:
EAA National requires that all members of local chapters are members
of National. Some local chapters have chosen not to enforce this. To
use the Flight Advisor or Technical Counselor program, you MUST be a
member of National. For the Avemco insurance discount, I would
suggest that you are a member of National in addition to any Chapter.
=
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell
Flying in So. CA, USA
RV6flier(at)yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Cimino <jcimino(at)epix.net> |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
The RV-8 mentioned was the first prototype (the blue one), it was piloted
by Van. The pilot killed in the -3 was a very close friend of his. The
G-meter read 9.2 and remember that the wing must only hold 9.0 for a few
seconds to be considered acrobatic.
Jim Cimino
RV-8 sn 80039
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/5771
(717)842-4057 N.E. Pennsylvania
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie and Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
Robert Busick wrote:
>
>
snip
>
> I am wondering if the load is in tension, compression or maybe a shear
> load? I had always thought that the rear attachment was to keep the
> wing from twisting when a rolling moment was applied to the wing by the
> aileron, and to keep the wing from bending rearward during flight.
>
> In the spirit of being helpfull and providing some educational
> information, perhaps a structural engineer could explain the loads, and
> quantify the failure limits based upon the various suggestions provided
> on this subject.
>
> Bob Busick
> RV-6
> Fremont CA
I'm no engineer, & uncomfortable speaking authoritatively without any
authority, but here's how I explained it to myself:
If I remember correctly, most of the rv-3 wing failures started with the
rear spar attach failing & the wing folding forward. If I remember
correctly, the explanation was, that high g's, you've got high angle of
attack. Lift is perpendicular to air stream, therefore lift actually is
pulling the wing FORWARD relative to the fuselage. Once the rear attach
fails, the main spar has little resistance to the forward bending
pressure.
I THINK that I read this in an RVator several years ago, but I can't say
for sure & certainly don't know for sure that I understood what I read
correctly.
Charlie
RV-4
Slobovia Outernational
Jackson Ms
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Moe Colontonio" <moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net> |
At the advice of several listers, I went shopping for Chucking Reamers
today, and found a local Machine shop that could help me. When I went it, I
found that reamers come in way too many sizes to make things easy. They are
stepped in few thousandth increments. So what size do I get? What size drill
do I use to drill for them? Is there a cut and dry "formula"? I want to get
a 3/8, 7/16, and 3/16 reamer, so could somebody who knows tell me what is
the actual size reamer I should use, and what size bits shoudl I use to
"underdrill" before reaming? It's not as simple as converting the sizes to a
deciamal, because I brought some bolts with me, and he mic'd them and some
were over and some were under. Why can't they figure a way to make this
airplane building stuff more like lego's?
Moe Colontonio
moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net
Check out my RV-8 Page at:
http://tabshred.com/moe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronald Blum" <fly-in-home(at)worldnet.att.net> |
>G-meter read 9.2 and remember that the wing must only hold 9.0 for a few
>seconds to be considered acrobatic.
Here's my $0.02 on this. Yes, the wing must only hold 9.0G for a few
seconds to be considered aerobatic, but the design load is not 9.0 but
rather 6.0. That 50% pad in there is for things like fatigue, corrosion,
poor construction (both homebuilt and spam cans), and etc. The plane should
have never been out past 6.0G.
I know this may sound weird, but as a designer, I feel like the next
airplane out shouldn't say what the ultimate loading was so people don't use
the pad as "normal operating".
Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Riveting 676 & 677 Belly Skins Before Installing Gear Mounts |
?
I'm riveting my RV6A fusalage in a limited space shop, with no room to install
the wings. I would like to turn the fusalage over now to do some top side work
, & install the gear mounts in the spring when I can take the assembly
outside. I will leave the front bottom skin unriveted until the mounts are
installed. Is it essential to leave the two middle belly skins unriveted ,or
is it just more convienient? I would prefer to rivet them now to make the
structure more rigid & get the clecos out of the way. Or am I just making more
work for myself in the long run?
Larry Adamson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Alex Peterson <alexpeterson(at)cwix.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
> I'm no engineer, & uncomfortable speaking authoritatively without any
> authority, but here's how I explained it to myself:
>
> If I remember correctly, most of the rv-3 wing failures started with the
> rear spar attach failing & the wing folding forward. If I remember
> correctly, the explanation was, that high g's, you've got high angle of
> attack. Lift is perpendicular to air stream, therefore lift actually is
> pulling the wing FORWARD relative to the fuselage. Once the rear attach
> fails, the main spar has little resistance to the forward bending
> pressure.
You are accurate that the lift could be considered somewhat forward with
respect the the fuselage at high angles of attack. However, I suspect that
the induced drag will overpower the forward component of lift (otherwise,
one could establish a high angle of attack, then shut the engine down and
cruise for free). :>)
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN 6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | smcdaniels(at)Juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
>> Remember: this is a pivot joint! These parts will move in relation
>to each
>> other.
>
>Really??? How does it pivot with the bolt tightened?? Are we talking
>about the
>same thing? A 5/16 torqued bolt clamping one piece of aluminum
>between two
>others won't easily pivot.
>
>>You can over-build the fuse attach without too much worry.
>
>What?
>
>>Remember the story of the scratch-built -4 that flew with no fastener
>in this
>>hole?
>
>No, I never heard that one but it gives some comfort.
>
>Sounds like we are talking about the same thing - where the rear wing
>spar
>attaches to the two bars on the side of the fuselage. I'd sure like
>to more
>about the pivot bit.
>
>hal
>
>
>
The rear spar is a piviot point in a theoretical sense but not
neccessarily a litteral one (but it is possible)
You will notice that the plans call for a drilled AN5 bolt in this
location with an AN310 castellated nut and cotter pin.
The reason for this is that under load the wings do bend (at 6 G's I
think it is something like 2 to 3" deflection at the wing tips).
This bending is translated through the entire wing such that a small
amount of movement "could" take place at the rear spar attach point.
Unless you are constantly cycling the load on your RV between -3 and +6
G's it is not likely that you would induce any movement that would cause
any wear or galling at this point. But, since their is the potential for
a small amount of movement in normal service, a cotter pin safetied
bolt/nut is specified to prevent it from loosening.
BTW... we have removed the wings from 3 or 4 different company planes for
major modifications (Franklin installation, etc.) and have never seen
evidence of any wear at the rear spar attach point after many hundreds of
hours in service.
Scott McDaniels
These opinions and ideas are mine alone and do not necessarily
reflect the opinions and ideas of my employer.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | smcdaniels(at)Juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat CO concern |
> While flying to Texas and back this weekend, I noticed a curious
>phenomenon
>with my cabin heat box. I have the standard cabin heat box from Van's,
>and I
>added a 2" hose to direct the heated air from the cabin outlet on the
>firewall, to the pilot side foot area. As I started to open the cabin
>air
>valve I reached down to feel the hot air flowing out of the tube. I
>discovered
>that with the valve open 1/2 way, I got a tremendous amount of air
>flow, and
>with the valve opened all the way, the airflow diminished somewhat,
>but
>increased in temperature.
> What I think is happening, is the discharge engine cooling are is
>at a
>higher pressure than the air in the cabin, and when the hot air valve
>is only
>open part way, this air will backflow through the hot air valve,
>mixing with
>the heated air from the muff and enter the cabin. Now, a couple of my
>exhaust
>system slip joints leak exhaust gas. I know this because of the
>residue that
>accumulates on the exhaust tubes. Couldn't some of this leaking
>exhaust gas
>find it's way into the cabin when the hot air valve is open part way?
>My
>solution was to make sure the hot air valve was opened all the way to
>prevent
>the cooling discharge air from back flowing into the cabin. Had I not
>been
>aware that this is possible, who knows?...........Is this a valid
>concern? or
>am I just being too paranoid?
>
>Mark LaBoyteaux
>
Mark,
No, it is not paranoid. I think you have raised a very good question.
First off I would like to know which heat valve you have. Van's sells 2
different ones.
Is it shaped like a box, or is it shaped like a wedge?
My first thought would be that this couldn't happen.
The lower cowl in an RV-6(A) is pressurized slightly, but most builders
are feeding the heater/heatmuff system with air fed from the upper baffle
plenum area which should be at a much higher pressure than is in the
bottom.
I would think that this would be enough pressure differential to prevent
this from happening, but is suppose their could be a large pressure loss
through the scat hose and heat muff.
I am interested in hearing what you find out with your tests.
Another easy way to make a test might be to mount one of those cheap
color change carbon monoxide detectors directly in the outlet of the heat
valve and see if it begins to change after only a short time.
Scott McDaniels
These opinions and ideas are mine alone and do not necessarily
reflect the opinions and ideas of my employer.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV 4 wing spar Question |
| From: | Marvin B Scott <mscott7545(at)Juno.com> |
I just finished riveting the wing spar.Checking the fit with the F-404
bulkhead I noticed that the 13th hole from the root end of the spar on
the bottom roe of holes is empty. Looking at drawing #13 (F-404 bulkhead)
this hole does not attach to the F-404 bulkhead. Is this hole suppose to
be empty or get a rivet????
Marv Scott
Tacoma Wa.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Zilik <zilik(at)bewellnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Riveting 676 & 677 Belly Skins Before Installing Gear |
Mounts ?
Leaving them loose and clecoed allows for a lot easier installation of
the gear mounts. when installing the wings it is nice to have full
access to the main spar bolts and also with the belly skins off the
wings drop in. Drilling the mounts is a lot easier too because of the
ease of access.
Gary Zilik
6A s/n 22993
Pine Junction CO (snowing big time)
RVHI(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> I'm riveting my RV6A fusalage in a limited space shop, with no room to install
> the wings. I would like to turn the fusalage over now to do some top side work
> , & install the gear mounts in the spring when I can take the assembly
> outside. I will leave the front bottom skin unriveted until the mounts are
> installed. Is it essential to leave the two middle belly skins unriveted ,or
> is it just more convienient? I would prefer to rivet them now to make the
> structure more rigid & get the clecos out of the way. Or am I just making more
> work for myself in the long run?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | [EAA membership] |
Why would you not want to? Despite the Pober-dynasty and other "ills", EAA
is and has been a prime advocate and lobbying force for our right to build
and fly these wonderful aircraft. You're going to drop $40K+ on an RV.
Spend the $35 nat'l plus $10-15 local per year. IMHO it's worthwhile even
if you never actively participate.
Regards,
Greg Young
RV6 N6GY (reserved) fitting canopy
>>Can we join just the 'local' or does the EAA require that we join the
>>National organisation before joining a local chapter?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com> |
| Subject: | Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
Scott,
I just checked my 1993 RV-6A Plans and I can find no mention of a
castellated nut on the rear spar attachment point. I know I currently have a
standard lock nut in this location (for the past 1220 Hrs of operation). Is
this a problem? Where was it called out in the plans?
Fred Stucklen
N925RV RV-6A
E. Windsor, Ct
> -----Original Message-----
> From: smcdaniels(at)juno.com [SMTP:smcdaniels(at)juno.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 22, 1999 1:01 AM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer!
**** SNIP ****
> You will notice that the plans call for a drilled AN5 bolt in this
> location with an AN310 castellated nut and cotter pin.
>
***** SNIP *****
> Scott McDaniels
> These opinions and ideas are mine alone and do not necessarily
> reflect the opinions and ideas of my employer.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Besing, Paul" <PBesing(at)pinacor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cutting hole for Tip up weldment |
I have a dremel tool, and tried exactly what you say, but the curved piece
of the canopy deck (the piece with the square hole in it for the latch
mounts) gets in the way. The only thing I can think of would be a snake
attachment.
Paul
>
>Paul,
>
>I used a high speed cutter in a Dremel tool to hog out a 3/8" hole to a
>slot. The cutter works very quickly and is useful several times in
>construction. If new builders have not yet bought a Dremel or one of the
>clones, it should be seriously considered as an addition to the tool
>box.
>
>One item concerning the weldment that I forgot to address until it was
>mounted is the extra "tab" on the right "end" of the piece; It can be
>trimmed off since there is no latch pushrod to attach on the right side
>of the cabin.
>
>Sam Buchanan (engine, panel, fiberglass.....)
>"The RV Journal" http://www.ath.tis.net/~sbuc/rv6
>
>
>"Besing, Paul" wrote:
>>
>>
>> I am installing the weldment that latches the canopy closed, and would
like
>> to know how some of you have cut the slot in F-605 for the points of the
>> weldment to reach into. Any suggestions?
>>
>> Thanks..
>>
>> Paul Besing
>> RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
>> http://www.doitnow.com/~rv8er
>> Finish Kit
>
>
Paul Besing
Pinacor, Inc.
(800) 528-1415 ext.67697
.....Committed to being your primary distributor!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Besing, Paul" <PBesing(at)pinacor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Reamer sizing |
Moe: I have two reamers that I like very much. They make holes really
clean and round. I purchased mine from Cleveland tool. The AN-4 bolts use
a "D" size reamer, and I can not remember what size the AN-3 bolts use, but
it is slightly smaller than a 3/16". If you call Cleveland, they can tell
you which reamers you need. They are very high quality, and not that
expensive. $5-$8 each if I remember correctly.
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://www.doitnow.com/~rv8er
Finish Kit
>
>At the advice of several listers, I went shopping for Chucking Reamers
>today, and found a local Machine shop that could help me. When I went it, I
>found that reamers come in way too many sizes to make things easy. They are
>stepped in few thousandth increments. So what size do I get? What size
drill
>do I use to drill for them? Is there a cut and dry "formula"? I want to get
>a 3/8, 7/16, and 3/16 reamer, so could somebody who knows tell me what is
>the actual size reamer I should use, and what size bits shoudl I use to
>"underdrill" before reaming? It's not as simple as converting the sizes to
a
>deciamal, because I brought some bolts with me, and he mic'd them and some
>were over and some were under. Why can't they figure a way to make this
>airplane building stuff more like lego's?
>
>Moe Colontonio
>moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net
>Check out my RV-8 Page at:
>http://tabshred.com/moe
>
>
Paul Besing
Pinacor, Inc.
(800) 528-1415 ext.67697
.....Committed to being your primary distributor!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Douglas G. Murray" <dgmurray(at)telusplanet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door |
Listers:
The other night I had another builder look at my project. We got around to the
wedge type heat box and were talking about the best place to mount it, when he
asked my opinion on the aluminum door in it. He was concerned that if there was
a pin hole develop in the exhaust pipe inside the heat muff that the pressure of
the exhaust gasses could blow heat and flame up the Scat tubing and burn a hole
through the cabin heat door in very short order. This would then leave no way to
seal the cabin off from further heat/ flames etc. He was also concerned that in
the event of an engine fire that the cabin heat box would melt quickly leaving
a
2" hole to the cabin. He recommended making the cabin heat box out of stainless
steel. I am now wondering how so many RV's have been built with the aluminum
heat box and not much concern has been shown. Am I just being overly concerned?
Your comments will be appreciated as I want a very safe aircraft for the grand
kids to ride in.
DGM RV-6 C-GRPA Waiting for engine compartment parts to arrive.
Southern Alberta
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Douglas G. Murray" <dgmurray(at)telusplanet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cutting hole for Tip up weldment |
Besing, Paul wrote:
> I have a dremel tool, and tried exactly what you say, but the curved piece
> of the canopy deck (the piece with the square hole in it for the latch
> mounts) gets in the way. The only thing I can think of would be a snake
> attachment.
>
Paul - After measuring very carefully, I cut the tips off the weldament 9 about
3/8") and left the bulkhead alone. It works very well and secured the canopy as
designed.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Brick" <jbrick(at)wolfenet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV 4 wing spar Question |
>
>I just finished riveting the wing spar.Checking the fit with the F-404
>bulkhead I noticed that the 13th hole from the root end of the spar on
>the bottom roe of holes is empty. Looking at drawing #13 (F-404 bulkhead)
>this hole does not attach to the F-404 bulkhead. Is this hole suppose to
>be empty or get a rivet????
> Marv Scott
> Tacoma Wa.
I put a rivet in mine. Look at drawing 11.
John Brick
Graham WA
RV-4 fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Besing, Paul" <PBesing(at)pinacor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Riveting 676 & 677 Belly Skins Before Installing Gea |
r Mounts ?
Larry: I have a QB, but I had to drill new gear mounts on mine, due to a
hole mis-alignment problem. So the answer is, yes it can be done, it is
just a little uncomfortable since you have to get underneath the fuse (while
it is upside down) and work around in there. I used transfer punches
through the spar to mark my gear sockets, and then drilled them on the
bench.
Although you are deviating from "standard" procedure, since I have done the
equivalent with my Quickbuild, you can do it if you wish. Just get some
carpet or kneepads, cause you will be kneeling under there for quite some
time.
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB)Arizona
http://www.doitnow.com/~rv8er
Finish Kit
>I'm riveting my RV6A fusalage in a limited space shop, with no room to
install
>the wings. I would like to turn the fusalage over now to do some top side
work
>, & install the gear mounts in the spring when I can take the assembly
>outside. I will leave the front bottom skin unriveted until the mounts are
>installed. Is it essential to leave the two middle belly skins unriveted
,or
>is it just more convienient? I would prefer to rivet them now to make the
>structure more rigid & get the clecos out of the way. Or am I just making
more
>work for myself in the long run?
>
>Larry Adamson
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Melvin Barlow" <Melvin.Barlow(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Reamer sizing |
Hi, Moe! you sound a bit frustrated, and you have brought back "fond"
memories of my own frustration in trying to drill and fit the bolts on
my -4's spar, back around 1983. The best description I found then was in a
book entitled "Custom Aircraft Building with Sheet Metal (Vol. 2)". The
section on installation of bolts and nuts describes the process as follows:
"...The fit of holes and bolts cannot be defined in terms of shaft and hole
diameters but in the terms of the friction between bolt and hole when
sliding the bolt into place. A tight-drive fit, for example, is one in which
a sharp blow of a 12-14-ounce hammer is required to move the bolt. A bolt
that requires a hard blow and sounds tight is considered to fit too tightly.
A light-drive fit is one in which a bolt will move when pressed by the
weight of your body while using a hammer handle against the head of the
bolt. A bolt which moves when pushed with your thumb is considered too
loose."
To obtain a light-drive fit, I measured several bolts of the correct nominal
size with a micrometer, and separated them into three groups, "large",
"medium", and "small". Then I drilled the holes to 1/32" or 1/64" smaller
than nominal size. I purchased reamers that were sized about .0015" larger
than the "small" bolts and reamed some holes then tried fitting the bolts.
I just went through my (Approx. $50) reamer collection and found the
following sizes: Nominal .187 (AN-3 bolts) - .186 & .1875; Nominal .250
(AN-4 bolts) - .2480 & .2490; Nominal .375 (3/8 NAS spar bolts) - .374 Dia.
Another part of this process is technique in drilling and reaming. I seemed
to always get a slightly larger hole than the reamer was sized at, but the
segregated bolts usually produced the desired light-medium drive fit. In
some cases, just running the reamer back through a tight bolt hole by hand
opened the hole up to change the fit from "tight" to "medium" .
Kind of long, but hope this helps.
Mel Barlow, Ct, USA; RV4; N114RV
-----Original Message-----
From: Moe Colontonio <moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net>
Date: Friday, January 22, 1999 4:51 AM
Subject: RV-List: Reamer sizing
>
>At the advice of several listers, I went shopping for Chucking Reamers
>today, and found a local Machine shop that could help me. When I went it, I
>Moe Colontonio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door |
>Listers:
>
>The other night I had another builder look at my project. We got around
to the
>wedge type heat box and were talking about the best place to mount it,
when he
>asked my opinion on the aluminum door in it. He was concerned that if
there was
>a pin hole develop in the exhaust pipe inside the heat muff that the
pressure of
>the exhaust gasses could blow heat and flame up the Scat tubing and
burn a hole
>through the cabin heat door in very short order. This would then leave
no way to
>seal the cabin off from further heat/ flames etc. He was also concerned
that in
>the event of an engine fire that the cabin heat box would melt quickly
leaving a
>2" hole to the cabin. He recommended making the cabin heat box out of
stainless
>steel. I am now wondering how so many RV's have been built with the
aluminum
>heat box and not much concern has been shown. Am I just being overly
concerned?
>Your comments will be appreciated as I want a very safe aircraft for
the grand
>kids to ride in.
>
>DGM RV-6 C-GRPA Waiting for engine compartment parts to arrive.
>Southern Alberta
I was just yesterday looking at mine, (wondering where to put the
thing!) and can see your friend's point. I do, however, feel it is
HIGHLY unlikely that such a chain of events could happen. Sure, a
pinhole could develop in the exhaust pipe, but what are the odds that it
will happen right inside the heat muff? Short of a catastrophic failure
of the exhaust section in this area, a CO monitor in the cabin would
offer a measure of protection from a small exhaust leak....at least
allowing you to land the thing and assess the situation.
As for flame burning through the aluminum diverter plate, well, if live
flame is present that far down the exhaust pipe, you've got other
problems to deal with anyway! I hope I'm not missing anything here, and
I'm glad you brought this subject to the list. Any other builders out
there who've had this happen to them?
Just my 104.356 pesos. What's the exchange rate anyway?
Brian Denk
RV8 #379
wiring stuff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)accessus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door |
The FAA made Bellanca retrofit a steel heater and ventilation air valve to
replace the original factory aluminum valve in my 14-13-2. You might take
that into consideration. However if the flap and its supporting mechanism is
steel, having an aluminum box feeding should not matter.
-----Original Message-----
From: Douglas G. Murray <dgmurray(at)telusplanet.net>
Date: Friday, January 22, 1999 9:35 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door
>
>Listers:
>
>The other night I had another builder look at my project. We got around to
the
>wedge type heat box and were talking about the best place to mount it, when
he
>asked my opinion on the aluminum door in it. He was concerned that if there
was
>a pin hole develop in the exhaust pipe inside the heat muff that the
pressure of
>the exhaust gasses could blow heat and flame up the Scat tubing and burn a
hole
>through the cabin heat door in very short order. This would then leave no
way to
>seal the cabin off from further heat/ flames etc. He was also concerned
that in
>the event of an engine fire that the cabin heat box would melt quickly
leaving a
>2" hole to the cabin. He recommended making the cabin heat box out of
stainless
>steel. I am now wondering how so many RV's have been built with the
aluminum
>heat box and not much concern has been shown. Am I just being overly
concerned?
>Your comments will be appreciated as I want a very safe aircraft for the
grand
>kids to ride in.
>
>DGM RV-6 C-GRPA Waiting for engine compartment parts to arrive.
>Southern Alberta
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sylvain Duford" <sduford(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
Also, if he was rolling as he pulled 9.2G, the upgoing wing would
actually see more than that, probably over 10G. Pulling high Gs while
rolling should always be avoided.
Sylvain Duford
Bellevue, WA
RV-8 #47, Wings
N130RV Reserved
The RV-8 mentioned was the first prototype (the blue one), it was
piloted
by Van. The pilot killed in the -3 was a very close friend of his. The
G-meter read 9.2 and remember that the wing must only hold 9.0 for a few
seconds to be considered acrobatic.
Jim Cimino
RV-8 sn 80039
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/5771
(717)842-4057 N.E. Pennsylvania
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | RV8 throttle/mixture cables, etc. |
Fellow RV8 folks,
I would like to install the throttle and mixture cables now but do not
have the engine yet. I will be installing one of Bart's 0-360s with
standard carburetor. Can anyone give me the coordinates of where the
cables should exit the firewall? I have the cables that Van's sells that
are supposedly cut to length for this installation.
Also, the cabin heat box. Where should this thing go? I'm thinking that
in the center area, just above the cabin floor would make sense, or
should it be up under the forward baggage hold floor? The only thing
giving me pause from placing it low (in front of the rudder pedals) is
the thought of all that heat going right into my foot! Or, am I overly
concerned about this?
Thanks,
Brian Denk
RV8 #379
seats, panel and wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sylvain Duford" <sduford(at)hotmail.com> |
Well said, Ron. One should NEVER exceed 6G on purpose. I personnaly plan
to never exceed 4G and consider 6G as the ultimate limit. There is no
need for any more than 3G for a properly performed loop, and a 4G turn
is tight enough for me.
Sylvain Duford
Bellevue, WA
RV-8 #47, Wings
N130RV Reserved
----------------------------------------------------------------
Here's my $0.02 on this. Yes, the wing must only hold 9.0G for a few
seconds to be considered aerobatic, but the design load is not 9.0 but
rather 6.0. That 50% pad in there is for things like fatigue,
corrosion,
poor construction (both homebuilt and spam cans), and etc. The plane
should
have never been out past 6.0G.
I know this may sound weird, but as a designer, I feel like the next
airplane out shouldn't say what the ultimate loading was so people don't
use
the pad as "normal operating".
Ron
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV4Brown(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re:Deaf in Monroe |
Gary,
I jave a 5 hp sears air raid warning device that also compresses air on
the side. I would appreciate a description and list of parts needed to muzzle
that bear!
Thanks!
