RV-Archive.digest.vol-hc
October 11, 1999 - October 15, 1999
4. As you get farther away from critical AoA, how does the calibration of
the LRI hold up?
>Our business is priamarily one of saving lives. Do you have a problem with
>that, Mr. Lloyd?
Oh, get off your high horse. Your business is one of making money or it
isn't a business. Yes you have what appears to be a good product. Yes it
seems to work. No, it isn't magic. It has flaws that are dictated by cost
and physics. Trying to claim that the flaws are features is poppycock.
Trying to claim that the LRI is perfect is equally poppycock.
Every day people fly with an airspeed indicator. They know that the stall
speed is dictated by aircraft loading and that they must accommodate that
when operating near stall speed. They understand about instrument
installation errors and the difference between indicated and calibrated
airspeeds. They have been taught the effects of temperature and pressure
on the instrument and are therefore able to accommodate its limitations.
All I am asking you to do is to provide the same information about the LRI.
You know, one of the nice things about microprocessor-based equipment is
that you can program in corrections for variations in the system. You can
calibrate out the errors. That is much more difficult to do with purely
mechanical systems. I do notice that you have come out with a version of
the LRI with a digital display. Are you going to use a microprocessor to
calibrate out the system errors? That would be nice. And while you are at
it, you can use an input from the flap system to recalibrate the instrument
so that it gives spot-on information when the flaps are deployed. About
the simplest and most reliable method is a microswitch that lets the unit
know when the flaps are deployed.
>Let me know when the Propriatary Software system will fly on a certified
>aircraft.
I cannot say firsthand because I haven't seen it but I have been informed
that it is indeed flying on a certified aircraft. You will have to talk
with PSS about that. I am not going to make any claims that I have not
verified.
>No reports of bugging or fouling with the LRI, not as yet (20 some odd
>years).
Maybe you are lucky. Maybe no one felt that it was necessary to tell you
that a big old grasshopper impacted the probe and fouled it. So the pilot
had to get out and dig the pieces out of the probe just as he would have
for his pitot tube. I betcha that it never occurred to them to tell you
about it. But just because you have never had a *report* doesn't mean it
didn't happen. To me, your probe appears to be just as vulnerable to
impact fouling as is a pitot tube. If I am wrong, please correct me.
Please back up your correction with a technical explanation of why I am wrong.
>We do have reports of getting pilots out of difficult situations
>when their airspeed indicators went down for those very reasons.
I don't doubt that. I never doubted that. And a second airspeed
instrument might have served them just as well as might a PSS AoA
instrument or a vane-type AoA sensor. This sort of added safety does not
seem to be the unique domain of the LRI.
>Heat is a factor with de-icing equipment and in morning frost, etc.
Are you trying to tell me that your LRI is accurate when the airframe is
iced up? That it is accurate after ice has distorted the airfoil? In that
case, it is magic. I was under the impression that the LRI probe had to be
adjusted to the particular airfoil to which it is attached. If that
airfoil changes without a corresponding change to the calibration of the
LRI then the LRI's information is suspect.
OK, so your LRI probe is deiced and it is working normally. The
information it is giving is still suspect if the wing has ice or frost on
it. On the other hand, it is still providing relative information as is
the ASI or other AoA equipment. You just have to find where the new
critical AoA is so you can mentally adjust for the instrument readings
(read, you have to play test pilot with your iced up airplane). What I
won't buy is that the LRI is going to reliably let the pilot know where the
critical AoA is on the first take-off of the day with a frosted up wing.
Relying on the airspeed or AoA instrument in that case is plain foolish.
>Mr. Franz goes after us very often. Perhaps you were not aware of that?
No, I was not aware of that. I have never seen any negative stuff from
him. I have seen negative stuff from you. If he uses negative
marketing/advertising then shame on him. It is sad that people feel a need
to attack their competitors and their competitors' products. I would much
rather have factual information so I can make a reasoned decision about
which product I want to purchase. Sometimes it is very difficult to do
because the manufacturers are generating lots of heat and very little
light. I am asking you to shed more light on the subject of *your* product.
>Our mission is to help general aviation overcome a bad habit - airspeed.
>We are battling that 'bad habit' every day.
Your mission is to sell a product and that is as it should be. I agree
that AoA is better information than AS but I sure as heck wouldn't call
using the ASI a "bad habit" given that every airplane is equipped with an
ASI. You just need to know the limitations of the instrument just as you
need to know the limitations of the LRI or other AoA instrument. No
instrument is perfect and an understanding of its limitations is very
important so that the pilot may make safe decisions.
>We tell pilots who call us, who come by our booth at various airshows, or
>in any way contact us, that it doesn't matter to us what system they use,
>but fly AOA.
No argument there.
>If you are going to attempt a comparison of systems in public, Mr. Llyod,
>please try to make that attempt an accurate.
I beg your pardon? That is what I am attempting to do. I *KNOW* what the
PSS AoA unit does because I have many hours using it under many different
conditions. I have put it to every test I can devise and it has accurately
reported the two data points I can easily reproduce; i.e. zero lift/AoA and
critical AoA; at all types of G and aircraft loading and at many different
density altitudes. It is always spot on. How that is achieved is less
important than the final result. It sounds like you are implying that the
PSS AoA does not work or is somehow incorrect in its presentation to the
pilot. I can attest that it does work and that it does so very well.
>All articles that I am aware
>of comparing the various systems that have appeared in the aviation press
>have been written by Mr. Franz. We invite comparisons. We invite
>discussion. We do not feel compelled to attack Proprietary Software. But
>please make the debate honest, make the evaluations impartial, get all the
>facts, understand all the issues, get familiar with all the applications.
Seems to me that is what I am doing. Frankly, I discount manufacturers'
claims. They have a vested interest in making their product look better
than their competitors' products. I certainly discount both yours and Mr.
Frantz' claims. What I am saying is that I was sufficiently convinced by
Mr. Frantz that I was willing to bet money on what to my mind was an
unproven system. What I am saying here is that the Proprietary Software
Systems AoA instrument, as installed in my aircraft, works precisely as
claimed by Proprietary Software Systems. I understand the physics behind
its operation and I have seen for myself that it is accurate. In fact I go
back periodically and recheck the calibration just to make sure it hasn't
drifted. So far so good.
On the other hand, I have never had the physics of the LRI explained to me.
I have had to infer how it operates from looking at the unit and its
probe. I can see where it probably has potential for installation error
and instrument errors. You have done nothing to answer my questions or
dispel my concerns other than act hurt and point to tests by other
organizations. Yes, I have read the "Engineering Discussion" section of
your web page but some of the questions that I and others have asked remain
unanswered.
>Again, I ask you, in what way have we harmed or offended you, Mr. Lloyd,
>and what are you doing to promote general aviation safety, to save lives
>and to raise awareness so that the level of GA accident statistics declines?
You haven't harmed me in any way. You haven't offended me other than you
haven't provided me with solid test information so I can see how the
indications on the LRI really map to the real world.
And your latter comment implies that you are doing something to improve the
safety of GA and I am not. This discussion isn't about me, it is about
your product. Please stick to the facts and provide factual information
about your product.
As I understand it, I believe the following statements to be true:
1. you are in business to sell the LRI and you want to make it as
attractive as possible;
2. the LRI provides useful information about AoA especially near critical
AoA where it is most needed;
3. the LRI suffers from errors but these errors are probably not
sufficiently great so as to provide the pilot with a false sense of security.
If I am wrong, *PLEASE* correct me, and do so with hard, factual
information. I would especially love to see a calibration chart showing
the relationship between the LRI indications and actual AoA under varying
conditions. I know my PSS AoA is accurate over a wide operating range
because I have personally tested my own unit in my aircraft. Maybe my
airplane is an anomally and the PSS AoA instrument's good performance is a
fluke. Somehow I doubt that since the PSS AoA instrument was designed and
tested on Lancair aircraft and my Nanchang CJ-6A Chinese military trainer
designed in 1957 is pretty far from that Lancair but I cannot an will not
make any claim other than the PSS AoA instrument works properly on *MY*
aircraft. Your milage may vary.
And as for how I am trying to make GA safe, I am a flight instructor. I
try to make GA safer one pilot at a time. I have a reasonable grasp of
aerodynamics but I make no claim to be an aeronautical engineer. I use the
tools at hand and try to impart enough knowledge so that, when I am not
around, my students will make safe, conservative decisions. Hopefully they
will have learned enough to do that with or without an AoA indicator in the
cockpit.
>Jim Huntington
Brian Lloyd
brian(at)lloyd.com
+1.530.676.6513
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LIVING with aircraft batteries |
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
> One company in particular
> has gone the extra mile in optimizing cranking
> performance in VERY small cells (1.2 a.h.).
>
> See http://199.239.60.165/
>
> These tiny cells combined with two alternators make
> it now possible to remove the pigs found on most
> aircraft engines for starters and alternators and
> to forego the classic 24 a.h. battery in favor of
> light weight alternators, starter, and itty-bitty
> batteries for a DUAL electrical system who's TOTAL
> weight is about equal to the original 24 a.h. battery!
Bob,
I looked at this website and could only find their SecureStart product. How
would you propose using this in the architecture you describe above? Also,
would you have zero battery backup for electric instruments because of the
dual alternators?
Ross Mickey
6A Finishing kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John" <fasching(at)amigo.net> |
I have over 100 hours in my RV-6A using the LRI now. All I can say is that
it works! It does what I want and the obscure technical nuances don't really
mean that much in real life. FWIW I wouldn't be without it.
RV-6A Flying
Salida, CO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sarg314(at)azstarnet.com (tom sargent) |
| Subject: | Wingtip VOR antenna |
I have decided to use Bob Archer's in-the-fiberglass-wingtip VOR
antenna. (Yes, I'm retro enough to want a VOR.) The antenna apparently has
2 versions: one mounts at the bottom inside of the wingtip and the other at
the top. I assume that since the RV-6A wingtip is flatter on the top than
on the bottom, that one would want the version that mounts at the top.
Could some one out there who has used this antenna confirm this for me?
Thanks,
---
Tom Sargent, sarg314(at)azstarnet.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jrh(at)mustang.us.dell.com (Randy Howard) |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Planning |
>
>
> Agreed, Gary. The .063 is just a tad bit flimsy IMO...FWIW, I have a .090
> panel..much more rigid..I like it much more than the .063 that Van's sells.
>
I'm assuming it's sold thinner primarily for weight (and maybe cost?).
Anyone know how the various panel types/thicknesses stack up on weight?
--
Randy Howard (jrh(at)mustang.us.dell.com)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <rv8er(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Planning |
I didn't weigh my .090 and .063 panels, but my guess is that the .090 was
about 2 pounds heavier..not a big deal, really..the cost was about $40 for
the sheet.
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://members.home.net/rv8er
Finish Kit
-----Original Message-----
From: Randy Howard <jrh(at)mustang.us.dell.com>
Date: Monday, October 11, 1999 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Instrument Panel Planning
>
>>
>>
>> Agreed, Gary. The .063 is just a tad bit flimsy IMO...FWIW, I have a
.090
>> panel..much more rigid..I like it much more than the .063 that Van's
sells.
>>
>
>I'm assuming it's sold thinner primarily for weight (and maybe cost?).
>Anyone know how the various panel types/thicknesses stack up on weight?
>
>--
>Randy Howard (jrh(at)mustang.us.dell.com)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Edward Cole" <emcole(at)ix.netcom.com> |
EAA Chapter 62 is close to Wayne Handley so I thought I'd forward this
message to
the list for anyone who was interested.....
From Judy Stout, Secretary Chapter 62 San Jose, CA
Just an update on Wayne Handley. I got a card and we all signed it
at the meeting on Thursday. Nick (my grandson) was part of Wayne's crew the
day this happened and has been at the hospital every chance he can including
the day of the accident. He has been directly in contact with Karen Handley
and gave her the signed card from Chapter 62. Since he is so well known all
of the cards are being held and all flowers are being photographed and sent
to others in the hospital, otherwise there would not be room for Wayne.
Nick went to the hospital after Young Eagles on Saturday and was not able to
see Wayne yet but spoke with Karen. Wayne is eating and sitting up and
spirits are good. The operation was a complete success and there is no
reason to doubt a complete recovery. Wayne should be released from the
hospital later this week.
Ed Cole
RV6A Finish Kit
EAA Chapter 62 Board
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RWINGSPAN(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Paint Spray Guns |
In a message dated 10/11/99 3:41:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, emrath(at)home.com
writes:
<< I am trying to decide upon a HVLP spray gun for primer painting. There are
several on the HarborFreight WWW site. Has anyone any experience with the
Central Pneumatic spay guns and what I should consider? >>
Marty,
I'm currently using the HF model 38308-1RDH HVLP gravity feed (was on sale
for 39.99). It's worked great for me and would recommend it to anyone for
priming (not finishing). I know the catalog references another gun which
looks the same; however the box information on the model I received (ie jet
info., etc.) was identical to the more expensive model.
Rich Greener
RV-8
(still waiting on wing kit)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RWINGSPAN(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Paint Spray Guns |
In a message dated 10/11/99 3:41:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, emrath(at)home.com
writes:
<< I am trying to decide upon a HVLP spray gun for primer painting. There are
several on the HarborFreight WWW site. Has anyone any experience with the
Central Pneumatic spay guns and what I should consider? >>
Marty,
re. my previous post. Harbor Freight #38308-2VGA HVLP gravity feed 39.99
(still on sale - just checked). Sorry for the wrong part number post.
Rich Greener
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <rv8er(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Paint Spray Guns |
You might start a big thread, but the general opinions that I have noticed
is that the Harbor Freight guns are fine for priming, but spend a little
more on a better gun for painting...not that the Harbor Freight gun doesn't
paint well, just not as well as a DeVilbiss or Binks. I purchased many
tools from Harbor Freight, and for the most part, they are
fine...painting>is too important to me to save a few bucks on, so I would
spend the extra money on a higher quality gun. As far as gravity fed is
concerned, it is
personal preference. I have always used a siphon gun, but some others swear
by the gravity fed guns..
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://members.home.net/rv8er
Finish Kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | donspawn(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wayne Handley |
Wayne is eating and sitting up and spirits are good. The operation was
a complete success and there is no reason to doubt a complete recovery.
Wayne should be released from the hospital later this week.
>
>Ed Cole
>RV6A Finish Kit
>EAA Chapter 62 Board
>
thanks for the update.
do not archive
Don Jordan ~ 6A fuselage ~ Arlington,Tx ~ donspawn(at)juno.com>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Schrimmer <mschrimmer(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Prepping skins without removing alclad |
Before I prime the inside of the empennage, how do I prepare the skins
without damaging the thin alclad coating? Do you just rub the skins very
lightly with a gray scotchbrite pad? If so, what do you do with a deep
scratch? Just prime over the scratch without removing it?
If the alclad is so thin, would you be better off to skip the scotchbrite
pads altogether and just etch, alodine and prime the parts? Perhaps I've
just stumbled onto the reason the inside skins on many spam cans aren't
primed at all.
Thanks for the help. I spent a couple of hours in the archives but couldn't
find the answer to these questions.
Mark Schrimmer
Irvine, CA
Waiting for RV-9 tail kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dr Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.usyd.edu.au> |
Well,
The building is done.... let the issues continue
VH-LDX has an unswingable compass. I have it mounted on the stainless
steel windscreen support bar but the problem is clearly the windscreen
rollover bar.
Where have people mounted their compasses? Does anyone have a successful
installation on the windscreen brace? Dash mount?
(please tell me I don't have to make a hole in my nice panel)
Cheers,
Leo Davies
LDX (flying)
RV6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV8DRIVER(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Planning |
>
I didn't weigh my .090 and .063 panels, but my guess is that the .090 was
about 2 pounds heavier..not a big deal, really..the cost was about $40 for
the sheet.
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://members.home.net/rv8er
Finish Kit<
Seems to me that a few light angle stiffners riveted in the right places
would provide the necessary stiffness at less weight. FWIW, Andy Johnson -8
wing skinning
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy Lervold" <randyl(at)pacifier.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pneumatic tailwheel |
Van's should have them in soon.
> I've looked unsuccessfully on the Web for where to buy a 6" Andair
> pneumatic tailwheel someone reported buying at Oshkosh...er, AirVenture.
> The Andair website doesn't give a clue... it only lists fuel-related
stuff
> and I can't make their e-mail button work.
>
> Can anybody steer me? Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wvu(at)mail.ameritel.net |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 for sale |
Good luck Jerry,
Send propective buyers this way if they need some good words. Received your
R50 today. I'll let you know once I have a chance to try it.
Anh
>
>I reluctantly have decided to sell my 6. Its the third of five homebuilts,
>(a Starduster Too, 3 RV6s and an RV8. Finished in august 94 TT 175hrs
>O-320E Lyc 160hp, Colin Walker wood prop. Has tilt up canopy, gyro panel,
>760Val, R50 loran, King 76a with encoder, nav lts, belly strobe and good
>cabin heat. Paint is a military scheme blue top white bottom invasion
>stripes and probably the only sharks mouth on a 6. I received builders
>choice at the 97 Oswego NY fly in and appeared on front cover of COPAs
>Canadian Flight monthly paper november 97. Asking low 50s US$. For more info
>and or pictures contact off list or at 506 472 0503. My 1st and 3rd RV6s are
>currently flying in the US. Photos can be seen at (
>http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/nielsdaj/Weyman/weyman.htm ) Will deliver for
>expenses.
>Regards Jerry Wilcox
>jawilcox(at)nb.sympatico.ca
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary A. Sobek" <rv6flier(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wingtip VOR antenna |
> sarg314(at)azstarnet.com (tom sargent)
> >
> > I have decided to use Bob Archer's
> in-the-fiberglass-wingtip VOR
> > antenna. (Yes, I'm retro enough to want a VOR.)
> The antenna apparently
> has
> > 2 versions: one mounts at the bottom inside of the
> wingtip and the other
> at
> > the top. I assume that since the RV-6A wingtip is
> flatter on the top than
> > on the bottom, that one would want the version
> that mounts at the top.
> > Could some one out there who has used this antenna
> confirm this for me?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > ---
> > Tom Sargent, sarg314(at)azstarnet.com
Tom:
I have Bob's VOR antenna mounted in the TOP of each
wing tip. ONE is used for the VOR and the other is
used for the FM radio entertainment system. I have
the same ones that are used on the T-18s years before
there were RV-6.
====
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
So. CA, USA
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Point <jpoint(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | HS608 edge distance |
Listers,
While riveting the HS608 rib to the rear spar in my -6 horiz. stab, I
had to drill out a rivet, and buggered the hole in the rib. On the
advice of many, I have cut off the flange, riveted a new one on and
redrilled it to the spar. The problem is, I outsmarted myself and put
the new flange inside the rib (same side as the flanges) and
consequently, one of the new holes in the flange has only 3/16 edge
distance from the radius of the bend. Does the 1/4 edge distance for
AD4 rivets apply to a radius? If not, would it be acceptable to put one
or two AD4 rivets attaching the 608 to the spar in the middle of the
spar (between the flange strips) to strengthen it and make up for the
3/16 edge? Or, should I bite the bullet and order a new rib, and throw
the old one on the scrap pile with my first HS610?
Jeff Point
jpoint(at)execpc.com
-6 tail
Milwaukee, WI
the learning curve steepens...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry E James" <larryj(at)oz.net> |
OK ..... I'll try again. By changing the 20 3/16" dimension mentioned, and
keeping the bottom of the spar carry through constant; you change the wing
angle of incidence .... not the location of the wing fore and aft. Another
way to say it would be adjusting the 3.03" difference in main to rear wing
spar height (with top longeron level) will change the wing incidence angle.
I chose to specify the incidence angle as determined by the spar carry
through in an effort to preclude pre-stressing this part of the fuselage by
forcing the rear spar to fuselage interface as a means of establishing
incidence. (The archives discuss this to a small extent)
My questions are: does anyone have experience measuring the levelness(?) of
the top longeron during flight ?? and, has anyone adjusted their wing
incidence or made it purposefully different from stock and found any
performance differences ???
Thanks A Bunch,
Larry
>I would be very careful moving the wing fore or aft, you are doing a lot
>more here than simply flying the fuselage a very small angle difference
from
>"spec"!
>Bernie Kerr, 6A finishing, SE Fla
>>Bernie Kerr brings up a very interesting subject - the variance in wing
>>incidence. I visited a fellow builder earlier this week (with much more
>>experience than I) who mentioned changing the 20 3/16" fuselage dimension
>>(RV-4; firewall datum to forward top of main spar carry-through) to
>>something slightly greater.
>>Larry James
>>>One possible solution is to drop the trailing edge down the 3/16 inch to
make
>>>it flush with the fuselage skin. This will change the incidence angle on
the
>>>wing. You will have to account for this on the horizontal stab incidence
so
>>>that they keep the same relative angle to each other or you will change
the
>>>pitch stability. When you are ready to set the stab incidence, pitch the
>>>airplane until you get the 3.03 inch difference between the top of the
wing
>>>at the butt joint over the main spar and the top of the wing over the
rear
>>>spar as shown on the plans. Now your top longeron will not be level,
ignore
>>>this and set the horizontal stab at zero angle to horizontal. This means
that
>>>your fuselage will fly at slightly less angle of attack than a nominal
RV,
>>>but I was told by Van's technical staff that it might be faster or slower
>>>because it has never been optimized for best angle. I would check with
Van's
>>>to make sure they have not changed their position, but this is the way my
>>>plane is but it not flying yet.
>>>Bernie Kerr, 6A finishing, SE Fla
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wingtip VOR antenna |
GARY DO YOU HAVE STROBES ON YOUR WING TIPS TOM RV8
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV-List Digest: FireWall Punches |
Several days ago, someone mentioned that Harbor Freight had some punches that
were suitable for punching holes in the firewall. Does anyone have the
catalog number for these punches? I have been unable to locate any in their
catalog.
Thanks
Wally Hunt
RV4WGH(at)aol.com
Finishing Kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary A. Sobek" <rv6flier(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wingtip VOR antenna |
--- WFACT01(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> GARY DO YOU HAVE STROBES ON YOUR WING TIPS TOM
> RV8
YES. RMD landing lights, A650-PG/PR wingtip
strobe/position lights, and A490A power supplies in
each tip. (Van's Catalog System 2 Option A.) Strobes
are set up master / slave so are in sync when they
flash. There is also a single strobe on the vertical
with another A490A power supply in the tail.
The VOR radio is a KX-125 and picks up signals quite a
way out.
====
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
So. CA, USA
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BumFlyer(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: vertical fin offset |
In a message dated 10/11/99 9:09:23, kempthorne(at)earthlink.net writes:
Stan,
I know nothing about the need or not for rudder tabs but I do know that
engineering is not best done by "looks wrong" or by being always in
symmetry. Space the bolt holes in a round part in a non-symmetrical
pattern to ensure that the mechanic puts it on correctly for example.
The tail on straight tail Bonanzas and Debonairs (still for sale) are
offset from the centerline and one flap must be up slightly more than the
other.
The natural human urge for symmetry is just one more thing engineers need
to get over.
Hal Kempthorne, PE
>Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with SMTP id
> for
>
>I am also troubled by the percentage of rudder tabs I have seen. Just my
>opinion, but an offset rudder just looks "WRONG". I am a nut for symmetry, >>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Barnhart" <dave(at)davebarnhart.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Painting Info |
>Started painting tonight. Control Surfaces, wing tips, cowl
>Cleaned, dusted, swept.......Cleaned, dusted and swept again.
>If you think your shop is dust free, guess what....Your're wrong.
>Oh well, I guess my amatuer built will have an amateur paint job ;' )
Take heart. I felt the same way. For the life of me, I could not make my
paint booth dust-free. No matter how hard I tried, I still ended up with
dust in the painted surface.
The reality though, is that once the airplane is together and flying, no
one will notice. My RV-6 was at Copperstate today, and got lots of
compliments. Nobody saw the few slight imperfections. (In fact, I doubt
that *I* could find all the dust specks I was originally so upset about.)
Best Regards,
Dave Barnhart
RV-6 N601DB
Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark D. Dickens" <mddickens(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HS608 edge distance |
Jeff, I think you're ok...Gil Alexander has a copy of the mil spec for
this at http://www.flash.net/~gila/rivet_spec/rivet_a.htm
Go to the bottom of the document (I printed it and keep it in the shop)
and it addresses this...basically it says:
"Provide a minimum of .03" between the edge of non-flush rivet heads
(Nos. 1 or 2) and bend radius tangent point. Otherwise, maintain the
normal edge distances, both visible and invisible."
There's a picture in the document as well. Funny, I just had to cut off
a flange myself yesterday and just by luck put it on the right
side...didn't even think about the consequences of putting it inside the
flanges...
Mark Dickens
Germantown, TN
RV-8 Empennage, skins drilled to skeleton and ready to rivet!
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Point <jpoint(at)execpc.com>
Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 6:56 PM
Subject: RV-List: HS608 edge distance
>
> Listers,
>
> While riveting the HS608 rib to the rear spar in my -6 horiz. stab, I
> had to drill out a rivet, and buggered the hole in the rib. On the
> advice of many, I have cut off the flange, riveted a new one on and
> redrilled it to the spar. The problem is, I outsmarted myself and put
> the new flange inside the rib (same side as the flanges) and
> consequently, one of the new holes in the flange has only 3/16 edge
> distance from the radius of the bend. Does the 1/4 edge distance for
> AD4 rivets apply to a radius? If not, would it be acceptable to put
one
> or two AD4 rivets attaching the 608 to the spar in the middle of the
> spar (between the flange strips) to strengthen it and make up for the
> 3/16 edge? Or, should I bite the bullet and order a new rib, and
throw
> the old one on the scrap pile with my first HS610?
>
> Jeff Point
> jpoint(at)execpc.com
> -6 tail
> Milwaukee, WI
>
> the learning curve steepens...
>
>
---
>
---
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
---
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Cy Galley <cgalley(at)accessus.net> |
EAA Action Item - We need your support!
On October 7, 1999, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) published the
EAA Exemption request that seeks to allow owners of special airworthiness
(experimental) category aircraft to be compensated for allowing his/her
aircraft to be used for transition training and flight reviews under FAR
Part 61, by authorized flight instructors.
This request in a major step forward in allowing experimental aircraft
owners to be compensated for allowing their aircraft to be used in a
training environment. This is a major step forward because, if this
exemption is approved, EAA members will be finally able to receive flight
training in similar aircraft to the one they are building, buying, or
flying.
We are all aware that amateur-built, experimental aircraft are the fastest
growing segment of general aviation (GA) and currently comprises more than
20% of the active single-engine GA fleet of aircraft. These aircraft have
handling and performance characteristics that are different than comparable
standard airworthiness aircraft. Some of these new aircraft are quite
sophisticated, are pressurized, have highly unusual planforms, operate at
higher airspeeds, are more maneuverable, and are capable of operating at
high altitudes.
Two years ago, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) identified
the cause of many special airworthiness category aircraft accidents - Safety
Recommendation #A97-55 stated the inability of a pilot to receive training
in his/her specialized aircraft prior to their first flight was the leading
cause of many aircraft accidents, especially those that occurred when the
pilot had less than 10 hours of total flight time in the particular type of
airframe.
In response to both our members requests and the NTSB finding, EAA
petitioned the FAA to allow the builders/owners of these experimental
aircraft the opportunity to receive flight training in flight tested,
proven, aircraft similar to theirs before they conduct initial flight tests
in their own, newly-built aircraft. EAA also petitioned the FAA that this
training requirement also extends to those owners who acquire experimental
aircraft in the secondary marketplace and those who seek to meet the flight
review requirements of CFR 14 Part 61.
In this exemption request, EAA illustrated that the level of safety will be
greatly improved for the pilots of these special category aircraft and
consequently, the public. With the approval of this exemption, EAA, the
National Association of Flight Instructors (NAFI), and the Small Aircraft
Manufacturers Association (SAMA) fully expect the overall accident rate of
this category of aircraft will be significantly reduced.
In order to ensure this critical piece of aviation safety policy gets
approved EAA, NAFI, and SAMA NEED YOUR HELP !!
Please write in support of this exemption request to :
The Federal Aviation Administration
Office of the Chief Counsel
ATTN: Rule Docket (AGC-200)
Petition Docket Number 29661
800 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20591
You may also e-mail your comments to: 9-NPRM-cmts(at)faa.gov. The subject of
your e-mail should be: Comments to Docket No. 29661.
The deadline for the FAA to receive comments is 10/26/99
This is a critical piece of rule making and your comments will help EAA,
NAFI, SAMA, and our members to create truly safer skies and pilots. EAA
requests you e-mail copies of your comments to: govt(at)eaa.org.
Also, for a copy of the Transition Exemption and the Transition Training
Change contact Randy Hansen at rhansen(at)eaa.org or 920-426-6103
Cy Galley - Editor, B-C Contact!
Visit our web site at... http://www.bellanca-championclub.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | LeastDrag(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Wingtip VOR antenna |
In a message dated 10/11/1999 12:20:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
sarg314(at)azstarnet.com writes:
>
> I have decided to use Bob Archer's in-the-fiberglass-wingtip VOR
> antenna. (Yes, I'm retro enough to want a VOR.) The antenna apparently has
> 2 versions: one mounts at the bottom inside of the wingtip and the other at
> the top. I assume that since the RV-6A wingtip is flatter on the top than
> on the bottom, that one would want the version that mounts at the top.
> Could some one out there who has used this antenna confirm this for me?
>
> Thanks,
>
> ---
> Tom Sargent, sarg314(at)azstarnet.com
Hello Tom,
The VOR antenna mounts along the top of the wingtip. The antenna should be
mounted as far forward as you can install it. Any strobe and/or NAV light
wires have to be routed along the front edge of the antenna through the
cables clamps provided on the antenna.
Jim Ayers
Thousand Oaks, CA
N47RV Maroon Marauder
P.S. The COM antenna is mounted along the bottom of the tip rib, and angled
up to the top of the wingtip to get some vertical polarity.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Huntington <jimrhunt(at)wco.com> |
| Subject: | AOA/LRI - Brian Lloyd |
Dear Brian,
( I feel like I know you well enough now to call you by your
first name.)
First, please allow me to apologize to the RV-List for airing this
discussion here.
I hope at least a few find it interesting and the rest who don't just
delete these posts. If anyone looks at the previous headings they will note
that I have tried to keep this between Brian and myself. It is not that I
am trying to hide anything, but I feel that most if not all of this
discussion has been gone over sufficiently on the RV-List so I have tried
to avoid offending anyone by continuing to go over the same material too
often. I have decided to post this directly to the list (my first post to
the list on this current issue) in order to defend myself and my company
from what I feel are unwarranted attacks.
I monitor the RV-List from time to time because I find many of the
discussions interesting and informative. I must admit I don't know an F696
something from a WD822 part. I am not building an RV. Shame on me!
However,there are threads that come up about flying or safety that I find
stimulating. I also like to follow the various discussions that people
start about angle of attack and then inevitably someone brings up the LRI.
I have noticed in these discussions that there is invariably some
detractor, someone who HAS NEVER ACTUALLY FLOWN with an LRI but
nevertheless feeling knowledgeable enough to feel free to trash the
product. On most occasions, I believe that I have not stepped in to make
any claims unless someone has asked me to respond.
Imagine my shock when I read your first post yesterday, Brian, tearing
apart my company and making accusations about me, posting a PRIVATE e-mail
to your list with various responses to it. Well it did get me a bit upset,
I must admit, and I attempted to respond to you in private once again to
discover what I could have done to cause you to resort to such tactics.
Once again, to my shock, I find that you publicly posted that PRIVATE
response to you along with your comments to the entire RV-List.
Proprietary Software makes a fine instrument. Certainly. On occasion I
have been asked to spell out the differences between the LRI and PSS. I
don't believe that I have ever publicly attacked their product, but it has
become a running gag amongst us folks to learn how 'ugly' we are. This
discovery was pleasantly pointed out to us by the PSS literature. What
this has to do with aviation safety, I am at a loss. Now to the list of
our physical deformities must be added "snake oil" and "magic". Thank you.
There are differences between the instruments regardless of all this and
that information should be available, all of it, for everyone to evaluate
in the best way they can. In this pursuit, yes I have made comments about
holes in wings, and plugged pitots', piggy-backed pitot-static systems, etc.
Concerning your comment about riding 'high horses', please be assured that
when I read of aviation accidents such as two this summer that claimed 15
jumpers and two pilots, or when a pilot slips behind the power curve due to
density altitude or any other cause and loses himself and his airplane, my
first thought has nothing at all to do with lost sales. I am torn apart
wondering what I can do to get word out about our instrument because these
accidents do not have to happen! The fact is, Brian, our mission really is
to promote aviation safety. So if any of this flaming mess goes to that
end, good!
Please, until you have flown with the LRI and really become familiar with
it, try to refrain from trashing me or my company. The LRI has an
astonishingly high acceptance rate by those who have installed and flown
with it. As much as that may sound like 'snake oil', the statement is
true. If I fail as a spokesman for it, that is another matter altogether.
Again, I am at a loss as to understan why you have chosen to make this
unprovoked attack on me and my company especially in a public forum. As I
mentioned above, I monitor this list and I have always felt that your
contributions were among the best.
If the members of this list would like more information about the LRI and
what it does or how it works I will be glad to provide what I know, but not
in such a way that I feel I am defending myself from attacks and at the
same time trying the patience of this list.
Jim Huntington
jimrhunt(at)wco.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | F1Rocket(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Thank You - Copperstate Fly-in |
Listers,
A very large part of what makes a successful Fly-in is the attendance and
enthusiasm of the people that attend. Team Rocket would like to extend a
sincere "Thank You" to all that visited us at the Copperstate Fly-in. The
show was very successful for us, and beyond that, it was a real pleasure
meeting those of you that came by.
Thank you for taking the time to introduce yourself and chatting for a few. I
look forward to seeing you all again at the next fly-in.
Thanks Again!!
Scott
Team Rocket, Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV8DRIVER(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Painting Info |
>Started painting tonight. Control Surfaces, wing tips, cowl
>Cleaned, dusted, swept.......Cleaned, dusted and swept again.
>If you think your shop is dust free, guess what....Your're wrong.
>Oh well, I guess my amatuer built will have an amateur paint job ;' )
Just a FWIW tip, get a large capacity pesticide/herbicide sprayer, 4-5
gallons, and keep the floor wetted down as much as possible. I realize that
this may create other problems if you're painting in your basement, but it
will make a big difference in the amount of dust. Another thought is to wear
freshly laundered clothes, or better still with the dangerous paints now
used, is aTyvek paint suit with hood. Andy Johnson, 8 wings. BTW the paint
experience is from numerous large scale RC models, I'm not really looking
forward to painting something as large as an RV.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | F1Rocket(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Southwest Regional fly-in |
Those of you that are planning on attending the Southwest Regional Fly-in
located in Abilene, Texas, please come by the Team Rocket booth to say hi and
introduce yourselves. Weather pending, I will be there Thursday thru Sunday,
leaving Sunday Morning to head back to Fla.
See you there!!
Scott
Team Rocket, Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
GV wrote "Back when I started my kit, I did this shear testing and I think
the data is
in the archives. IIRC the MK-319-BS was only slightly poorer in shear than
the AD426-3. It does however require a 7/64" hole. I used them only where I
couldn't buck the real ones and they are fine."
Gary: Thanks. This is just the what I was looking for. Wish I still
had access to some of that neat testing equipment.
Harry Crosby
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bruce Gray <brucegray(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: wing incidence |
There has been several messages posted on the Glasair listserver that suggest
that the greater the difference between the Horz. Stab. incidence and the main
wing incidence (decallage ?sp), the slower and more stable the airplane. The
fastest Glasairs have the lowest decallage angle, but are a little more
"squirly".
Bruce
Glasair III builder
Larry E James wrote:
>
> OK ..... I'll try again. By changing the 20 3/16" dimension mentioned, and
> keeping the bottom of the spar carry through constant; you change the wing
> angle of incidence .... not the location of the wing fore and aft. Another
> way to say it would be adjusting the 3.03" difference in main to rear wing
> spar height (with top longeron level) will change the wing incidence angle.
> I chose to specify the incidence angle as determined by the spar carry
> through in an effort to preclude pre-stressing this part of the fuselage by
> forcing the rear spar to fuselage interface as a means of establishing
> incidence. (The archives discuss this to a small extent)
>
> My questions are: does anyone have experience measuring the levelness(?) of
> the top longeron during flight ?? and, has anyone adjusted their wing
> incidence or made it purposefully different from stock and found any
> performance differences ???
> Thanks A Bunch,
> Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Painting Info |
Since I painted my RV-6 just a few weeks ago (and survived the process),
I would like to weigh in on the dust issue. I originally had big plans
for an elaborate paint booth, and while a booth was constructed, it was
much simpler than originally planned.