Tom Brown
RV4brown(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cappucci, Louis" <Louis.Cappucci(at)gs.com> |
OK, so now you have me nervous! how do i know what kind of "fit" i need in
different applications?
also, i haven't measured all my bolts, but a random sample shows that the
AN3's are right on 3/16=.1875, or even slightly larger at .1880, therefore i
am using a #12 drill (.1890). they slide in with a very slight pressure,
usually scraping just a bit of the plating off, up until the very end near
the head where there is a tiny fillet. then i have to push firmly to get the
head down snug against the piece. (i would say that the bolts fit the holes
about the same as a drill bit will fit in a drill guage.)
for the AN4's, the ones i measured seem to be slightly undersized, around
.2480 or .2490, so a 1/4 drill works fine for me, fitting as described
above.
so besides the spar (mine came with the QB), when do i need "tight-drive"
and "light-drive" bolt fits?
louis cappucci
6a-qb
mamaroneck, ny
> "...The fit of holes and bolts cannot be defined in terms of shaft and
> hole
> diameters but in the terms of the friction between bolt and hole when
> sliding the bolt into place. A tight-drive fit, for example, is one in
> which
> a sharp blow of a 12-14-ounce hammer is required to move the bolt. A bolt
> that requires a hard blow and sounds tight is considered to fit too
> tightly.
> A light-drive fit is one in which a bolt will move when pressed by the
> weight of your body while using a hammer handle against the head of the
> bolt. A bolt which moves when pushed with your thumb is considered too
> loose."
>
> To obtain a light-drive fit, I measured several bolts of the correct
> nominal
> size with a micrometer, and separated them into three groups, "large",
> "medium", and "small". Then I drilled the holes to 1/32" or 1/64"
> smaller
> than nominal size. I purchased reamers that were sized about .0015" larger
> than the "small" bolts and reamed some holes then tried fitting the bolts.
>
> I just went through my (Approx. $50) reamer collection and found the
> following sizes: Nominal .187 (AN-3 bolts) - .186 & .1875; Nominal .250
> (AN-4 bolts) - .2480 & .2490; Nominal .375 (3/8 NAS spar bolts) - .374
> Dia.
>
> Another part of this process is technique in drilling and reaming. I
> seemed
> to always get a slightly larger hole than the reamer was sized at, but the
> segregated bolts usually produced the desired light-medium drive fit. In
> some cases, just running the reamer back through a tight bolt hole by hand
> opened the hole up to change the fit from "tight" to "medium" .
>
> Kind of long, but hope this helps.
>
>
>
> >
> >At the advice of several listers, I went shopping for Chucking Reamers
> >today, and found a local Machine shop that could help me. When I went it,
> I
>
> >Moe Colontonio
>
>
>
>
>
> -
>
> -
>
> -
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dipaula(at)pete.nit.disa.mil |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
> Also, if he was rolling as he pulled 9.2G, the upgoing wing would
> actually see more than that, probably over 10G. Pulling high Gs while
> rolling should always be avoided.
please excuse my ignorance, but can you please explain that? how does
rolling (presumably an aeleron roll) increase the G force on the rising
wing? i was under the impression that a body rotating at constant
angular velocity (say, 180 degrees/second or whatever) is under a constant
linear acceleration because of it (they are accelerated toward the center),
but no angular acceleration from it (which is what would be perpendicular
to the wing surface). that is, a roll would cause a tension along the
wings, but i don't see any component that would act perpendicular to the
wing spar.
did my first-semester physics mislead me here? what am i missing?
-D-
>
> The RV-8 mentioned was the first prototype (the blue one), it was
> piloted
> by Van. The pilot killed in the -3 was a very close friend of his. The
> G-meter read 9.2 and remember that the wing must only hold 9.0 for a few
> seconds to be considered acrobatic.
>
>
> Jim Cimino
> RV-8 sn 80039
> http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/5771
> (717)842-4057 N.E. Pennsylvania
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KBoatri144(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
<< please excuse my ignorance, but can you please explain that? how does
rolling (presumably an aeleron roll) increase the G force on the rising
wing? i was under the impression that a body rotating at constant
angular velocity (say, 180 degrees/second or whatever) is under a constant
linear acceleration because of it (they are accelerated toward the center),
but no angular acceleration from it (which is what would be perpendicular
to the wing surface). that is, a roll would cause a tension along the
wings, but i don't see any component that would act perpendicular to the
wing spar.
did my first-semester physics mislead me here? what am i missing?
-D- >>
The rolling pullup creates greater forces on one wing because the aileron
which is deflected downward generates more lift on that side of the airplane.
This additional lift causes the roll, and is the source of higher structural
loads on that side of the airplane. So, if you're pulling 6 g's in a rolling
pullup, one wing is seeing more than 6 g's, and one is seeing less than 6 g's
('cause it's all got to average out to 6 g's).
Kyle Boatright
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV8 throttle/mixture cables, etc. |
Hi Brian;
I would strongly recommend that you wait til you get the engine on and
mounted before you start cutting holes in the firewall. This way, you
KNOW you've got it right on! There is plenty of room to work behind the
engine as far as cutting the holes, etc. You do need a 90 degree drill,
which I am sure you already have. I did it this way, and it was
absolutely a piece of cake!
Von Alexander (RV-8, still painting)
N41VA(at)juno.com
writes:
>
>Fellow RV8 folks,
>
>I would like to install the throttle and mixture cables now but do not
>
>have the engine yet. I will be installing one of Bart's 0-360s with
>standard carburetor. Can anyone give me the coordinates of where the
>cables should exit the firewall? I have the cables that Van's sells
>that
>are supposedly cut to length for this installation.
>
>Also, the cabin heat box. Where should this thing go? I'm thinking
>that
>in the center area, just above the cabin floor would make sense, or
>should it be up under the forward baggage hold floor? The only thing
>giving me pause from placing it low (in front of the rudder pedals) is
>
>the thought of all that heat going right into my foot! Or, am I overly
>
>concerned about this?
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Brian Denk
>RV8 #379
>seats, panel and wiring
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV Harmon Rocket Accident |
For those of you who haven't heard, Vern Dahlman died this past week. I
had forwarded some second-hand info about the fire in his Harmon Rocket-II
which, as I have since discovered, was erronious.
I was over at the Sacramento FSDO yesterday. (Yes, they did the right
thing regarding the operating limitations on my CJ-6a.) We got to talking
about Vern Dahlman's fire. Turns out the guy I was talking to had been
involved in the investigation and gave me some first-hand info.
The fire began forward of the firewall in the vicinity of the rear
cylinders. (The exact cause isn't known but the current guess is that one
of the fuel injection lines to the rear cylinders failed.) The fire burned
through the firewall down low where the firewall is displaced forward to
make room for the rudder pedals. It also burned through all the rubber
grommets in the firewall allowing smoke, fumes, and flame into the cockpit
well before the firewall failed.
The latter makes me think a lot harder about how wiring and cables get
through the firewall. I am planning to go back and change a few things in
the firewall of my RV-4 as a result.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6399 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax O-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tom Martin <fairlea(at)execulink.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door |
A
>
>The other night I had another builder look at my project. We got around to the
>wedge type heat box and were talking about the best place to mount it, when he
>asked my opinion on the aluminum door in it. He was concerned that if there was
>a pin hole develop in the exhaust pipe inside the heat muff that the
pressure of
>the exhaust gasses could blow heat and flame up the Scat tubing and burn a
hole
>through the cabin heat door in very short order.
Yes you are overly concerned, scat hose is good for 450 degrees, aluminum 1100.
The hose would obviously go before any damage to the little door.
Tom martin
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Melvin Barlow" <Melvin.Barlow(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door |
My RV-4 is equipped with a wedge shaped Cessna 150 cabin heat box which I
picked up at an aviation flee market. Its aluminum...Stainless might be
better, however.
Mel Barlow, N114RV
-----Original Message-----
From: Douglas G. Murray <dgmurray(at)telusplanet.net>
Date: Friday, January 22, 1999 3:42 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door
>
>Listers:
>
>The other night I had another builder look at my project. We got around to
the
>wedge type heat box and were talking about the best place to mount it, when
he
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sylvain Duford" <sduford(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
What you are missing is that one wing gets accelerated more than the
other. It's very easy to see if you visualize it with a model in your
hands.
-Start with straight-and-level flight.
-Now assume a continuous 4G pull-up, the whole aircraft is being
accelerated at 4G.
-Now start a right roll while maintaining the 4G pull, the left wing is
going up in relation to the fuselage, hence it is being accelerated
beyond 4G, the reverse applies to right wing.
Rolling Gs are bad. This is a basic principle that they taught us early
on in the Airforce. I imagine any aerobatic school would teach this
also.
Sylvain Duford
Bellevue, WA
RV-8 #47, wings
N130RV Reserved
> Also, if he was rolling as he pulled 9.2G, the upgoing wing would
> actually see more than that, probably over 10G. Pulling high Gs while
> rolling should always be avoided.
please excuse my ignorance, but can you please explain that? how does
rolling (presumably an aeleron roll) increase the G force on the rising
wing? i was under the impression that a body rotating at constant
angular velocity (say, 180 degrees/second or whatever) is under a
constant
linear acceleration because of it (they are accelerated toward the
center),
but no angular acceleration from it (which is what would be
perpendicular
to the wing surface). that is, a roll would cause a tension along the
wings, but i don't see any component that would act perpendicular to the
wing spar.
did my first-semester physics mislead me here? what am i missing?
-D-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Weiler" <dougweil(at)pressenter.com> |
| Subject: | Jet Hot ceramic coating |
Fellow Listers:
I was visiting a friend who is building a Glasair the other day (ugh,
plastic!). I was impressed with his beautiful silver colored exhaust system
and he said that this was coated with a rather high-tech ceramic system
called Jet-Hot. It is used quite a bit on dragster and racing auto headers.
It is supposed to be a thermal barrier and greatly reduces the amount of
heat in the engine compartment. I don't really don't know too much about
this process, but it is a virtually indestructible coating and really looks
nice. The finish is both inside and outside the exhaust pipes. A local guy
has also used it on his J-3 Cub (that's probably illegal since it's a
certified airplane). My Glasair friend specified that they omit the coating
from the exhaust muff area to allow heat transfer there.
Anyway, sounded interesting and thought you might be interested. They have
a web site at http://www.jet-hot.com/
Doug
===========
Doug Weiler
Hudson, WI
715-386-1239
dougweil(at)pressenter.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dipaula(at)pete.nit.disa.mil |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
> << please excuse my ignorance, but can you please explain that? how does
> rolling (presumably an aeleron roll) increase the G force on the rising
> wing? i was under the impression that a body rotating at constant
> angular velocity (say, 180 degrees/second or whatever) is under a constant
> linear acceleration because of it (they are accelerated toward the center),
> but no angular acceleration from it (which is what would be perpendicular
> to the wing surface). that is, a roll would cause a tension along the
> wings, but i don't see any component that would act perpendicular to the
> wing spar.
>
> did my first-semester physics mislead me here? what am i missing?
>
> -D- >>
>
> The rolling pullup creates greater forces on one wing because the aileron
> which is deflected downward generates more lift on that side of the airplane.
> This additional lift causes the roll, and is the source of higher structural
> loads on that side of the airplane. So, if you're pulling 6 g's in a rolling
> pullup, one wing is seeing more than 6 g's, and one is seeing less than 6 g's
> ('cause it's all got to average out to 6 g's).
you don't seem to take the meaning of my question. allow me to give
an example.
suppose you are in relatively straight flight, no pitch up. the wings
should basically be experiencing 1 G, right?
now, suppose you start rolling the plane at maximum rate. i don't see
why each wing should carry greatly increased G loads as it is rising and
then greatly degreased G loads as it crosses the top and is descending.
that is, i can see how it is moving, but i don't see how it is subject
to varying loads that way when the fuselage and attach points are
also rotating at the same rate.
if you have a flagpole sticking out from a building and put a weight on
the end, it is subject to a load similar to a wing in straight flight.
but if you hinge the flagpole so it simply moves when there is a weight
on the end, isn't that similar to a plane rolling?
in other words, if the wing is rated for a maximum of, say, 9 G, it seems
that increasing the upward force on the wing would result in _either_ an
increased G load _or_ a rolling motion, but not both. (especially since
the reduced load on the opposite wing when rolling would seem to tend
to roll the fuselage and thus unload the rising wing anyway).
-D-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eustace Bowhay" <ebowhay(at)shuswap.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine maintenance. |
----------
> From: Eustace Bowhay <ebowhay(at)shuswap.net>
> To: Louise Coats
> Subject: Re: Engine maintenance.
> Date: Friday, January 22, 1999 10:58 AM
>
>
>
> ----------
> > From: Louise Coats <lcoats(at)wave.co.nz>
> > To: Eustace Bowhay
> > Subject: Engine maintenance.
> > Date: Wednesday, January 20, 1999 2:41 AM
> >
> > Hi Eustace,
> >
> > I have enjoyed reading your posts and they are a source of interest to
> me
> > as I got one of these new engines from Van's and it is my desire to
keep
> > running costs to a minimum and try and get TBO from this engine.
> >
> > The more I have read about engine oils the more uncertain I become and
> the
> > LAME that looks after my ship is really encouraging me to go from
> Aeroshell
> > 15W-50 to W100. Yet another LAME says on no account to change as
there
> > will be increased engine wear at start up! So my question is what
have
> > you done? I realise that the chemical composition of 15W-50 has
> changed
> > due to the TCP being a carcinogen but now I read that the new component
> > TPP? leaches out copper etc. Have you got any thoughts about this.
> >
> > Also, there is an AD on the crankshaft and my LAME says the outer plug
> has
> > to be removed and the inside cleaned and painted with a special paint
and
> > he wants to put a new plug down the end where it has been punctured (as
> the
> > service bulletin said too). I have a 0 - 320-D1A and it has been
> > converted to fixed pitched. After reading the posts about the outer
> plug
> > blowing out and the oil being lost I feel that perhaps I am
> misinterpreting
> > something here or my LAME is in error.
> >
> > Your thoughts on both these points would be appreciated.
> >
> > Louise Coats
> >
> > PS I try and fly at least once a week to keep the engine moving but I
am
> > guilty of having a lot of short flights due to the limited time I have
> free
> > to get away flying.
> > L.Coats
> > ZK-RVL RV6 294.5hr
>
> Hi Louise:
>
> I am going to combine my comments to you with a post to the RV list as
well
> as this may interest some other builders as well.
>
> From your post I am not sure of your operating conditions as to
> temperatures etc. but this dosn't really matter. If you read my recent
post
> on engine handleing this should have answered some of your questions.
>
> In any event this is what I do:
>
> During the summer months run Shell W 100 . With approach of winter or
when
> the nightime temperature starts dropping below freezing switch to Shell W
> 80. For me the most important thing is never attempt to start without
> preheating when the temp is below freezing or preferably below 40 F if
you
> are still on 100 . Preheating need not be a drag. All you need is a
narrow
> flat in -car heater set up to blow hot air into the rear of the lower
cowl
> with the front inlets closed. In the hangar or a sheltered enviroment a
> half hour or so should do it. If you faithfully follow this rule the
> viscosity is not really a concern as you will be getting proper
lubrication
> on start up in any event. For example in our big radial engines we run
> Shell W 100 the year round with winter temperatures often as low as -35 F
> but we observe strict shut down and start up procedures. These engines
are
> carefully cooled and the oil diluted while running at low RPM with the
> onboard fuel by means of a solenoid allowing the av-gas to flow into the
> engines oil supply at a given rate thus thinning the oil. The amount of
> dillution is based on the outside temperature then the engine is shut
down.
> Before starting the engines are covered and heated with large hot air
> heaters bringing them up well above freezing temps. The in flight oil
temp
> is controlled by ajustable shutters on the oil coolers and the av-gas is
> evaporated of.
>
> For me the most important thing is to keep the RPM down until you have
the
> oil temp on its way up, then in flight try and keep the oil temp up to
the
> vernatherm setting of around 180, this will take care of the build up of
> condensation in the oil. To do this you may have to partially block off
the
> oil cooler or have a controllable shutter on it.
>
> I have no experience with the multi-viscosity oils for a/c engines
because
> sticking to my rules there is no need for it and besides it is just to
> expensive. We ran into trouble years ago with some brands of aviation oil
> but this was taken care of with the advent of the Shell W series of oils.
I
> am sure there are other oils out there now that maybe just as good but
with
> Shell W we have a oil with millions of hours of proven operational
> experience so would be reluctant to change. All you have to do is see the
> inside of a engine that has been timexed on Shell W to make a believer
out
> of you.
>
> With a new or newly overhauled engine or one that has had a top overhaul
it
> must be run on mineral based oil for the first 25-50 hours or until the
> oil consumption has stabilized. If not you run the risk of glazing the
> cylinders with the resulting high oil consumption.
>
> With regard to the crakshaft AD at the low hrs you have I woudn't be
> concerned but I am sure the coating they recommend is worthwhile. As to
> removing the puntured rear plug I can't see any gain in this but will
check
> with Bart when he gets back on monday and get back to you.
>
> Safe Flying
>
> Eustace Bowhay Blind Bay B.C Going to sneek down to the shop today and
> drill some more holes in the 6A
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Engine mount bolts kit & cowl length questions |
Hi all,
Did I lose the documentation that came with the wing bolt set from Van's? Two
bolts were in net baggies and two weren't. Catalog says two are a hair shorted.
Which go where?
Washers - where do all those washers go?
Any hints; neat swear words; magic potions etc to get the bolts to go in also
appreciated.
I have the constant speed cowl as sold in Feb 97 - is that the short cowl or the
long?
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JRWillJR(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Reamer sizing |
Here are some recommendations --I will try to get more if it is needed. Let me
say that in part the reason for a reamer is not only to provide the proper
bolt fit but to make a ROUND hole. Even sharp quality drills do not make
really round holes. This is especially true in thinner or softer metals. Of
course we do not ream our rivet holes and such as a generality--that is not
even a consideration. Lets see, 3/16--.1865 and .1875, 1/4-----.2490 and
.2500, 5/16----.3115 and .3125, 3/8---.3740 and .3750. These will provide a
tap fit for critical fits and a true size hole for bearing fits or times a
tighter fit are not called for. Use the drill bit one size or a few t's below.
Work up to that bit on really critical holes in several steps. Ream and drill
assembles clamped tightly together not separately or you will have to ream
again when they are put together thus ruining your true holes. Bolt fits are
classified by terms like, interference--hole slightly less than shank, tight,
tap, push etc. This is supposed to be an educational process so get some A&P
books or machinery books or talk to people who do this type work like a T&D
man and Learn--experiment on scrap and do not worry so. JR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cappucci, Louis" <Louis.Cappucci(at)gs.com> |
| Subject: | More RV-8 questions |
> > Also, if he was rolling as he pulled 9.2G, the upgoing wing would
> > actually see more than that, probably over 10G. Pulling high Gs while
> > rolling should always be avoided.
>
> please excuse my ignorance, but can you please explain that? how does
> rolling (presumably an aeleron roll) increase the G force on the rising
> wing? i was under the impression that a body rotating at constant
> angular velocity (say, 180 degrees/second or whatever) is under a constant
> linear acceleration because of it (they are accelerated toward the
> center),
> but no angular acceleration from it (which is what would be perpendicular
> to the wing surface). that is, a roll would cause a tension along the
> wings, but i don't see any component that would act perpendicular to the
> wing spar.
>
> did my first-semester physics mislead me here? what am i missing?
>
> -D-
>
your theory is correct (i think?), but the application is just slightly
flawed.
in fact, the reason why the airplane rolls is the application of a force to
cause an angular acceleration! if you are at a constant angle-of-bank
(wings-level is just a special case of CABT :-) ), then your angular
velocity is zero, right? any change in the angle-of-bank, better known as a
roll, would mean an angular acceleration. as you point out, this force is
perpendicular to the spar.
louis cappucci
6a-qb
mamaroneck, ny
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)accessus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door |
450 degrees won't hold up very long to 1400 plus degrees and makes short
work of 1100 degree aluminum.
Vern Dallman who died as the result of an in-flight fire in an RV, probably
would not have gotten the plane down if the smoke, gases, and fire had a 2
inch portal to come through at the speed of the plane.
Exhaust gases are like a blow-torch and will melt and destroy most anything
except steel. Why take the chance???
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Martin <fairlea(at)execulink.com>
Date: Friday, January 22, 1999 1:30 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door
>
>A
>>
>>The other night I had another builder look at my project. We got around to
the
>>wedge type heat box and were talking about the best place to mount it,
when he
>>asked my opinion on the aluminum door in it. He was concerned that if
there was
>>a pin hole develop in the exhaust pipe inside the heat muff that the
>pressure of
>>the exhaust gasses could blow heat and flame up the Scat tubing and burn
a
>hole
>>through the cabin heat door in very short order.
>
>
>Yes you are overly concerned, scat hose is good for 450 degrees, aluminum
1100.
>
>The hose would obviously go before any damage to the little door.
>
>Tom martin
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)accessus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door |
What material is the Flapper valve?
-----Original Message-----
From: Melvin Barlow <Melvin.Barlow(at)worldnet.att.net>
Date: Friday, January 22, 1999 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door
>
>My RV-4 is equipped with a wedge shaped Cessna 150 cabin heat box which I
>picked up at an aviation flee market. Its aluminum...Stainless might be
>better, however.
>
>Mel Barlow, N114RV
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Douglas G. Murray <dgmurray(at)telusplanet.net>
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Friday, January 22, 1999 3:42 PM
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door
>
>
>
>>
>>Listers:
>>
>>The other night I had another builder look at my project. We got around to
>the
>>wedge type heat box and were talking about the best place to mount it,
when
>he
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KBoatri144(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
<< if you have a flagpole sticking out from a building and put a weight on
the end, it is subject to a load similar to a wing in straight flight.
but if you hinge the flagpole so it simply moves when there is a weight
on the end, isn't that similar to a plane rolling?
No. In the flagpole example, the flagpole is in a hinged connection which
cannot oppose a moment. Therefore, there is no bending moment in the
flagpole. In an airplane, on the other hand, the aileron is attached to the
airplane, and forces the entire mass of the airplane to rotate around its
axis. Assuming the airplane is in wings level 1 g flight, the wing which is
rolling upward will accelerate at gravity plus whatever additional g force is
required to achieve a roll rate. The downward rotating wing will experience 1
g minus whatever the force is which is required to create the roll.
>> in other words, if the wing is rated for a maximum of, say, 9 G, it seems
that increasing the upward force on the wing would result in _either_ an
increased G load _or_ a rolling motion, but not both. (especially since
the reduced load on the opposite wing when rolling would seem to tend
to roll the fuselage and thus unload the rising wing anyway).
NO... If an airplane in a rolling maneuver maintains an average of 9 g, one
wing will be pulling 9+ g's, and the other one will be pulling under 9 g's.
Something mounted on the centerline of the fuselage will experience exactly 9
g's. To keep this analysis simple, let's not introduce the complicating
factor of reducing the overall g loading into the mix.
Kyle Boatright
PS... If you're gonna debate online, throw your name out there.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Denny Harjehausen <harje(at)proaxis.com> |
Does any one have a plan for or a location to get a fire warning system for
the firewall forward?
I am installing an Halon system that delivers to the engine area. One of
our local guys has this system on his RV, he installed it after he had a
fire on the ground. However, he has no warning system. On his previous
fire, he was unaware of the fire until a fellow came running with a fire
extinguisher and yelled at him to shut down. The fellow fired the bottle
into the exhaust air outlet of the cowling, putting out the fire. The
result was very light damage.
That and several other reports with less happy results is incentive enough
for this old duck.
Have a great Day!
Denny Harjehausen
Lebanon, OR
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tedd McHenry <tedd(at)idacom.hp.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
Hal Kempthorne writes:
>
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> > Remember: this is a pivot joint! These parts will move in relation to each
> > other.
>
> Really??? How does it pivot with the bolt tightened?? Are we talking about
the
> same thing? A 5/16 torqued bolt clamping one piece of aluminum between two
> others won't easily pivot.
For what it's worth, there is a difference between a pinned joint and a double
shear bolted joint. I haven't gotten to the wing yet, so I'm not sure which
this joint is, though I suspect it's a bolted, double shear joint. A bolted
joint is meant to clamp the parts together so that there is no relative movement
between them, including rotational movement. That's why the bolt is preloaded
(torqued) to about 80% of its rated load--so that it is an effective clamp. A
pinned joint, on the other hand, has minimal axial preload, and is specifically
intended to allow rotational movement between the parts. Some (all?) jet
airplanes use pinned joints to attach the main spars to the fuselage. Two pinned
joints, so that the wing doesn't flop around! The fastener is different in a
pinned joint. Typically, the threaded part of the pin (if it has a threaded part)
is smaller diameter than the shank, reflecting the fact that it's not meant to
provide a large axial preload.
A bolted joint will allow relative movement of the parts if the bolt is not
preloaded (torqued) enough, or if the design of the joint provides inadequate
surface area. When this happens, there will be fretting damage on the mating
faces, and the joint is likely to fail due to fretting fatigue.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
-6 tail
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Craig Hiers <craig-RV4(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
Jim Cimino wrote:
>
>
> The RV-8 mentioned was the first prototype (the blue one), it was piloted
> by Van. The pilot killed in the -3 was a very close friend of his. The
> G-meter read 9.2 and remember that the wing must only hold 9.0 for a few
> seconds to be considered acrobatic.