Here is the bottom line.......you are not going to be able to eliminate
dust in a home paint booth. Even the guys at the body shops with the
$60,000 up-draft booths have fits with dust. Guess what happens the
first time the spray gun happens to be aimed in the direction of a
fender well? Yep, dust....
I was amazed at the amount of stuff that found its way into the air that
originated from the interior spaces of the airframe. In spite of
vigorous vacuuming and blowing, there was still dust and particles that
were dislodged by the spray gun.
However, I soon discovered that it really didn't matter because there is
something available to every painter that will take care of dust
specks..............1500 grit sand paper.
I used to think the flawless paint finishes were the result of
immaculate gun technique. And while I highly respect the painters that
are true masters with a spray gun, any, and I repeat, any of us can get
a great finish if we are willing to spend some time sanding and buffing
dust and other defects. Yes, the less dust in the paint to begin with
the better, but there is no reason to obsess over surface defects
whether it is due to dust or suicidal bugs.
There are almost no paint flaws that can't be sanded out with 1500 paper
and buffing compound. If you use a single stage paint, then get the
paint on the best you can and resolve to perfect the finish after the
fact. Same goes for base coat/clear coat, you just may have to do the
job twice. Some of the best paint I laid down was on the components I
painted out in the yard on saw horses. Maybe there was enough of a
breeze to blow dust away from the paint. I decided to stop spending a
great deal of time figuring out why dust sometimes appeared and other
times it didn't, and just fix the blems later.
A friend of mine flew his new RV-8 today for the first time. He painted
the plane in the driveway, and while there are numerous problem areas to
fix, he will fly now and spend the winter sanding and buffing. By
spring, he will have a beautifully finished plane.
Painting, as are all aspects of RV construction, is difficult for the
exceptionally anal builders :-)
Relax, get the paint as nice as you can, confident that you can get the
showplane finish later if you wish to expend the necessary elbow grease.
Sam Buchanan (RV-6, nicely buffed.........except the bottom of the
wings.....maybe later.....maybe not....)
"The RV Journal" http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal
-----------------------
RV8DRIVER(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
>
> >Started painting tonight. Control Surfaces, wing tips, cowl
> >Cleaned, dusted, swept.......Cleaned, dusted and swept again.
> >If you think your shop is dust free, guess what....Your're wrong.
> >Oh well, I guess my amatuer built will have an amateur paint job ;' )
>
> Just a FWIW tip, get a large capacity pesticide/herbicide sprayer, 4-5
> gallons, and keep the floor wetted down as much as possible. I realize that
> this may create other problems if you're painting in your basement, but it
> will make a big difference in the amount of dust. Another thought is to wear
> freshly laundered clothes, or better still with the dangerous paints now
> used, is aTyvek paint suit with hood. Andy Johnson, 8 wings. BTW the paint
> experience is from numerous large scale RC models, I'm not really looking
> forward to painting something as large as an RV.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Unswingable Compass and first flight |
In a message dated 10/11/99 5:07:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
leo(at)icn.usyd.edu.au writes:
<< The building is done.... let the issues continue>>
Well done, Leo! Does my sleek canopy skirt cap give you a few more kph?
<< VH-LDX has an unswingable compass. I have it mounted on the stainless
steel windscreen support bar but the problem is clearly the windscreen
rollover bar.>>
Have you thought of degaussing the surrounding steel? I would think that
something somewhere has become magnetized perhaps from beating on the bar to
make it fit ;
).
<< Where have people mounted their compasses? Does anyone have a successful
installation on the windscreen brace?>>
My Precision vertical card compass works great about half way up the bar on
the slider.
I would think that a dash mount would be worse.
-GV
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: wing incidence |
LARRY I DID JUST THAT REDUCED THE ANGLE ON MY RV4 BOUNTY HUNTER. BEST TIME
SUN 100 227.25 WITH 180HP TOM RV8 LYCIO540
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Stefan King <seking(at)xoommail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-List Digest: FireWall Punches |
Harbor Freight Fall 1999 Catalog, middle of page 12,
6-piece punch set (3/16,1/4,5/16,3/8,7/16,1/2) item #02580-1RDH $3.99
9-piece punch set (3/32,1/8,5/32,3/16,1/4,5/16,3/8,7/16,1/2) item #03838-1RDH
$5.99
phone number: 800-423-2567
website: www.harborfreight.com
They say they are good "for light gauge sheet metal", I have not tried them on
stainless steel...
No I don't work for them, just happened to be looking at the catalog!
Stefan King
Sanford, FL
RV-6 plans and workshop stuff...
RV4WGH(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Several days ago, someone mentioned that Harbor Freight had some punches that
> were suitable for punching holes in the firewall. Does anyone have the
> catalog number for these punches? I have been unable to locate any in their
> catalog.
>
> Thanks
>
> Wally Hunt
> RV4WGH(at)aol.com
> Finishing Kit
________________________________________________________________________________
My project was purchased with the tail components nearly completed several
years ago. I recently completed the fuse tothe point where I needed to pull
the tail parts out of the shop rafters and fit them to my work. Good news
and bad: The hor and vir stabs fit perfectly to the fuse -- The vir stad has
a signeficant twist in it that doesn't look as if it can be repaired, the
hor stab and the elevators don't match very well and the overall construction
is not great. I have shown this mess to several people including Bill
Benedict from the factory
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | Airbox Clearance to Scoop |
The airbox on my 360 Airflow Performance 6A is about 3/8" from the left
side of the scoop. Engine torque should increase this distance, but is it
too close? Also, how far should the alternator be from the cowl? Lord
mounts.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
________________________________________________________________________________
My project was purchased with the tail components nearly completed several
years ago. I recently completed the fuse to the point where I needed to pull
the tail parts out of the shop rafters and fit them to my work. Good news
and bad: The hor and vir stabs fit perfectly to the fuse -- The vir stab has
a significant twist in it that doesn't look as if it can be repaired, the
hor stab and the elevators don't match very well and the overall construction
is not great. I have shown this mess to several people, including Bill
Benedict from the factory. Bottom line: build a new tail group. Yesterday
a friend building an 8 tried his vir stab on my fuse and it fit perfectly.
Question for the experts: Has anyone fitted an RV-8 tail to a 4? I know
this has been done on a Rocket I saw, but the contact at Van's did not know
of anyone doing this to a 4. I would like the simplicity of using the
pre-punched parts available with the 8, I expect it would weight a bit more
( about 4 inches larger), but perhaps the extra control surfaces wouldn't
hurt. Any ideas or comments? Thanks for the help. Sorry for the partial
msg, hit the send button by mistake.
Ray Grenier -- Back to step one
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ken Glover" <wirraway(at)bravo.net.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Pneumatic tailwheel |
<< pneumatic tailwheel someone reported buying at
Oshkosh...er, AirVenture.
> The Andair website doesn't give a clue... it
only lists fuel-related stuff
> and I can't make their e-mail button work.
>
> Can anybody steer me? Thanks.>>>
Johnny and others.
Below is a reply to an e-mail I sent to Andair,
which should answer most questions. Hope it helps.
Dear Ken,
Thanks for your note.
We make two types of pneumatic tail wheel. The 6"
and
the 7".
The 6" will fit on the Vans supplied tail fork
whereas the 7" will fit on
the Aviation products tail fork. (This is an
optional extra and is in the
catalogue)
The weight for the 6" is 1Lb 4.5Oz (half the
weight of the solid rubber
wheel) and the 7" weighs 1Lb 11.25 Oz.
The 6" on runs at $65.00 + $10.00 shipping and
the 7" one is $77.00 +
$12.00 shipping. They are currently only available
direct from Andair so if
you would like one of these wheels send a cheque
for the correct amount to
the address below (payable to Andair Ltd) and when
receive the cheque I will
send it out. However, in saying that, we are just
about to supply Vans the
first shipment of some 6" wheels. He may have not
sold all of them.
Both of the types have a 6 ply construction which
makes them rugged enough
to take the pounding of a bumpy strip. We
recommend pressure setting of
between 40 - 60 PSI. However this is a setting
that you will have to "play
with" so that you get the feel that you require,
but even at the maximum
rated 90 PSI it will still take out a good deal of
shock that is normally
transmitted by the solid type.
Thanks again, hope to hear from you soon.
Yours Sincerely
Owen Phillips.
andair(at)andair.co.uk ---
www.andair.co.uk
Andair Ltd.
Unit 3
25c Brockhampton Lane,
Havant
Hampshire
PO9 1JT
England
Fax +44 1705 473946 --- Tel +44 1705
473945
Cheers and take care,
Ken Glover Newcastle Oz RV4 VH-MKW
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: wing incidence |
In a message dated 10/12/99 1:38:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
brucegray(at)earthlink.net writes:
<< There has been several messages posted on the Glasair listserver that
suggest
that the greater the difference between the Horz. Stab. incidence and the
main
wing incidence (decallage ?sp), the slower and more stable the airplane. The
fastest Glasairs have the lowest decallage angle, but are a little more
"squirly".
Bruce >>
This is textbook aero 101. If you make more downforce with the horizontal
then the wing has to make up the lift(more induced drag) because the net
force of the two has to overcome the weight. The penalty in induced drag to
do this is minute when you are going the cruise speed with the light wing
loading of an RV type machine. You will pay in pitch stability which is not
the same as pitch sensitivity. Stability is if something like a gust or
bumping the stick upsets the airplane, does it comeback to level flight or
does it diverge to larger pitch angles. If the airplane is unstable, it can
not be flown hands off in a trimmed condition. The Voyager was designed
purposely this way for the around the world flight to make the ultimate fuel
mileage. Not what you want in a recreational aircraft for day to day flying.
I would not reduce the stability of my RV for a pitance more speed !!!
Bernie Kerr, 6A finishing, SE Fla
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Chalker <john.chalker(at)infoseek.com> |
The only problem I can forsee you might have is this. The tail in essence
provides a downward lift factor. With a bigger (than designed specs) HS and
no recalibration you will have a plane that will tend to raise its nose (due
to the extra reverse lift). I assume if you take in to account for this you
should be alright.
John
> -----Original Message-----
> From: GRENIER(at)aol.com [SMTP:GRENIER(at)aol.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 5:37 AM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: RV-4 Tail
>
>
> My project was purchased with the tail components nearly completed several
>
> years ago. I recently completed the fuse to the point where I needed to
> pull
> the tail parts out of the shop rafters and fit them to my work. Good news
>
> and bad: The hor and vir stabs fit perfectly to the fuse -- The vir stab
> has
> a significant twist in it that doesn't look as if it can be repaired, the
>
> hor stab and the elevators don't match very well and the overall
> construction
> is not great. I have shown this mess to several people, including Bill
> Benedict from the factory. Bottom line: build a new tail group.
> Yesterday
> a friend building an 8 tried his vir stab on my fuse and it fit perfectly.
>
> Question for the experts: Has anyone fitted an RV-8 tail to a 4? I know
> this has been done on a Rocket I saw, but the contact at Van's did not
> know
> of anyone doing this to a 4. I would like the simplicity of using the
> pre-punched parts available with the 8, I expect it would weight a bit
> more
> ( about 4 inches larger), but perhaps the extra control surfaces wouldn't
>
> hurt. Any ideas or comments? Thanks for the help. Sorry for the partial
>
> msg, hit the send button by mistake.
>
> Ray Grenier -- Back to step one
>
>
>
> -
>
> -
>
> -
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Acker" <racker(at)cyberhighway.net> |
| Subject: | AOA/LRI - Brian Lloyd |
> I have noticed in these discussions that there is
>invariably some detractor, someone who HAS NEVER ACTUALLY
>FLOWN with an LRI but
>nevertheless feeling knowledgeable enough to feel free to
>trash the product.
Tried to stay out of the current LRI thread, but it too closely duplicates
my experience with the folks at LRI (also my private and rv-list exchanges
with them).
I remember being told that I don't have to know how it works, it just works
and if you don't believe it its your loss. They were also unable to provide
product literature. I tried to arrange a demo even after this poor
service...which they were unable to provide.
In short, the product may indeed work and work well, but I have ZERO
confidence in the company behind it.
Oh...and if you check the NTSB archives, you will find that one pilot had
too much confidence in it and rotated before enough lift was available.
Rob Acker (RV-6Q, FWF stuff).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frazier, Vincent A" <VFrazier(at)usi.edu> |
| Subject: | rudder tabs and flap joggles |
I can add a few comments on the rudder tab issue and also on the wing
incidence/flap joggle discussion. My comments are based on a FLYING RV-4,
not on what looks good, etc.
Way back, before e-mail and before the RV-6, 8, or the 9, when I built my 4
I noticed that many, many 4's had an unsightly flap joggle where the flap
meets the belly. Someone at Van's said there were errors on the plans, or
at least misleading information, which caused the problems. I was told to
take some careful measurements off my wings (That's one reason to build the
wings before the fuselage) and adjust the F404 bulkhead so that the belly
skin/wing interface would be smooth. I did and had no flap joggle. I don't
recall making any changes to the HS incidence, but I did double check the
incidence relationship against the wing. The plane flew with the elevators
perfectly aligned.
Again way back, before e-mail and before the RV-6, 8, or the 9, when I built
my 4 I also noticed that virtually all 4's had a 6" rudder tab. I built
mine per the plans anyway because Van's advised me that all the other 4's
probably had built in errors which caused them to need the tab. Guess what
I added to mine after the first flight - YOU GUESSED RIGHT! - a 6" rudder
tab. Later my 4 was slightly damaged and I built a new VS and offset the
leading edge about 1/4 - 3/8" to the left when installed on te fuselage.
VOILA! NO MORE TAB NECESSARY! All you skeptics need to go look at some GA
airplanes. Many have an offset fin. A good example is a 300 hp Bellanca
that lives at a nearby field. It must be offset 1 and 1/2" or more. My
current RV project will be getting a 1/4" minimum offset. 'Nuf said.
My 4 goes 196 mph with no speed mods behind a tired 150 h.p. and wood prop.
I guess the above techniques must have worked OK.
FWIW, I plan to install some sort of angle of attack sensing device on my
current project. All competitors feel free to send product literature to
the address below.
Thank you,
Vince Frazier
3965 Caborn Road
Mount Vernon, IN 47620
812-985-7309 home
812-464-1839 office
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | A20driver(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV-List Digest: FireWall Punches |
I think those punches are for gasket material not stainless firewalls...Jim
Brown,NJ,3&4 flying..
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: ELT antenna location |
I used a aviation handheld "rubber duckie" antenna & in my limited tests it
works great. The signal reception of any antenna of this type....... in
theory...... has less signal capturing ability but according to my signal
strength meter & SWR meter ( I am a HAM amatuer radio geek...in a prior life)
I
am showing less than 3.5% loss difference between the 1/4 wave diapole cut
exactly for 121.5 MHZ ( as close as one can come with a file & SWR meter) and
the rather cool looking shapely rubber duckie antenna that came with my ICOM
A-22.....My biggest fear was poking the standard 2 foot antenns in my eye
because the rv-4 is rather close to the ground and the traditional location is
on the turtle deck location on the rv-4 allways produced a nurvious twitch in
my eye when I came near it....Now my rubber ducky antenna is located there
(about 2 feet ahead of the vert. stab on centerline)...........cheers
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
| Subject: | Lycoming 0320-A1A For Sale |
Will he take $10,000 ?
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Olson [mailto:lolson(at)doitnow.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 3:02 PM
Subject: RV-List: Lycoming 0320-A1A For Sale
OK, let's try again.
Friend will take offer...
------------------------------------------
Posting for a friend:
For Sale
Lycoming 0320-A1A Complete
0 SMOH
New Slick Mags & Harnesses
New Carb
New Prop Governor
New Vacuum Pump or Hyd Pump
Alternator
Starter
Fuel Pump
All logs since new
Rebuild by local reputable shop
$ 12,500 FOB Phoenix, AZ
Plug N Play...
You can reply to me and I'll forward.
Larry Olson
Cave Creek, AZ
RV6 - Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BumFlyer(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Unswingable Compass and first flight |
In a message dated 10/11/99 23:22:48, Vanremog(at)aol.com writes:
In a message dated 10/11/99 5:07:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
leo(at)icn.usyd.edu.au writes:
<< The building is done.... let the issues continue>>
Well done, Leo! Does my sleek canopy skirt cap give you a few more kph?
<< VH-LDX has an unswingable compass. I have it mounted on the stainless
steel windscreen support bar but the problem is clearly the windscreen
rollover bar.>>
Have you thought of degaussing the surrounding steel? >>
That's what I did with mine( the rollover bar) and it worked like a charm.
Tip and degausing was courtesy of Don Permattei. Must be something he
learned in Veterinary medicne. He used a big hog of a device which plugged
into AC current and hummed mightily. Be sure and remove the compass when you
do it! Mine is down on hte glare shield by the way, but the roll bar was
still interfering.
D Walsh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
The only problem I could forsee is that RV-4's are notoriously tail-heavy
anyway. I would worry about adding any extra weight on the tail. How much
does an 8 tail weigh as opposed to a 4? Although, I'm not an engineer...
-----Original Message-----
From: GRENIER(at)aol.com [mailto:GRENIER(at)aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 5:37 AM
Subject: RV-List: RV-4 Tail
My project was purchased with the tail components nearly completed several
years ago. I recently completed the fuse to the point where I needed to
pull
the tail parts out of the shop rafters and fit them to my work. Good news
and bad: The hor and vir stabs fit perfectly to the fuse -- The vir stab
has
a significant twist in it that doesn't look as if it can be repaired, the
hor stab and the elevators don't match very well and the overall
construction
is not great. I have shown this mess to several people, including Bill
Benedict from the factory. Bottom line: build a new tail group. Yesterday
a friend building an 8 tried his vir stab on my fuse and it fit perfectly.
Question for the experts: Has anyone fitted an RV-8 tail to a 4? I know
this has been done on a Rocket I saw, but the contact at Van's did not know
of anyone doing this to a 4. I would like the simplicity of using the
pre-punched parts available with the 8, I expect it would weight a bit more
( about 4 inches larger), but perhaps the extra control surfaces wouldn't
hurt. Any ideas or comments? Thanks for the help. Sorry for the partial
msg, hit the send button by mistake.
Ray Grenier -- Back to step one
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
The only problem I could forsee is that RV-4's are notoriously tail-heavy
anyway. I would worry about adding any extra weight on the tail. How much
does an 8 tail weigh as opposed to a 4? Although, I'm not an engineer...