>
> Jim Cimino
> RV-8 sn 80039
> http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/5771
> (717)842-4057 N.E. Pennsylvania
>
>
Could the 9.2 G-force on the G-meter have occured when the
plane impacted the ground, and not in the air?
Craig Hiers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Thompson <grobdriver(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire Warning |
---Denny Harjehausen wrote:
>
>
> Does any one have a plan for or a location to get a fire warning
system for
> the firewall forward?
>
> I am installing an Halon system that delivers to the engine area.
"Two great minds, one great thought".
Been thinking along these lines more seriously since the -8 went down
to a fire.
Halon bottle shooting onto the carb and exhaust area. Careful using
it in the cabin lest it displace the oxygen. Keep a handy CO2 bottle
in the cabin for electrical fires. Mount halon bottle to sub-panel
between firewall and rear of instrument panel (weight up front).
Anything else?
Now, as you say, how to detect engine compartment fire?
Mike Thompson
Austin, TX
-6 N140RV (Reserved)
Prepping those ribs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Denis Walsh <dwalsh(at)ecentral.com> |
| Subject: | Re: [EAA membership] |
Perhaps we can get a Teck counselor to really explain this, but in the
meantime, here is the process as I understand it:
To get the desired rate and coverage from Avemco, you must certify to
them that you are a member of EAA and have participated in the Tech
counselor and flight counselor program. They did not require that I
send them any proof of this. Rather, the advisors send a card to
national Hq every time they do an inspedion/ counseling. Records are
kept an National of all inspections both for credit for the counselors
and for recertification. It is my understanding that these records are
also availabel to Avemco, who apparently don't request them unless they
have a claim to deal with. Counselors must be nominated by a chapter
and certificated by National; hence the chapter involvement. You could
probably get a counselor to inspect even if you weren't a chapter member
but I certainly agree it is worthwhile to join a chapter if you are
anywhere near one.
D Walsh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen Johnson" <spjohnsn(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Jet Hot ceramic coating |
Doug,
I would be very careful about this. I remember reading somewhere
(rec.aviation.homebuilt?) that tape used by racers to wrap exhaust pipes
would cause exhaust pipe cracking. The problem is that the same heat
barrier that keeps the engine compartment cooler causes the exhaust system
to get much hotter than originally intended. No problem for a dragster that
runs a few seconds, but a definite concern for any continuous duty
application.
Steve Johnson
RV-8 #80121
>
>Fellow Listers:
>
>I was visiting a friend who is building a Glasair the other day (ugh,
>plastic!). I was impressed with his beautiful silver colored exhaust
system
>and he said that this was coated with a rather high-tech ceramic system
>called Jet-Hot. It is used quite a bit on dragster and racing auto
headers.
>It is supposed to be a thermal barrier and greatly reduces the amount of
>heat in the engine compartment. I don't really don't know too much about
>this process, but it is a virtually indestructible coating and really looks
>nice. The finish is both inside and outside the exhaust pipes. A local
guy
>has also used it on his J-3 Cub (that's probably illegal since it's a
>certified airplane). My Glasair friend specified that they omit the
coating
>from the exhaust muff area to allow heat transfer there.
>
>Anyway, sounded interesting and thought you might be interested. They have
>a web site at http://www.jet-hot.com/
>
>Doug
>
>===========
>Doug Weiler
>Hudson, WI
>715-386-1239
>dougweil(at)pressenter.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Moe Colontonio" <moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Empenage/Fuselage Attach Point (Dwg 34) |
I had the same trouble with my RV-8 QB. The guys at Vans told me that it is
not possible to get proper edge distance here. I was told to get the bolt
centered between the two edges best I could. I did this by first drilling to
#40, getting under there and checking, then using a small needle file to
move the holes in the appropriate direction, then final drilling.
Apparently, Van knew this would happen, and that is part of the reason for
the two inboard holes. Tom at Vans told me not to try to beef it up in any
way, like by adding additional bolts. He says it's fine. I have pictures of
this assembly on my web page.
Moe Colontonio
moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net
Check out my RV-8 Page at:
http://tabshred.com/moe
>Hello
>Just a simple question!
>
> I'm wondering if anyone else on the list has experienced this problem and
if so how
>was it resolved. While looking at the plans and preparing for a trial fit
of the tail
>to the fuselage RV6a-Qb, I noticed that the attach angle under the F-614
(aft deck)
>looks too short. The HS-614 (front spar lower splice angle ) bolts to this
in 4 places.
>Two bolts go inboard of the longerons on each side and the other two appear
to go
>through both the attach angle and the longeron.
>
> My problem is the lower attach angle does not extend far enough under the
longeron on
>either side to provide enough edge distance for the two outboard bolts. See
Dwg 34 top
>view. It appears that the only solution is to drill out all the attach
rivets and
>fabricate a new longer angle. While this is not an insurmountable
undertaking, this
>area is very tight and critical to the mounting the tail.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | lottmc(at)datasync.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fire Warning |
I think I would rather have halon in the cockpit, than CO2. What would be the
physical, or medical complications caused by breathing either one in a tight,
enclosed environment? I know someone out here knows a lot more about this than
I do.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | More RV-8 questions |
D,
Let's try another explanation... the roll is
caused by differential lift on the wings. If you
start from level flight and roll left, the right
wing must produce more lift than the left to get
the roll started. Even in a constant rate,
stabilized roll (ignoring the flight path) you
will still need differential lift to overcome drag
and sustain the roll rate. The situation doesn't
change whether you start at 1G or 9G's.
Regards,
Greg Young
RV-6 N6GY (reserved) finishing kit
> you don't seem to take the meaning of
> my question. allow me to give
> an example.
>
> suppose you are in relatively straight
> flight, no pitch up. the wings
> should basically be experiencing 1 G, right?
>
> now, suppose you start rolling the
> plane at maximum rate. i don't see
> why each wing should carry greatly
> increased G loads as it is rising and
> then greatly degreased G loads as it
> crosses the top and is descending.
> that is, i can see how it is moving,
> but i don't see how it is subject
> to varying loads that way when the
> fuselage and attach points are
> also rotating at the same rate.
>
> if you have a flagpole sticking out
> from a building and put a weight on
> the end, it is subject to a load
> similar to a wing in straight flight.
> but if you hinge the flagpole so it
> simply moves when there is a weight
> on the end, isn't that similar to a
> plane rolling?
>
> in other words, if the wing is rated
> for a maximum of, say, 9 G, it seems
> that increasing the upward force on the
> wing would result in _either_ an
> increased G load _or_ a rolling motion,
> but not both. (especially since
> the reduced load on the opposite wing
> when rolling would seem to tend
> to roll the fuselage and thus unload
> the rising wing anyway).
>
> -D-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
<< I just checked my 1993 RV-6A Plans and I can find no mention of a
castellated nut on the rear spar attachment point. I know I currently have a
standard lock nut in this location (for the past 1220 Hrs of operation). Is
this a problem? Where was it called out in the plans? >>
DWG 46, Section View A-A.
-GV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: Fire & holes in the firewall |
My old Deb has a steel gate that slides over the air intake hole. It is
operated by a cable with a red knob labeled (memory?) "Firewall Cutoff"
How about a string or other flame sensitive material holding a spring loaded
normally closed switch open so that when string burns thru switch closes
sounding alarm??
I wonder if a smoke detector would work?
What I really need is an alaarm about low oil pressure. RMI for example.
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
>> please excuse my ignorance, but can you please explain that? how does
>> rolling (presumably an aeleron roll) increase the G force on the rising
>> wing? i was under the impression that a body rotating at constant
>> angular velocity (say, 180 degrees/second or whatever) is under a
constant
>> linear acceleration because of it (they are accelerated toward the
>> center),
While I won't argue that the load on the wings in a roll is not equal, hence
one wing might be experiencing more load than the other, or the G meter
indicates in the cockpit, We are missing the point here.
The important thing to remember is that with the ailerons deflected and a
twisting load on the spar the load capacity of the wing is significantly
decreased. An airplanes tolerance to "rolling pull"or "rolling G's" is
different determined by the wing and spar design. The Douglas A-26 was an
awesome flyer and many stories are told of A-26's dog fighting with Mustangs
for fun. However, they are very intolerant of "rolling G's" I was at an
airshow where the rear spar cap broke doing just that. Fortunately the wing
remained attached to the airplane.
I personally Plan for +4/-2. I sometimes see 4.5 if I get a bump in a pull.
I never see -2, It hurts too much for a fat guy! If you want to pull +6/-4
daily, you are going to want to do gyroscopic stuff. Get a Pitts, Extra, or
1 Design.
Because I fly Big Birds in airshows, I practice to not do rolling pulls in
anything. Pull, unload, roll. Or, Roll, ailerons neutral, pull. It is a
good habit pattern to have in any airplane.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
dougr(at)petroblend.com
http://www.petroblend.com/dougr
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Busick <rbusick(at)netmagic.net> |
> Here's my $0.02 on this. Yes, the wing must only hold 9.0G for a few
> seconds to be considered aerobatic, but the design load is not 9.0 but
> rather 6.0. That 50% pad in there is for things like fatigue, corrosion,
> poor construction (both homebuilt and spam cans), and etc. The plane should
> have never been out past 6.0G.
>
I expalin it this way: The wing is designed to catastrophically fail
at 9.0 Gs, just like a fuse is designed to fail at a certain point.
Maybe looing at the glass half empty is a better way to understand this
concept.
Bob Busick
RV-6
Fremont Ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Busick <rbusick(at)netmagic.net> |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
> Rolling Gs are bad. This is a basic principle that they taught us early
> on in the Airforce. I imagine any aerobatic school would teach this
> also.
In the aerobatic school I trained with, they emphasised to never pull
and bank at the same time. Pull first, unload then bank, or bank,
unload then pull. When I asked why, I was told that this was what
aerobatic judges looked for in a good maneuver. Now I know why they
looked for it and why that makes it a good maneuver.
For those who want to know more, there is a lot in the archives about
the dangers of rolling maneuvers.
Bob Busick
RV-6
Fremont CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: Jet Hot ceramic coating |
>
>Doug,
>
>I would be very careful about this. I remember reading somewhere
>(rec.aviation.homebuilt?) that tape used by racers to wrap exhaust pipes
>would cause exhaust pipe cracking. The problem is that the same heat
>barrier that keeps the engine compartment cooler causes the exhaust system
>to get much hotter than originally intended.
>Steve Johnson
>
>RV-8 #80121
>
Steve,
Your not talking about the same thing. The tape you refer to is wrapped
around the header pipes to provide insulation. The problem is that it also
traps moisture and this is what causes the corrosion that leads to exhaust
system failure. Of course it does also keep more heat in the exhaust
system, but then a properly built exhaust system is meant to handle heat.
These exhaust system failures when using this tape happen to the car guys
too but they accept it to keep the under hood temps down. Just means
replacing the exhaust headers fairly frequently. This would be a poor
choice on an airplane. I'd be interested in hearing what the experience has
been using this tape on good quality stainless exhaust (Vetterman). The car
guys are usually using mild steel.
On the other hand, the Jet Hot process is an applied coating. It doesnt
trap moisture between the coating and the exhaust system. It was developed
specifically for the aerospace industry for use in turbine engines. Ive
never used it but the hot rodders Ive talked to about it say its worth the
$. Im gonna give it a try on my exhaust system when the time comes.
Mike Wills
RV4 fuse out of the jig
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire Warning |
>
>Does any one have a plan for or a location to get a fire warning system for
>the firewall forward?
>
>Have a great Day!
>Denny Harjehausen
>Lebanon, OR
>RV-6
Denny,
The AFA AV8/AV10 engine monitors have thermocouple inputs which can be
used for monitoring under cowl temps. I dont know about the other monitors
on the market but they may have provision for this also. Aero electric Bob
has a good article on thermocouples on his website at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles.html
I dont remember if the article specifically addresses this, but its a good
read and might provide you with the info to build a simple monitor system.
I would imagine it would be a fairly simple circuit to design. Maybe Bob
could jump in with an assist here?
Mike Wills
RV-4 fuse out of the jig
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Denny Harjehausen <harje(at)proaxis.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire Warning |
A
>"Two great minds, one great thought".
>Been thinking along these lines more seriously since the -8 went down
>to a fire.
>Halon bottle shooting onto the carb and exhaust area.
The airplanes I use to fly had some sort of simple bi-medal switch that
when heated to a predetermined value would complete the circuit. When it
cooled down below that value the light would go out. In otherwords ready
to detect again. A bell was included that could be canceled. The light
could not be canceled. The switch had to cool. There were several
switches, as I recall. Anyone of them would set off the bell and the
light. But that is all I know about it.
Have a Great Day!
RV-6
Denny Harjehausen
Lebanon, OR
________________________________________________________________________________
All this talk about a fire forward of the firewall gets me to thinking.
Although it would be nice to have the sophisticated engine fire
extinguishing system, for most of us this would be a problem of more
weight and more money. It seems to me the real key is to have an
immediate warning of fire in the engine compartment. This would buy you
time,( I would guess a few minutes) so that you could get down
(hopefully), or fix the problem. How about we put our heads together and
come up with a simple, inexpensive way to do this? The string with a
switch idea sounds like it could work, I would imagine you would want to
mount it in the lower part of the cowling, just above the exhaust pipes
about 12"? Of course it would be essential to use all the usual
precautions at the firewall to prevent rapid spread of the fire or smoke
into the cockpit. Would really like to see us discuss this further.
Von Alexander
N41VA(at)juno.com(painting trim)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
>
>> Here's my $0.02 on this. Yes, the wing must only hold 9.0G for a few
>> seconds to be considered aerobatic, but the design load is not 9.0 but
>> rather 6.0. That 50% pad in there is for things like fatigue, corrosion,
>> poor construction (both homebuilt and spam cans), and etc. The plane should
>> have never been out past 6.0G.
>>
> I expalin it this way: The wing is designed to catastrophically fail
> at 9.0 Gs, just like a fuse is designed to fail at a certain point.
>
> Maybe looing at the glass half empty is a better way to understand this
> concept.
> Bob Busick
A perfectly built wing only has to be able to hold 9g once. Any
excursions past 6g may be damaging the structure, and if the
excursions past 6g are numerous, the wing may eventually have an
ultimate load carrying ability that is significantly less than 9g.
If you exceed 6g at the aerobatic gross weight, you should be talking
to Van's about inspection criteria prior to flying again.
Kevin Horton RV-8 (fuel tanks)
khorton(at)cyberus.ca (613) 821-7862 (home)
Ottawa, Canada (613) 952-4319 (work)
http://www.cyberus.ca/~khorton/rv8.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Martin Shorman <kskids(at)netins.net> |
| Subject: | Re: G-pers and load testing How |
snip
>
> >G-meter read 9.2 and remember that the wing must only hold 9.0 for a few
> >seconds to be considered acrobatic.
>
> ..... Yes, the wing must only hold 9.0G for a few
> seconds to be considered aerobatic, but the design load is not 9.0 but
> rather 6.0.
Can someone explain how the loading test is done, i.e., is it a dynamic
sort of shock test where a load is dropped on the wing, or is the
pressure increased through the use of hydraulic jacks, or some such
method?
How about the wing itself; is it suspended from each end, or just at the
main attachment points as it would be on the airframe? Has anybody ever
witnessed one of these tests?
thanks
martin shorman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Wiesel <dan(at)interlinkrecruiting.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire & holes in the firewall |
Why not look at what the guys use in the baoting industry. the big boats
all used to have halon in the engine hold and they must have had some type
of warning device. Any boaters out there??????????At 03:21 PM 1/22/99
-0800, you wrote:
>
>My old Deb has a steel gate that slides over the air intake hole. It is
>operated by a cable with a red knob labeled (memory?) "Firewall Cutoff"
>
>How about a string or other flame sensitive material holding a spring loaded
>normally closed switch open so that when string burns thru switch closes
>sounding alarm??
>
>I wonder if a smoke detector would work?
>
>What I really need is an alaarm about low oil pressure. RMI for example.
>
>hal
>
>
>
Dan
Dan Wiesel
Interlink Recruiting
408-551-6554
dan(at)interlinkrecruiting.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry McKee" <lmckee(at)cnetech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire Warning |
>
>Does any one have a plan for or a location to get a fire warning system for
>the firewall forward?
>
Check Mike Palmer's (P.O. Box 5564, Glendale, AZ 85312-5564) article at page
82 in the May 1997 issue of Kitplanes.
Larry McKee
-6A wings
eschew obfuscation
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | randall(at)edt.com (Randall Henderson) |
| Subject: | Re: Empenage/Fuselage Attach Point (Dwg 34) |
[snip]
> While looking at the plans and preparing for a trial
> fit of the tail to the fuselage RV6a-Qb, I noticed that the attach angle
> under the F-614 (aft deck) looks too short.
[snip]
> My problem is the lower attach angle does not extend far enough under
> the longeron on either side to provide enough edge distance for the two
> outboard bolts. See Dwg 34 top view. It appears that the only solution
> is to drill out all the attach rivets and fabricate a new longer angle.
Mine isn't a QB so I don't know about how they do those, but I remember
fabricating this part and having to cut the ends at an angle and
chamfering the corners so they'd nest right in against the longeron
angle for max. edge distance. In fact after I got mine in I wasn't
satisfied so I drilled it out and made a new one -- not a big deal, as
you said.
I imagine without the edge distance it would probably be ok, esp. with
a nose dragger which won't see the punishment back there that a
tailwheel does. But I personally have a hard time letting things go
until I know they're right.
Randall Henderson, RV-6 (engine/finish)
Portland, OR
http://www.edt.com/homewing
randall(at)edt.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Cimino <jcimino(at)epix.net> |
I just added some new pictures to my fuselage page.
Jim Cimino
RV-8 sn 80039
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/5771
(717)842-4057 N.E. Pennsylvania
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | pagan <pagan(at)CBOSS.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: [EAA membership] |
Denis is right! I've had the Tech Counselor from the local Chapter(I
belong to the National but not to a local) inspect my plane and he sends a
card in to the national. I make an entry in my construction log indicating
the project was inspected (I HAD EAA TECHNICAL COUNSELOR, xxxx xxxx, VISIT
MY AIRCRAFT PROJECT ON 00/00/00 AND HE INSPECTED THE EMPENNAGE, WING AND
CONTROL SURFACES.) I am not aware of any requirement to be a member of the
local.
>
>
>Perhaps we can get a Teck counselor to really explain this, but in the
>meantime, here is the process as I understand it:
>
>To get the desired rate and coverage from Avemco, you must certify to
>them that you are a member of EAA and have participated in the Tech
>counselor and flight counselor program. They did not require that I
>send them any proof of this. Rather, the advisors send a card to
>national Hq every time they do an inspedion/ counseling. Records are
>kept an National of all inspections both for credit for the counselors
>and for recertification. It is my understanding that these records are
>also availabel to Avemco, who apparently don't request them unless they
>have a claim to deal with. Counselors must be nominated by a chapter
>and certificated by National; hence the chapter involvement. You could
>probably get a counselor to inspect even if you weren't a chapter member
>but I certainly agree it is worthwhile to join a chapter if you are
>anywhere near one.
>
>
>D Walsh
>
>
Bill Pagan
"The original and only -8A builders page on the web"
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/9749/william.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Haan <bhaan(at)easystreet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire & holes in the firewall |
>Why not look at what the guys use in the baoting industry. the big boats
>all used to have halon in the engine hold and they must have had some type
>of warning device. Any boaters out there??????????
The halon system we installed on our boat was a large Halon bottle like a
scuba tank with a head that was like a sprinkler system head. This bottle
was mounted above the engine.
Imagine our alarm when the halon system went off in the middle of the night
when we were 25 miles off the Washington coast. Sounded like a rifle shot.
The engine immediately begin to die as it ingested the halon. It stopped.
There was no fire. As a result, we could not figure out why it went off
until we got out the documentation for the halon system and discovered that
it was designed to go off at 165 F. We thought it went off at above 212 F.
We did not realize that our engine compartment temperature got to 165 F.
After airing out the compartment the engine started and ran fine.
Bob Haan
bhaan(at)easystreet.com
Portland, OR
RV6A 24461 Working on Baffles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JNice51355(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: [EAA membership] |
In a message dated 1/21/99 6:50:57 PM Pacific Standard Time,
rv6flier(at)yahoo.com writes:
<< To
use the Flight Advisor or Technical Counselor program, you MUST be a
member of National. >>
IMHO, the subscription to Sport Aviation is nearly worth the dues by itself.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ammeterj(at)home.com (John Ammeter) |
| Subject: | Re: [EAA membership] |
>
>
>Perhaps we can get a Teck counselor to really explain this, but in the
>meantime, here is the process as I understand it:
>
>To get the desired rate and coverage from Avemco, you must certify to
>them that you are a member of EAA and have participated in the Tech
>counselor and flight counselor program. They did not require that I
>send them any proof of this. Rather, the advisors send a card to
>national Hq every time they do an inspedion/ counseling. Records are
>kept an National of all inspections both for credit for the counselors
>and for recertification. It is my understanding that these records are
>also availabel to Avemco, who apparently don't request them unless they
>have a claim to deal with. Counselors must be nominated by a chapter
>and certificated by National; hence the chapter involvement. You could
>probably get a counselor to inspect even if you weren't a chapter member
>but I certainly agree it is worthwhile to join a chapter if you are
>anywhere near one.
>
>
>D Walsh
>
I'm a Tech Counselor for EAA Chapter 26 here in Seattle.
Denis is substantially correct in everything he says. Every time I
inspect an aircraft I make a report to National. My understanding is
that the aircraft builder can get a discount on his insurance if at
least 3 visits made during the construction period. Personally, I
trie to visit at least 4 times and strongly urge the builder to have
other people check the aircraft, too.
National has not prohibited me from inspecting Non-EAA members but
they have strongly urged me to convince them to join. Of course, they
would not receive the insurance discount unless they are members.
Avemco would check for the required visits if a claim was made.
Should someone claim the visits to get the discount without actually
having the visits could prove to be a very expensive savings should
there be an accident.
John Ammeter
Seattle WA
USA
1975 JH-5
RV-6 (sold 4/98)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: G-pers and load testing How |
>
> snip
>>
>> >G-meter read 9.2 and remember that the wing must only hold 9.0 for a few
>> >seconds to be considered acrobatic.
>>
>> ..... Yes, the wing must only hold 9.0G for a few
>> seconds to be considered aerobatic, but the design load is not 9.0 but
>> rather 6.0.
>
>
> Can someone explain how the loading test is done, i.e., is it a dynamic
> sort of shock test where a load is dropped on the wing, or is the
> pressure increased through the use of hydraulic jacks, or some such
> method?
>
> How about the wing itself; is it suspended from each end, or just at the
> main attachment points as it would be on the airframe? Has anybody ever
> witnessed one of these tests?
>
> thanks
> martin shorman
Martin,
Go to <http://www.vansaircraft.com/sections/newrv8.htm> This is the
final report of Van's investigation on the N58RV accident. Among
other things, it describes how the static load testing is done, with
pictures.
The load was applied via bags of lead shot piled on the wing in a
very precise way to accurate reproduce the loads predicted on the
wing at 9 g. The wing was upside down, and the load was applied on
the bottom surface. The spars were bolted to a fixture. The rest of
the wing was supported while the shot bags were piled on, but the
supports were removed for the actual test point.
Companies building transport category aircraft (and with bigger
budgets) may use computer controlled hydraulic jacks, but they are
generally also going to do a fatigue test which requires thousands of
loading cycles, so shot bags would be a bit slow. I have seen some
of these type of tests on big aircraft. It is amazing how far the
wing tips on big aircraft will flex (over 10 ft in some cases I
believe at the design load).
Take care,
Kevin Horton RV-8 (fuel tanks)
khorton(at)cyberus.ca (613) 821-7862 (home)
Ottawa, Canada (613) 952-4319 (work)
http://www.cyberus.ca/~khorton/rv8.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Adrian Chick <adrianchick(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: G-pers and load testing How |
Martin, go to Van's web page and check out the N58RV update. It's got the
detailed article found in the news letter explaining how it's done. do not
archive
Martin Shorman wrote:
>
>
> Can someone explain how the loading test is done, i.e., is it a dynamic
> sort of shock test where a load is dropped on the wing, or is the
> pressure increased through the use of hydraulic jacks, or some such
> method?
>
> How about the wing itself; is it suspended from each end, or just at the
> main attachment points as it would be on the airframe? Has anybody ever
> witnessed one of these tests?
>
> thanks
>
> martin shorman
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JRWillJR(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | EAA Tech.Coun. Program information (D.Walsh) |
D. Walsh, you do not have to be a member of a local chapter to participate in
the EAA TC and FA programs. I am a Technical Counselor and make visits to
members of the EAA who are not members of a local chapter. Most EAA TC's are
nominated by a chapter but some are appointed "at large" by the EAA National
HQ. I am an EAA TC at large. However, either type of TC should be able to
provide you assistance. Further, the EAA TC works for free, chapter or at
large, and neither sign a logbook but instead jointly feel out a form with the
builder they visit which is returned to the National Office. The builder then
makes a very important notation in his/her builders log/diary that EAA TC John
Doe made a visit for a precover etc. inspection on such and such date. Make a
notation of issues discussed and your resolution would be a nice entry also.