-----Original Message-----
From: GRENIER(at)aol.com [mailto:GRENIER(at)aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 5:37 AM
Subject: RV-List: RV-4 Tail
My project was purchased with the tail components nearly completed several
years ago. I recently completed the fuse to the point where I needed to
pull
the tail parts out of the shop rafters and fit them to my work. Good news
and bad: The hor and vir stabs fit perfectly to the fuse -- The vir stab
has
a significant twist in it that doesn't look as if it can be repaired, the
hor stab and the elevators don't match very well and the overall
construction
is not great. I have shown this mess to several people, including Bill
Benedict from the factory. Bottom line: build a new tail group. Yesterday
a friend building an 8 tried his vir stab on my fuse and it fit perfectly.
Question for the experts: Has anyone fitted an RV-8 tail to a 4? I know
this has been done on a Rocket I saw, but the contact at Van's did not know
of anyone doing this to a 4. I would like the simplicity of using the
pre-punched parts available with the 8, I expect it would weight a bit more
( about 4 inches larger), but perhaps the extra control surfaces wouldn't
hurt. Any ideas or comments? Thanks for the help. Sorry for the partial
msg, hit the send button by mistake.
Ray Grenier -- Back to step one
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Van Artsdalen, Scott" <svanarts(at)unionsafe.com> |
The only problem I could forsee is that RV-4's are notoriously tail-heavy
anyway. I would worry about adding any extra weight on the tail. How much
does an 8 tail weigh as opposed to a 4? Although, I'm not an engineer...
-----Original Message-----
From: GRENIER(at)aol.com [mailto:GRENIER(at)aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 5:37 AM
Subject: RV-List: RV-4 Tail
My project was purchased with the tail components nearly completed several
years ago. I recently completed the fuse to the point where I needed to
pull
the tail parts out of the shop rafters and fit them to my work. Good news
and bad: The hor and vir stabs fit perfectly to the fuse -- The vir stab
has
a significant twist in it that doesn't look as if it can be repaired, the
hor stab and the elevators don't match very well and the overall
construction
is not great. I have shown this mess to several people, including Bill
Benedict from the factory. Bottom line: build a new tail group. Yesterday
a friend building an 8 tried his vir stab on my fuse and it fit perfectly.
Question for the experts: Has anyone fitted an RV-8 tail to a 4? I know
this has been done on a Rocket I saw, but the contact at Van's did not know
of anyone doing this to a 4. I would like the simplicity of using the
pre-punched parts available with the 8, I expect it would weight a bit more
( about 4 inches larger), but perhaps the extra control surfaces wouldn't
hurt. Any ideas or comments? Thanks for the help. Sorry for the partial
msg, hit the send button by mistake.
Ray Grenier -- Back to step one
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Vanderzyde <jvanderzyde(at)gtn.net> |
We are currently working on the Fusalage. I am a bit confused as to the orientation
of the components between the fire wall ( F-6101, F-602, F-684, F-655) and
the " spar" bulkhead (F-604).
Does the F6101 go inboard of the F-604 flange? Does the F-685 go outbord of all
of the other components, ect.....I find the plans are not to clear in this area.
If anyone has some detailed directions and/or pictures of this area, please send
them to me. They would be apritiated.
John Vanderzyde
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | n5lp <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net> |
Listers,
I looked at Tyler Feldman's checkerboard RV-6 at Copperstate. It's a
different world ain't it. My primary concern, after multiple cowl attach
failures, is to just keep the cowling from flapping in the breeze like
Levis on the line in west Texas. His concerns, apparently are that his
tail fairing, attached with 4 small screws, does not have a hairs breadth
gap anywhwere and that the mirror finish of the INSIDE of the cowling
does not have any smudges or pinholes. And how is it that the spinner
stays on with NO screws?
Let's see; my record in 100 hours.
Bottom cowl to fuselage attach hinges started breaking at about 5 hours.
Replaced with .063 aluminum and plate nuts. No further problems.
Side of bottom cowl to fuselage hinge attach on left side only replaced
once for about the top five eyes. Broken again now. Considering steel
or extruded aluminum hinge this time.
Behind spinner originally installed .063 aluminum and nut plates. Broke
on both sides this weekend. Planning 4130 steel.
The performance of this airplane is fantastic. I was able to easily make
it to Copperstate earlier from my home 500 miles away than from the motel
in Mesa on the shuttle bus. But this is if you don't consider all the
time for cowling attach repairs. Unless the plane gets more reliable I
really don't feel good about flying long distances in it; a pity.
I am baffled as to why I am having so much trouble. Some may be
vibration. There is not a propeller shop nearby, but I need to look for
one for a balancing job, although subjectively the plane seems smoother
than the majority of planes I have flown. Some may be a lack of building
technique although my cowl seems to have a nice relaxed fit and when I
read about the experiences of people like Mike Seager and Martin Sutter I
know this is not the whole story.
I think that if I built another RV I would first inventory all the
aluminum hinge. Then I would set aside the amount needed for the
seatbacks. The remaining hinge I would bundle up with duct tape and then
would run at top speed to the nearest dumpster.
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP 100 hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RV-Lis Compass swing |
See Elect. Bob for some Mueu Metal ( I know that is spelled wrong !) & wrap it
around your compass. This is a somewhat common aviation fix......
p.s. keep your subject line informative for all users of the archive
service......cheers
Dr Leo Davies on 10/11/99 07:38:59 PM
Please respond to rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV-List: (no subject)
Well,
The building is done.... let the issues continue
VH-LDX has an unswingable compass. I have it mounted on the stainless
steel windscreen support bar but the problem is clearly the windscreen
rollover bar.
Where have people mounted their compasses? Does anyone have a successful
installation on the windscreen brace? Dash mount?
(please tell me I don't have to make a hole in my nice panel)
Cheers,
Leo Davies
LDX (flying)
RV6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Keith Williams <73623.2504(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pneumatic tailwheel |
Listers -
Tom Glover's question on the Andair tailwheel prompted me to try the list
with this question. I have tried to contact Andair twice via the Email
part of their website with no reply - and don't see this covered in the
archives..
I purchased the 6" model at Oshkosh and installed it on my recently
completed RV6. It fit perfectly and looked good ( after an air to air
photo session the guys told me it spins like mad in flight - I hope it is
spinning in the right direction). After three or four flights it went flat
while taxiing back to the hanger. So now the old reliable solid wheel is
back on the airplane. On the Andair wheel the tire casing seems OK but the
tube will no longer hold air. Its like the tube got torn inside without a
blowout.
My problem is that I have not been able to get it to come apart (split). I
have removed the bolts and clamped the tire - trying to pry the wheel apart
with a wooden lever. I also tried inflating it to 90psi with the bolts
loosened. I can't tell for sure, but I think I see some dried adhesive
that has oozed out between the halves. At any rate, no luck so far in
opening it up. My next step would be to attack the parting seam with a
chisel of some kind. But Its such a nice part that I hate to mar it.
Has anyone had one apart or have any suggestions? Is it keyed in some way,
requiring that part be turned before splitting? Any ideas appreciated.
Also, any ideas about replacement inner tube sources this side of the
U.K.?. I have a suggestion to try the medical supply places where they use
wheelchair wheels of a similar size.........no TSO, though.
Keith Williams - Moline, IL
RV6 - 30 hours and learning.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Huntington <jimrhunt(at)wco.com> |
| Subject: | LRI/ Rob Acker / NTSB Reports |
Rob and Listers,
It has been brought to my attention by someone kind enough to forward Rob's
posting to me concerning the LRI and an NTSB report.
This is a very serious matter, and one of which I am totally unaware. Rob,
would you please post the report number and the location to access the
report. Please post this information, if you will, here on the list for
all those who might have an interest to read the report for themselves.
I subscribe to the digest version of this list so it may not be possible to
follow up on this matter until tomorrow.
Thanks Rob,
Jim Huntington
jimrhunt(at)wco.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Pneumatic tailwheel |
In a message dated 10/12/99 11:17:18 AM Central Daylight Time,
73623.2504(at)compuserve.com writes:
<< My problem is that I have not been able to get it to come apart (split) >>
I also purchased the 6" at OshKosh but have expeirenced no problems to date
in operating from both grass and hard surface with my "4".
Concerning splitting the wheel to replace tire / tube as is done with a
"normal" aircraft wheel, is this neccessary with the Andair considering the
considerably smaller dimensions, or was it designed to roll on/off as an auto
tire? Or am I missing something?
Steve Schmitz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry E James" <larryj(at)oz.net> |
Jim,
I have read the thread on the RV-List on LRI / PSS / Other / AoA with great
interest. I have found Brian Lloyd's discussion rational and very
non-discriminating. I have not read any distortion, negative or otherwise
biasing statements or intentions on his part. I have seen his attempt to
keep the discussion technically centered and technically accurate.
I don't really care how Jim or anyone else "feels" about these issues .... I
am concerned with the physics, technical accuracy, and user interface
involved with an AoA. I am not concerned with Jim's rationalization of
saving lives or how hurt he feels by these perceived attacks. Indeed, I
have not seen anyone attack him. I have seen strong technical discussion
where LRI's product (nothing to do with Jim, unless he personalizes this)
leaves some seemingly obvious gaps. These gaps may be technically
meaningful or not meaningful (first order vrs. second order effects) or
technically inaccurate. The technical questions posed have not been met
with technical answers.
I was convinced by two local pilots, one currently building and the other
getting ready to build (both ex-military fighter drivers / navigators) that
AoA is important and useful ... and I have decided to include it in my
airplane. Thank you Brian and Jim and Al for the discussion !!!!!
Cheers,
Larry E James
Bellevue, WA
larryj(at)oz.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Planning |
>
>If you are really looking for absolute min distance the only way to get it
>is to do a mock-up panel using the real instruments. There is definitely
>some variation between different "standard" sized instruments.
>
>I crammed a lot of instruments close together, and used a piece of scrap
>.032 AL to make a mock-up before cutting the real thing, and am glad I did.
>Masonite or thin plywood can also be used.
>
>
>Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (21 hrs)
>Portland, OR
>http://www.edt.com/homewing
Ive mentioned this before but... If you want to get some good quality
panel work done and particularly if you want/need a check panel to verify
placement, try Steve Davis. He provides a clear acrylic check panel as part
of his process. Check the archives for more info.
Mike Wills
RV4 canopy
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hal Kempthorne <kempthorne(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Prepping skins without removing alclad |
Mark and all,
My 1965 Beech Debonair is not primed on the inside and not corroded at all
tho the magnesium elevators were and so replaced a few years ago.
I believe there are three reasons not to prime some areas:
1: Not needed
2: Cost
3: Weight
hal
>If the alclad is so thin, would you be better off to skip the scotchbrite
>pads altogether and just etch, alodine and prime the parts? Perhaps I've
>just stumbled onto the reason the inside skins on many spam cans aren't
>primed at all.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hal Kempthorne <kempthorne(at)earthlink.net> |
>Larry wrote:
>I am baffled as to why I am having so much trouble. Some may be
>vibration.
Do we have any sources for vibration analysis? For industrial machinery
there are vibration signature analyzers.
I suspect some RVs have more trouble than others due to the quantity and
quality of vibration they are generating. I suppose this would be
especially true with modified engines.
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | trying to find Mark LaBoyteaux |
Does anyone know the email address of Mark LaBoyteaux? His old one at AOL
seems to be stale.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6513 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
>
>
>See Elect. Bob for some Mueu Metal ( I know that is spelled wrong !) &
wrap it
>around your compass. This is a somewhat common aviation fix......
> p.s. keep your subject line informative for all users of the archive
>service......cheers
It is called mu-metal (mu is the greek letter generally used to indicate
the magnetic coercivity of a substance). Magnetic lines of force are
attracted to and "stick" to a material with high magnetic coercivity thus
making this material a good magnetic "shield". The problem is, your
compass still needs to "receive" the earth's magnetic field so if you put a
mu-metal shield around the compass, the compass will no longer work.
If the source of magnetic interference is localized, you can reduce the
effects by putting a mu-metal shield around the offending source or as
close to the source as possible. The closer the shield is to your compass,
the more the shield will distort the earth's field and introduce compass
errors.
Also remember that plain old steel has fairly high coercivity and will act
as a shield or a conduit for a magnetic field. It may be that the post in
question was dropped and became permanently magnetized (one way to
magnetize steel is to align it with the earth's magnetic field and then
beat on it). If you can wrap a coil of wire around the steel post, you can
subject it to a decaying AC field and demagnetize it. That might reduce
its effect enough so that you can swing the compass.
If people need to do magnetic shielding (I needed to shield my needle/ball)
you can get mu-metal shielding material from Magnetic Shield Corporation
(http://www.magnetic-shield.com/). They make varying thicknesses from
plate down to foil. I used the thicker foil to make a shield for my T&B.
It is solderable so you can easily fabricate a can for any localized
magnetic source. They also make braid that you can slip over a wire and
reduce its magnetic effect. Very cool stuff.
>
>
>Dr Leo Davies on 10/11/99 07:38:59 PM
>
>Please respond to rv-list(at)matronics.com
>
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>
>Subject: RV-List: (no subject)
>
>
>Well,
>
>The building is done.... let the issues continue
>
>VH-LDX has an unswingable compass. I have it mounted on the stainless
>steel windscreen support bar but the problem is clearly the windscreen
>rollover bar.
>
>Where have people mounted their compasses? Does anyone have a successful
>installation on the windscreen brace? Dash mount?
>
>(please tell me I don't have to make a hole in my nice panel)
>
>Cheers,
>
>Leo Davies
>
>LDX (flying)
>RV6A
>
>
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6513 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "george murphy" <george(at)atlantic.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Trade for RV6(a) Kits? |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman Hunger" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Painting Info |
> However, I soon discovered that it really didn't matter because there is
> something available to every painter that will take care of dust
> specks..............1500 grit sand paper.
>
> There are almost no paint flaws that can't be sanded out with 1500 paper
> and buffing compound. If you use a single stage paint, then get the
> paint on the best you can and resolve to perfect the finish after the
> fact.
CAUTION - Most single stage metallic paints cannot be sanded at all without
exposing the metallic flakes as little silver spots. Looks terrible. If you
must have a metallic, basecoat clearcoat is easier to apply. You can wetsand
the clearcoat for a perfect finish. There are differences between the many
different brands of paints though.
The original post refers to solid colors and is very good information on
that topic. Check out his webpage to see the fine paintjob he now has.
Single stage metallic paints require good booths. Wet down the walls and
floor just before pushing in your project. Never wet down the roof, just
blow it off with high pressure air before the wetdown. Paint the wings one
at a time. Build racks for them with wheels on the bottom.
The new HVLP sprayers do much nicer work because they have a much higher
percentage of the paint applying to the surface than the old styles of spray
guns. It is the overspray that is the dust problem. The old guns make tons
of it. HVLP sprayers use less paint as a result. They are more efficient.
You will not need as much paint. If you invest in a good name brand system
you should be able to sell it when you are done for at least half of what
you paid for it.
Norman Hunger
RV6A Delta,BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank van der Hulst <frankv(at)ee.cit.ac.nz> |
John Vanderzyde wrote:
> We are currently working on the Fusalage. I am a bit confused as to the orientation
of the components between the fire wall ( F-6101, F-602, F-684, F-655)
and the " spar" bulkhead (F-604).
You're building an RV-6A, right? I'm building a -6, but have some photos
and notes that might still be useful.
Go to <http://members.xoom.com/frankv/bunny.htm> and follow the link to
Fuselage -- In the Jig. In the "Firewall to F-604 Longerons" section
there's a link to a photo.
> Does the F6101 go inboard of the F-604 flange? Does the F-685 go outbord of all
of the other components, ect.....I find the plans are not to clear in this
area.
I think the F6101 goes inboard. What's the F-685? I can't recall. Or do
you mean F655?
> If anyone has some detailed directions and/or pictures of this area, please send
them to me.
> They would be apritiated.
Feel free to email me with questions.
Frank.
--
frankv(at)ee.cit.ac.nz Frank van der Hulst
My home page is http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~frankvdh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
>
>I was convinced by two local pilots, one currently building and the other
>getting ready to build (both ex-military fighter drivers / navigators) that
>AoA is important and useful ... and I have decided to include it in my
>airplane. Thank you Brian and Jim and Al for the discussion !!!!!
>
>Cheers,
>Larry E James
>Bellevue, WA
>larryj(at)oz.net
I also have been convinced that AoA is a valuable instrument to have and
Im going to get one. When asked, LRI produced testimonials from unbiased
third parties attesting to the quality and usefulness of the instrument.
I'm gonna buy the LRI because it better fits my budget, it does what I need
it to do, and when I spoke to the company reps I walked away with a good
feeling that they were straight shooters. I didnt get the same feeling from
the PSS guy I talked to who spent a fair amount of time knocking the LRI
rather than telling me about the virtues of his own instrument.
While it would be nice to see these questions regarding how the instrument
works answered, its not critical in my decision to buy the instrument. For
me it is enough to know that it DOES work.
OTOH my track record on judging companies/products isnt all that great
recently since I'm one of the guys who has apparently been screwed by the
disappearance of Audio Flight Avionics.
Mike Wills
RV-4 canopy
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | donspawn(at)juno.com |
The 684's go up front on both the 6 & 6A, the 6 gets a 654 & 655 to the
rear.
the 6101's go on the rear of the 6A only & don't get any 654's or 655's.
ref drwg 31.
Be sure to tell us what airframe you are asking about.
The 685 is the backrest support on manuel flaps.
Take some time laying out the revits around the 6101, you will need to
hide one in each courner to hold things together until the visable rivet
are defined.
I think they wanted more structure around the geear legs brackets on the
6A to carry more load. The gear on the 6 is taken out in the engine
mount.
Don Jordan ~ 6A fuselage ~ Arlington,Tx ~ donspawn(at)juno.com
===========================================
writes:
>
>We are currently working on the Fusalage. I am a bit confused as to
>the orientation of the components between the fire wall ( F-6101,
>F-602, F-684, F-655) and the " spar" bulkhead (F-604).
>
>Does the F6101 go inboard of the F-604 flange? Does the F-685 go
>outbord of all of the other components,
>
>John Vanderzyde
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Olson <lolson(at)doitnow.com> |
John,
There are two web sites that I found to be very helpful in this area.
Sam Buchanan's at http://home.HiWAAY.net/~sbuc/journal/
and
M & M Aerosport at http://www.flash.net/~donmack/rv6a/index.html
Hope it helps...
Larry Olson
Cave Creek, AZ
RV6 - Sitting in Fuse making airplane noises!!!