Good luck and if you have any questions feel free to contact me. JR, A&P, EAA
TC at large, RV4 2280 and Kitfox N390SH
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com> |
| Subject: | orientation of the bolts that hold the VS to the fuselage |
Hello Listers,
I have the VS on my RV-6A now. I followed the plans that clearly show that
the bolts in the lower part of the VS are inserted from inside the fuselage
through the bulkhead with the threads ends pointing aft. The rudder bottom
is rubbing against the threaded ends of the bolts, though, and will not
move. It's quite hung up.
The manual shows how the builders of the RV-6A should install the tail
tie-down. The manual seems to show all the bolts in the lower part of the
VS are inserted from the rear with the threaded ends pointing forward. This
would cure my problem with the rudder bottom, but I think it is bad practice
to put the bolts in this way. What have the rest of you done?
I think I will take the rudder off and back out the Heim rod end joints a
turn or two to give more clearance between the rudder and the rear VS spar
unless putting the bolts in "backwards" is the solution.
Steve Soule
Huntington, Vermont
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com> |
| Subject: | Empenage/Fuselage Attach Point (Dwg 34) |
Hugh,
On my non-QB, I made the angle so that it was long enough to drill through
per the plans. Even so, it took a lot of sweat and careful measurements
(and luck) before drilling to get the hole through all those pieces. Maybe
it isn't important that the outboard bolt goes through everything. Maybe
just going through the longeron is good enough. I would ask Van's.
Steve Soule
Huntington, Vermont
-----Original Message-----While looking at the plans and
preparing for a trial fit of the tail
to the fuselage RV6a-Qb, I noticed that the attach angle
under the F-614 (aft deck)
looks too short. The HS-614 (front spar lower splice angle )
bolts to this in 4 places.
Two bolts go inboard of the longerons on each side and the
other two appear to go
through both the attach angle and the longeron.
My problem is the lower attach angle does not extend far
enough under the longeron on
either side to provide enough edge distance for the two
outboard bolts.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Philip A Lehrke" <plehrke(at)msn.com> |
>
>>G-meter read 9.2 and remember that the wing must only hold 9.0 for a few
>>seconds to be considered acrobatic.
>
>Here's my $0.02 on this. Yes, the wing must only hold 9.0G for a few
>seconds to be considered aerobatic, but the design load is not 9.0 but
>rather 6.0. That 50% pad in there is for things like fatigue, corrosion,
>poor construction (both homebuilt and spam cans), and etc. The plane
should
>have never been out past 6.0G.
The 50% is not a knock down factor for fatigue, corrosion, etc. What is the
correct definition is that less than or equal to 6G's (design load factor)
there should be no structural deformation. Between 6G's and 9G's (ultimate
load factor which typically is design load factor times a 1.5 safety factor)
there can be structural deformation but not structural failure. Above 9G's
(ultimate load factor) structural failure can occur.
If you pull greater than 6G's you should do a major inspection as some
structural deformation may have occurred.
Phil Lehrke
Structural Design Engineer
Boeing St Louis (the Military stuff)
RV-6a attaching ailerons
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)accessus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire & holes in the firewall |
Halon is great for a water cooled boat compartment but the cooling blast for
an aircooled engine will dissipate the gas before it smoothers the
fire.i.e... waste of time and money to install UNLESS you can stop the 100
mile an hour cooling gale, or you are on the ground where you can turn off
the engine. Halon works fine in confined areas like an underpanel fire.
Won't even slow it down under the cowl while flying.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Haan <bhaan(at)easystreet.com>
Date: Friday, January 22, 1999 8:31 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Fire & holes in the firewall
>
>>Why not look at what the guys use in the baoting industry. the big boats
>>all used to have halon in the engine hold and they must have had some type
>>of warning device. Any boaters out there??????????
>
>The halon system we installed on our boat was a large Halon bottle like a
>scuba tank with a head that was like a sprinkler system head. This bottle
>was mounted above the engine.
>
>Imagine our alarm when the halon system went off in the middle of the night
>when we were 25 miles off the Washington coast. Sounded like a rifle shot.
> The engine immediately begin to die as it ingested the halon. It stopped.
>
>There was no fire. As a result, we could not figure out why it went off
>until we got out the documentation for the halon system and discovered that
>it was designed to go off at 165 F. We thought it went off at above 212 F.
> We did not realize that our engine compartment temperature got to 165 F.
>
>After airing out the compartment the engine started and ran fine.
>
>
>Bob Haan
>bhaan(at)easystreet.com
>Portland, OR
>RV6A 24461 Working on Baffles
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Jet Hot ceramic coating |
I am using Jet Hot on my present aeroplane, and it is starting to rust,
delaminate, etc. They advertise a life time guar., btu you have to pay
shipping each and every time you send it back. I have sent mine back three
times (3. that's right 3) and it is no longer fun. Spend the extrea money, and
but a stainless system.
Ed Storo 8 QB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JNice51355(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
In a message dated 1/22/99 3:16:38 PM Pacific Standard Time, gyoung@cs-sol.com
writes:
<< Even in a constant rate,
stabilized roll (ignoring the flight path) you
will still need differential lift to overcome drag
and sustain the roll rate. The situation doesn't
change whether you start at 1G or 9G's. >>
I think it would be a good idea for someone to attach a G-meter to each wing
and do one good 4G turn, then return to base and file the report. do not
archive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Douglas G. Murray" <dgmurray(at)telusplanet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door |
Cy Galley wrote: -> RV-List mess
> What material is the Flapper valve?
>
>
Cy - The entire heat box is aluminum. I am wondering if just changing the door
to stainless or galvanized steel will be enough or should the entire box be
steel. Maybe the slider door affair under the box as per Tony B. would be the
way to go.
What do you think?
DGM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Douglas G. Murray" <dgmurray(at)telusplanet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire Warning |
Denny Harjehausen wrote:
>
> Does any one have a plan for or a location to get a fire warning system for
> the firewall forward?
>
> I am installing an Halon system that delivers to the engine area. One of
> our local guys has this system on his RV, he installed it after he had a
> fire on the ground. However, he has no warning system. On his previous
> fire, he was unaware of the fire until a fellow came running with a fire
> extinguisher and yelled at him to shut down. The fellow fired the bottle
> into the exhaust air outlet of the cowling, putting out the fire. The
> result was very light damage.
>
> That and several other reports with less happy results is incentive enough
> for this old duck.
>
> Have a great Day!
> Denny Harjehausen
> Lebanon, OR
> RV-6
Denny - could you post some more information on this fire delivery system. I
have been giving this some though lately and wondered if a receptacle could be
built into to the instrument panel that was plumbed into the engine compartment.
Then in case of and engine fire you could use your portable extinguisher and
squirt it into the receptacle which would direct the haylon through the plumbing
and onto the fire.
What do you think? Will it work?
DGM RV-6
Southern Alberta
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "true(at)uswest.net |
by phnxpop2.phnx.uswest.net with SMTP; 23 Jan 1999 04":40:53.-0000(at)matronics.com
| Subject: | Re: Fire Warning |
lottmc(at)datasync.com wrote:
>
> I think I would rather have halon in the cockpit, than CO2. What would be the
physical, or medical complications caused by breathing either one in a tight,
enclosed environment? I know someone out here knows a lot more about this than
I do.
>
I remember the post a few months back about the guy who set off a halon extinguisher
in his airplane and he DIED (true story). The halon displaced all
the air in the cockpit and he suffocated . Halon in the engine compartment, OK.
In the
cockpit, NO WAY.
George True, Phoenix, AZ
List Lurker, RV-8 wanabee builder
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Finn Lassen <finnlassen(at)netzero.com> |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
Craig Hiers wrote:
> Could the 9.2 G-force on the G-meter have occured when the
> plane impacted the ground, and not in the air?
If that were so, the pilot could probably have walked away from the impact.
It's my understanding that at impact the needle hardly has time to move and in
fact makes a visible dent in the meter.
Finn
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JNice51355(at)aol.com |
Somebody asked a question about the -3 wing failure that showed 9.2 G's on
the G-meter. The question was, "How do you know the 9.2 G's were not the
G's felt at "impact". Well, does anybody want to answer this?(I don't)
Jim Nice
RV6A
WA State
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronald Blum" <fly-in-home(at)worldnet.att.net> |
Yes, G-meters are very intolerant of lateral and longitudinal accelerations.
The chances of the airplane hitting the ground in a very level attitude is
unlikely (but the NTSB can normally figure out that angle). Anyhow, the
needle of the G-meter will either stop in that position or damage the face
of the unit at that location.
>Somebody asked a question about the -3 wing failure that showed 9.2 G's on
>the G-meter. The question was, "How do you know the 9.2 G's were not the
>G's felt at "impact". Well, does anybody want to answer this?(I don't)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Taping for Trim Colors |
Now that I have my main color on my RV-8 (Delstar Acrylic Enamel), I am
wondering how long to wait to apply tape for the two trim colors. The
Product Sheet says tape free time is 6 hours; should I double this to be
sure? Or more? Is there a maximum time after which you have to sand
before applying the trim paint? It also says recoat time is 4-6 hours.
What does this mean? And lastly, I understand that you are supposed to
apply the masking tape and paper within 1/4" of the desired line, then
use the 1/2" fine line tape on top of the masking tape to go up to the
line. This will enable me to easily pull just the fine line tape off
right after shooting the trim, which will give me a nice edge. But heres
the question; How can I apply the masking tape within a 1/4" of the
desired line, when I need to use the fine line tape to make the line in
the first place? Using the method above, I wind up with the fine line
tape on the wrong side of the masking tape. Hope you can make sense of
this!
Von Alexander
N41VA(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
In thinking ahead to getting RV-8 to the airport, I plan to rent a
flat-bed trailer. What is the best way to tie this down? Also can I go
ahead and install all the movable tail surfaces? Or could these be
easily damaged by the road trip (15 miles)?I am trying to do as much as
possible here at my house, as the hangar is unheated.
Von Alexander
N41VA(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Capt. Steven DiNieri" <capsteve(at)wzrd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire Warning |
if halon still contains cfc's ,then i would opt for co2. working with
refridgerants i've always have been told that when any of the refridgerants
containing cfc's burned they produced phosgene gas. does anyone know better?
Steven DiNieri
Capsteve(at)wzrd.com
Wings in the works!!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Capt. Steven DiNieri" <capsteve(at)wzrd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire & holes in the firewall |
the portable halon i've installed had heads that melted at a preset temp.
panel annuciators were simply led's connected to heat detectors. i know that
we can buy relatively small and light heat detectors designed for home alarm
use (12v) and adapt them to actuate an alarm (they contain a set of no/nc
contacts)
Steven DiNieri
Capsteve(at)wzrd.com
Wings in the works!!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Engine mount bolts kit & cowl length questions |
| From: | "Paul A. Rosales" <rv6a(at)Juno.com> |
Hi Hal, I just hung my motor two weeks ago. There is an excellent
picture in Section 11, figure 11-1, of the preview plans. If you don't
have that, I scanned it and put in at
http://www.eaa49.av.org/gifs/mounts.jpg for you. I had two others
helping me with my engine - One on the engine hoist and two pulling on
the motor. My two top two bolts went right in but then it was a matter
of tightening those two bolts and
pulling/pushing/hoisting/releasing/fighting/swearing to get the third
bolt in. Once in, my fourth one went right in (~40 minutes all
together). By the way, you have the short cowl. Good Luck,
Paul Rosales
RV-6A N628PV
Firewall Forward
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fire & holes in the firewall |
It seems that we need a ready indication such as the Bi-metal indicators along
with a maximum resistance to fire and smoke coming thru the firewall and fire
prevention as the best bet against a fatal accident with a fire in the engine
bay.
It seems that the vacum pump hose is a prime area that needs help in keeping
it on the front side of the firewall because it is a large diameter rubber
hose way high on the firewall. Has anyone firesleeved it or taken other
preventive measures?
Bernie Kerr, 6A mounting vacum pump, SE Fla
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Strickland" <eric.strick(at)prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Taping for Trim Colors |
-----Original Message-----
From: n41va(at)juno.com <n41va(at)juno.com>
Date: Saturday, January 23, 1999 12:49 AM
Subject: Taping for Trim Colors
>Now that I have my main color on my RV-8 (Delstar Acrylic Enamel), I am
>wondering how long to wait to apply tape for the two trim colors. The
>Product Sheet says tape free time is 6 hours; should I double this to be
>sure? Or more?
I promise if you use masking tape it will mar .
Is there a maximum time after which you have to sand
>before applying the trim paint? It also says recoat time is 4-6 hours.
>What does this mean?
It means before chemical adhesion is lost (WET ON WET) You'll have to sand ,
but that's what you want .
And lastly, I understand that you are supposed to
>apply the masking tape and paper within 1/4" of the desired line, then
>use the 1/2" fine line tape on top of the masking tape to go up to the
>line. This will enable me to easily pull just the fine line tape off
>right after shooting the trim, which will give me a nice edge. But heres
>the question; How can I apply the masking tape within a 1/4" of the
>desired line, when I need to use the fine line tape to make the line in
>the first place?
You should be able to get with in a 1/2" of the stripe just eyeballing it .
If not buy 1/16" it's cheaper than the 1/8" or 1/2". Put the 1/16" down and
the masking with in a 1/4" and pull up the 1/16" and lay the 1/2" .
Using the method above, I wind up with the fine line
>tape on the wrong side of the masking tape. Hope you can make sense of
>this!
O.K. you apply the masking tape on the side you don't want painted with in a
1/4" or so of the Exact line . When you have the line you wish to tape off
use the masking tape then the fine line . For prep you should only have to
lightly scuff the new paint to open the pores and allow the stripe to
adhere. Be sure to use 1000 grit to nock down the big trash . I wish you the
best of luck . I wish I were near so I could help !
Eric C. Strickland
Dallas,Texas
>Von Alexander
>N41VA(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVer273sb(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Taping for Trim Colors |
Von,
I used the PPG delstar on my RV4. I went as long as 24 hr between
applying trim colors. Lay out your trim lines with appropriate
widths of fine line tape for the radiuses desired. I masked all my
trim lines at the same time and masked between the ones that remain
base color. Be careful to remember which is what color ect. You can
shoot one color and wait till it is tape free, then remove what paper and tape
necessary to shoot the other color. I had little trouble keeping clean tape
lines
when removing tape. Where you do, keep a exacto knife handy to score along
tape.
If you go a long time between the base color and trim, just scotch brite the
base
color first. This PPG delstar is terrific paint for inexperienced painters!!!
Stew RV4 CO.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVer273sb(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Trip to Airport |
Von,
If the trailer has a wood floor you can nail down chocks for the
tires. With the wheel pants off, you can tie town the gear with rope
including the tail wheel if you have one. I left the horizontal and
verticle stabs, rudder and elevator on. Wish I had had only 15 miles to
the airport!!!
Stew RV4 CO.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)accessus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Trip to Airport |
Distance to airport is NOT A FACTOR. Since it is far enough to use a
trailer, preparation and protection is. Once the plane is loaded, you
should be able to drive across the country. We have to do it once in a
while with a disabled plane at Oshkosh. We have had planes trucked and
trailered to Texas and California with no problems. Need to check it after
a short distance to see if you have it all right. Once put a VariEze on a
trailer and towed it 150 miles to get the Feds to inspect.
With a trailer, crap and gravel thrown by the towing vehicle can be a
problem.
-----Original Message-----
From: RVer273sb(at)aol.com <RVer273sb(at)aol.com>
Date: Saturday, January 23, 1999 7:55 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Trip to Airport
>
>Von,
> If the trailer has a wood floor you can nail down chocks for the
>tires. With the wheel pants off, you can tie town the gear with rope
>including the tail wheel if you have one. I left the horizontal and
>verticle stabs, rudder and elevator on. Wish I had had only 15 miles to
>the airport!!!
>Stew RV4 CO.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)miami.gdi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire & holes in the firewall |
Bernie,
It seems to me that a steel bulkhead connector with a one way check
valve inside would be the appropriate cure for bringing the vacuum
supply hose into the cockpit. Plastic hose could be attached on both
sides of the bulkhead fitting. The check valve would allow air to flow
from the cockpit gauges into the pump, but prevent a reversal of flow.
(ie superheated air/fire coming into the cockpit)
EAA Chapter 133 will be having our flyin/picnic today at Willis
Gliderport (see Miami Sectional-S.W. Palm Beach County) if anyone in the
area would like to come. Just look for the crowd on the south end of the
runway (Jim Reynolds house)
Charlie Kuss
RV8 wings
EAA Chapter 133 treasurer
snipped
> It seems that the vacum pump hose is a prime area that needs help in keeping
> it on the front side of the firewall because it is a large diameter rubber
> hose way high on the firewall. Has anyone firesleeved it or taken other
> preventive measures?
>
> Bernie Kerr, 6A mounting vacum pump, SE Fla
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Taping for Trim Colors |
Eric and others;
Thanks for the tips on taping and painting; One further question, you say
if I use masking tape, the paint will mar. Do you mean if I use it at 6
hours? What I need to know is how long do you recommend I let the main
body color dry before starting to tape off with masking tape and paper,
followed by the fine line tape at the desired line?
Von Alexander
N41VA(at)juno.com
writes:
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: n41va(at)juno.com <n41va(at)juno.com>
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Date: Saturday, January 23, 1999 12:49 AM
>Subject: Taping for Trim Colors
>
>
>>Now that I have my main color on my RV-8 (Delstar Acrylic Enamel), I
>am
>>wondering how long to wait to apply tape for the two trim colors. The
>>Product Sheet says tape free time is 6 hours; should I double this to
>be
>>sure? Or more?
>I promise if you use masking tape it will mar .
>
> Is there a maximum time after which you have to sand
>>before applying the trim paint? It also says recoat time is 4-6
>hours.
>>What does this mean?
>It means before chemical adhesion is lost (WET ON WET) You'll have to
>sand ,
>but that's what you want .
>
>And lastly, I understand that you are supposed to
>>apply the masking tape and paper within 1/4" of the desired line,
>then
>>use the 1/2" fine line tape on top of the masking tape to go up to
>the
>>line. This will enable me to easily pull just the fine line tape off
>>right after shooting the trim, which will give me a nice edge. But
>heres
>>the question; How can I apply the masking tape within a 1/4" of the
>>desired line, when I need to use the fine line tape to make the line
>in
>>the first place?
>
>You should be able to get with in a 1/2" of the stripe just eyeballing
>it .
>If not buy 1/16" it's cheaper than the 1/8" or 1/2". Put the 1/16"
>down and
>the masking with in a 1/4" and pull up the 1/16" and lay the 1/2" .
>
>Using the method above, I wind up with the fine line
>>tape on the wrong side of the masking tape. Hope you can make sense
>of
>>this!
>
>O.K. you apply the masking tape on the side you don't want painted
>with in a
>1/4" or so of the Exact line . When you have the line you wish to tape
>off
>use the masking tape then the fine line . For prep you should only
>have to
>lightly scuff the new paint to open the pores and allow the stripe to
>adhere. Be sure to use 1000 grit to nock down the big trash . I wish
>you the
>best of luck . I wish I were near so I could help !
>Eric C. Strickland
>Dallas,Texas
>
>>Von Alexander
>>N41VA(at)juno.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Taping for Trim Colors |
Stew;
I agree, Delstar is fantastic and easy to use and highly recommend it for
you beginning painters(and others). I had used Centauri before and liked
it, but I think the Delstar is more forgiving. I almost went with a poly
paint at double the cost, but now am glad I didn't because this stuff has
the wet look without having to use clear.
Von Alexander
N41VA(at)juno.com
>
>Von,
> I used the PPG delstar on my RV4. I went as long as 24 hr between
>applying trim colors. Lay out your trim lines with appropriate
>widths of fine line tape for the radiuses desired. I masked all my
>trim lines at the same time and masked between the ones that remain
>base color. Be careful to remember which is what color ect. You can
>shoot one color and wait till it is tape free, then remove what paper
>and tape
>necessary to shoot the other color. I had little trouble keeping
>clean tape
>lines
>when removing tape. Where you do, keep a exacto knife handy to score
>along
>tape.
> If you go a long time between the base color and trim, just scotch
>brite the
>base
>color first. This PPG delstar is terrific paint for inexperienced
>painters!!!
>Stew RV4 CO.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cutting hole for Tip up weldment |
The final hole shape is elongated about the vertical axis to accept the
point. I drilled a #30 hole in the F605 at the initial contact point, then
routed out the hole with my die grinder. I used the Avery Aircraft taper
Pin Router Bit, P/N 933-2, $5.00. I run the die grinder at reduced rpm,
that afforded by 60 PSI, and I find I can route my way through aluminum
almost as easily as I do through wood.
I also adjusted my two Wd622 latches so that the Wd617 hooks relax when they
are rotated fully over-center. I get a satisfying CLICK when the hooks are
fully engaged!
I also cut out a new C609 pawl as the one supplied by Van's engaged poorly.
The lock installment pictured in the RVAtor did not suit me so my lock has a
riveted extension arm that captivates the canopy opening lever on the
inboard edge, rather than through a slot.
Dennis Persyk 6A finishing kit
Hampshire, IL
-----Original Message-----
From: Besing, Paul <PBesing(at)pinacor.com>
Date: Thursday, January 21, 1999 5:00 PM
Subject: RV-List: Cutting hole for Tip up weldment
>
>I am installing the weldment that latches the canopy closed, and would like
>to know how some of you have cut the slot in F-605 for the points of the
>weldment to reach into. Any suggestions?
>
>Thanks..
>
>Paul Besing
>RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
>http://www.doitnow.com/~rv8er
>Finish Kit
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | GLPalinkas(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Oil-Less Compressor Mod |
Oil-Less Compressor Mod (Rube Goldberg desperate attempt #9)
Posted because of the number of off-list emails I received.
This mod works for the Sears compressors that I have seen. The intake is a
plastic housing that is standard for most all of Sears oil-less compressors.
The plastic housing appears sturdy but I am not sure that it will not split or
crack under a lot of use. I plan on making an aluminum intake when time
permits.
The mod reduces the noise BUT IT STILL TOO LOUD (according to my "resident
experts"). Used in conjunction with other "fixes" it will help. (Carpet/foam
mat; sound deflection/absorbtion techniques) The muffler acts as it does on a
lawn mower. I am not sure I would want a lawnmower running in my basement
either. I plan on doing a decibel meter test upon return from vacation. I will
post results. I still haven't ruled out buying (gasp) a belt driven compressor
(desperate attempt #10)
Parts list:
1 - muffler (garden variety cylindrical, hot-dog shape 1 1/2" X 3" w/ 1/2 "
threaded pipe)
1- 2"-3" 1/4" pipe threaded on both ends (size varies depending on how far out
of the intake manifold you want to extend it to clear the plastic housing)
1 - 1/2 to 3/8 reducer (unless you can find a 1/2 to 1/4 reducer)
1 - 3/8 to 1/4 bushing
pipe thread compound
I used a standard Briggs & Stratton type muffler from a lawn mower. It goes on
the intake manifold. Sears carries numerous types. I used an "Arnold" M-105 @
$1.99. It takes several standard gas pipe reduction fittings to bring the
size down to 1/4" which is what the intake of the compressor is sized at. I
took the entire compressor head apart and the plastic intake housing is just
sandwiched between the compressor head and body. It takes a LONG number 15
torque driver to take the entire plastic case/housing off but that is not
necessary if you are careful.
Once the muffler/pipe unit was assembled, using the pipe joint compound, I
used the 1/4" pipe to thread the unit into the plastic intake housing. The fit
and strength of the connection is stronger than you will think at first. A
correct size tap could be used.
Additionally, I have placed the foam air filter into the muffler inlet.
I have a digital camera and can upload some jpeg photos if the instructions
are not clear enough. Good luck to all and if a better solution is found
please post.
Sorry for the long post.
Gary Palinkas
Parma, Ohio (Borders Cleveland for those who asked)
QB 6 N198RV (reserved)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Scott Gesele <sgesele(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: orientation of the bolts that hold the VS to the |
fuselage
Steve,
It is considered good practice to install bolt heads either forward or up.
The reason for this is that if the nut would come off, gravity or
aerodynamic pressure would tend to hold the bolt in rather than trying to
remove it. There are locations on an RV where it is impossible to follow
this convention. The location that you are referring to is one area where
it is necessary to install the bolt heads aft.
Hope this helps.
Scott Gesele N506RV - Flying
>
>Hello Listers,
>
>I have the VS on my RV-6A now. I followed the plans that clearly show that
>the bolts in the lower part of the VS are inserted from inside the fuselage
>through the bulkhead with the threads ends pointing aft. The rudder bottom
>is rubbing against the threaded ends of the bolts, though, and will not
>move. It's quite hung up.
>
>The manual shows how the builders of the RV-6A should install the tail
>tie-down. The manual seems to show all the bolts in the lower part of the
>VS are inserted from the rear with the threaded ends pointing forward. This
>would cure my problem with the rudder bottom, but I think it is bad practice
>to put the bolts in this way. What have the rest of you done?
>
>I think I will take the rudder off and back out the Heim rod end joints a
>turn or two to give more clearance between the rudder and the rear VS spar
>unless putting the bolts in "backwards" is the solution.