>
>We are currently working on the Fusalage. I am a bit confused as to the
orientation of the components between the fire wall ( F-6101, F-602, F-684,
F-655) and the " spar" bulkhead (F-604).
>
>Does the F6101 go inboard of the F-604 flange? Does the F-685 go outbord
of all of the other components, ect.....I find the plans are not to clear
in this area.
>
>If anyone has some detailed directions and/or pictures of this area,
please send them to me. They would be apritiated.
>
>
>John Vanderzyde
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Al Mojzisik <prober(at)iwaynet.net> |
Well Larry, since you mentioned me by name I guess I'll comment on your
post. I think your post is very reasoned and well stated. I think what Jim
was refering to (and I'm not trying to speak for Jim here) is that his
private E-mails were posted to the RV-List with comments without even the
courtesy of a heads-up. I don't blame him for those "feelings". Frankly I
was surprised at Brian because I didn't think he would do something like
that. I have a lot of respect for Brian, but the tone of his posts just
seemed accusatory to me. Maybe it's just the way I'm reading it. But
beyond that, I don't blame Jim for his defense because of the last time
this got dragged accross the RV -List about a year ago. It's all in the
archives and people were getting pretty outspoken about their distaste for
further discussion in this forum. For Brian to bring it up in such a
context without giving Jim the courtesy of some private dialog puts Jim at
a distinct disadvantage in the discussion because as soon as he
participates he is, in some listers views, misuseing the RV-List. He's
darned if he does and darned if he doesn't. My interest in this is that I
have run several RV-List special price sales on the instrument. I e-mailed
Jim over a year ago and asked him if he could give us a special quantity
buy for RV-List members and he graciously agreed to do that. Since that
time I have run that special twice and haven't heard any complaints from
anyone who has participated. In fact I know one is flying and CB told me he
likes it but is getting more experience with it and learning what it will
do. I have since met Bill and Jim at Oshkosh and believe them to be
honorable men. For one thing, their instrument has a life time guarantee.
Something goes bad and they will make it right. No questions asked.
I realize that this still hasn't answered your question about just how does
it work. Well I have an idea but it's one that I have formed myself through
reasoning things out in my own mind. AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED,the fact is,
it does work. In all the feedback I have from people who have flown with
it, they say it works. Maybe Jim can give us more sources of information. I
don't know. And frankly I don't even care. What I care about is what people
who are using the device have to say about it's usefullness and accuracy.
When Rob Acker points us to that NTSB report to back up his claim, maybe I
can read something negative about the LRI. Until that happens I haven't
heard or seen anything negative about the instrument. What I have seen is
some people call it everything, including usefull, but I still come away
thinking that they still believe there is something wrong with it because
they don't understand it. Sometimes simplicity can be confusing. I
certainly hope I haven't offended you. AL
>
>Jim,
>I have read the thread on the RV-List on LRI / PSS / Other / AoA with great
>interest. I have found Brian Lloyd's discussion rational and very
>non-discriminating. I have not read any distortion, negative or otherwise
>biasing statements or intentions on his part. I have seen his attempt to
>keep the discussion technically centered and technically accurate.
>
>I don't really care how Jim or anyone else "feels" about these issues .... I
>am concerned with the physics, technical accuracy, and user interface
>involved with an AoA. I am not concerned with Jim's rationalization of
>saving lives or how hurt he feels by these perceived attacks. Indeed, I
>have not seen anyone attack him. I have seen strong technical discussion
>where LRI's product (nothing to do with Jim, unless he personalizes this)
>leaves some seemingly obvious gaps. These gaps may be technically
>meaningful or not meaningful (first order vrs. second order effects) or
>technically inaccurate. The technical questions posed have not been met
>with technical answers.
>
>I was convinced by two local pilots, one currently building and the other
>getting ready to build (both ex-military fighter drivers / navigators) that
>AoA is important and useful ... and I have decided to include it in my
>airplane. Thank you Brian and Jim and Al for the discussion !!!!!
>
>Cheers,
>Larry E James
>Bellevue, WA
>larryj(at)oz.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV -6/6A wing & tail kit for sale |
Hello listers,
Although I have been lurking for some time, this is not the type of first
message to the list I had anticipated sending. However, in the interest of
family harmony, here goes:
My RV-6/6A wing & tail kits are for sale. Included are:
HS, VS, rudder, and elevators complete (except fiberglass work)
trim tab 99% complete (set up for manual trim, easily changed to electric
trim)
Phlogiston spar
wings are in jigs with main skins and outboard leading edges drilled on.
no work has been done on the ailerons, flaps, fuel tanks.
aileron bellcrank drilled, but not riveted, no work on rest of controls.
variprime on tailkit, PPG DP-50 epoxy primer used on wings.
2 Van's landing light kits.
My tools will be offered first to who ever buys the wing kit.
Located in Jupiter, FL, near West Palm Beach.
For sale at my cost - $6350
Thanks, Alan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Totland <totland(at)telia.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pneumatic tailwheel |
Keith,
I had the same problem, although I got a few more flights (<20) before the
tire
went flat. I used a knife blade with edge placed at the parting seam to
split the
wheel. A light tap with a small hammer made the two halves come apart.
The parts are not keyed.
There is a reinforcement patch where the valve is attached to the tube. The
inner
tube was torn right at the edge of this patch. Seems like a quality problem
to me.
Rubber resembles cheap ($3) Chinese bicycle tubes. Tyre seems ok. I have
emailed my findings to Andair, but have seen no response. Pity, because it's
a beautiful wheel and taxiing is much smoother. I also need the weight
saving as
my -6 is tail heavy. Anyone else having had problems with this product?
If you find a replacement tube, please tell us.
Ernst Totland
SE-XOI RV6 200h
>
>snip
> After three or four
flights it went flat
>while taxiing back to the hanger. So now the old reliable solid wheel is
>back on the airplane. On the Andair wheel the tire casing seems OK but the
>tube will no longer hold air. Its like the tube got torn inside without a
>blowout.
>
>My problem is that I have not been able to get it to come apart (split). I
>have removed the bolts and clamped the tire - trying to pry the wheel apart
>with a wooden lever. I also tried inflating it to 90psi with the bolts
>loosened. I can't tell for sure, but I think I see some dried adhesive
>that has oozed out between the halves. At any rate, no luck so far in
>opening it up. My next step would be to attack the parting seam with a
>chisel of some kind. But Its such a nice part that I hate to mar it.
>
>Has anyone had one apart or have any suggestions? Is it keyed in some way,
>requiring that part be turned before splitting? Any ideas appreciated.
>
>Also, any ideas about replacement inner tube sources this side of the
>U.K.?. I have a suggestion to try the medical supply places where they use
>wheelchair wheels of a similar size.........no TSO, though.
>
>Keith Williams - Moline, IL
>RV6 - 30 hours and learning.
>
>snip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Weight (Was lighting) |
>I didn't weigh my .090 and .063 panels, but my guess is that the .090 was
>about 2 pounds heavier..not a big deal, really..the cost was about $40 for
>the sheet.
>
>Paul Besing
>RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
>http://members.home.net/rv8er
>Finish Kit<
>
>Seems to me that a few light angle stiffners riveted in the right places
>would provide the necessary stiffness at less weight. FWIW, Andy Johnson -8
>wing skinning
Aluminum weighs right at 0.1 pound per cubic inch. A sheet of aluminum
12 x 36 x .090 thick would weigh 3.88 pounds while .063 thick would
drop to 2.72 pounds for a decrease of about 1.1 pounds. I suspect
our 12 x 36 inch panel is a bit big so the expected weight
savings would be less than a pound. The trick now is to offset
the loss of stiffness with less than one pound of braces and
rivets.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o========
< Independence Kansas: the >
< Jurassic Park of aviation. >
< Your source for brand new >
< 40 year old airplanes. >
================================
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
>
>I was convinced by two local pilots, one currently building and the other
>getting ready to build (both ex-military fighter drivers / navigators) that
>AoA is important and useful ... and I have decided to include it in my
>airplane. Thank you Brian and Jim and Al for the discussion !!!!!
>
>Cheers,
>Larry E James
>Bellevue, WA
>larryj(at)oz.net
I also have been convinced that AoA is a valuable instrument to have and
Im going to get one. When asked, LRI produced testimonials from unbiased
third parties attesting to the quality and usefulness of the instrument.
I'm gonna buy the LRI because it better fits my budget, it does what I need
it to do, and when I spoke to the company reps I walked away with a good
feeling that they were straight shooters. I didnt get the same feeling from
the PSS guy I talked to who spent a fair amount of time knocking the LRI
rather than telling me about the virtues of his own instrument.
While it would be nice to see these questions regarding how the instrument
works answered, its not critical in my decision to buy the instrument. For
me it is enough to know that it DOES work.
OTOH my track record on judging companies/products isnt all that great
recently since I'm one of the guys who has apparently been screwed by the
disappearance of Audio Flight Avionics.
Mike Wills
RV-4 canopy
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Al Mojzisik <prober(at)iwaynet.net> |
Well Larry, since you mentioned me by name I guess I'll comment on your
post. I think your post is very reasoned and well stated. I think what Jim
was refering to (and I'm not trying to speak for Jim here) is that his
private E-mails were posted to the RV-List with comments without even the
courtesy of a heads-up. I don't blame him for those "feelings". Frankly I
was surprised at Brian because I didn't think he would do something like
that. I have a lot of respect for Brian, but the tone of his posts just
seemed accusatory to me. Maybe it's just the way I'm reading it. But
beyond that, I don't blame Jim for his defense because of the last time
this got dragged accross the RV -List about a year ago. It's all in the
archives and people were getting pretty outspoken about their distaste for
further discussion in this forum. For Brian to bring it up in such a
context without giving Jim the courtesy of some private dialog puts Jim at
a distinct disadvantage in the discussion because as soon as he
participates he is, in some listers views, misuseing the RV-List. He's
darned if he does and darned if he doesn't. My interest in this is that I
have run several RV-List special price sales on the instrument. I e-mailed
Jim over a year ago and asked him if he could give us a special quantity
buy for RV-List members and he graciously agreed to do that. Since that
time I have run that special twice and haven't heard any complaints from
anyone who has participated. In fact I know one is flying and CB told me he
likes it but is getting more experience with it and learning what it will
do. I have since met Bill and Jim at Oshkosh and believe them to be
honorable men. For one thing, their instrument has a life time guarantee.
Something goes bad and they will make it right. No questions asked.
I realize that this still hasn't answered your question about just how does
it work. Well I have an idea but it's one that I have formed myself through
reasoning things out in my own mind. AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED,the fact is,
it does work. In all the feedback I have from people who have flown with
it, they say it works. Maybe Jim can give us more sources of information. I
don't know. And frankly I don't even care. What I care about is what people
who are using the device have to say about it's usefullness and accuracy.
When Rob Acker points us to that NTSB report to back up his claim, maybe I
can read something negative about the LRI. Until that happens I haven't
heard or seen anything negative about the instrument. What I have seen is
some people call it everything, including usefull, but I still come away
thinking that they still believe there is something wrong with it because
they don't understand it. Sometimes simplicity can be confusing. I
certainly hope I haven't offended you. AL
>
>Jim,
>I have read the thread on the RV-List on LRI / PSS / Other / AoA with great
>interest. I have found Brian Lloyd's discussion rational and very
>non-discriminating. I have not read any distortion, negative or otherwise
>biasing statements or intentions on his part. I have seen his attempt to
>keep the discussion technically centered and technically accurate.
>
>I don't really care how Jim or anyone else "feels" about these issues .... I
>am concerned with the physics, technical accuracy, and user interface
>involved with an AoA. I am not concerned with Jim's rationalization of
>saving lives or how hurt he feels by these perceived attacks. Indeed, I
>have not seen anyone attack him. I have seen strong technical discussion
>where LRI's product (nothing to do with Jim, unless he personalizes this)
>leaves some seemingly obvious gaps. These gaps may be technically
>meaningful or not meaningful (first order vrs. second order effects) or
>technically inaccurate. The technical questions posed have not been met
>with technical answers.
>
>I was convinced by two local pilots, one currently building and the other
>getting ready to build (both ex-military fighter drivers / navigators) that
>AoA is important and useful ... and I have decided to include it in my
>airplane. Thank you Brian and Jim and Al for the discussion !!!!!
>
>Cheers,
>Larry E James
>Bellevue, WA
>larryj(at)oz.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <rv8er(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Weight (Was lighting) |
Where do you get all of your data, Bob? That is great stuff...glad to have
you on the list!
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://members.home.net/rv8er
Finish Kit
> Aluminum weighs right at 0.1 pound per cubic inch. A sheet of aluminum
> 12 x 36 x .090 thick would weigh 3.88 pounds while .063 thick would
> drop to 2.72 pounds for a decrease of about 1.1 pounds. I suspect
> our 12 x 36 inch panel is a bit big so the expected weight
> savings would be less than a pound. The trick now is to offset
> the loss of stiffness with less than one pound of braces and
> rivets.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ////
> (o o)
> ===========o00o=(_)=o00o========
> < Independence Kansas: the >
> < Jurassic Park of aviation. >
> < Your source for brand new >
> < 40 year old airplanes. >
> ================================
> http://www.aeroelectric.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Heavier Instument Panel Aluminum |
Paul: Where did you get your 0.090 aluminum for the panel? I checked A/C
Spruce and the smallest piece they offer is 2' x 4' for about twice what you
say you paid.
Harry Crosby (HCRV6(at)aol.com)
Fuselage skinning (still)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LIVING with aircraft batteries |
>Bob,
>
>I looked at this website and could only find their SecureStart product.
Hmmm . . . they've rearranged their website again. Try this:
http://199.239.60.165/tech/tmf.asp
This points to the description of the individual cells . . .
>How
>would you propose using this in the architecture you describe above? Also,
>would you have zero battery backup for electric instruments because of the
>dual alternators?
you betcha! no need to carry lots of lead around if you have
two engine driven power sources.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o========
< Independence Kansas: the >
< Jurassic Park of aviation. >
< Your source for brand new >
< 40 year old airplanes. >
================================
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <rv8er(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Heavier Instument Panel Aluminum |
Steve Davis got it when he cut my panel. He got it from a local supplier in
Memphis. You may want to give him a call...here is his website.
http://members.aol.com/panelcut
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://members.home.net/rv8er
Finish Kit
-----Original Message-----
From: HCRV6(at)aol.com <HCRV6(at)aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 9:49 PM
Subject: RV-List: Heavier Instument Panel Aluminum
>
>Paul: Where did you get your 0.090 aluminum for the panel? I checked A/C
>Spruce and the smallest piece they offer is 2' x 4' for about twice what
you
>say you paid.
>
>Harry Crosby (HCRV6(at)aol.com)
>Fuselage skinning (still)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Listers: I can't resist asking what is probably a really dumb painting
question. For you guys who are finished painting, when in the building
process did you finish paint the interior of the cabin (RV-6/6A), before
riveting the skins on or after the fuse is out of the jig?
Harry Crosby
HCRV6(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <rv8er(at)home.com> |
Sorry I don't qualify for the sequence, as I have a quickbuild, but I can
tell you that it was no big deal to paint it after the skins were on. You
may want to wait until you have done the canopy and such, to avoid
scratching the paint, if you don't use a very tough paint. I painted mine
too early..if I were to do it again, it would be one of the last things I
did before putting in wiring, canopy, and interior.
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://members.home.net/rv8er
Finish Kit
-----Original Message-----
From: HCRV6(at)aol.com <HCRV6(at)aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 10:12 PM
Subject: RV-List: Painting
>
>Listers: I can't resist asking what is probably a really dumb
painting
>question. For you guys who are finished painting, when in the building
>process did you finish paint the interior of the cabin (RV-6/6A), before
>riveting the skins on or after the fuse is out of the jig?
>
>Harry Crosby
>HCRV6(at)aol.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <rv8er(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | .090 panel/MicroEncoder |
Oh yeah, a word of caution using the .090. If you are installing a
MicroEncoder in a .090 panel, it will not sit flush on the front of the
panel, as it's front edge is only deep enough to sit flush on an .063 panel.
Mine sits back a little..not a big deal, but for aesthetic reasons, I wish
it was flush.
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://members.home.net/rv8er
Finish Kit
-----Original Message-----
From: HCRV6(at)aol.com <HCRV6(at)aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 9:49 PM
Subject: RV-List: Heavier Instument Panel Aluminum
>
>Paul: Where did you get your 0.090 aluminum for the panel? I checked A/C
>Spruce and the smallest piece they offer is 2' x 4' for about twice what
you
>say you paid.
>
>Harry Crosby (HCRV6(at)aol.com)
>Fuselage skinning (still)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | donspawn(at)juno.com |
>
>Listers: I can't resist asking what is probably a really dumb
>painting
>question. For you guys who are finished painting, when in the
>building
>process did you finish paint the interior of the cabin (RV-6/6A),
>before
>riveting the skins on or after the fuse is out of the jig?
>
>Harry Crosby
>HCRV6(at)aol.com
I am waiting on the finish kit. 6A w/tip up. I have 1/2 the instruments
in & the elec flaps. I am still at cleco stage. I painted the interior
w/ Centari. Will wait to rivet any thing until I get the canopy finished.
Seems like everthing needs to come back out for the 50th time, so I am to
scared to rivet yet. The brakes can be installed backwards. I did get
them in right side up though. I shot every thing that you won't be able
to see on the bench. I left the 672 forward bottom skin off, then I shot
the interior. I still have to do the 631 roll bar, the top of the 605 &
the 621's on the side.
Don Jordan ~ 6A fuselage ~ Arlington,Tx ~ donspawn(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mitch Faatz <mfaatz(at)sagent.com> |
>
>...AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED,the fact is, it does work.
>In all the feedback I have from people who have flown with
>it, they say it works.
Yikes, this has certainly gone from what I thought was a good technical
discussion to a personal thang. Jim of LRI, I didn't perceive Brian's
emails as "attacking" you, but more of a request for less hand waving and
more technical data. You replied with more hand waving and complaining.
And yet again, failed to provide some technical data or background. And I
think Brian is justified in trying to figure out just where the LRI might be
less accurate, since people are partially "betting their bacon" on it. Yes,
everybody who has an LRI might be fat dumb and happy with it's performance,
but are there times in the flight regime that they are flying closer to the
raggest edge than they know?
We're talking about the LRI not knowing that the airfoil has changed shape
due to flap deployment. Last time I checked this happens at a pretty
critical time, in the pattern and on final. If the LRI is possibly less
accurate during the most critical time, you bet people are interested in
finding out just how and to what degree it is off. It's that simple. Not a
personal attack, just a request for information on the product.