>
>Steve Soule
>Huntington, Vermont
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JHeadric(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: orientation of the bolts that hold the VS to the fuselage |
The general policy with bolts is to point them inboard, down or aft, but if it
is impractical, put them in anyway they will work. With a good lock nut, the
bolt won't fall out, so ...just do it.
Jim RV6A 160JH
waiting for FAA airworthiness insp.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JHeadric(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Taping for Trim Colors |
I would recommend you wait two or more days. Otherwise, that stuff tends to
leave little tape "tracks". Good luck.
Jim 160JH RV6A
completed
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brad Knapp" <bknapp(at)indyweb.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 spar mod? |
I couldn't agree with Bill Costello more, concerning taking GREAT care when
deciding to modify a spar design. Having majored in this area of aerospace
structures design in college, it gave me somewhat of a chill to read about
the RV spar mods being undertaken by individual builders out there. It is
NOT just a simple matter of "strengthening" the spar to be able to withstand
greater load factors normal (perpendicular) to the chord. Introducing more
material to "strengthen" a spar starts an involved iterative design process
that now must consider many other factors, ESPECIALLY if load carrying items
such as spar caps are changed dimensionally. Folks, PLEASE be careful in
doing this, in fact, I don't recommend it at all. Well, off of the soapbox,
and back to riveting. Brad Knapp
bknapp(at)indyweb.net
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Costello <bcostello(at)mbsi.net>
Date: Wednesday, January 20, 1999 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: RE: RV-List: RV-8 spar mod?
>
>Hi Folks,
>
>Boy, I would be SUPER careful about modifying spars. I am certainly not an
>aeronautical engineer, but I have found out from good sources that spars
are
>designed to distribute and dissipate the load across the wing. If we make
>something seemingly stronger by beefing it up, that might result in more of
the
>load being transmitted to another part of the spar (because it doesn't flex
and
>dissipate it) and this could overload that other part, causing failure.
>
>This is meant in no way to criticize anyone, just, perhaps, to give you
>something to think about.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Bill Costello
>
>>>> "Clark, Thomas IFC" 01/20 4:08 PM
>>>
>
>Moe,
>You are not the first to think of this! I have modified my spars to
>extend this reinforcement strip out several feet. I used 3/16"x 1.125"
>2024 material on the top and 1/8"x 1.125" on the bottom. Leading edge
>ribs had to be modified slightly. The whole job took a full day to
>completely modify both spars. This modification made me feel more
>comfortable.
>
>Tom Clark 80525 wings in the jig
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank van der Hulst <frankvdh(at)ihug.co.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: Trip to Airport |
One bloke I know took the tailwheel off his RV-4 and replaced it with a
towbar. Then he just hitched the plane up to the back of his ute (US:
small pickup truck) and towed it backward to the airport.
Some (obvious?) points:
1. Wings travelled separately.
2. He only lives a couple of miles from the airport.
3. There's not much traffic on the roads he used.
4. In theory, the aircraft should have been registered as a trailer for
this trip.
5. With the emp on, it was a little wider than the maximum trailer
width. It was possibly longer than the maximum length too. In theory,
this would necessitate the hassle and expense of a police escort.
6. Points 4 and 5 aren't a problem in a small rural NZ town.
Frank.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Haan <bhaan(at)easystreet.com> |
| Subject: | How safety nuts on engine studs |
On a Lycoming the prop governor, vacuum pump, and carb are assembled on 4
studs that are 1/4 20 course thread. As the engine came from the factory
these places were sealed with a cover held on with plain nuts, plain
washers plus internal star lock washers.
Are these items assembled like the covers with plain 1/4 20 course nuts,
plain washers plus internal star lock washers?
I would like to safety the nuts with more than the internal star washer. How?
Thank you in advance,
Bob
Bob Haan
bhaan(at)easystreet.com
Portland, OR
RV6A 24461 Working on Baffles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | KBoatri144(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Aftermarket Parts, Instrument Size, & More |
I wanted to pass along to the list my review of a couple of items I bought
from Tracy Saylor... The gear leg fairings are the best made fiberglass parts
I have bought to date. This includes Van's parts (aargh!) and wheel pants I
bought from Sam James. The GLF were $110 delivered, as I remember. I also
bought Tracy's left hand throttle quadrant ($55 I think)for my RV-6. It is a
kit, which requires about 15 minutes to assemble, and will take me maybe an
hour or so to install in the airplane. The throttle quadrant is high
quality, IMHO, and the aluminum parts are anodized a really nice shade of
grey. Consult the archives if you want to find Tracy.
I'm in the process of attaching my wingtips. I can't get them to come out
quite level with the top of the wing. After much trimming and fitting, I've
concluded that the things are warped. Anyone else have this problem?
Suggested solutions? I figure I'll break out the heat gun and reshape them
if I don't get any replies, because I don't want to trim them any more.
Finally, the 1" vacuum gauge Van's sells... I am going to provide space in my
panel for one of these, but won't install one until well after the beast flys.
I need the dimension of the hole needed (1"?) and the face of this instrument.
Will someone please enlighten me.
Thanks,
Kyle Boatright
RV-6 Panel, wing closeout, etc., etc., etc. N46KB reserved
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)accessus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: How safety nuts on engine studs |
They make self-locking coarse thread nuts just like the fine thread AN. Go
to your local hardware store. They are available approved, just no one
stocks them.
You can get all metal ones as well.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Haan <bhaan(at)easystreet.com>
Date: Saturday, January 23, 1999 2:40 PM
Subject: RV-List: How safety nuts on engine studs
>
>On a Lycoming the prop governor, vacuum pump, and carb are assembled on 4
>studs that are 1/4 20 course thread. As the engine came from the factory
>these places were sealed with a cover held on with plain nuts, plain
>washers plus internal star lock washers.
>
>Are these items assembled like the covers with plain 1/4 20 course nuts,
>plain washers plus internal star lock washers?
>
>I would like to safety the nuts with more than the internal star washer.
How?
>
>Thank you in advance,
>
>Bob
>
>Bob Haan
>bhaan(at)easystreet.com
>Portland, OR
>RV6A 24461 Working on Baffles
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Strickland" <eric.strick(at)prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Taping for Trim Colors |
-----Original Message-----
From: n41va(at)Juno.com <n41va(at)Juno.com>
Date: Saturday, January 23, 1999 9:14 AM
Subject: RV-List: Re: Taping for Trim Colors
>
>Eric and others;
>Thanks for the tips on taping and painting; One further question, you say
>if I use masking tape, the paint will mar. Do you mean if I use it at 6
>hours?
Let it dry as long as you can . The acrylic enamel paints take a long time
to cure .
If you bend over and smell it gassing , wait !
What I mean by maring is that the tape will leave a print of itself like a
finger print.
Von email me your # or call me at (972)841--3183 that's my mobile as I am on
the net . i can better explain the paint process over the phone .
Ericf
What I need to know is how long do you recommend I let the main
>body color dry before starting to tape off with masking tape and paper,
>followed by the fine line tape at the desired line?
>Von Alexander
>N41VA(at)juno.com
>
> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: n41va(at)juno.com <n41va(at)juno.com>
>>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>>Date: Saturday, January 23, 1999 12:49 AM
>>Subject: Taping for Trim Colors
>>
>>
>>>Now that I have my main color on my RV-8 (Delstar Acrylic Enamel), I
>>am
>>>wondering how long to wait to apply tape for the two trim colors. The
>>>Product Sheet says tape free time is 6 hours; should I double this to
>>be
>>>sure? Or more?
>>I promise if you use masking tape it will mar .
>>
>> Is there a maximum time after which you have to sand
>>>before applying the trim paint? It also says recoat time is 4-6
>>hours.
>>>What does this mean?
>>It means before chemical adhesion is lost (WET ON WET) You'll have to
>>sand ,
>>but that's what you want .
>>
>>And lastly, I understand that you are supposed to
>>>apply the masking tape and paper within 1/4" of the desired line,
>>then
>>>use the 1/2" fine line tape on top of the masking tape to go up to
>>the
>>>line. This will enable me to easily pull just the fine line tape off
>>>right after shooting the trim, which will give me a nice edge. But
>>heres
>>>the question; How can I apply the masking tape within a 1/4" of the
>>>desired line, when I need to use the fine line tape to make the line
>>in
>>>the first place?
>>
>>You should be able to get with in a 1/2" of the stripe just eyeballing
>>it .
>>If not buy 1/16" it's cheaper than the 1/8" or 1/2". Put the 1/16"
>>down and
>>the masking with in a 1/4" and pull up the 1/16" and lay the 1/2" .
>>
>>Using the method above, I wind up with the fine line
>>>tape on the wrong side of the masking tape. Hope you can make sense
>>of
>>>this!
>>
>>O.K. you apply the masking tape on the side you don't want painted
>>with in a
>>1/4" or so of the Exact line . When you have the line you wish to tape
>>off
>>use the masking tape then the fine line . For prep you should only
>>have to
>>lightly scuff the new paint to open the pores and allow the stripe to
>>adhere. Be sure to use 1000 grit to nock down the big trash . I wish
>>you the
>>best of luck . I wish I were near so I could help !
>>Eric C. Strickland
>>Dallas,Texas
>>
>>>Von Alexander
>>>N41VA(at)juno.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lcp.livingston.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire Warning |
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Capt. Steven DiNieri wrote:
>
> if halon still contains cfc's ,then i would opt for co2. working with
We had a substantial thread on fire extinguishers several months back. We
talked about Co2 vs Halon, displacing the air in the cockpit, how Halon
works, is Halon safe, etc. Please check the archives.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane
(916) 676-6399 - voice Suite 1
(916) 676-3442 - fax Cameron Park, CA 95682
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gil Alexander <gila(at)flash.net> |
| Subject: | Re: How safety nuts on engine studs |
Bob,
... my Lycoming parts manual (for the O-320 series) calls for the
following parts on the prop governor:
STD-35 Washer 5/16 plain {8!! per stud for a Woodward governor}
STD-475 Washer, 5/16 lock, internal teeth
STD-1410 Nut, 5/16-18 plain
The hardware you have (Lycoming part numbers given above) is what the
manufacturer requires for a certified installation, so just go ahead and
use it. The vacuum pump attachment is similar, but 1/4-20 hardware.
E-mail me if you need all of detailed part numbers.
Note that the specified torque may be higher than AN hardware - from
the Lycoming Overhaul manual.
1/4 hardware 96 in. Lb.
5/16 hardware 204 in. Lb. OR 17 ft. Lb.
These torques, and the specified locking washers will keep the hardware
in place. No locknuts are needed....
Gil (the manufacturer is usally right) Alexander
RV6A, #20701 ... fitting tip-up canopy
>
>On a Lycoming the prop governor, vacuum pump, and carb are assembled on 4
>studs that are 1/4 20 course thread. As the engine came from the factory
>these places were sealed with a cover held on with plain nuts, plain
>washers plus internal star lock washers.
>
>Are these items assembled like the covers with plain 1/4 20 course nuts,
>plain washers plus internal star lock washers?
>
>I would like to safety the nuts with more than the internal star washer. How?
>
>Thank you in advance,
>
>Bob
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Noble" <apple(at)cmc.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 spar mod? |
This is very interesting, Mo.
I don't have my wings yet, but the spar you describe in your friends wing
kit is quite different than the drawings in my preview plans drawing set. I
will elaborate below.
>
>I helped another 8 builder rivet the leading edges on his wings last
Friday,
>and looking at his front spar, I have a question. Along the back of the
spar
>is the "waffle" plate that extends the entire length. >
On my preview plans drawings the waffle doubler on the aft side of the spar
only extends out to the fourth rib from the tip (station 91.75); not the
entire length.
I am also quite sure that the quick-build wing that was being shown at
Oshkosh last year was like this.
>On the front are the
>two pieces of barstock, starting at the inboard end of the spar and
>extending to about 8" past the fuel tanks.>
On my preview plans these front side bars stop short of the end of the fuel
tank by approximately 6 inches. That is to say that on the drawngs, they
stop short of the place where the wing failure occured on N58RV.
I'd be very interested to have you confirm these differences and also to
know when your friend took delivery of his wing kit.
Jack Noble - Seattle
RV-8 80719
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | bill young <bill_young(at)bc.sympatico.ca> |
Randall Henderson wrote:
>
>
> I've been corresponding via email with John Caldwell at AAMR/AirCore, a
> supplier of aviation and marine electronic supplies. His service seemed
> to me like something RVers would want to know about so I agreed to
> forward his ad/offer to the RV-list. I am not affiliated with them in
> any way nor did I get anything for doing this, I just thought it looked
> like something that RV list members might want to know about. After
> looking at their web site I wish I had known about them before I started
> wiring my plane. :-(
>
> Randall Henderson
>
> ------------- Begin Forwarded Message -------------
>
> From: AAMRELECTR(at)aol.com
> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 21:30:35 EST
> To: randall(at)edt.com
> Subject: The Ad
>
> We would like to offer the RV-List members a 30days/first order 10%
> discount. In other words on their first order placed by or before Feb. 15,
> 1999. We will deduct 10% off the price of the goods ( Discounted amount does
> not include shipping or taxes). We are AAMR/AirCore located in Seattle, WA.
> Our On-Line Secure Order Site is at
> http://members.aol.com/aamrelectr/index.html We are a distributor of Mil Spec
> aircraft rated electrical connectors and related product. We sell in small
> quanties and are aviation home builder friendly. Our office # is
> 206.242.2527,and we have a 24 hr. toll free fax/message line at 1.800.431.3789
> When you place an order please be sure to ID yourself as an RV-List member in
> the comments area of the order form and we'll deduct 10%.
>
> John Caldwell @AAMR/AirCore
> ------------- End Forwarded Message -------------
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "joseph.wiza" <planejoe(at)flnet.com> |
I have elected not to use the vertical channel normally used for engine
controls and have decided on a horizontal right below the Inst panel. My
question, is the vertical channel structural does the inst panel need to be
supported by something else like a brace to the rear panel? thanks for any
sug.
Joe/RV6A finish kit, pluggin along
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVer273sb(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: How safety nuts on engine studs |
Bob,
The use of a plain nut, flat washer and a star lockwasher is
standard practice! It works just fine for the purpose.
Self locking nuts are not necessary. Why put hardware store
nuts on your engine?? Some of the crimped hardware store
nuts damage the threads and may back out the stud while
removing the nut.
Stew RV4 CO.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Zilik <zilik(at)bewellnet.com> |
| Subject: | Positech Oil Coolers |
Listers,
Positech has a web page located at: http://www.oil.coolers.com which is
full of information about their FAA certified oil coolers. I became
really interested in their line of coolers after visiting with Larry
Vetterman and looking at the Positech cooler he has installed in his
Rocket. The oil cooler looks like a high quality unit and is a good 100
bucks cheaper than the Stewart-Warner it replaces. Specification
drawings can be found at http://www.oilcoolers.com/aviationcatalog.htm
Gary Zilik
6A s/n 22993 - Finally riveting the sliding canopy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Thompson <grobdriver(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Fire Detection, RV-8 and Apology |
Friends,
Yesterday (or Thursday) I posted to the fire detection thread and in
mentioning my thoughts made reference to a -8 "going down to a fire".
I received email questioning that as there has been no RV-8 with an
in- flight fire. I was incorrectly referencing the recent Harmon
Rocket II incident.
The email made me think I may have worried some folks so I wanted to
set the record straight.
It's a beautiful day here in Austin - wish I were out there flying
instead of in here building!
Mike Thompson
Austin, TX
-6 N140RV (Reserved)
Rear Spar
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Hartmann <hartmann(at)sound.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aftermarket Parts, Instrument Size, & More |
>I'm in the process of attaching my wingtips. I can't get them to come out
>quite level with the top of the wing. After much trimming and fitting, I've
>concluded that the things are warped. Anyone else have this problem?
I had trouble getting a good fit between the fiberglass tip ant the wing top
skin at the reinforcing rib. I added some thin spacers of scrap aluminum
between the reinforcing rib and the wingtip to raise the fiberglass slightly
at the leading edge of the reinforcing rib. This allows the tip to more
closely follow the curve of the top of the wing. Without the spacers the
reinforce rib pulled the fiberglass down flat at a point where the top of
the wing still has some curve.
Beyond that a few minutes with a heat gun and stuffing the tip full of
newspaper was all it took.
-Mike
hartmann(at)sound.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JNice51355(at)aol.com |
Folks
On drawing 7PP(RV6A) the AN426AD4-6 flush head rivet is called out for use in
holding in the nutplate to the R405 Rudder Horn. Would anyone know why they
are using the flush heads at this location while the other nutplates are being
held in with universal head rivets? Just curious, since it involves the extra
process of countersinking the R405, and dimpling the other parts associated.
It just doesn't seem necessary, and am curious what the shop heads would be
interfering with.
Jim Nice
RV6A
WA State
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MLaboyteau(at)aol.com |
I once saw a Beech Staggerwing that had two medium sized fire extinguishers
installed in the cabin, with the discharge hoses plumed to the engine
compartment with large quick disconnects. They were similar to the air hose
quick disconnects, but bigger. I assumed that this would allow the bottles to
be removed and used for other fires if needed. This would be a relatively
simple way to add suppression to an RV. In case of a detected fire, all you do
is pull the pin and fire. With stainless tubing forward of the firewall, one
"tee" to discharge some of the agent in the accessory area, and the rest
discharged in the top of the plenum. Of course this would only be effective
after all fuel has been shut off to the engine compartment.
Mark LaBoyteaux
RV-6A N106RV
Broken Arrow, Ok
MLaboyteau(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Planemike(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: More RV-8 questions |
The ariplane has to accelerate to get to "180deg/sec" initially. Plus the
torque of the ailerons ie differential lift distribution, required to achieve
the angular acceleration is a big factor in the stress level of the aircraft.
This occcurs over and above the ZG load the pilot feels in the seat.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Moe Colontonio <moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 spar mod? |
I got a few emails asking about my description of the wing I worked on last
week. I described the wing I worked on from memory, and my memory is very bad on
the best day. The waffle plate does not extend all the way down the spar. It
ends a few rib bays from the tip. The doublers on the forward side of the spar
extend past the fuel tanks, but only about 6 inches. As far as I know, Vans has
not made any spar changes to the 8 for the life of the kit.
Sorry if I caused any anxiety/confusion.
--
Moe Colontonio
moejoe(at)bellatlantic.net
Check out my RV-8 page at:
http://tabshred.com/moe
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Boyd Butler" <linbb(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Firewall Fittings |
Pardon the spelling just the content matters, all of the problems with
firewalls start when you drill holes in it and it becomes just another
bulkhead and is no longer a firewall why use stanless or anything other than
plywood if you put holes in it? If one looks at ww2 and airliners they have
firewall fittings that slow the progress of flame thur it, yes even starter
cables use phenolic blocks not plastic to transfer the load thru the
firewall cannon plugs with phenolic inside not plastic for insulation. We
need to remember this when piercing the firewall, do not use rubber gromets
they are made for bulkheads and places to prevent chafing not to stop the
progress of fire. Please do a little research and make your RV safe, no
plastic oil pressure lines, electric cables thru the firewall. Like I said
do a little home work and look at those old planes at the firewall and see
how they did it, some even had firewall shutoffs for fuel and oil to deprive
the fire of fuel, one pilot even used it to cause the engine to sieze and
throw the prop off of an engine that had a runaway prop, C-97 R4360 Pan Am
flight over the Atlantic early 50s as I remember. Well enough need to get
back to looking at my RV3 #745 under constructon.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott A. Jordan" <SAJ_SLJ(at)compuserve.com> |
>On drawing 7PP(RV6A) the AN426AD4-6 flush head rivet is called out for use
in holding in the nutplate to the R405 Rudder Horn. Would anyone know why
they are using the flush heads at this location while the other nutplates
are being
held in with universal head rivets?<
Jim,
Looking at my -8 preview plans (rev 2 Nov 97 and not available when I
built my emp), There is no rivet callout for the nutplate on the 405 but
there is a note "to be installed when reinforcement plate is attached to
R-802PP spar" There are rivet callout for five places for 470AD4-7 where
the 405 attches to the 606 plate and the spar, the R607 & 608 reinforcement
plates call for AN470AD4-6. No mention of flush rivets anywhere.
I pulled out my full size plans (origional, Aug 96) to check. The older
plans only have the note about installing the nutplates when instaling the
reinforcement plates to the spar, no rivet callouts on any of the platenuts
Using the 470's didn't result in any problems with construction so I have
no idea why they are called now (is there a revision # associated with the
callout?). Possibly, they are thinking of possible interference with a
wrench tightening the jam nut (I didn't have that problem) but that would
apply to all three locations. If you do use flush rivets you will only
have to countersink the 606 reinforcement plate since it is forward of the
spar.
Scott A. Jordan
80331
Fuselage ships in Feb
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Adrian Chick <adrianchick(at)home.com> |
What if, instead of using a reinforcement plate at the bottom, you just attached
the nutplate to the thick 405 horn? If you did this, you'd have to use flush
rivets on the forward side so that the horn would fit flush up against the spar.
My guess is that this is how the rudder used to be built, and that Van's changed
the method, incorporated a third reinforcement plate, and forgot to change 426
to
470. I used 470's on mine and don't forsee any problems. That's my guess. do
not archive
Adrian Chick
Nashville, TN
RV6A emp completed
JNice51355(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Folks
> On drawing 7PP(RV6A) the AN426AD4-6 flush head rivet is called out for use in
> holding in the nutplate to the R405 Rudder Horn. Would anyone know why they
> are using the flush heads at this location while the other nutplates are being
> held in with universal head rivets? Just curious, since it involves the extra
> process of countersinking the R405, and dimpling the other parts associated.
> It just doesn't seem necessary, and am curious what the shop heads would be
> interfering with.
> Jim Nice
> RV6A
> WA State
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)miami.gdi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Positech Oil Coolers |
Gary,
You have a small typo in your first website link. The actual address is:
http://www.oilcoolers.com
I couldn't access the second link (the online catalog) directly from
your link or from Pacific Oil Cooler Service Inc.'s home page. How did
you get to the second link?
Charlie Kuss
RV8 wings
Boca Raton, Fl.
> Listers,
>
> Positech has a web page located at: http://www.oil.coolers.com which is
> full of information about their FAA certified oil coolers. I became
> really interested in their line of coolers after visiting with Larry
> Vetterman and looking at the Positech cooler he has installed in his
> Rocket. The oil cooler looks like a high quality unit and is a good 100
> bucks cheaper than the Stewart-Warner it replaces. Specification
> drawings can be found at http://www.oilcoolers.com/aviationcatalog.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerry calvert <calverjl(at)flash.net> |
JNice51355(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Folks
> On drawing 7PP(RV6A) the AN426AD4-6 flush head rivet is called out for use in
> holding in the nutplate to the R405 Rudder Horn. Would anyone know why they
> are using the flush heads at this location while the other nutplates are being
> held in with universal head rivets? Just curious, since it involves the extra
> process of countersinking the R405, and dimpling the other parts associated.
> It just doesn't seem necessary, and am curious what the shop heads would be
> interfering with.
> Jim Nice
> RV6A
> WA State
>
Jim,
I wondered the same thing when I was at that point. Which rivet you use
depends on when you mount the 405 & plate nut. If you mount the plate
nut to the 405 before you attach it to the VS spar, use flush head. The
two flush rivets will just hold the plate nut on. I used universal head
and the two rivets went through the plate nut, 405, and the spar.
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok -6a wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Zilik <zilik(at)bewellnet.com> |
| Subject: | Positech Oil Coolers; the correct URL |
Sorry for the incorrect URL for Positech, it should have been
http://www.oil-coolers.com for the main page, and
http://www.oil-coolers.com/aviationcatalog.htm for the cooler
specifications.
Sorry for the inconvenience
Gary Zilik
Gary Zilik wrote:
>
>
> Listers,
>
> Positech has a web page located at: http://www.oil.coolers.com which is
> full of information about their FAA certified oil coolers. I became
> really interested in their line of coolers after visiting with Larry
> Vetterman and looking at the Positech cooler he has installed in his
> Rocket. The oil cooler looks like a high quality unit and is a good 100
> bucks cheaper than the Stewart-Warner it replaces. Specification
> drawings can be found at http://www.oilcoolers.com/aviationcatalog.htm
>
> Gary Zilik
> 6A s/n 22993 - Finally riveting the sliding canopy
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)accessus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire Warning |
Since you breath out CO2 constantly, I can't see the validity of your CO2
statement. If you breath in an undiluted inert gas, it might kill you by
smothering. I would be willing to bet that the same amount of CO2 as the
halon in your 20 by 40 room would not create a breathing problem either.
Remember, the halon didn't replace all the oxygen. that is why you still
could breath.
-----Original Message-----
From: MICHAEL <lottmc(at)datasync.com>
Date: Saturday, January 23, 1999 11:53 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Fire Warning
>
>Thanks Jim,
>I was once part of a test where halon was set off in an enclosed
>room (20 x 40 ft.).
>Some men were holding lighted matches. The large halon container
>was set off, it put out the matches, but we didn't die. We were
>told it was safe to breathe normally, just don't stay any longer
>than we needed to. On the other hand, I know one breathe of CO2
>will kill you. Michael Lott. rv-4
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen Johnson" <spjohnsn(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | [RV-8] Aileron Twist |
Hi all,
Well, I get to build a new left aileron, because mine came out with about a
3/8" twist measuring just the rear skin - more if you include the entire
bottom skin. I drilled the top skin and spar and the top end ribs on a flat
table, put the aileron in a V jig to drill the forward skin to the
counterweight (bad idea), and drilled the bottom on a flat table. On
drilling the bottom, I needed a lot of weight to take out the twist, and
when I removed the weights the aileron sprang back to a twisted position. I
reattached the counterweight after rotating it, and re-drilled the
counterweight holes on the flat surface. This helped some, but not enough.
I decided to go ahead and finish the aileron for the riveting practice and
hoped I could take out some of the twist by riveting order - no luck. By
the way, I riveted it myself using bracing through the center of the
counterweight pipe to help hold it in position.
So, I am wondering if those of you that have built straight ailerons could
share the drilling sequence? My guess is that all holes forward of the rear
skin should be drilled at the end on a flat surface.
Steve Johnson
RV-8 #80121
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jerry calvert <calverjl(at)flash.net> |
jerry calvert wrote:
>
>
> JNice51355(at)aol.com wrote:
> >
> >
> > Folks
> > On drawing 7PP(RV6A) the AN426AD4-6 flush head rivet is called out for use
in
> > holding in the nutplate to the R405 Rudder Horn. Would anyone know why they
> > are using the flush heads at this location while the other nutplates are being
> > held in with universal head rivets? Just curious, since it involves the extra
> > process of countersinking the R405, and dimpling the other parts associated.
> > It just doesn't seem necessary, and am curious what the shop heads would be
> > interfering with.
> > Jim Nice
> > RV6A
> > WA State
> >
>
> Jim,
>
> I wondered the same thing when I was at that point. Which rivet you use
> depends on when you mount the 405 & plate nut. If you mount the plate
> nut to the 405 before you attach it to the VS spar, use flush head. The
> two flush rivets will just hold the plate nut on. I used universal head
> and the two rivets went through the plate nut, 405, and the spar.
>
> Jerry Calvert
> Edmond Ok -6a wings
>
OOOOPS! I need to amend my message, the 405 is attached to the rudder
spar, not the VS spar.
Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire Warning |
>
>Thanks Jim,
>I was once part of a test where halon was set off in an enclosed
>room (20 x 40 ft.).
>Some men were holding lighted matches. The large halon container
>was set off, it put out the matches, but we didn't die. We were
>told it was safe to breathe normally, just don't stay any longer
>than we needed to. On the other hand, I know one breathe of CO2
>will kill you. Michael Lott. rv-4
Something went wrong yesterday and my posting to this thread was eaten by
my mailer somehow.
Anyway, the Halon vs. Co2, Co2 will kill you, Halon will kill you, I heard
about someone who died because they breathed , thread was beaten to death a few months back. Check the
archives.
1. You won't die from breathing Co2. What do you think you breathe out
every breath?
2. You won't die from breathing Halon.
3. You will die, after several minutes, if anything displaces the oxygen
in the air including inert chemicals like nitrogen, argon, helium, Co2, etc.
And now back to our regularly scheduled program ...
Brian Lloyd 3420 Sudbury Road
brian(at)lloyd.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
http://www.lloyd.com +1.530.676.1113
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RClayp5888(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Slider canopy question |
Does anybody have any suggestions regarding sealing the slider canopy? It
seems like ther should be some sort of rubber seal placed between the two
halfs underneath the fiberglass. Or does the fiberglass seal it off
adequately? Bob Claypool, Fresno, CA.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kennett(at)direct.ca (robert kennett) |
| Subject: | Re: [RV-8] Aileron Twist |
The following worked for me on my RV-6 ailerons. All drilling was completed
on a flat surface with the assembly weighted down.
2) Drill top of spar to skin
3) Drill top of end ribs
4) Flip aileron over with top spar clecoes hanging over edge of flat surface
5) Drill bottom of spar to skin
6) Drill bottom of end ribs
7) Drill skin to counterweight.
For riveting:
1) Top spar to skin first in a V-jig.
2) All subsequent riveting done on flat surface with aileron weighted down.
3) Top of end ribs
4) Inspection as required (in Canada).
5) Bottom spar to skin.
6) Bottom of end ribs
7) Counterweight to skin.
A similar procedure was used for the flaps (i.e. as much drilling and
riveting as possible with the flap on the flat surface)
Rob Kennett
RV6(A) Wings
>
>Hi all,
>
>Well, I get to build a new left aileron, because mine came out with about a
>3/8" twist measuring just the rear skin - more if you include the entire
>bottom skin. I drilled the top skin and spar and the top end ribs on a flat
>table, put the aileron in a V jig to drill the forward skin to the
>counterweight (bad idea), and drilled the bottom on a flat table. On
>drilling the bottom, I needed a lot of weight to take out the twist, and
>when I removed the weights the aileron sprang back to a twisted position. I
>reattached the counterweight after rotating it, and re-drilled the
>counterweight holes on the flat surface. This helped some, but not enough.
>
>
>So, I am wondering if those of you that have built straight ailerons could
>share the drilling sequence? My guess is that all holes forward of the rear
>skin should be drilled at the end on a flat surface.
>
>Steve Johnson
>
>RV-8 #80121
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank van der Hulst <frankvdh(at)ihug.co.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: [RV-8] Aileron Twist |
Stephen Johnson wrote:
> Well, I get to build a new left aileron, because mine came out with about a
> 3/8" twist measuring just the rear skin - more if you include the entire
> bottom skin.
Snap! Except mine was the right aileron. You want a matched pair?
What I found (eventually) was that dimpling the aileron spar for the rib
attachment twists it. Double-check that on your next one. My aileron
building experiences can be found at
<http://members.xoom.com/frankv/bunny2d.htm>.
Frank.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire suppresion |
> I once saw a Beech Staggerwing that had two medium sized fire extinguishers
>installed in the cabin, with the discharge hoses plumed to the engine
>compartment with large quick disconnects. They were similar to the air hose
>quick disconnects, but bigger. I assumed that this would allow the bottles to
>be removed and used for other fires if needed. This would be a relatively
>simple way to add suppression to an RV.
In my several years working with TC aircraft, I've observed
few issues more complex than how to install and then be assured
that a fire suppression system is going to work. Given the
realtive simplicity of flamible fluid systems and sources
of igntion in an RV, I'll suggest that it's easier and more
comforting to design out the probability of fire than to
try and devise ways to deal with the fire after it's started.
Testing is the problem . . . how many fires will your RV endure
before you've found the optimum size of the bottles and locations
and sizes of discharge nozzles under the cowl?
It's easier to improve on one's chances of survival with
vacinations vis-a-vis hiring lots of doctors.
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 L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Fittings |
> If one looks at ww2 and airliners they have
>firewall fittings that slow the progress of flame thur it, yes even starter
>cables use phenolic blocks not plastic to transfer the load thru the
>firewall cannon plugs with phenolic inside not plastic for insulation. We
>need to remember this when piercing the firewall, do not use rubber gromets
>they are made for bulkheads and places to prevent chafing not to stop the
>progress of fire.
I've written about this before. There is at least one article I can
recall in Sport Aviation on fabricating grommet shields for bolstering
firewall integrity . . . but the reader is correct in his assertion that
holes should not be punched through the firewall without considering
the means by which plumbing and wires are brought through with minimal
influence in FW capability . . . do the RV assebmbly instructions
deal with this issue?
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 <grobdriver(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | W607E and F mounting holes |
Fitting reinforcing plates W607E and F to rear spars on my -6.
The hole spacing from the bottom of the plate is 5/16, 1 /5/8, 1 5/8.
This spacing puts the uppermost holes nearly into the curve of the
607E/F.
Can I back the top holes off (down) to give a little clearance (1/4")?
Checking the drawings I cannot find anything that would make this a
critical measurement but I could be missing something.
Meaasure twice, drill once!
Mike Thompson
Austin, TX
-6 N140RV (Reserved)
Rear Spars
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Denis Walsh <dwalsh(at)ecentral.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RD-List: Cabin Heat box door |
Douglas G. Murray wrote:
>
> Cy Galley wrote: -> RV-List mess
>
> > What material is the Flapper valve?
> >
> >
>
> Cy - The entire heat box is aluminum. I am wondering if just changing the door
> to stainless or galvanized steel will be enough or should the entire box be
> steel. Maybe the slider door affair under the box as per Tony B. would be the
> way to go.
>
> What do you think?
>
> DGM
>
I don't know if the control door material is as important as the wire and tube
pass throughs in the firewall. I do agree that steel is better than aluminum.
There are heat control boxes available which have steel doors. Mine does. I got
it through Vetterman, nad it it made by a local homebuilder, John Evens. They
are also carried in Aircraft Spruce. Larry Vetterman also makes a line of
control and mixer boxes, some of which are carried by Van's.. All these have
steel valves in them.
D Walsh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Joa" <joa(at)deschutes.net> |
| Subject: | DIY C-Frame building |
I'm looking for plans for a 24" (or so) C-Frame for dimpling skins. Any out
there on the web that you folks know of?
I know its not rocket science but I figure if someone else has already
successfully done one why reinvent the wheel.
Thanks!
Joa
www.deschutes.net/~co291
"Vaircraft Engine Page"
________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chuck Brietigam <brietig(at)ibm.net> |
| Subject: | Re: DIY C-Frame building |
Joa wrote:
>
> I'm looking for plans for a 24" (or so) C-Frame for dimpling skins. Any out
> there on the web that you folks know of?
>
> I know its not rocket science but I figure if someone else has already
> successfully done one why reinvent the wheel.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Joa, tried to use your email address. Couldn't get through! Anyway, contact me
> direct and I will be happy to give the plans for a 24" pneumatically operated
> yoke. It uses a standard pnuematic squeezer. Chuck, RV-3's forever!!!
> (This is a heavy machine--uses 2" steel plate, flame cut and machined to
> adapt the squeezer.)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | Updated guide to determining static system errors |
RV-Listers,
I posted an update to the guide that I wrote on determining static
system errors. The changes address some comments that I received on
the original version. I also made significant changes in the
accompanying spreadsheet to incorporate a more accepted method of
calculation. There is very little change in the calculated result,
but the method used has a better pedigree. I also added the ability
to select different units for the airspeed indicator and GPS ground
speed (kt, mph or km/h).
Take care,
Kevin Horton
khorton(at)cyberus.ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV4 Canopy Frame |
<< While you are at it get the welder to weld on two tabs, one front
and back. These will now hold the canopy hold down pins. By using these tabs
you can have a two position canopy, closed and part open for taxing on hot
days.
>>
I like to here more on how you did this. Are you welding the tabs on the
outside of the 407 and 402?
Firewall Forward
Carey Mills
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert Bristol" <bbristol(at)intranet.ca> |
-----Original Message-----
From: joseph.wiza <planejoe(at)flnet.com>
Date: Sunday, January 24, 1999 12:49 AM
Subject: RV-List: Inst Panel
Joe,
I installed a brace from the "sub panel" that I installed below the
instrument panel. I secured the brace under the throtle lock nut and
attached the other end to a firewall angle. I found that the panel flexed
too much, with the application of throttle, and the brace fixed the problem.
This small sub panel also houses the mixture and carb heat.
Bob Bristol...RV6A C-GCTZ 43 hours.
>
>I have elected not to use the vertical channel normally used for engine
>controls and have decided on a horizontal right below the Inst panel. My
>question, is the vertical channel structural does the inst panel need to be
>supported by something else like a brace to the rear panel? thanks for any
>sug.
>
>Joe/RV6A finish kit, pluggin along
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Slider canopy question |
In a message dated 1/24/99 11:27:31 AM Pacific Standard Time,
RClayp5888(at)aol.com writes:
<< Does anybody have any suggestions regarding sealing the slider canopy? It
seems like there should be some sort of rubber seal placed between the two
halves underneath the fiberglass. Or does the fiberglass seal it off
adequately? >>
Fiberglass?? Egad, man! If this is a 6/6A, why would you want a slider
canopy skirt cap made of fiberglass?
Those in the know buy my super nifty (and cheap at twice the price) formed
sheet metal cap that fits the track real well.
Mr. and Mrs. America, go to the people. Ask the hands that serve the machines
of America if they regret for a second the expenditure of $10 paltry bucks for
the beautiful piece of aircraft artwork they received. Go ahead, ask them.
-GV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Denis Walsh <dwalsh(at)ecentral.com> |
> Joe, I second the motion. I installed a brace on the advice ofanother
> builder and it works great, as described below, except mine only goes to the
> next bulkhead which is in turn attached to the firewall on the slider. Be
> conscious of making it removable so you can get the panel out if needed
D Walsh
> Joe,
> I installed a brace from the "sub panel" that I installed below the
> instrument panel. I secured the brace under the throtle lock nut and
> attached the other end to a firewall angle. I found that the panel flexed
> too much, with the application of throttle, and the brace fixed the problem.
> This small sub panel also houses the mixture and carb heat.
> Bob Bristol...RV6A C-GCTZ 43 hours.
>
> >
> >I have elected not to use the vertical channel normally used for engine
> >controls and have decided on a horizontal right below the Inst panel. My
> >question, is the vertical channel structural does the inst panel need to be
> >supported by something else like a brace to the rear panel? thanks for any
> >sug.
> >
> >Joe/RV6A finish kit, pluggin along
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Orear" <jorear(at)mari.net> |
| Subject: | Re: W607E and F mounting holes |
Mike:
No problem with spacing those rivets away from the spar flange. The one
area where you need to be cautious is where the aileron pushrod passes
through the rear spar. There is one rivet that gets close to the hole you
must cut to pass the rod through the spar, so make sure it is place so that
there is proper edge distance
Regards,
Jeff Orear
RV6A
25171
Left Wing skins
-----Original Message-----
From: rv-list(at)matronics.com <rv-list(at)matronics.com>
Date: Sunday, January 24, 1999 8:00 PM
Subject: RV-List: W607E and F mounting holes
>
>
>Fitting reinforcing plates W607E and F to rear spars on my -6.
>The hole spacing from the bottom of the plate is 5/16, 1 /5/8, 1 5/8.
>This spacing puts the uppermost holes nearly into the curve of the
>607E/F.
>Can I back the top holes off (down) to give a little clearance (1/4")?
>Checking the drawings I cannot find anything that would make this a
>critical measurement but I could be missing something.
>
>Meaasure twice, drill once!
>
>Mike Thompson
>Austin, TX
>-6 N140RV (Reserved)
>Rear Spars
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Car drives into Sobek' s "My Sanity" |
| From: | "Paul A. Rosales" <rv6a(at)Juno.com> |
Hello all, I thought I posted this Saturday but it's not archived....
I'm working firewall forward and needed some engine pictures. Gary was
due for an oil change and used that as an excuse to come pick me up on
Saturday at
Fox Field (CA). First, we flew to Apple Valley for breakfast with
several other RVers (Harris, Berry, Pickering...). Buzzed around with
Dwain Harris for awhile after breakfast then back Gary's hanger at
Cable for an oil change and opportunity for me to take desperately needed
engine pictures. After a great afternoon of hanger flying, Gary me flew
back to Fox where I got out with the biggest RV grin you can imagine.
After 3 years of building, I now have about 2 hours RV Time in right seat
because of Gary. I had to stay and wave as he broke ground, and he'
returned' the wave. Gary called me about 1800.......this is what I
got from him....I'm sure he'll clarify this at a later date...
Gary returned to Cable and topped off the tanks. Leaving the pumps, he
was taxiing back to his hanger, which includes a slight incline up to
the hangers, when a car drove head-on into the front of his RV-6. Gary's
OK, but 'My Sanity' suffered extensive damage: The C/S
prop has one blade bent approximately 90 degrees, the right landing gear
totally collapsed and the tailwheel also rotated 90 degrees. I feel just
awful as I was asking about all the cars I saw parked in and about the
hangers. According to Gary, the airport does not have keyed/pass entry
to drive onto the airport.......
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tom Glover <glovebox(at)smartt.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Landing light |
Hal Kempthorne wrote:
> I haven't been able to find wiring connectors to the two tiny pins on the lamps
Hal, those sockets should be available at homebase, home depot, etc.
I found three different types; one has a rectangular ceramic base and
silicone-impregnated fiberglass insulation on the wires, and one of the
others has white fiberglass covered leads on a 1/2 inch diameter
ceramic socket. The third has a rectangular base and white fiberglass
covered wires. It's an Atron p/n HLA201, and I got it at Home Depot
here locally.. Good luck with the hunt. They're not expensive.
I've unsubscribed from the list for a while until I get some computer
problems ironed out. I was away for a few days and had 550 messages
waiting! It's overwhelming!
See ya!
Tom Glover
RV6A (in stasis) Surrey BC Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Haan <bhaan(at)easystreet.com> |
| Subject: | Prop gov 8 plain washers per stud |
>Bob,
> ... my Lycoming parts manual (for the O-320 series) calls for the
>following parts on the prop governor:
>
>STD-35 Washer 5/16 plain {8!! per stud for a Woodward governor}
>STD-475 Washer, 5/16 lock, internal teeth
>STD-1410 Nut, 5/16-18 plain
>
> The hardware you have (Lycoming part numbers given above) is what the
>manufacturer requires for a certified installation, so just go ahead and
>use it. The vacuum pump attachment is similar, but 1/4-20 hardware.
>E-mail me if you need all of detailed part numbers.
>
> Note that the specified torque may be higher than AN hardware - from
>the Lycoming Overhaul manual.
>
>1/4 hardware 96 in. Lb.
>5/16 hardware 204 in. Lb. OR 17 ft. Lb.
>
> These torques, and the specified locking washers will keep the hardware
>in place. No locknuts are needed....
>
>
> Gil (the manufacturer is usally right) Alexander
Gil,
I think I found the pages you referenced. Are they 1-8 and 1-9 of the
parts list section.
Since all the stud is threaded, any thoughts on why Lycoming says to attach
the Prop Gov to the studs in the accessory case with 8 plain washers plus
an internal star lock washer and a plain nut per stud?
I but a second nut on the stud as a stop nut safety. There was just enough
room using only one plain washer. In Carroll Smith's book "Nuts, bolts
fasteners and plumbing Handbook," he says a stop nut is an excellent
safety. This is an outstanding book mentioned by someone on the RV-List.
I ordered it from Amazon.com.
Thanks again,
Bob (learned a lot from your reply) Haan
Bob Haan
bhaan(at)easystreet.com
Portland, OR
RV6A 24461 Working on Baffles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George McNutt <gmcnutt(at)intergate.bc.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Fire suppresion |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> In my several years working with TC aircraft, I've observed
> few issues more complex than how to install and then be assured
> that a fire suppression system is going to work. Given the
> realtive simplicity of flamible fluid systems and sources
> of igntion in an RV, I'll suggest that it's easier and more
> comforting to design out the probability of fire than to
> try and devise ways to deal with the fire after it's started.
> Testing is the problem . . . how many fires will your RV endure
> before you've found the optimum size of the bottles and locations
> and sizes of discharge nozzles under the cowl?
>
> It's easier to improve on one's chances of survival with
> vacinations vis-a-vis hiring lots of doctors.
>
I will second Bobs thoughts on building a workable fire supression
system and add my own opinion about designing a functional fire warning
system such as has been discussed on the list.
In 32 years of airline flying I have had several fire warnings but
thankfully never a real fire. All of the false warnings were in single
fire loop systems such as used on early DC-8's or in the APU compartment
of the B737.
Modern airliners have dual loop systems. The B-747 Operations (pilots)
Manual describes the B747-400 system thusly:
"A dual loop fire detector is installed in each engine nacelle. In
addition, each engine has a dual loop overheat detector. In normal
operation, both loops must detect a fire or overheat condition to
activate the respective engine fire warning or overheat caution.
(portion deleted)
The engine and APU loops are continuously monitored for faults. If a
fault is detected in one of the loops, the system reconfigures to single
loop operation" ....
A fire warning in a single engine aircraft is cause to get on the ground
as soon as possible, and any warning is better than none. However a fire
warning system must be properly engineered and tested.
What happens if you are flying over rugged country and you get a fire
warning on your homebuilt system, will you shut off the fuel, call
mayday and try to land on a logging road?
Probably you will head for safer ground but wait to confirm a real fire.
Maybe not, either way its would be quite a decision to make.
My only point is that a false engine fire warning is a pain in a
multi-engine aircraft - middle of night, fire bell, adrenalin rush, fire
drill, dump fuel, return to Mexico City.
With a single engine unproven system a false warning and that adrenalin
rush may tempt the pilot to land in an unsuitable area, downwind, too
fast or whatever and cause more injuries and damage than the hazard the
system was designed to solve.
George McNutt, Langley B.C.
6-A, Starting fusalage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Anderson Ed" <anderson_ed(at)bah.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aftermarket Parts, Instrument Size, & More |
Kyle,
I had a misalinement problem with the wing tips as well. I found that
by slitting the tail end of the wingtip horizontally (alone the seam
where the two halves are jointed), I could then get the tip to fit
fine. After drilling my attachement holes, I think fiberglassed the
slit back together.
Ed Anderson
RV-6A N494BW
Vienna, VA
KBoatri144(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> quite level with the top of the wing. After much trimming and fitting, I've
> concluded that the things are warped. Anyone else have this problem?
> Suggested solutions? I figure I'll break out the heat gun and reshape them
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Browne <cebrowne(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Misdrilled Elevator Horn |
After carefully lining up my elevators, I got careless and proceeded to
drill the push tube bolt hole at an angle. My elevators no longer line
up in trail and although it is noticeable, it isn't grotesque. I am
mulling over options, and leaving it alone is not one of them since it
drives me nuts looking at it. Options I have considered are: (1)
welding on new steel over one of the holes or filling it with weld metal
and trying again, (2) opening up the holes from #12 to #10 and try to
align the elevators using the extra "slop" before I torque the bolt, (3)
drilling a new hole at another spot on the horn, although the angular
misalignment between the two horns will mean the new hole will be very
close the old, or (4) replacing the horn or elevator, both of which are
dumb even by my standards.
I like (2) because it is easy, but wonder if it is wise should the nut
ever loosen. I can't weld so I am luke warm to (1). Any other
suggestions?
Chris Browne
-6A Atlanta
cebrowne(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | pichon.dean(at)ADLittle.com |
| Subject: | Surface prep for painting steel |
I'm getting ready to paint several of the steel weldments found the RV-4
fuselage (rudder pedals, roll cage, control column, etc.). My primary
objective is to attain good paint adhesion for corrosion protection. I'd like
some advice regarding the following issues:
1. Should the parts be sand or bead blasted?
2. Is there a chemical etching or plating process that is used to improve
adhesion?
3. Do any RV-list subscribers have any experience using water soluble epoxy
primers on steel? I use a water-soluble primer formulated for aluminum, but
don't have any experience with paints for steel.
Dean Pichon
Arlington,MA
(Turned the fuselage right-side-up yesterday!)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan DeNeal <rv6apilot(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Looking for Sam James Number |
Anybody got Sam James phone number or e-mail address?
Dan DeNeal
Hoopeston, IL
fuselage ready to turn upright!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Douglas G. Murray" <dgmurray(at)telusplanet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Misdrilled Elevator Horn |
Chris Browne wrote:
>
>
> After carefully lining up my elevators, I got careless and proceeded to
> drill the push tube bolt hole at an angle. My elevators no longer line
> up in trail Options I have considered are:
> (1) welding on new steel over one of the holes or filling it with weld
> metaland trying again,
IMHO - this is the best option short of replacing the elevator horn. I shouldn't
be that hare to find a good welder for five minute work in your area. I've had
to drive an hour for one and he did a great TIG weld for me - the repair
looked like the original weld.
> (2) opening up the holes from #12 to #10 and try to align the elevators using
> the extra "slop" before I torque the bolt,
Since this is a control surface you will want to be sure to keep ALL unnecessary
extra clearances in the controls to a minimum. It sounds as though you are a
careful builder and so you wouldn't want to build 'slop' into your aircraft.
> (3)
> drilling a new hole at another spot on the horn, although the angular
> misalignment between the two horns will mean the new hole will be very close
> the old,
I doubt that you can drill a second hole in the horns and still maintain the
edge distances required.
> (4) replacing the horn or elevator,
Replacing one horn is the best option as you will be sure to get the hole in the
correct spot the second time. The hole will end up the correct size and you will
only be out a couple of hours time. Drilling out the horn isn't that hard of a
job ( ask me how I know) and you will really be happy when it's done right.
> I like (2) because it is easy, but wonder if it is wise should the nut
> ever loosen. I can't weld so I am luke warm to (1). Any other
> suggestions?
>
> Chris Browne
> -6A Atlanta
> cebrowne(at)earthlink.net
>
DGM RV-6 Sweating the small stuff
Southern Alberta - It's a good thing that I'm still building 'cause the winds
sure are blowin' - 160KPH last week!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Besing, Paul" <PBesing(at)pinacor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Looking for Sam James Number |
FYI, you can get this from The RV Builders Yeller Pages.
SAM JAMES AIRCRAFT 941-675-4493 RV WING FAIRINGS, WHEEL PANTS, ENGINE
COOLING PLENUMS AND HOLY COWL COWLINGS
The Yeller Pages can be found at:
http://www.sound.net/~hartmann/yelrpage.htm
Paul Besing
>
>Anybody got Sam James phone number or e-mail address?