Mitch Faatz San Jose, CA N727MF (reserved)
RV-6AQME Finishing Kit...
Pres/Newsletter Editor - Bay Area RVators
http://www.skybound.com/BARV
http://www.aftershock.org/rv.htm
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: EGT & Fuel Flow Question |
| From: | "William R. Davis Jr" <rvpilot(at)juno.com> |
writes:
>
>I have just purchased an RV-6A with a Lycoming 160 and Hartzell
>constant
>speed prop. Total time on the airframe, engine and prop is now 120
>hours.
>I have flown it for the last 14 of those hours including a trip from
>GA to
>NH to bring it home.
>
Frank,
Your numbers seem reasonable to me.
EGT readings are relative and have a whole lot to do with how far down
the exhaust pipes the thermocouples are installed. My own EGT's run in
the 1380 to 1420 range when leaned to peak at 65 % power.
Regards, Bill N66WD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | LRI and AoA (long) |
>
>Well Larry, since you mentioned me by name I guess I'll comment on your
>post. I think your post is very reasoned and well stated. I think what Jim
>was refering to (and I'm not trying to speak for Jim here) is that his
>private E-mails were posted to the RV-List with comments without even the
>courtesy of a heads-up. I don't blame him for those "feelings". Frankly I
>was surprised at Brian because I didn't think he would do something like
>that.
It was a mistake. I had taken myself off the RV-list temporarily and
thought that the message had come to me and been posted to the RV-list so I
replied accordingly.
>I have a lot of respect for Brian, but the tone of his posts just
>seemed accusatory to me. Maybe it's just the way I'm reading it.
Not accusatory but certainly frustrated. I have people asking me how the
LRI works and is it a valid source of AoA information? I want to
understand it so I can give reasonable answers. All I can do is look at
the instrument, look at the patent (look up US patent number 4559822 at
http://www.patents.ibm.com), and try to divine the information myself. The
patent is very illuminating and creates more questions in my mind.
>But
>beyond that, I don't blame Jim for his defense because of the last time
>this got dragged accross the RV -List about a year ago. It's all in the
>archives and people were getting pretty outspoken about their distaste for
>further discussion in this forum. For Brian to bring it up in such a
>context without giving Jim the courtesy of some private dialog puts Jim at
>a distinct disadvantage in the discussion because as soon as he
>participates he is, in some listers views, misuseing the RV-List. He's
>darned if he does and darned if he doesn't.
I was under the impression that people wanted this information. I got the
feeling that there were a lot of people considering some sort of AoA
device, the two most prominent being the LRI and the PSS AoA from Jim
Frantz. I thought that, since the discussion originated here (my mistake
-- it had originated on another list the and reply from Jim was a private
one forwarded to me privately), my response should go back here. It just
goes to show that even someone who has taught others to look carefully at
the headers before posting, can make a mistake.
>My interest in this is that I
>have run several RV-List special price sales on the instrument. I e-mailed
>Jim over a year ago and asked him if he could give us a special quantity
>buy for RV-List members and he graciously agreed to do that. Since that
>time I have run that special twice and haven't heard any complaints from
>anyone who has participated. In fact I know one is flying and CB told me he
>likes it but is getting more experience with it and learning what it will
>do. I have since met Bill and Jim at Oshkosh and believe them to be
>honorable men. For one thing, their instrument has a life time guarantee.
>Something goes bad and they will make it right. No questions asked.
This certainly sounds like good business practice and good support for
their customers.
>I realize that this still hasn't answered your question about just how does
>it work. Well I have an idea but it's one that I have formed myself through
>reasoning things out in my own mind. AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED,the fact is,
>it does work. In all the feedback I have from people who have flown with
>it, they say it works. Maybe Jim can give us more sources of information. I
>don't know. And frankly I don't even care. What I care about is what people
>who are using the device have to say about it's usefullness and accuracy.
Ahh, now you get to my major concern -- accuracy. Is the LRI an accurate
portrayal of angle of attack? Will it keep you out of trouble? The more I
look at it the more it appears that it is NOT an angle of attack indicator.
From what I have been able to determine, it is only correct at one angle
of attack, the AoA which corresponds to the zero indication on the
instrument. If it is calibrated at the critical angle of attack (stall)
then it will reliably indicate critical AoA and only that one AoA. If you
use it to indicate how far you are from critical AoA the faster you are
going and the more your airplane is loaded (pulling Gs), the more it will
indicate you are "safe" when in fact you are actually quite close to stall.
Unlike true angle of attack instruments, airspeed has a significant effect
on the LRI indication over and above the actual AoA. In fact, the LRI
displays a combination of airspeed and AoA in one guage. If you are going
fast and pulling hard, you just might hit an accelerated stall before the
LRI has a chance to tell you that you are near the edge.
>When Rob Acker points us to that NTSB report to back up his claim, maybe I
>can read something negative about the LRI. Until that happens I haven't
>heard or seen anything negative about the instrument. What I have seen is
>some people call it everything, including usefull, but I still come away
>thinking that they still believe there is something wrong with it because
>they don't understand it. Sometimes simplicity can be confusing.
And sometimes too much simplicity can make something less than useful. The
LRI has red and green areas on the instrument, apparently there to indicate
safe and unsafe operating range. If you are flying in a narrow range of
airspeed, such as during landing approach, this is probably valid. If you
have the airplane loaded up and pulling Gs, the LRI indications are
magnified such that the needle might be in the green range when in fact it
would be in the red range if the aircraft were on a 1G approach to the
airport.
Now this is not in and of itself a bad thing IF THE PILOT KNOWS THIS IS
HAPPENING! I suspected that this is the case but I didn't know for sure so
I asked Jim the questions. The LRI will definitely tell you is if you are
approaching a stall if:
1. it was calibrated to indicate zero right at stall;
2. the airplane is configured exactly the same way it was (gear, flaps,
slats) when it was calibrated.
Beyond that I am not sure what it will tell you. Maybe it is really useful
and the combination of AoA and AS in the same instrument turns out to be
really useful, I don't know. What I think I may safely say now is that the
LRI is not a pure AoA instrument and people using it to guage their AoA are
not necessarily getting the information that they think they are getting.
How far it is in error, I don't know. It may be that the errors are not
significant enough to matter. The errors may matter very much. I simply
don't know and I would like to find out.
It would be really easy to get better information if someone with a LRI
would go out and do some tests. I would like to know how the LRI indicates
margin above stall at higher G loadings (accelerated stall). Start by
finding the airspeed that corresponds to the top of the red on the LRI and
identify what percentage above stall speed the top of the red represents.
Now lets repeat the test at 2 Gs (60 degree bank level turn) and 3 Gs (70
degree bank level turn). If the margin above stall remains the same or if
the amount above stall speed remains the same then it is clear that the LRI
is useful at higher G loading. My suspicion is that the stall margin
indicated by the LRI will be greater than the actual stall margin remaining.
Even if there are errors in the LRI, if people who own them know what the
errors are they can mentally compensate thus making the LRI more useful.
If I owned an LRI I would certainly be doing this kind of test so that I
could fully understand my instrument.
So I apologize to everyone for taking up too much bandwidth here. I have
gotten a little carried away. Hopefully someone will perform the tests I
suggested above and then send the information to me so I will know. In any
case I will shut up now because, without experimental information, anything
more would be just beating a dead horse.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6513 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Planning |
>
>>
>>If you are really looking for absolute min distance the only way to get it
>>is to do a mock-up panel using the real instruments. There is definitely
>>some variation between different "standard" sized instruments.
>>
>>I crammed a lot of instruments close together, and used a piece of scrap
>>.032 AL to make a mock-up before cutting the real thing, and am glad I did.
>>Masonite or thin plywood can also be used.
I used my calipers to measure each instrument separately and then created a
template for each instrument in my CAD program. This works well also and
prevents nasty surprises. Of course this presumes you already have the
instrument in hand to measure.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6513 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Copperstate time-to-climb attempt |
Hey, Paul or other Copperstate attendees. I'd like to hear how Bruce
Bohannon and the Flyin' Tiger did on their 6000m record attempt. I live near
his home base and hang out there a lot turning screwdrivers when needed and
bumming rides in his RV-4. He had the Tiger running really well before he
left Texas and felt good about the attempt. I hope it went well.
Troy Black
-8 VS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Bolder Tech Batteries was "LIVING with aircraft batteries" |
Bob,
I looked through my files and found Bolders information on the TMF Rebel
batteries. I just emailed them to see if they still sell them. Their 12
volt, 1 amp, 6 cell battery puts out 150 cold peak starting amps and >1200
peak short circuit current amps and weighs 1.6 lbs. The 12 cell has twice
the output and weighs 2.9 lbs. These would be great if they still make them
and the have a reasonable price and longevity. Would you use two in series
or just have one?
Ross Mickey
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
> Hmmm . . . they've rearranged their website again. Try this:
>
> http://199.239.60.165/tech/tmf.asp
>
> This points to the description of the individual cells . . .
>
> >How
> >would you propose using this in the architecture you describe above?
Also,
> >would you have zero battery backup for electric instruments because of
the
> >dual alternators?
>
> you betcha! no need to carry lots of lead around if you have
> two engine driven power sources.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sam Buchanan <sbuc(at)hiwaay.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Painting Info |
Yes indeed, Norman, these are good points. I failed to mention that I
used solid colors in my paint scheme. However, I wonder if the truly
novice painter has any business using metallic paints. A local RV'er
used metallic single stage paint and it was very difficult to keep the
metallic application uniform. He did sand some orange peel out of his
finish and it sanded and buffed well (PPG Concept, a most forgiving
paint).
Sam Buchanan
----------------
Norman Hunger wrote:
>
>
> > However, I soon discovered that it really didn't matter because there is
> > something available to every painter that will take care of dust
> > specks..............1500 grit sand paper.
> >
>
> > There are almost no paint flaws that can't be sanded out with 1500 paper
> > and buffing compound. If you use a single stage paint, then get the
> > paint on the best you can and resolve to perfect the finish after the
> > fact.
>
> CAUTION - Most single stage metallic paints cannot be sanded at all without
> exposing the metallic flakes as little silver spots. Looks terrible. If you
> must have a metallic, basecoat clearcoat is easier to apply. You can wetsand
> the clearcoat for a perfect finish. There are differences between the many
> different brands of paints though.
>
> The original post refers to solid colors and is very good information on
> that topic. Check out his webpage to see the fine paintjob he now has.
>
> Single stage metallic paints require good booths. Wet down the walls and
> floor just before pushing in your project. Never wet down the roof, just
> blow it off with high pressure air before the wetdown. Paint the wings one
> at a time. Build racks for them with wheels on the bottom.
>
> The new HVLP sprayers do much nicer work because they have a much higher
> percentage of the paint applying to the surface than the old styles of spray
> guns. It is the overspray that is the dust problem. The old guns make tons
> of it. HVLP sprayers use less paint as a result. They are more efficient.
> You will not need as much paint. If you invest in a good name brand system
> you should be able to sell it when you are done for at least half of what
> you paid for it.
>
> Norman Hunger
> RV6A Delta,BC
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Acker" <racker(at)cyberhighway.net> |
| Subject: | LRI/ Rob Acker / NTSB Reports |
> Rob,
> would you please post the report number and the location to access the
> report. Please post this information, if you will, here on the list for
> all those who might have an interest to read the report for themselves.
Jim,
Here's what I found: http://www.ntsb.gov/aviation/lax/93a170.htm
Of course, the LRI may have been incorrectly adjusted and/or faulty at the
time of the incident.
Rob Acker (RV-6Q, FWF stuff).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Hamer <shamer(at)mscomm.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pneumatic tailwheel |
Anyone else having had problems with this product? (Andair Pneumatic
Tailwheel)
I got about a half dozen landings out of mine before it went flat. It sure is
a
nice tailwheel but if I have to carry my old tailwheel for insurance, I'll bolt
it back on the tail of the plane and leave the pretty Andair wheel in the
hangar. Here's hoping they come up with a better tube.
Steve Hamer
RV-4 Bought it, didn't build it
RV-6 Left wing almost done
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Al Mojzisik <prober(at)iwaynet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LRI and AoA (long) |
Now this is the Brian Lloyed I thought I knew and admired. Brian I
completely agree with you and your questions are well put and I hope to
find a way to get as many of them as possible answered. Thank you. You have
not let me down. AL
>
>>
>>Well Larry, since you mentioned me by name I guess I'll comment on your
>>post. I think your post is very reasoned and well stated. I think what Jim
>>was refering to (and I'm not trying to speak for Jim here) is that his
>>private E-mails were posted to the RV-List with comments without even the
>>courtesy of a heads-up. I don't blame him for those "feelings". Frankly I
>>was surprised at Brian because I didn't think he would do something like
>>that.
>
>It was a mistake. I had taken myself off the RV-list temporarily and
>thought that the message had come to me and been posted to the RV-list so I
>replied accordingly.
>
>>I have a lot of respect for Brian, but the tone of his posts just
>>seemed accusatory to me. Maybe it's just the way I'm reading it.
>
>Not accusatory but certainly frustrated. I have people asking me how the
>LRI works and is it a valid source of AoA information? I want to
>understand it so I can give reasonable answers. All I can do is look at
>the instrument, look at the patent (look up US patent number 4559822 at
>http://www.patents.ibm.com), and try to divine the information myself. The
>patent is very illuminating and creates more questions in my mind.
>
>>But
>>beyond that, I don't blame Jim for his defense because of the last time
>>this got dragged accross the RV -List about a year ago. It's all in the
>>archives and people were getting pretty outspoken about their distaste for
>>further discussion in this forum. For Brian to bring it up in such a
>>context without giving Jim the courtesy of some private dialog puts Jim at
>>a distinct disadvantage in the discussion because as soon as he
>>participates he is, in some listers views, misuseing the RV-List. He's
>>darned if he does and darned if he doesn't.
>
>I was under the impression that people wanted this information. I got the
>feeling that there were a lot of people considering some sort of AoA
>device, the two most prominent being the LRI and the PSS AoA from Jim
>Frantz. I thought that, since the discussion originated here (my mistake
>-- it had originated on another list the and reply from Jim was a private
>one forwarded to me privately), my response should go back here. It just
>goes to show that even someone who has taught others to look carefully at
>the headers before posting, can make a mistake.
>
>>My interest in this is that I
>>have run several RV-List special price sales on the instrument. I e-mailed
>>Jim over a year ago and asked him if he could give us a special quantity
>>buy for RV-List members and he graciously agreed to do that. Since that
>>time I have run that special twice and haven't heard any complaints from
>>anyone who has participated. In fact I know one is flying and CB told me he
>>likes it but is getting more experience with it and learning what it will
>>do. I have since met Bill and Jim at Oshkosh and believe them to be
>>honorable men. For one thing, their instrument has a life time guarantee.
>>Something goes bad and they will make it right. No questions asked.
>
>This certainly sounds like good business practice and good support for
>their customers.
>
>>I realize that this still hasn't answered your question about just how does
>>it work. Well I have an idea but it's one that I have formed myself through
>>reasoning things out in my own mind. AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED,the fact is,
>>it does work. In all the feedback I have from people who have flown with
>>it, they say it works. Maybe Jim can give us more sources of information. I
>>don't know. And frankly I don't even care. What I care about is what people
>>who are using the device have to say about it's usefullness and accuracy.
>
>Ahh, now you get to my major concern -- accuracy. Is the LRI an accurate
>portrayal of angle of attack? Will it keep you out of trouble? The more I
>look at it the more it appears that it is NOT an angle of attack indicator.
> From what I have been able to determine, it is only correct at one angle
>of attack, the AoA which corresponds to the zero indication on the
>instrument. If it is calibrated at the critical angle of attack (stall)
>then it will reliably indicate critical AoA and only that one AoA. If you
>use it to indicate how far you are from critical AoA the faster you are
>going and the more your airplane is loaded (pulling Gs), the more it will
>indicate you are "safe" when in fact you are actually quite close to stall.
> Unlike true angle of attack instruments, airspeed has a significant effect
>on the LRI indication over and above the actual AoA. In fact, the LRI
>displays a combination of airspeed and AoA in one guage. If you are going
>fast and pulling hard, you just might hit an accelerated stall before the
>LRI has a chance to tell you that you are near the edge.
>
>>When Rob Acker points us to that NTSB report to back up his claim, maybe I
>>can read something negative about the LRI. Until that happens I haven't
>>heard or seen anything negative about the instrument. What I have seen is
>>some people call it everything, including usefull, but I still come away
>>thinking that they still believe there is something wrong with it because
>>they don't understand it. Sometimes simplicity can be confusing.
>
>And sometimes too much simplicity can make something less than useful. The
>LRI has red and green areas on the instrument, apparently there to indicate
>safe and unsafe operating range. If you are flying in a narrow range of
>airspeed, such as during landing approach, this is probably valid. If you
>have the airplane loaded up and pulling Gs, the LRI indications are
>magnified such that the needle might be in the green range when in fact it
>would be in the red range if the aircraft were on a 1G approach to the
>airport.
>
>Now this is not in and of itself a bad thing IF THE PILOT KNOWS THIS IS
>HAPPENING! I suspected that this is the case but I didn't know for sure so
>I asked Jim the questions. The LRI will definitely tell you is if you are
>approaching a stall if:
>
>1. it was calibrated to indicate zero right at stall;
>2. the airplane is configured exactly the same way it was (gear, flaps,
>slats) when it was calibrated.
>
>Beyond that I am not sure what it will tell you. Maybe it is really useful
>and the combination of AoA and AS in the same instrument turns out to be
>really useful, I don't know. What I think I may safely say now is that the
>LRI is not a pure AoA instrument and people using it to guage their AoA are
>not necessarily getting the information that they think they are getting.
>
>How far it is in error, I don't know. It may be that the errors are not
>significant enough to matter. The errors may matter very much. I simply
>don't know and I would like to find out.
>
>It would be really easy to get better information if someone with a LRI
>would go out and do some tests. I would like to know how the LRI indicates
>margin above stall at higher G loadings (accelerated stall). Start by
>finding the airspeed that corresponds to the top of the red on the LRI and
>identify what percentage above stall speed the top of the red represents.
>Now lets repeat the test at 2 Gs (60 degree bank level turn) and 3 Gs (70
>degree bank level turn). If the margin above stall remains the same or if
>the amount above stall speed remains the same then it is clear that the LRI
>is useful at higher G loading. My suspicion is that the stall margin
>indicated by the LRI will be greater than the actual stall margin remaining.