>
>Dan DeNeal
>Hoopeston, IL
>fuselage ready to turn upright!
>
>
>
>
Paul Besing
Pinacor, Inc.
(800) 528-1415 ext.67697
.....Committed to being your primary distributor!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVer273sb(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Misdrilled Elevator Horn |
Chris,
depending on how much edge distance and out of
alignment you have... You can carefully go to an oversize
hole in one horn. (to match a flanged bushing with a 3/16
ID). And carefully move the other hole to where you can stay at the same size
flanged bushing for that side. Put the flange on the inside.
Stew RV4 CO.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Denis Walsh <dwalsh(at)ecentral.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Slider canopy question |
Vanremog(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 1/24/99 11:27:31 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> RClayp5888(at)aol.com writes:
>
> << Does anybody have any suggestions regarding sealing the slider canopy? It
> seems like there should be some sort of rubber seal placed between the two
> halves underneath the fiberglass. Or does the fiberglass seal it off
> adequately? >>
>
> Fiberglass?? Egad, man! If this is a 6/6A, why would you want a slider
> canopy skirt cap made of fiberglass?
>
> Those in the know buy my super nifty (and cheap at twice the price) formed
> sheet metal cap that fits the track real well.
>
> Mr. and Mrs. America, go to the people. Ask the hands that serve the machines
> of America if they regret for a second the expenditure of $10 paltry bucks for
> the beautiful piece of aircraft artwork they received. Go ahead, ask them.
>
> -GV
>
I built mine before these awesome though paltry caps were offered. Therefore I
cannot attest as above; however , I can attest to suffering from skirt envy.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George McNutt <gmcnutt(at)intergate.bc.ca> |
| Subject: | Piper Pitot & Stall Warning |
I sent the following information to a member of the list and thought it
might be interesting to others so am posting it.
> Hi George:
>
> I think we may have met in Salmon Arm last summer but I can't remember for sure.
Anyway, I noticed in the RV-list archives that you were putting a piper heated
pitot in your RV6. I managed to pick up a similar pitot for next to nothing
(i.e. 10 dollars) and am getting to the point where I need to decide how to
mount it.
> Can you provide me with some details on your installation. Some questions I
have include:
>
> 1) Where did you locate it ?
I mounted my pitot 3&3/8 inches aft of the skin joint and 7&1/2 inches
outboard of inspection hole opening. (measured to center of pitot hole)
> 2) Did you look at any other installations before deciding where to put it?
I went down to Langley airport and checked out several Cherokees and
a RV-6. The RV-6 had a piper pitot mounted with two mounting
screws through the wing spar flange. I did not like the idea of holes in
the spar flange and wanted a doubler, so mounted mine closer to the
Piper location.
> 3) What sort of doubler (thickness, size) did you use, and what was it
> attached to (skin only, skin + ribs)?
I made a 4 X 6 inch doubler with a 1/2 inch flanges all around, (.025 I
think) it is attached to the lower skin and butts up close (about 1/8")
against the rib. It is quite a sturdy support. Platenuts are rivited on
the backside of the doubler. The doubler was rivited to the skin before
the skin was rivited to the wing.
Some Cherokees have a doubler plate while others seem to have none.
> 3) What tubing did you use to connect it? Mine looks like it uses a
> smaller diameter line than the aluminum tube that Van's supplies, and
> appears to have been connected to some sort of rubber hose with hose >clamps.
> I would prefer to use the aluminum tube but am not sure whether you can >go from
one size to another.
I have plumbed the wing with plastic (Tygon) tubing for the pitot line
only, I will use Vans static system with static ports on the fusalage. I
think that there is a greater potential for static port errors than
pitot
errors. (more below)
It looked like the factory had slipped the plastic pitot and static
lines
over the brass fittings on the pitot tube and twisted lockwire around
the lines to keep them tight, no clamps.
> 5) What size wire did you finally decide on?
I went with 12 gauge wire for the pitot heater, it draws 13 amps. Not
sure if I will try to make the airplane IFR, however if I do the pitot
heat could be turned on for lengthy periods. For intermittent use on a
VFR airplane one might get away with lighter wire.
Two misc. items about the Piper heated Pitot tube that I have
discovered:
1) heating elements are about $90 each and there are two of them, best
price I found was from a company in Florida that was advertising in
Trade-a-plane.
2) Piper Pitot tubes all look the same however the bottom face of the
pitot, the sloped part with the static port on it is different. The
angle of that face varied up to four degrees on the pitot tubes I
measured. My guess is that the sloping static face must be at a constant
angle to the wing cord line or longitudnal axis of the aircraft to get
an accurate static reading.
Different pitot tubes were probably used depending on the position that
the pitot was mounted on that particular model Piper aircraft.
This unknown is the reason I am not using the static port on my Pitot
tube.
By the way I came across a free Aztec stall warning switch for the wing
and have mounted it. It made a nice neat installation.
Used the switch mounting location of the Richardson system (thanks Tim
Lewis) it is 21&1/4 inch from top wing skin line and 20&3/4 inch inboard
from tip. This location looked low so made a cardboard template of wing
leading edge and checked various G/A aircraft, all were similiar.
My systems are untried and unproven as yet, so take this info FWIW.
George McNutt, 6A
Fusalage bulkheads
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JRWillJR(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Misdrilled Elevator Horn |
You might weld the hole shut (or leave it) and then using a washer or doubler
made of 4130 of the same thikness weld it to the horn and drill back
through--in the right place this time--put a washer on both sides and it will
match. If you do this get someone who has built a tube airplane and not the
plumber next door. JR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Wiesel <dan(at)interlinkrecruiting.com> |
| Subject: | Re: orientation of the bolts that hold the VS to the |
fuselage
I had the same problem and also decided to back out the heims. Only problem
was that I felt that they weren't long enough and I was concerned about the
number of turns left in the rudder( for all three heims). I decided to
>
>Hello Listers,
>
>I have the VS on my RV-6A now. I followed the plans that clearly show that
>the bolts in the lower part of the VS are inserted from inside the fuselage
>through the bulkhead with the threads ends pointing aft. The rudder bottom
>is rubbing against the threaded ends of the bolts, though, and will not
>move. It's quite hung up.
>
>The manual shows how the builders of the RV-6A should install the tail
>tie-down. The manual seems to show all the bolts in the lower part of the
>VS are inserted from the rear with the threaded ends pointing forward. This
>would cure my problem with the rudder bottom, but I think it is bad practice
>to put the bolts in this way. What have the rest of you done?
>
>I think I will take the rudder off and back out the Heim rod end joints a
>turn or two to give more clearance between the rudder and the rear VS spar
>unless putting the bolts in "backwards" is the solution.
>
>Steve Soule
>Huntington, Vermont
>
>
>
Dan Wiesel
RV6a QB starting finishing kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | aeronut <aeronut(at)mci2000.com> |
| Subject: | Loctite 290 and Watch Out for AD42H |
I'd like feedback from anyone who has used Loctite 290 to seal fuel tank
leaks. Results, tips for use, watch-out-fors.
Scott at Vans says he's had good reports from others about it, but has
no personal experience with it.
My leak is between the center T-812 spacer and the fuel tank back plate. It
was fine when the tank was built about a year ago, but after I recently
replaced some AD41H rivets which Vans had mis-labelled as AD42H a new leak
test showed this seepage.
By the way, anyone who has an early serial number wing kit might check just
to be sure that their AD42H rivets really are AD42H. Don't know how many
they sent out that way.
> George Kilishek
> RV-8 #80006
> Fuselage (except for one nagging fuel tank seep)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CTonnini(at)aol.com |
RV3 fast back thinking of selling. in final stages, just needs assembling,
major riveting already completed. also have steve fry fuselage jig and
0320-160hp engine withyellow tag, crankcase and std crankshaft. all remaining
parts have been inspected. all that is needed is 4 jugs and some time to
assemble. serious inquires only. contact- ctonnini(at)aol.com or call claudio,
days 8005823125 eve 7326980705
e.s.t.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Louis Willig <larywil(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | RV-4 Ground location |
Is it poor design to attach the battery ground to the firewall on my RV-4?
Currently, my battery is grounded to the left main seat rib(hope I am using
the proper nomenclature), and the engine is grounded from the back of the
case to the right gear leg attachment bolt. May I, instead, use a 3/8"
brass or bronze bolt, backed up with appropriate washers to attach the
battery to the firewall and then on the engine side of the F/W attach the
engine ground to this same bolt? What are the corrosion implications?
I just am not happy with the original builder's use of the gear leg bolt
for a ground. There is no good, flat surface and "Electron" Bob suggests
not using the engine mount for a ground.(and I very much agree). Thanks in
advance.
Louis
Louis I. Willig , RV-4
larywil(at)home.com
(610) 668-4964
Philadelphia, PA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gil Alexander <gila(at)flash.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Misdrilled Elevator Horn |
Chris ... One more option:
(5) Enlarge (and shift) the holes to 1/4 inch and use a diffferent rod end
bearing on the end of the pushrod. Ther should be plenty of 'meat' left on
the steel part for good edge distances.
This is what I did, since I didn't read the plans carefully (I should
know better by now...:
) and made the lower hole in the horn for an AN4
bolt just like the upper hole.....
This might be the easiest solution.
....Gil (with a spare rod end bearing) Alexander
RV-6A, #20701 final tip canopy installation
>
>After carefully lining up my elevators, I got careless and proceeded to
>drill the push tube bolt hole at an angle. My elevators no longer line
>up in trail and although it is noticeable, it isn't grotesque. I am
>mulling over options, and leaving it alone is not one of them since it
>drives me nuts looking at it. Options I have considered are: (1)
>welding on new steel over one of the holes or filling it with weld metal
>and trying again, (2) opening up the holes from #12 to #10 and try to
>align the elevators using the extra "slop" before I torque the bolt, (3)
>drilling a new hole at another spot on the horn, although the angular
>misalignment between the two horns will mean the new hole will be very
>close the old, or (4) replacing the horn or elevator, both of which are
>dumb even by my standards.
>
>I like (2) because it is easy, but wonder if it is wise should the nut
>ever loosen. I can't weld so I am luke warm to (1). Any other
>suggestions?
>
>Chris Browne
>-6A Atlanta
>cebrowne(at)earthlink.net
-------------------------------------------------------
mailto:gila(at)flash.net
Gil Alexander,
Los Angeles, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Skinner <bskinr(at)trib.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Misdrilled Elevator Horn |
>
>After carefully lining up my elevators, I got careless and proceeded to
>drill the push tube bolt hole at an angle. My elevators no longer line
>up in trail and although it is noticeable, it isn't grotesque.
Chris,
Welding the hole closed will work. I had to do this on the 6A I'm helping
with after the kit owner mis-drilled the hole. One thing that I did find,
however, is that when it was time to drill the filled hole the fill material
was very hard to drill.
If the mis-alignment is isn't too bad, you might consider another option.
Drill on a spacer block higher on the elevator horns when the elevators are
in perfect alignment and bolt the assembly together. This will keep the
alignment dead on. Then, go ahead and bolt the rod end on. I did this on
my RV because I was off a bit on alignment, too. I also reasoned that, in
the unlikely event that the rod end bolt fell out, it would be good to have
both elevators solidly attached to each other. You wouldn't have two
elevators flopping around and, with both elevators acting as one, you would
have a shot at landing by using the elevator trim.
Drilling off and riveting on a new horn on a completed elevator would be
my last choice.
Bob Skinner RV-6 460 hrs. Buffalo, WY bskinr(at)trib.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mcnu93945(at)aol.com |
Can somebody tell me if there is a rv6 builders club or list of builders for
my area. I live in the Nashua N.H. area. Thanks J.F. McNulty.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
| Subject: | ac43.13-1b aircraft repair standards and practices |
For any who dont have a copy of this, its available on the web in pdf
format at:
http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/300/pdf/1a-cover.pdf
This is an updated version according to Avweb. Good info and its free!
Mike Wills
RV-4 fuse out of the jig
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: rv3a for sale, |
check archives, a lady named susan was looking for one about a month ago
scott
left winging it in tampa
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Daniel H. Morris III" <Morristec(at)icdc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ac43.13-1b aircraft repair standards and practices |
Note: This is only the cover sheet. I don't believe that the whole
document (>100 pages)is up on the FAA site yet.
Dan
RV6
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil>
Date: Monday, January 25, 1999 1:12 PM
Subject: RV-List: ac43.13-1b aircraft repair standards and practices
>
>For any who dont have a copy of this, its available on the web in pdf
>format at:
>
>http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/300/pdf/1a-cover.pdf
>
>This is an updated version according to Avweb. Good info and its free!
>
>Mike Wills
>RV-4 fuse out of the jig
>willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eustace Bowhay" <ebowhay(at)shuswap.net> |
Fellow RVer's
Some more thought's an the subject. On George's (McNutt) post I feel that
he has answered the question on installing any fire suppresion system.
When I started building my first RV I asked Van if he had any advice for me
a first time builder. His reply was "Keep it as light as possible, keep it
simple and don't deviate from the drawings unless there is some practical
gain in doing so". I didn't always follow his advice " ie " full IFR panel
, heavy upholstery and wound up with a empty weight a 100 lbs. more than it
should have been which has probably eaten up most of the 20 HP of the O360
verses the O320. Won't make the same mistakes on the RV 6A.
As Geoge has said "preventing the fire in the first place is the way to
go"
In trying to do this would like to offer these suggestions:
Never cut corners under the cowl, a poor place to try to save money.
Use certified practices in the selection and make up of all oil and fuel
lines,coolers etc. An example would be making up lines with Aero -Quip
fittings, are you sure of how to do it. Do you get them tested at a proper
test facility. Are they fire sleeved?
Proper routing of lines away from heat sources and avoiding stress on lines
due sharp bends or not enough length to compensate for movement during
start -up are just a few of the things to be considered.
Going back to the stainless steel shields that were mentioned before on
certified a/c the holes put in the firewall were kept to the smallest size
that would accomodate whatever was going through plus the smallest grommet.
Then the shields had a piece of asbestos placed in them and installed.
Don't know what has replaced the use of asbestos. There is also available a
fireproof variety of PRC which could be put over the grommets before
installing the shields.
In revueing my post re engine handling and the resulting dicussion on power
reductions after take-off I completely forgot to mention one of the main
reason is to reduce the tremendous amount of heat generated by full
throttle use, particularily as regards the exhaust system. An example is
the P&W R 1830-92 with takeoff power being 48 inches and recommended climb
is 36.
I know fires do happen but my experience has been the same as Geoge's, have
never had a fire in the 55 years I have been flying. I believe that a
engine installation properly done and maintained probably represents one of
the lowest risks you have in flying.
I don't want to become a daily poster to the list but have trouble
resisting a post if I can contribute something that might help.
Safe Flying
Eustace Bowhay Blind Bay, B.C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cappucci, Louis" <Louis.Cappucci(at)gs.com> |
| Subject: | "slop" in control linkages |
how much "slop" is too much? for example, if the aileron bellcrank is
pinned, how much play should there be in the aileron. it seems that at least
some movement is inevitable because of the series of bearings and bolts. is
it possible for there to be no movement at all? if not, should it be limited
to say +/- 1/4" at the trailing edge? 1/16"?, or more like only a few
thousands?
i know i don't want the typical spam can slop (yoke seems to rotate 3 inches
before ailerons move!), but i don't want to get too obsessive either.
thanks,
louis cappucci
rv-6a qb
mamaroneck, ny
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: ac43.13-1b aircraft repair standards and practices |
>
>Note: This is only the cover sheet. I don't believe that the whole
>document (>100 pages)is up on the FAA site yet.
>
>Dan
>RV6
Dan,
Thats what I thought also but... If you click on the blue highlighted
section it will take you to the table of contents. Click on the chapter
heading that your interested in and the appropriate chapter comes up. As
far as I can tell, its all there.
Mike Wills
RV-4 fuse out of the jig
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)accessus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ac43.13-1b aircraft repair standards and practices |
ADVISORY CIRCULAR 43.13-1B
Advisory Circular (AC) 43.13-1B; Acceptable Methods, Techniques, and
Practices Aircraft Inspection and Repair;
The long awaited revision of AC 43.13-1A has been completed and is now
available on the internet. The internet address is:
http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/300/pdf/1a-cover.pdf Once you reach the cover of
AC 43.13-1B, click in the blue box which will take you to the first page of
the AC. To continue, click in the blue box of the first page. This will take
you to the contents. Continue by clicking on the black boxes containing the
titles the sections within the chapters.
You can also get AC 43.13-1b from ..
http://www.moneypit.net/~pratt/ac43/
ALL of it!
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel H. Morris III <Morristec(at)icdc.com>
Date: Monday, January 25, 1999 5:09 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: ac43.13-1b aircraft repair standards and practices
>
>Note: This is only the cover sheet. I don't believe that the whole
>document (>100 pages)is up on the FAA site yet.
>
>Dan
>RV6
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil>
>To: RV-List(at)matronics.com
>Date: Monday, January 25, 1999 1:12 PM
>Subject: RV-List: ac43.13-1b aircraft repair standards and practices
>
>
>>
>>For any who dont have a copy of this, its available on the web in pdf
>>format at:
>>
>>http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/300/pdf/1a-cover.pdf
>>
>>This is an updated version according to Avweb. Good info and its free!
>>
>>Mike Wills
>>RV-4 fuse out of the jig
>>willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Denis Walsh <dwalsh(at)ecentral.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Piper Pitot & Stall Warning |
George McNutt wrote:
>
> I sent the following information to a member of the list and thought it
> might be interesting to others so am posting it.
>
> > Hi George:
> >
> > I think we may have met in Salmon Arm last summer but I can't remember for
sure. Anyway, I noticed in the RV-list archives that you were putting a piper
heated pitot in your RV6. I managed to pick up a similar pitot for next to nothing
(i.e. 10 dollars) and am getting to the point where I need to decide how
to mount it.
>
> > Can you provide me with some details on your installation. Some questions
I have include:
> >
> > 1) Where did you locate it ?
>
> I mounted my pitot 3&3/8 inches aft of the skin joint and 7&1/2 inches
> outboard of inspection hole opening. (measured to center of pitot hole)
>
> > 2) Did you look at any other installations before deciding where to put it?
>
> I went down to Langley airport and checked out several Cherokees and
> a RV-6. The RV-6 had a piper pitot mounted with two mounting
> screws through the wing spar flange. I did not like the idea of holes in
> the spar flange and wanted a doubler, so mounted mine closer to the
> Piper location.
>
> > 3) What sort of doubler (thickness, size) did you use, and what was it
> > attached to (skin only, skin + ribs)?
>
> I made a 4 X 6 inch doubler with a 1/2 inch flanges all around, (.025 I
> think) it is attached to the lower skin and butts up close (about 1/8")
> against the rib. It is quite a sturdy support. Platenuts are rivited on
> the backside of the doubler. The doubler was rivited to the skin before
> the skin was rivited to the wing.
>
> Some Cherokees have a doubler plate while others seem to have none.
>
> > 3) What tubing did you use to connect it? Mine looks like it uses a
> > smaller diameter line than the aluminum tube that Van's supplies, and
> > appears to have been connected to some sort of rubber hose with hose >clamps.
> > I would prefer to use the aluminum tube but am not sure whether you can >go
from one size to another.
>
> I have plumbed the wing with plastic (Tygon) tubing for the pitot line
> only, I will use Vans static system with static ports on the fusalage. I
> think that there is a greater potential for static port errors than
> pitot
> errors. (more below)
> It looked like the factory had slipped the plastic pitot and static
> lines
> over the brass fittings on the pitot tube and twisted lockwire around
> the lines to keep them tight, no clamps.
>
> > 5) What size wire did you finally decide on?
>
> I went with 12 gauge wire for the pitot heater, it draws 13 amps. Not
> sure if I will try to make the airplane IFR, however if I do the pitot
> heat could be turned on for lengthy periods. For intermittent use on a
> VFR airplane one might get away with lighter wire.
>
> Two misc. items about the Piper heated Pitot tube that I have
> discovered:
>
> 1) heating elements are about $90 each and there are two of them, best
> price I found was from a company in Florida that was advertising in
> Trade-a-plane.
>
> 2) Piper Pitot tubes all look the same however the bottom face of the
> pitot, the sloped part with the static port on it is different. The
> angle of that face varied up to four degrees on the pitot tubes I
> measured. My guess is that the sloping static face must be at a constant
> angle to the wing cord line or longitudnal axis of the aircraft to get
> an accurate static reading.
> Different pitot tubes were probably used depending on the position that
> the pitot was mounted on that particular model Piper aircraft.
> This unknown is the reason I am not using the static port on my Pitot
> tube.
>
> By the way I came across a free Aztec stall warning switch for the wing
> and have mounted it. It made a nice neat installation.
>
> Used the switch mounting location of the Richardson system (thanks Tim
> Lewis) it is 21&1/4 inch from top wing skin line and 20&3/4 inch inboard
> from tip. This location looked low so made a cardboard template of wing
> leading edge and checked various G/A aircraft, all were similiar.
>
> My systems are untried and unproven as yet, so take this info FWIW.
>
> George McNutt, 6A
> Fusalage bulkheads
>
>
I would add on the following as further info.
I have heard the different Piper blades described as high and low speed models.
Dean Hall claims to have cured a position error by changign the bottom angle
on his.
My installation is very similar to George's . It is aft of the spar, and outboard
of the inspection plate about 3 inches. I used similar logic, trying to match
Piper's install. I ran plastic line all the way from the static connect
to the panel but also installed a van's cheap rivet fuselage system. Flipped
a coin and
tried the fuse system first and have never looked back. My IAS checks out within
1.5 MPH (reads opitmistic) on the high end at cruise and is rigtht on the predicted
stall speed at the low end. BTW I painted mine and think it looks a
lot better that way, and the accuracy did not change.
D Walsh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | winterland(at)rkymtnhi.com |
| Subject: | Re: ac43.13-1b aircraft repair standards and practices |
> For any who dont have a copy of this, its available on the web in pdf
> format at:
>
> http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/300/pdf/1a-cover.pdf
The printed version will also be available in about 2 weeks. Anyone
wanting to pre-order can call or e-mail back and we'll reserve one for
you. I've been told by the publisher that there will NOT be a price
increase over the previous version ($18.95).
Andy Gold
RV-ation Bookstore
970 887-2207
http://www.rvbookstore.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "joseph.wiza" <planejoe(at)flnet.com> |
While trying to attach the oil pressure line to the 45 deg fitting coming
out of the engine accessory case I found it just cleared the engine mount
(Vans standard for 0 360) by 1/8" this appears much to close (engine moves
mount dosent) by backing it off about 35 deg it appears to clear. Checking
a couple other RV6A's (one flying) they just had the 1/8" clearance. Any
pro's or con's on this thanks in advance.
planejoe/finishing kit RV6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Strickland" <eric.strick(at)prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Surface prep for painting steel |
-----Original Message-----
From: pichon.dean(at)ADLittle.com <pichon.dean(at)ADLittle.com>
Date: Monday, January 25, 1999 8:48 AM
Subject: RV-List: Surface prep for painting steel
>
>I'm getting ready to paint several of the steel weldments found the RV-4
>fuselage (rudder pedals, roll cage, control column, etc.). My primary
>objective is to attain good paint adhesion for corrosion protection. I'd
like
>some advice regarding the following issues:
>
>1. Should the parts be sand or bead blasted?
All you need to do to aluminum is scotch brite it and clean it , then spray
it with zinc chromate and paint .
>2. Is there a chemical etching or plating process that is used to improve
>adhesion?
Zinc Chromate
>3. Do any RV-list subscribers have any experience using water soluble epoxy
>primers on steel? I use a water-soluble primer formulated for aluminum,
but
>don't have any experience with paints for steel.
I've never used a water borne primer on steel . It does'nt make sense to use
water on bare steel (RUST)
Eric
>Dean Pichon
>Arlington,MA
>(Turned the fuselage right-side-up yesterday!)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVer273sb(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV-4 Ground location |
Louis,
I used one of the small bolts that attach the firewall
to the engine mount assembly. (just above the floor
tunnel) Hook the groung cable from the battery to the
inside and the engine ground cable to the firewall side.
Stew RV4 CO.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVer273sb(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: "slop" in control linkages |
Louis,
You always want to shoot for minimum control play as
possible. You certainly don't want + or - 1/4 inch.
With all the belcrank holes drilled accurately to size
you should have virtually no slop at the aileron t/e.
My RV4 has less than a 32nd total.
Stew RV4 CO.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Buster" <6430(at)axion.net> |
Do y'all have an ammeter in the panel ? If so, do I need one and why (if I
have a good voltmeter and battery gauge )?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ammeterj(at)home.com (John Ammeter) |
>
>Do y'all have an ammeter in the panel ? If so, do I need one and why (if I
>have a good voltmeter and battery gauge )?
>
>
How about an Ammeter in the Seat??
Sorry, couldn't resist.
John Ammeter
Seattle WA
USA
1975 JH-5
RV-6 (sold 4/98)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com> |
I think that Van's will give you a list of local builders if you ask.
Steve Soule
Huntington, Vermont
-----Original Message-----
Can somebody tell me if there is a rv6 builders club or list
of builders for
my area. I live in the Nashua N.H. area. Thanks J.F.