>
>Even if there are errors in the LRI, if people who own them know what the
>errors are they can mentally compensate thus making the LRI more useful.
>If I owned an LRI I would certainly be doing this kind of test so that I
>could fully understand my instrument.
>
>So I apologize to everyone for taking up too much bandwidth here. I have
>gotten a little carried away. Hopefully someone will perform the tests I
>suggested above and then send the information to me so I will know. In any
>case I will shut up now because, without experimental information, anything
>more would be just beating a dead horse.
>
>
>Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
>brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
>http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
>+1.530.676.6513 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cowl Attach-Vibration |
I know of two RV-6's ; one had the senior vibration enginer & staff from a
fortune 100 company come to the airport and did analysis of anything thet
moved,spun,rotated,flapped,or moved in any way & added weights to smooth out the
airplane----result 160 hrs. latter hinge eye cracks........... the other rv-6
had NOTHING ballanced about it ( as a matter of fact I know he dosen't even
ballance his check book !) and a 200 hours nothing cracked....go figure
kempthorne(at)earthlink.net on 10/12/99 01:26:27 PM
Please respond to rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Cowl Attach
>Larry wrote:
>I am baffled as to why I am having so much trouble. Some may be
>vibration.
Do we have any sources for vibration analysis? For industrial machinery
there are vibration signature analyzers.
I suspect some RVs have more trouble than others due to the quantity and
quality of vibration they are generating. I suppose this would be
especially true with modified engines.
hal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net> |
> >
> >Listers: I can't resist asking what is probably a really dumb
> >painting question. For you guys who are finished painting, when in the
> >building process did you finish paint the interior of the cabin
> >(RV-6/6A), before riveting the skins on or after the fuse is out of the
I painted the interior after the plane was on gear, all instruments and
lines fitted (but removed for painting). Pictures are on my web site.
Worked pretty good for me. Took some time to mask off what I didn't
want to paint, but worth the effort.
Tim
******
Tim Lewis
timrv6a(at)iname.com
N47TD RV-6A, painting
Springfield VA
http://home.earthlink.net/~timrv6a
http://home.earthlink.net/~timrv6a/jpi.html - No JPI stuff in my airplane
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Reece" <reece(at)rt66.com> |
| Subject: | Copperstate time-to-climb attempt |
It was mentioned to me Saturday morning at Copperstate that his Nitrous
Oxide system malfunctioned and the attempt was aborted.
Rob Reece
RV-3 SN45
Socorro, NM
> Subject: RV-List: Copperstate time-to-climb attempt
>
> Hey, Paul or other Copperstate attendees. I'd like to hear how Bruce
> Bohannon and the Flyin' Tiger did on their 6000m record attempt.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Keith Williams <73623.2504(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Pneumatic tailwheel |
Thanks much Ernst. I went right out and tried your suggestion. The wheel
was cemented together but the rap at the parting seam split it.
My tube has exactly the failure you described. A small hole about 3/8 inch
from the valve stem, right at the edge of the reinforcing gusset.
I'll start looking for a replacement tube and let you know what I find.
Then - Ernst Totland wrote:
I used a knife blade with edge placed at the parting seam to split the
wheel. A light tap with a small hammer made the two halves come apart.
The parts are not keyed.
There is a reinforcement patch where the valve is attached to the tube. The
inner tube was torn right at the edge of this patch. Seems like a quality
problem
to me. Rubber resembles cheap ($3) Chinese bicycle tubes. Tyre seems ok. I
have
emailed my findings to Andair, but have seen no response. Pity, because
it's
a beautiful wheel and taxiing is much smoother.
1st - Keith Williams wrote:
My problem is that I have not been able to get it to come apart (split). I
>have removed the bolts and clamped the tire - trying to pry the wheel
apart
>with a wooden lever......no luck so far in >opening it up.
>
>Has anyone had one apart or have any suggestions? Is it keyed in some
way,
>requiring that part be turned before splitting? Any ideas appreciated.
>
>Also, any ideas about replacement inner tube sources this side of the
>U.K.?. I have a suggestion to try the medical supply places where they
use
>wheelchair wheels of a similar size.........no TSO, though.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tim Lewis" <timrv6a(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AOA/LRI - Brian Lloyd |
On 11 Oct 99, at 20:48, Jim Huntington wrote:
> Imagine my shock when I read your first post yesterday, Brian, tearing
> apart my company and making accusations about me
Nonsense. Brian raised technical concerns and asked you for data,
and once again you evaded. I've received off-list emails indicating at
least one other list member has had similar experiences with you, and
numerous others have commented on this behavior on-list. The
issues can't be resolved by emotion, Mr Huntington, but they can be
resolved by ANSWERS and DATA.
I publicly challenge you to answer Brian's questions, and to back up
your answers with credible data:
1. What effect do gear and flap deployment have on the accuracy of
the LRI?
2. If there is an effect, how great it is and in what direction?
3. Are the LRI indications accurate and consistent at G loadings
significantly greater than 1 G?
4. As you get farther away from critical AoA, how does the
calibration of the LRI hold up?
Question 3 is especially important, as it has a direct bearing on safety.
As Peter Bennett pointed out a year ago (see attached email text from
the RV list), it appears that at heavy G loading and/or weight, the LRI
will indicate that you have more "lift reserve" than you really have.
That would be dangerous. We need DATA to understand the
limitations of the LRI, and the risks inherent in using the LRI.
Data means credible flight test numbers showing LRI indication vs
airspeed (and preferably angle of attack) for a variety of flight
conditions - stall, Vx, Vy, - at various G loading and A/C gross weight.
Do you have data Mr Huntington? Will you supply it for all to see
here on the RV-list?
Sincerely,
Tim Lewis
RV-6A Painting (base color done, two stripes to go)
On 25 Nov 98, at 22:10, pbennett(at)zip.com.au wrote:
>
> This is a longish post involving some math. Delete now if you find it
> tiresome already.
>
> > I can understand that the LRI/AOA thread may be getting
tiresome to
> > some. But to me it is getting more interesting all the time.
>
> I was going to keep quiet on this but George's comment encourages
me to
> say why I believe the LRI suffers much the same problems as an ASI
and may
> lull into a false sense of security those who use it as an AOA. I
would
> welcome correction by those with more fluid dynamics,
aerodynamics and
> math ability than me.
>
> As I understand it, the LRI has two pitot style ports at different
> angles to the airstream. It measures differential ram air pressure and
> displays it on a gauge. The bottom line is that such a setup will
> indicate zero lift margin (ie a stall) at different positions on the
> panel indicator depending on aircraft weight.
>
> For a normal pitot,
> Ram air pressure = (d . V*2)/2
> where d = air density
> v = airspeed
>
> If the ports are inclined to the airstream at angles a and b
> respectively for ports 1 and 2, then
>
> Port 1 pressure p1 =( d . (Vcos a)*2)/2
> Port 2 pressure p2 = (d . (Vcos b)*2)/2
>
> The differential pressure which is indicated is
>
> p1 - p2 = (d.V*2((cos a)*2 - (cos b)*2)/2
>
> If we consider only the stall condition, this will always happen at the
> same angle of attack, regardless of weight. Therfore a and b are
> constant at the stall for all aircraft weights, as of course is air
> density d. Therefore differential pressure at the stall is a function
> of only velocity squared.
>
> However the velocity at stall is a function of G loading or weight,
> whichever you prefer. Therefore the differential pressure at stall is a
> function of weight, which means that "zero lift reserve" will shift on
> the dial depending on fuel, pax and baggage.
>
> How significant is the shift? Single pilot stall is typically around 45
> mph, and gross weight stall 55 mph, a 22% increase. Because of the
square
> law relationship, the indication at stall will increase by 10.5% over
> the same weight range.
>
> If you always dogfight at the same weight, the LRI will do what you
> want, but if you then load up the wife and baggage and fly into short
> strips, take care.
>
> Peter
>
>
******
Tim Lewis
timrv6a(at)iname.com
N47TD RV-6A, painting
Springfield VA
http://home.earthlink.net/~timrv6a
http://home.earthlink.net/~timrv6a/jpi.html - No JPI stuff in my airplane
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Cowl Attach-Vibration |
>
> I know of two RV-6's ; one had the senior vibration enginer &
> staff from a
> fortune 100 company come to the airport and did analysis of
> anything thet
> moved,spun,rotated,flapped,or moved in any way & added weights
> to smooth out the
> airplane----result 160 hrs. latter hinge eye cracks...........
> the other rv-6
> had NOTHING ballanced about it ( as a matter of fact I know he
> dosen't even
> ballance his check book !) and a 200 hours nothing cracked....go figure
>
After hearing about all of the broken hinges, I checked mine very
carefully at the last oil change. All of the hinge eyes were intact. I
did find two broken rivets on the lower cowl hinge. The innermost rivet
(3/32 dia.) on each side of the exhaust was broken through the shank. I
drilled out the remnants of the rivets and replaced them with screws and
nuts.
I installed cowl hinges was shown on the drawings except for behind the
spinner where I installed two screws on each side. I have a O-320, 160 hp
with a Sensenich metal prop. Nothing was dynamically balanced. Am I
lucky, or did I do something right by mistake?
Mark Nielsen
RV-6, 445 hrs
Green Bay, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | wvu(at)mail.ameritel.net |
| Subject: | Re: vertical fin offset |
My philosophy on offsetting the rudder goes along with offsetting the
engine. It's best to find out what's causing the ball to be off center.
Van's intructions says that a slightly off-aligned gear fairing can cause
the ball to be off by half a ball and reduce speed by a few knots. Sure,
offsetting the rudder may fix the obvious problem but it may cost you a few
more knots yet. The question is: is that a big deal to you? If not, why
be anal and go ahead with the offset rudder. Sometimes we don't like to fly
a barn door eventhough it will fly.
RV-6/N985VU
>
>
>In a message dated 10/11/99 9:09:23, kempthorne(at)earthlink.net writes:
>
>
>Stan,
>
>I know nothing about the need or not for rudder tabs but I do know that
>engineering is not best done by "looks wrong" or by being always in
>symmetry. Space the bolt holes in a round part in a non-symmetrical
>pattern to ensure that the mechanic puts it on correctly for example.
>
>The tail on straight tail Bonanzas and Debonairs (still for sale) are
>offset from the centerline and one flap must be up slightly more than the
>other.
>
>The natural human urge for symmetry is just one more thing engineers need
>to get over.
>
>Hal Kempthorne, PE
>
>>Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with SMTP id
>> for
>>
>>I am also troubled by the percentage of rudder tabs I have seen. Just my
>>opinion, but an offset rudder just looks "WRONG". I am a nut for symmetry, >>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Source for Aluminum for panel |
Panel: Lost your message thanks to good old aol dropping off line on me
before I could reply. I did get the information so thanks.
HCRV6(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dr Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.usyd.edu.au> |
| Subject: | test flying: RV6A |
Many thanks to all those who congratulated me on the first flight of LDX
Early test flying issues:
The heavy left wing completely dissapeared with squeezing the right
aileron. I was very gentl and assumed it would need several
iterations.... not so. Interestingly the control pressures are
distinctly higher after this exercise, not unpleasant but noticeable,
especially at high speeds.
I was getting annoyed with myself for offsetting the vertical stab: so
many people had spoken against it I was convinced I would have a tab
even after re-building the tail intersection fairing to make this mod.
The aviation gods must be with me because LDX hums along at 160 knots
with the ball perfectly centered. For what it is worth the leading edge
of the VS is offset 1/4" to the left. The idea came from Dean Hall.
The starter motor solonoid is sticky. I mounted it sideways because of
discussion about high G forces activating it. I think it is probably
better in its design position (straight up and down). This is irritating
because I put plate nuts on the firewall to make it easy to get it on
and off. I may have to build a bracket to suit the plate nuts.
Several people have reported success with de-gaussing the roll bar so I
will do this and let the list know how it goes.
My electronics international tach is reading engine RPM perfectly but is
recording tach time at half the real rate????. A question for customer
support I guess.
I have a firewall mounted oil cooler (Vans) with 3" scat to the right
rear baffle and on a 21 degree (72 F) day I am getting CHTs of 355
(back right) and Oil temps (after 30 minutes at 75% at 1000 feet) of 180
to 185.
More to come,
Cheers,
Leo Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Interior Painting Sequence |
Listers: Thanks to all who responded. Guess the right answer is
whatever seems right (I may be anal enough to paint before riveting, we'll
see).
HCRV6(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | chriskelhand(at)juno.com |
| Subject: | fuel tank inboard rib tooling hole |
Hi all,
Van's manual says not to worry about prosealing the access hole
reinforcement ring when riveting it to the rib because it will be sealed
when the gasket and cover are installed. I've seen the posts regarding
do I or don't I proseal the cork gasket and I intend to use the sealant
on both sides of the cork gasket.
Will the sealant and gasket be enough to also seal the aft tooling hole
on that rib if I don't use sealant when riveting the reinforcement ring
to the rib? I've only got about 1/8 inch or so clearance from the
tooling hole to the outside edge of the cover plate.
I'm considering using sealant on the ring to rib job. Anybody tried that
and been able to keep the sealant out of the nutplate threads?
Thanks for your input,
Chris Hand
RV-6A, working on wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Zilik <zilik(at)bewellnet.com> |
Harry,
FWIW I painted mine after finishing the canopy and before installing any systems.
Actually I had run the brake lines but these were easy to remove before interior
paint. The reason I painted first was that any paint job will come out better if
all items that need masking are removed before painting. So I weighed the pro's
and con's of installing and removal vs painting and installing. I liked the idea
of paint first, then install. The downside is you have to be careful during
system installation so as not to scratch/chip your wonderful new paint. I used
Dupont Centari which is not known for it chip/scratch resistance. Other paints
such as Sherwin William's Sunfire are nearly bomb proof.
Also make sure that you are ready for paint. If something is not riveted before
painting the unpainted rivet looks real bad and is hard to touch up.
Gary Zilik
RV-6A - Laying up a new impinge fairing - removed wings today.
Pine Junction, CO
>
> Listers: I can't resist asking what is probably a really dumb painting
> question. For you guys who are finished painting, when in the building
> process did you finish paint the interior of the cabin (RV-6/6A), before
> riveting the skins on or after the fuse is out of the jig?
>
> Harry Crosby
> HCRV6(at)aol.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randall Henderson" <randallh(at)home.com> |
I have a buddy who's not on the list who ran into a problem with his
starter. His engine is a new O-360, and came with a Prestolite starter that
he swapped out for a SkyTek from Van's. He got this engine around the same
time I did so the engines are nearly identical. But mine came with the
SkyTek starter.
The other day he tried cranking with the starter for the first time and got
a horrible grinding noise. He stopped immediately and looked at the ring
gear and saw that the teeth, especially on the back side, are kind of chewed
up.
We compared starter part numbers and they're the same. We also counted the
teeth on the ring gear and they're the same. But the evidence is that the
starter gear or ring gear on his airplane has a different pitch or
something. The only thing we haven't done is to actually measure the teeth
on the starter.
Anybody have a clue what might be going on here? The only thing I can think
of is that the starter somehow got mis-labeled and is actually a different
pitch.
Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (30 hours)
Portland, OR
http://www.edt.com/homewing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Karl Ahamer" <ascot(at)hinet.net.au> |
| Subject: | Re: test flying: RV6A |
Leo,your temps look pretty good
I have a new starter relais (ex van's) which I bought as a spare...
You can try it before making any changes to the mountings of it.
Don't think the position would make any difference at all (at least not
under no additional G-force)
Have still a bit of a heavy left wing,your success may encourage me to start
fixing this little problem...
cheers
Karl
KARL AHAMER NSW AUSTRALIA
ASCOT(at)HINET.NET.AU
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman Hunger" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
Here's a few more points on the recent thread of metallic paints.
It is difficult to get an even "look" to finished metallic paint. It will
vary with pressure so make sure that your compressor can keep up. More
pressure will give a lighter finish. This is more obvious on a dark color.
The distance the gun is from the surface will change the finished look as
well. The painter must be very disciplined as he/she works along the target.
Novice painters should do the wings first while they are held in vertical
racks. Practice the movements before applying paint. Decide how wide the
strokes will be before spraying paint. The wings are the easiest pieces so
do them first to gain experience. I made separate racks for each of my flaps
and ailerons so that they could be done by themselves.
If your compressor doesn't have a large storage tank it will have to make
air to supply the gun. This will cause the air to become warmer as you go
along. Now an expensive air dryer becomes critical to a good finish. Not
that important if you have 60-80 gallons of storage tank but you still need
at least a simple air/water separator. This is even less important if you
have an HVLP gun as they use much less air than a standard gun. Many HVLP
systems don't connect to your air system but instead have are designed to
run off a pump that is part of the system.
Solid colors are easier to apply than metallic.
Lighter colors are easier to apply than dark colors.
White is the easiest color to paint.
White hides little flaws like dings, warps, and scratches better than dark
colors.
When my wings were finished I thought it would be best to paint them right
away so that the paint could have a couple of years to really harden up. I
built a booth and then decided that I would try practicing on a car first to
learn how it is done. I bought exactly the same paint as I was going to use
on my RV and went to work.
I learnt that I should pay a professional to do my painting for me.
Very shortly after I landed a really cool job working with cars. Over the
next year I took many lessons from a professional painter on our staff. I
learned lots about booths too. Now I am confident that I can paint my
fuselage with the tail installed (to get the striping right). I will build a
new booth on the side of my garage that will become a carport when I am
finished. I know it won't be the show room finish of a professional job but
it will be good enough for me.
I have been using Sherwin Williams Sunfire. It has a very shiny gloss and
appears to be very tough. It is their top single stage paint. Many people
have recommended it to me. It is very expensive but with paint that is a
good thing.
Norman Hunger
RV6A Delta, BC, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | VP4SkyDoc(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Experimental AOA? |
I too am convinced that I 'need' some sort of AOA indicator. However, the cost
of these things seems a little high ($780 something for the LRI) for an instrument
that is only about as complex as an ASI. In fact, I have been wondering
if it might be possible to fabricate one out of an ASI. It would be easy to
make a probe like the one used by the LRI. The lower port on the probe would
be plumbed to the static side of an ASI while the upper port would plumb to the
pitot side. As AOA increases pressure in the 'static' side increases relative
the upper port and the ASI indication declines. With proper adjusting of the
probe it should be possible to reproduce a stalling AOA that is at some positive
(and fixed) indication on the ASI. Then simply replace the markings on
the ASI to indicate where stall occurs.
It should also be possible make a similar set-up with the lower drag ports on an
in-wing AOA indicator, only the upper/lower -- pitot/static orientation would
be reversed.