McNulty.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com> |
| Subject: | "slop" in control linkages |
Good question. I hooked up my rudder for the first time this morning to
test fit the location of the rudder pedals before drilling them to the
fuselage. The cables are slack. Should they be taut? How much, tight as a
bowstring? Is loose OK or does it invite rudder flutter?
Steve Soule
Wishing I took airplane building in high school instead of chemistry ...
-----Original Message-----how much "slop" is too much? for
example, if the aileron bellcrank is
pinned, how much play should there be in the aileron. it
seems that at least
some movement is inevitable because of the series of
bearings and bolts. is
it possible for there to be no movement at all? if not,
should it be limited
to say +/- 1/4" at the trailing edge? 1/16"?, or more like
only a few
thousands?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Looking for Sam James Number |
| From: | "William R. Davis Jr" <rvpilot(at)Juno.com> |
Dan,
Sams number is 941-675-4493. He is not on E mail.
Bill , N66WD
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Misdrilled Elevator Horn |
| From: | "William R. Davis Jr" <rvpilot(at)Juno.com> |
Chris,
Option 1 is the best. There are plenty of people out there who can weld.
Bill, N66WD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <larry(at)bowen.com> |
The water pipe counter-weight included in my RV-8 wing kit is labeled
"RV-4". It's the right length, but measures 5/8" ID instead of the 1/2"
listed on the inventory list. Has anyone else experienced this?
-Larry
RV-8, finishing emp.
email: larry(at)bowen.com
web: http://larry.bowen.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mikel(at)dimensional.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV-4 Ground location |
>Is it poor design to attach the battery ground to the firewall on my RV-4?
No. Mine goes from the battery to the central firewall gear bolt; then a
flexable strap goes from the other end of the bolt to the engine.
>May I, instead, use a 3/8" brass or bronze bolt, backed up with appropriate
>washers to attach the battery to the firewall and then on the engine side
of >the F/W attach the engine ground to this same bolt? What are the
corrosion >implications?
If you the engine mount bolt, you, of course, have to use the bolt that
holds the engine mount on and it is an AN bolt as it is stressed. Brass or
bronze will not do. The engine mount is not the ground, the bolt is. Worked
for me.
Michael
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 water pipe |
Aileron water pipe in my kit is approx. 5/8" inside diameter & 7/8" outside
diameter.
Glen Wagner
RV8Q - Plymouth MI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "H. Martin Sutter" <hmsutter(at)flash.net> |
-----Original Message-----
From: Buster <6430(at)axion.net>
Date: Monday, January 25, 1999 7:10 PM
Subject: RV-List: Ammeter
>
>Do y'all have an ammeter in the panel ? If so, do I need one and why (if I
>have a good voltmeter and battery gauge )?
I have a volt meter because it gives me a better over all indication of the
health of my electrical system and it is easier to interpret. Engine
running, voltage14v = everthing in good health. Engine not running - 12 to
12.8v good battery. An amp meter will display a variable reading based on
system load wich only means something if you take in account what is on
line, if you just started up or have been running for a while and other
variables. It can be a good diagnostic tool in conjunction with a volt
meter if have trouble. For easy interpretation and simplicity, go with
volts.>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Piper Pitot & Stall Warning |
>>
>>
>> 2) Piper Pitot tubes all look the same however the bottom face of the
>> pitot, the sloped part with the static port on it is different. The
>> angle of that face varied up to four degrees on the pitot tubes I
>> measured. My guess is that the sloping static face must be at a constant
>> angle to the wing cord line or longitudnal axis of the aircraft to get
>> an accurate static reading.
>> Different pitot tubes were probably used depending on the position that
>> the pitot was mounted on that particular model Piper aircraft.
>> This unknown is the reason I am not using the static port on my Pitot
>> tube.
>>
>>
>> George McNutt, 6A
>> Fusalage bulkheads
>>
>>
>
> I would add on the following as further info.
>
> I have heard the different Piper blades described as high and low
> speed models. Dean Hall claims to have cured a position error by
> changign the bottom angle on his.
>
> My installation is very similar to George's . It is aft of the
> spar, and outboard of the inspection plate about 3 inches. I used
> similar logic, trying to match Piper's install. I ran plastic
> line all the way from the static connect to the panel but also
> installed a van's cheap rivet fuselage system. Flipped a coin and
> tried the fuse system first and have never looked back. My IAS
> checks out within 1.5 MPH (reads opitmistic) on the high end at
> cruise and is rigtht on the predicted stall speed at the low end.
> BTW I painted mine and think it looks a lot better that way, and
> the accuracy did not change.
> D Walsh
Static ports need to be at a location that has a pressure as close as
possible to the free stream ambient pressure. Wings, by design,
change the pressure - higher pressure below the wing and lower
pressure above the wing. Thus, it is asking for errors to put static
ports near wings.
The Piper pitot-static probes have an angle on the bottom to adjust
the pressure of the air. The air will have to accelerate to follow
the angle on the bottom of the probe, and the pressure will decrease
(Bernoulli's law). This is an attempt to correct for the higher
pressure below the wing. The probes come in models with various
angles to get the best accuracy on a given aircraft.
I watched with amusement as Diamond Aircraft spent weeks trying
different model Piper probes, in various underwing locations, when
they went from the Rotax powered Katana to the Continental one. They
had to move the probe on the Continental model due to an internal
wing design change, which was a real shame as the probe on the Rotax
model worked fine. The indicated airspeed at cruise would change
10-15 knots with the smallest change in probe. The marketing guys
really liked one of the probes, which showed a really fast cruise
indicated air speed, and a very slow stall speed. The engineering
guys, bless their hearts, told the marketing guys to get stuffed, and
worked to reduce the errors as much as possible. They eventually
ground their own special angle and made a unique part number.
Kevin Horton RV-8 (fuel tanks)
khorton(at)cyberus.ca (613) 821-7862 (home)
Ottawa, Canada (613) 952-4319 (work)
http://www.cyberus.ca/~khorton/rv8.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tracy Saylor <tracysaylor(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Gear leg fairings RV-4, 6,6A& 8 |
Tracy Saylor's gear leg fairings are now 95.00+10.00 S& H Ph.
805-933-8225
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Champagne <mongo7(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: rv6-Builders. |
Mcnu93945(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> Can somebody tell me if there is a rv6 builders club or list of builders for
> my area. I live in the Nashua N.H. area. Thanks J.F. McNulty.
>
>
Hi: You can come up to Mont Vernon And see my RV6QB in it's final
stages of assembly. Tel. 673-9358
Regards
Don Champagne
N767DC O-360/CS
98% Done
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tracy Saylor <tracysaylor(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Left side throttle quad. RV-6 |
Tracy Saylor,s throttle quadrant for RV-6 &6A is 55.00 + 5.00 S&H Ph.
805-933-8225
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | smcdaniels(at)Juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV-4 Ground location |
Louis,
Using a bolt through the firewall is much preferred to what you now have.
The engine mount and gear leg bolts should "NEVER" be used to attach a
ground cable.
Take a close look at a cable lug. It is soft material. Much softer than
a washer is. It will crush and cause the torque on the nut/bolt to be
reduced. This has been known to cause the bolt hole in a gear leg to
become elongated.
For the same reason an engine mount bolt is also not a good idea.
Scott McDaniels
These opinions and ideas are mine alone and do not necessarily
reflect the opinions and ideas of my employer.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | smcdaniels(at)Juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wing rear spar connection to fuselage - bummer! |
>Scott,
>
> I just checked my 1993 RV-6A Plans and I can find no mention of a
>castellated nut on the rear spar attachment point. I know I currently
>have a
>standard lock nut in this location (for the past 1220 Hrs of
>operation). Is
>this a problem? Where was it called out in the plans?
>
>Fred Stucklen
>N925RV RV-6A
>E. Windsor, Ct
>
I think someone else replied to this one so I hope you have your answer.
I do not have plans at home so I can't check but I know it is there ( I
completed my own RV-6A in the 92/93 time frame and the plans called for
it at that time.
Scott McDaniels
These opinions and ideas are mine alone and do not necessarily
reflect the opinions and ideas of my employer.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | smcdaniels(at)Juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: 45 deg elbow |
>While trying to attach the oil pressure line to the 45 deg fitting
>coming
>out of the engine accessory case I found it just cleared the engine
>mount
>(Vans standard for 0 360) by 1/8" this appears much to close (engine
>moves
>mount dosent) by backing it off about 35 deg it appears to clear.
>Checking
>a couple other RV6A's (one flying) they just had the 1/8" clearance.
>Any
>pro's or con's on this thanks in advance.
>
>planejoe/finishing kit RV6A
>
>
>
The engine moves very little at this point. This is one of it's pivot
points.
1/8 " is more than enough clearance.
Now the spinner end of the engine is another story. The engine can move
quite a bit at the forward end. Most of this happens during startup and
shut down.
Scott McDaniels
These opinions and ideas are mine alone and do not necessarily
reflect the opinions and ideas of my employer.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tracy Saylor <tracysaylor(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Strobe-Nav-Light Kit for Harmon Wing Tips |
Tracy Saylor's Light kit for Harmon tips is 95.00 + 10.00 S&H Ph.
805-933-8225 Home of the 236 mph stock engined RV -6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gil Alexander <gila(at)flash.net> |
| Subject: | RV Gear leg fairings RV-4, 6,6A& 8 |
Tracy ... where do I send my money??
Do you collect CA sales tax??
Gil Alexander
4434 Stewart Av.
Los Angles, CA 90066
>
>Tracy Saylor's gear leg fairings are now 95.00+10.00 S& H Ph.
>805-933-8225
>
-------------------------------------------------------
mailto:gila(at)flash.net
Gil Alexander,
Los Angeles, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rvbldr3170(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: [EAA membership] |
In a message dated 1/22/99 11:52:24 AM Eastern Standard Time,
charles(at)onramp.net writes:
<< The EAA is our strongest voice in dealing with Washington and the FAA.
>>
...And to add my own $.02, ANYONE who is interested in general aviation,
homebuilding or any facet of flight other than commercial should feel
obligated to join either EAA, AOPA, or both. They are the ONLY groups that
promote and lobby for our interests. Even if you don't give a hoot about the
local chapters or the fly-ins, or all the other social aspects, you are
supporting "our voice in Washington". Consider it your contribution to keep
the Feds at bay, if nothing else.
One small voice crying out in the storm has no hope of being heard, but if we
ALL cry out, the volume is overwhelming.
Opinions expressed here are sparked by a love of aviation.
Regards, Merle
RV-4 Chevy V-6 - Flyin' in '99 ?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "M.Mckenna" <mmckenna(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 water pipe |
Larry,
The 1/2" shown is a water pipe size, not a dimension of the
part.
Mike Mckenna
mmckenna(at)bellsouth.net
RV-8 wings
Lawrenceville, Ga.
Larry Bowen wrote:
>
>
> The water pipe counter-weight included in my RV-8 wing kit is labeled
> "RV-4". It's the right length, but measures 5/8" ID instead of the 1/2"
> listed on the inventory list. Has anyone else experienced this?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | pichon.dean(at)ADLittle.com |
| Subject: | RV-4 jig for sale |
I have a once-used Stephen Frey RV-4 jig, complete with "Birdcage", for sale.
Price: $500.00 or best offer.
Also, homemade (welded) steel wing jig ($100.00)
If interested, please respond to this E-mail, or reach me directly at:
Pichon.Dean(at)ADLittle.com
(617) 498-6525 (day)
(781) 646-8456 (evenings)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>Do y'all have an ammeter in the panel ? If so, do I need one and why (if I
>have a good voltmeter and battery gauge )?
I'll invite you to take a look at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/instrmnt/instrmnt.html
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: | MLaboyteau(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 1/25/99 8:27:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, 6430(at)axion.net
writes:
> Do y'all have an ammeter in the panel ? If so, do I need one and why (if I
> have a good voltmeter and battery gauge )?
One thing I've found the ammeter useful for, is good indicator that a
circuit is working. Example, one night doing practice approaches, my landing
light failed. I knew this right away, because I knew that turning it on
increased my current consumption by 10 amps. This particular approach, I
didn't see an increase in current, looked out at the wing tip, and sure
enough, no light! That was later followed by a night landing with no landing
light, but that's another story. Another example was my pitot heat circuit. It
increases consumption by 5 amps. I started noticing that during ground checks
the switch was becoming intermittent. It got to where I would have to wiggle
the switch in order to activate the circuit. I have the Rocky Mountain engine
monitor, and it shows both volts and current.
Mark LaBoyteaux
RV-6A N106RV
Broken Arrow, Ok
MLaboyteau(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glenn Hoskins" <Imagine21_glenn(at)email.msn.com> |
| Subject: | Crankshaft to Prop Lugs |
I have installed Van's 0360 but do not have the constant speed prop yet.
With the flywheel on the crankshaft the crankshaft lugs only protrude
approximately 1/8" to 3/16" past the flywheel. Is this correct length or is
something wrong for the mounting of a constant speed prop?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-4 Ground location |
>
>Is it poor design to attach the battery ground to the firewall on my RV-4?
>Currently, my battery is grounded to the left main seat rib(hope I am using
>the proper nomenclature), and the engine is grounded from the back of the
>case to the right gear leg attachment bolt. May I, instead, use a 3/8"
>brass or bronze bolt, backed up with appropriate washers to attach the
>battery to the firewall and then on the engine side of the F/W attach the
>engine ground to this same bolt? What are the corrosion implications?
>
>I just am not happy with the original builder's use of the gear leg bolt
>for a ground. There is no good, flat surface and "Electron" Bob suggests
>not using the engine mount for a ground.(and I very much agree). Thanks in
>advance.
We stock the brass hardware suitable for firewall penetrations
of battery and crankcase grounds. We've also added custom assembled
ground straps to our catalog. If anyone chooses not to use the
faston tab ground blocks, they're still welcome to order the
brass hardware and/or ground straps as needed.
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/wiring.html#gndblk
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 L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Car drives into Sobek' s "My Sanity" |
>
>Airplanes and cars never mix well.
>
>Gary Corde
>RV-6 N211GC - NJ
I might share a personal experiece in this topic
with RV'ers. I took my van out to the ramp to unload
a bunch of test eqipment from a Beechjet last weekend
and was backing toward the air-stair door when my
foot slipped and I accelerated toward the a/c
hard enough to squeal the tires and make some rubber
smoke. Didn't hit the a/c but it sure brought us
close to messing our drawers.
In retrospect, when you think about vehicles
driven near airplanes, the safest way is to
always approach the a/c driving forward, one
foot on gas and other on brake where
you're in better posture to watch what you're
doing and control the vehicle . . even if it
means that you carry some heavy stuff around
to the back of the vehicle to load it.
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: | "Peter Christensen" <peterchristensen(at)serviceresourcesinc.com> |
| Subject: | Drilling Elevator Horn |
All this recent talk about misdrilled elevator horns is scaring me, since
that's my next step. I have just one very quick question: the
instructions say to drill this hole "carefully," should I use a reamer, as
discussed in recent postings, or just drill with a 1/4" bit (I assume it's
a 1/4" hole). Also, any good ideas on what to use for or how to get a
"drill bushing?" Any help or past experience on this step will be
appreciated.
Peter Christensen
RV-6A, left elevator
Marietta, GA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Besing, Paul" <PBesing(at)pinacor.com> |
| Subject: | Internally regulated alternators |
I remember this thread from before, but I could not find a conclusion. My
alternator is internally regulated. What is the reasoning for bypassing
this and installing an external regulator?
Thanks..
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://www.doitnow.com/~rv8er
Canopy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lousmith(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Internally regulated alternators |
In a message dated 1/26/99 10:43:41 AM Eastern Standard Time,
PBesing(at)pinacor.com writes:
I remember this thread from before, but I could not find a conclusion. My
alternator is internally regulated. What is the reasoning for bypassing
this and installing an external regulator?
Thanks..
Paul Besing
>>
Paul,
So you would be able to use the over voltage module that Bob Nuckolls builds
and sells. On my first RV-4, I had the internal regulator. The regulator did
go south on a trip and zapped my com radio. I rigged my RV-8 with an
externally regulated alternator along with the over voltage module. After
about 50 hours of flight, my regulator malfunctioned. The over voltage module
took the alternator off line before any damage was done. I am sold on this
device.
Regards,
Louis Smith
RV-4 N102LS sold
RV-8 N801RV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JRWillJR(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Drilling Elevator Horn |
The hole should not be drilled with a 1/4 bit---egads----drill under and ream
up--drill under and ream up. It should be reamed to about .2490 or even .2485
for a good fit. Drill bits do not make round holes but reamers do. This should
be a good fit. You want the bolt to be held tight enough by the horn that it
does not rotate. When the assembly is ah assembled the rotation should occur
at the bearing in the rod end--it to be clamped tightly by the horn. No
jiggle--no slop--no rotation--that would be your goal. JR
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
> One thing I've found the ammeter useful for, is good indicator that a
>circuit is working. Example, one night doing practice approaches, my landing
>light failed. I knew this right away, because I knew that turning it on
>increased my current consumption by 10 amps. This particular approach, I
>didn't see an increase in current, looked out at the wing tip, and sure
>enough, no light! That was later followed by a night landing with no landing
>light, but that's another story. Another example was my pitot heat
circuit. It
>increases consumption by 5 amps. I started noticing that during ground checks
>the switch was becoming intermittent. It got to where I would have to wiggle
>the switch in order to activate the circuit. I have the Rocky Mountain engine
>monitor, and it shows both volts and current.
>
>Mark LaBoyteaux
>RV-6A N106RV
>Broken Arrow, Ok
>MLaboyteau(at)aol.com
Ah bless you my son . . . it warms the heart of us ol' sparkies
to find people who have taken the time and effort to know the
the system and make use of that knowledge to increase the utility
of their airplane and reduce probability of unhappy surprises.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Internally regulated alternators |
>
>I remember this thread from before, but I could not find a conclusion. My
>alternator is internally regulated. What is the reasoning for bypassing
>this and installing an external regulator?
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/bltinreg.pdf
and:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/bleadov.pdf
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mikel(at)dimensional.com |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall Fittings |
>Stainless steel firewall shields are available from A/C spruce and are
>listed under "firewall" (shields) . While not 100% effective is what has
>been commonly used on Certified A/C for many years.
>You can also make them yourself, Tony bingelis shows how in his books.
I made some, (using a wooden form) and bought some, the ones Avery sells. I
also used one of the stainless steel "eyeball" fittings from Schultz
(schultzav(at)aol.com; page 138 in Oct 98 Sport Aviation). These worked well
for the tach drive and may have other applications. Sort of expensive but I
bought them when they were first introduced and got a deal.
Michael
RV-4 N232 Suzie Q
Year Two
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mikel(at)dimensional.com |
| Subject: | "slop" in rudder cables |
>I hooked up my rudder for the first time this morning to test fit the
location >of the rudder pedals before drilling them to thefuselage. The
cables are >slack. Should they be taut?
No. There is no tension on the rudder cables until your feet are on the
peddles and the air is flowing past the rudder. Rudder flutter (!) is not a
problem.
>Wishing I took airplane building in high school instead of chemistry ...
No doubt.
Michael
RV-4 N232 Suzie Q
Year Two
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian Denk" <akroguy(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Fast-on connectors and inspections |
Listers..and Electric Bob!
Has anyone who chose to use the Fast-on connectors to wire their
aircraft experienced a hassle with the airworthiness inspection from a
DAR or FSDO rep? Personally, I'm planning on using the Fastons where
possible, but don't want to butt heads (buttheads?) with the inspector
when the big day comes...sometime in the next decade. *sigh*
Thanks,
Brian Denk
RV8 #379
finish kit on the way.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVer273sb(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: "slop" in control linkages |
The rudder pedal cables will be slack untill you
put your feet on the pedals. Unless you install springs
which arent necessary. You can actually fly with your feet
off the pedals!
Srew RV4 CO.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)accessus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Internally regulated alternators |
Story was that you could not get overvoltage, Bob N. has IT for internal
regulated Alternators on his site.
-----Original Message-----
From: Besing, Paul <PBesing(at)pinacor.com>
Date: Tuesday, January 26, 1999 10:07 AM
Subject: RV-List: Internally regulated alternators
>
>I remember this thread from before, but I could not find a conclusion. My
>alternator is internally regulated. What is the reasoning for bypassing
>this and installing an external regulator?
>
>Thanks..
>
>Paul Besing
>RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
>http://www.doitnow.com/~rv8er
>Canopy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RVer273sb(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Drilling Elevator Horn |
To aid in drilling this hole perpendicular to both horns
it helps to use a drill guide of say 1 in thick steel or alum
clamped to the horn. This guide has a hole drilled thru it
on say a drill press so the hole is perpendicular in it
Stew RV4 CO.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
> One thing I've found the ammeter useful for, is good indicator that a
>circuit is working.
Good for you! I bet your ammeter is set up to show alternator load instead
of battery charge/discharge. The latter type of ammeter is useless until
the alternator or regulator/controller dies and then it shows buss load on
the battery.
Bob's super-duper electrical system analyzer guage (alternator load, volts,
alternator field monitoring, low voltage light) sounds like just the ticket.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6399 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax O-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: Fire Detection, RV-8 and Apology |
Mike Thompson in Austin, TX wrote:
>It's a beautiful day here in Austin - wish I were out there flying
>instead of in here building!
Beats being in here looking like working!
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Wiesel <dan(at)interlinkrecruiting.com> |
| Subject: | forward bolts on landgear mount rv6a |
I am in the process of drilling the hole for the brake line connection that
is going out to the wings. Since my wings are in storage, I have used the
wing template to draw the eventual wing fit location on the fuselage. I
noticed that the flush head bolts that go into the forward arm of the gear
leg mounting will not be covered by the wing. Is this correct, or have I
miss aligned the wing.
Thanks!!!!!!
Dan Wiesel
RV6a QB starting finishing kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: Surface prep for painting steel |
Dean P. wrote:
> I'm getting ready to paint several of the steel weldments found the RV-4
> fuselage (rudder pedals, roll cage, control column, etc.).
Consider that paint is soon worn off where feet make contact repeatedly.
The cable to pedal links, for example, are 4130 steel. They might be replaced
by stainless steel (strength?), chromed, or greased and enclosed in teflon
shrink tube?
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV4131rb(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: electric primers |
<< Aircraft Spruce has an electric primer solenoid which shows an inlet and
outlet port, but I cannot see any wires or connectors to activate it. >>
Austin,
This should be what you want. I have one on my airplane and it
has worked flawlesly so far. Its a simple on off valve normally in the closed
position and powered in the open position. A simple push button switch is used
to momentarily open the valve. With your boost pump on and your fuel system
pressurized, a couple of 1 second shots is all you need for priming.
Ryan Bendure Co.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: Internally regulated alternators |
Which alternator? I want to avoid that one!
Why can cars go millions of miles with never an overvoltage? Usually what
happens is that a diode fails and you start getting some AC (whine) or just low
output. One of my three Mazda RX7s is having alternator trouble - squealing
bearing. It has been going on for several months. Pretty soon I will get it
overhauled.
hal
> On my first RV-4, I had the internal regulator. The regulator did
> go south on a trip and zapped my com radio. I rigged my RV-8 with an
> externally regulated alternator along with the over voltage module. After
> about 50 hours of flight, my regulator malfunctioned.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: Drilling Elevator Horn |
JR wrote:
> Drill bits do not make round holes but reamers do.
Quibble, quibble.
Reamers don't make holes at all, they just enlarge them.
Drill bits *DO* make round holes. They aren't *AS* round as holes made with
undersized drills and proper reamers. Tolerance is the operative word. FOr
most stuff, a drill bit does just fine.
We're building little airplanes here, not spacecraft.
Opinionated in San Jose,
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | halk(at)sybase.com (Hal Kempthorne) |
| Subject: | Re: How safety nuts on engine studs |
You could better safety the engine nuts by refitting them just as they are but
with some Loctite.
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Craig-Stearman" <tcraigst(at)ionet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Crankshaft to Prop Lugs |
Mine measures about the same.
Tom Craig-Stearman
RV-4/new O-360/Constant speed
>
>I have installed Van's 0360 but do not have the constant speed prop yet.
>With the flywheel on the crankshaft the crankshaft lugs only protrude
>approximately 1/8" to 3/16" past the flywheel. Is this correct length or is
>something wrong for the mounting of a constant speed prop?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Thomas Nguyen" <TNGUYEN(at)oss.oceaneering.com> |
| Subject: | Re: forward bolts on landgear mount rv6a |
Dan,
That's correct for the first two forward bolts. These will be exposed to everyone
to see (feel naked don't you).
T.Nguyen
>>> Dan Wiesel 01/26/99 11:34AM >>>
I am in the process of drilling the hole for the brake line connection that
is going out to the wings. Since my wings are in storage, I have used the
wing template to draw the eventual wing fit location on the fuselage. I
noticed that the flush head bolts that go into the forward arm of the gear
leg mounting will not be covered by the wing. Is this correct, or have I
miss aligned the wing.
Thanks!!!!!!
Dan Wiesel
RV6a QB starting finishing kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.su.OZ.AU> |
| Subject: | Re: electric primers |
>
>This may be a long post, so hit delete now if you like.
January 20, 1999 - January 26, 1999
RV-Archive.digest.vol-gg