I would be glad to test my theories, but my plane wont be flying for several years...
Any thoughts?
Dave Leonard
6QB
>>>>>I also have been convinced that AoA is a valuable instrument to have and
Im going to get one. When asked, LRI produced testimonials from unbiased
third parties attesting to the quality and usefulness of the instrument.<<<<
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | VP4SkyDoc(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AOA/LRI - Brian Lloyd |
Uh oh. I cant believe that Im doing this, but I think I can point out the flaw
in your thinking. Please keep in mind that I have no experience, credentials,
or for that matter a connection to the LRI... but
> How significant is the shift? Single pilot stall is typically around 45
> mph, and gross weight stall 55 mph, a 22% increase. Because of the
square
> law relationship, the indication at stall will increase by 10.5% over
> the same weight range.
Well, we know that your argument is flawed somewhat because so many pilots will
testify that the LRI is at least very close. It may have an error, but testimony
shows that it is no where near 10.5% for reasonable weight shifts.
> Port 1 pressure p1 =( d . (Vcos a)*2)/2
> Port 2 pressure p2 = (d . (Vcos b)*2)/2
>
> The differential pressure which is indicated is
>
> p1 - p2 = (d.V*2((cos a)*2 - (cos b)*2)/2
>
> If we consider only the stall condition, this will always happen at the
> same angle of attack, regardless of weight. Therfore a and b are
> constant at the stall for all aircraft weights, as of course is air
Ok, but lets suppose that we calibrate our LRI so that stall occurs when p1 is
the same as p2. Then we get:
d(VCos a)
2 /2 = d(VCos b)
2 /2
and everything nicely drops out except:
Cos a = Cos b
and the LRI at our calibrated stall is independent of V, d, weitght etc...
because of the angled faces of the probe, a and b are moving in different directions
with increasing AOA so it will always be able to be so colibrated.
You do seem to be correct with regard to dependance on airspeed at any AOA other
than stall may change the indicated 'closeness to stall'. But what exactly
do we mean by "closeness to stall?" Is it a percent of airspeed away from stall?
At markedly higher airspeeds this has a different meaning for me than at
low airspeeds. At a high airspeed "close to stall" seems to mean 'dont pull much
harder' while at low airspeeds it means - 'lookout, you really are very close
to stalling!'
I suspect that the LRI is very effective and reliable. I suspect that this deviation
with airspeed would be intuitive. It would be nice to know the numbers
though.
Best Regards
Dave Leonard
6QB
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Source for Aluminum for panel |
For aluminum, try Volgoson at Dillsburg Aero in Dillsburg PA. Nice folks and
they have lots of parts and material.
Dillsburg Aero
(717) 432-4589
david faile, fairfield, ct
mcfii/a&p faa aviation safety counselor
eaa technical counselor/flight advisor
christen eagle ii since '82 (n13bf)
rv6 (n44df) started
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com> |
| Subject: | Cowl Attach-Vibration |
Listers,
I now have 1425 hrs on my RV and still have the original hinges. Only
three eyelets have broken out in that time frame. The rest are getting
rather worn out, and I am now considering replacing them with CamLocks....
By the way, use of a lot of grease helps cut down on the wear.....
Fred Stucklen
N925RV RV-6A
E. Windsor, Ct
____
From: pcondon(at)csc.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Cowl Attach-Vibration
I know of two RV-6's ; one had the senior vibration enginer & staff
from a
fortune 100 company come to the airport and did analysis of anything
thet
moved,spun,rotated,flapped,or moved in any way & added weights to
smooth out the
airplane----result 160 hrs. latter hinge eye cracks........... the
other rv-6
had NOTHING ballanced about it ( as a matter of fact I know he
dosen't even
ballance his check book !) and a 200 hours nothing cracked....go
figure
kempthorne(at)earthlink.net on 10/12/99 01:26:27 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric.J.Henson(at)chase.com |
(Content Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with SMTP id
for" ;
Wed,
13 Oct 1999 08:32:44.-0400(at)matronics.com
| Subject: | Re: Metalic Paint |
"Norman Hunger" on 10/13/99 04:26:42 AM
Please respond to rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RV-List: Metalic Paint
Hey Norman, what is Sunfire (Poly, Enamel)? I have always been a PPG guy but the
Sherwin Williams guys really impressed me at Sun N Fun.I didn't get anything on
Sunfire. Great info material available on Acry-Glo and Jet-Glow. If any of you
are new to the paint world it would be beneficial to call SW and get an info
packet on Jet-Glow. Takes you step by step through the paint process. I learned
from PPG by screwing it up, stripping it and doing it again.
>>>I have been using Sherwin Williams Sunfire. It has a very shiny gloss and
appears to be very tough. It is their top single stage paint. Many people
have recommended it to me. It is very expensive but with paint that is a
good thing.
Norman Hunger
RV6A Delta, BC, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Adrian Chick" <adrianchick(at)home.com> |
A tech counselor visited recently and when I asked his advice about sealing
the tank access plate, he suggested something I've never heard of, but he
said he's known people for whom it has worked. He suggested putting wax on
the the access plate and the rib, and then using proseal with no gasket. He
says that the wax keeps the proseal from gluing the access plate on
permanently. I'd be interested to know if anyone has tried this and what
the results were.
Adrian Chick
Nashville, TN
RV-6A second wing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric.J.Henson(at)chase.com |
(Content Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with SMTP id
for" ;
Wed,
13 Oct 1999 08:51:48.-0400(at)matronics.com
| Subject: | Re: Painting Info |
Sam Buchanan on 10/12/99 08:00:55 PM
Please respond to rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Painting Info
Sounds like mottling (dark color stripes in the spray pattern near the center of
the pattern). Not enough pressure or too cold a temp. for the paint reducer. I
fought a hell of a battle with this with PPG Delstar (Acry Enamel). Finally
found that if you choke down your guns needle somewhere between a fog/tack coat
and a light coat and drop your normal pattern to only 1/3 your normal pass, you
can eliminate this problem. Takes some trial and error. Helps to hold a strong
light with your other hand so you can see the moment the paint flows, since it
takes a few passes for this to happen. I don't know why, but this leave no
orange peel. I thought it was a neat trick that might help someone out in the
future.
Eric Henson
Installing Tail Wheel Mount
However, I wonder if the truly
novice painter has any business using metallic paints. A local RV'er
used metallic single stage paint and it was very difficult to keep the
metallic application uniform.
Sam Buchanan
----------------
Norman Hunger wrote:
>
>
> > However, I soon discovered that it really didn't matter because there is
> > something available to every painter that will take care of dust
> > specks..............1500 grit sand paper.
> >
>
> > There are almost no paint flaws that can't be sanded out with 1500 paper
> > and buffing compound. If you use a single stage paint, then get the
> > paint on the best you can and resolve to perfect the finish after the
> > fact.
>
> CAUTION - Most single stage metallic paints cannot be sanded at all without
> exposing the metallic flakes as little silver spots. Looks terrible. If you
> must have a metallic, basecoat clearcoat is easier to apply. You can wetsand
> the clearcoat for a perfect finish. There are differences between the many
> different brands of paints though.
>
> The original post refers to solid colors and is very good information on
> that topic. Check out his webpage to see the fine paintjob he now has.
>
> Single stage metallic paints require good booths. Wet down the walls and
> floor just before pushing in your project. Never wet down the roof, just
> blow it off with high pressure air before the wetdown. Paint the wings one
> at a time. Build racks for them with wheels on the bottom.
>
> The new HVLP sprayers do much nicer work because they have a much higher
> percentage of the paint applying to the surface than the old styles of spray
> guns. It is the overspray that is the dust problem. The old guns make tons
> of it. HVLP sprayers use less paint as a result. They are more efficient.
> You will not need as much paint. If you invest in a good name brand system
> you should be able to sell it when you are done for at least half of what
> you paid for it.
>
> Norman Hunger
> RV6A Delta,BC
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Huntington <jimrhunt(at)wco.com> |
Thanks Rob for bringing this to my attention. I am enclosing the entire
text for anyone who is interested to read and to make their own
determination of the cause for this aircraft's premature rotation.
I do not read this report as an indictment of the LRI. It appears that
either the instrument was out of calibration, not checked as part of
pre-flight, or something of the kind. The comment about the pilot's
"overconfidence in his piloting skills" indicates a problem judgement and
probably proceedures.
Jim
NTSB Identification: LAX93LA170 For details, refer to NTSB microfiche
number 48340A
Accident occurred APR-11-93 at TORRANCE, CA
Aircraft: CESSNA 182G, registration: N460JA
Injuries: 1 Minor, 1 Uninjured.
THE PILOT STATED THAT DURING THE TAKEOFF ROLL HE GLANCED AT THE LIFT
RESERVE INDICATOR WHICH INDICATED THAT HE HAD ENOUGH LIFT TO FLY.
THE AIRPLANE IS MODIFIED WITH A WREN 460 STOL KIT. THE AIRSPEED OF THE
AIRPLANE WAS APPROXIMATELY 35-40 KNOTS. SHORTLY AFTER TAKEOFF, THE
AIRPLANE BEGAN A LEFT ROLLING MOTION. THE AIRPLANE DID NOT RESPOND
TO ANY CORRECTIVE ACTION INITIATED BY THE PILOT. THE AIRPLANE STRUCK
THE GROUND, LEFT WING TIP FIRST AND CAME TO REST BETWEEN THE TWO
RUNWAYS. IN AN INTERVIEW WITH FAA INSPECTORS, THE PILOT STATED THAT
THE "STALL WARNING HORN WAS GOING OFF AS USUAL," BUT HE CHOSE TO
"IGNORE IT AS USUAL." ACCORDING TO THE WREN OPERATIONS MANUAL FOR
THE AIRCRAFT, THE NORMAL TAKEOFF SPEED IS 60 MPH, AND A CLIMB SPEED
OF 90 MPH.
Probable Cause
FAILURE OF THE PILOT TO ATTAIN SUFFICIENT LIFT OFF AIRSPEED. FACTORS IN
THIS ACCIDENT WERE THE PILOT'S OVERCONFIDENCE IN HIS PILOTING SKILLS,
AND THE INADVERTENT STALL OF THE AIRPLANE.
Index for Apr 1993 | Index of Months
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>
>I have a buddy who's not on the list who ran into a problem with his
>starter. His engine is a new O-360, and came with a Prestolite starter that
>he swapped out for a SkyTek from Van's. He got this engine around the same
>time I did so the engines are nearly identical. But mine came with the
>SkyTek starter.
>
>The other day he tried cranking with the starter for the first time and got
>a horrible grinding noise. He stopped immediately and looked at the ring
>gear and saw that the teeth, especially on the back side, are kind of chewed
>up.
>
>We compared starter part numbers and they're the same. We also counted the
>teeth on the ring gear and they're the same. But the evidence is that the
>starter gear or ring gear on his airplane has a different pitch or
>something. The only thing we haven't done is to actually measure the teeth
>on the starter.
>
>Anybody have a clue what might be going on here? The only thing I can think
>of is that the starter somehow got mis-labeled and is actually a different
>pitch.
>
>Randall Henderson, RV-6 N6R (30 hours)
>Portland, OR
>http://www.edt.com/homewing
Sounds like you have the pinion gear designed to mate
with a 122 tooth ring gear. It's a tad larger in diameter
than the pinion for the 149 tooth gear. Being larger,
it wouldn't engage and turn the engine, just chew up
the back side of the ring gear.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o========
< Independence Kansas: the >
< Jurassic Park of aviation. >
< Your source for brand new >
< 40 year old airplanes. >
================================
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bolder Tech Batteries was "LIVING with aircraft |
batteries"
>
>Bob,
>I looked through my files and found Bolders information on the TMF Rebel
>batteries. I just emailed them to see if they still sell them. Their 12
>volt, 1 amp, 6 cell battery puts out 150 cold peak starting amps and >1200
>peak short circuit current amps and weighs 1.6 lbs. The 12 cell has twice
>the output and weighs 2.9 lbs. These would be great if they still make them
>and the have a reasonable price and longevity. Would you use two in series
>or just have one?
I'd use one of the 12-cell batteries. Let me know what you
find out from them. Which second alternator are you
considering?
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o========
< Independence Kansas: the >
< Jurassic Park of aviation. >
< Your source for brand new >
< 40 year old airplanes. >
================================
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Weight (Was lighting) |
>
>Where do you get all of your data, Bob? That is great stuff...glad to have
>you on the list!
From my physics book.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o========
< Independence Kansas: the >
< Jurassic Park of aviation. >
< Your source for brand new >
< 40 year old airplanes. >
================================
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | scott gesele <sgesele(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: vertical fin offset |
With all this talk about offsetting the VS to prevent an unsightly trim tab on
the rudder, has anyone attempted to solve an out of rig condition by changing
the alignment of the gear leg fairing? The biggest benefit of this is that
one could wait until after the airplane is flying and experiment to determine
how much offset is needed.
FWIW, I got lucky with my -6A. No tab was needed on the rudder and the VS is
centered. I would have been quite ticked off if I had offset the VS and then
needed a rudder trim tab to bring the ball back into center.
Scott Gesele N506RV - Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | rv8er <rv8er(at)concentric.net> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel tank inboard rib tooling hole |
Chris,
I ended up sealing the ring to the rib and used sealed nutplates instead of the
ones van's provided. To keep the pro-seal out of the nutplate treads I cut
q-tips in half and screwed the cotton end into the nutplate before installing
them. Not only did that keep the stuff out of the threads but when you pull the
q-tips out after prosealing it cleans the hole out.
Greg Puckett
Elizabeth, CO
RV-8 80081
chriskelhand(at)juno.com wrote:
>
>
> Will the sealant and gasket be enough to also seal the aft tooling hole
> on that rib if I don't use sealant when riveting the reinforcement ring
> to the rib? I've only got about 1/8 inch or so clearance from the
> tooling hole to the outside edge of the cover plate.
> I'm considering using sealant on the ring to rib job. Anybody tried that
> and been able to keep the sealant out of the nutplate threads?
>
> Thanks for your input,
> Chris Hand
> RV-6A, working on wings
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: test flying: RV6A |
In a message dated 10/12/99 10:10:39 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
leo(at)icn.usyd.edu.au writes:
<< The starter motor solenoid is sticky. I mounted it sideways because of
discussion about high G forces activating it. I think it is probably
better in its design position (straight up and down). This is irritating
because I put plate nuts on the firewall to make it easy to get it on
and off. I may have to build a bracket to suit the plate nuts. >>
Are you sure you are not just experiencing PM starter run-on? This was
discussed in the RVator a few issues back and Bob Nuckolls has a fix on his
site.
-GV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DOBES" <DOBES(at)prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Hobby Air Respirator |
Brand new Hobby Air Respirator in box never used. Paint 2 part paint and not
worry about the bad stuff. $300
Howard Kidwell
dobes(at)prodigy.net
512-288-0518
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eustace Bowhay" <ebowhay(at)shuswap.net> |
| Subject: | Re: proseal and wax |
Hi Adrian:
My solution was to make sure the area was good and clean then install the
cover as per Van's instructions with the cork gasket dry. Then put a small
bead of proseal around the edge of the cover making sure that I had
complete coverage between the cover and the rib and also a small bead
around each screw.
Had to remove the cover a couple of years later to service the fuel guage
and it was easy to scrape and remove the proseal around the cover. The
gasket was undamaged and could have been used over again. The screws can
just be turned out breaking the proseal and cleaned up before reinstalling.
The covers have been on for eight years now without a leak.
On the tooling hole if my memory serves me right I put a small patch over
it trimmed so as not to interfere with the cover and then prosealed it at
the same time as I put the covers on.
Eustace Bowhay
----------
> From: Adrian Chick <adrianchick(at)home.com>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV-List: proseal and wax
> Date: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 5:54 AM
>
>
> A tech counselor visited recently and when I asked his advice about
sealing
> the tank access plate, he suggested something I've never heard of, but he
> said he's known people for whom it has worked. He suggested putting wax
on
> the the access plate and the rib, and then using proseal with no gasket.
He
> says that the wax keeps the proseal from gluing the access plate on
> permanently. I'd be interested to know if anyone has tried this and what
> the results were.
>
> Adrian Chick
> Nashville, TN
> RV-6A second wing
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Terry Jantzi <tjantzi(at)netrover.com> |
| Subject: | Re: vertical fin offset |
scott gesele wrote:
>
>
> With all this talk about offsetting the VS to prevent an unsightly trim tab on
> the rudder, has anyone attempted to solve an out of rig condition by changing
> the alignment of the gear leg fairing? The biggest benefit of this is that
> one could wait until after the airplane is flying and experiment to determine
> how much offset is needed.
Scott,
You have just exposed me and my dirty little secret. I needed a trim tab
on the rudder until I changed to Tracy Saylor's gear leg fairings just
before painting my RV-6. I played around with the alignment until the
need for a tab disappeared. I built new cuffs and the misalignment is
very difficult to detect. There has been little impact on speed. In fact
I am slightly faster than another RV-6 with same engine and prop, the
only difference being my wheel pants (Van's pressure recovery) and the
already mentioned gearleg fairings. The speed came up slightly after
painting and I adjusted the trim with a slightly shorter spring on the
right rudder pedal. I have return springs on both. My VS is mounted as
per plans.
Terry Jantzi
RV-6 C-GZRV
Kitchener, Ontario
--
http://www.netrover.com/~tjantzi/terry/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Huntington <jimrhunt(at)wco.com> |
| Subject: | LRI/PSS - Brian Lloyd |
Brian and Listers,
I very much appreciate the questions - not so much the accusations and such
- but certainly the questions. If I appear defensive, it is in part a
reaction to being attacked but also a hesitation to saying anything less
than completely accurate.
I want to state that is my intention to respond in the best way that I am
able to most if not all questions which have been raised concerning the
LRI, but it will take some time. This is in part due to the fact that our
technical material is currently tied up in the STC process. It is also in
part due to the fact that I am not an engineer, and I want to make certain
that whatever information that I put out here is as accurate as possible.
That being said, I must admit certain questions arise for me concerning PSS
and the discussions over the past few days. Why are they not being called
to answer these same questions and others that might arise? What testing
has been performed by what institutions and disinterested parties on that
system. I have raised certain questions concerning the PSS system that
have been dismissed more or less out of hand. Where is the science in
that? Is PSS a pure AOA system? Not as I understand it. It is a presure
differential system (much like the LRI, but getting its inputs from the
wing surfaces rather than a probe) and transducing those inputs to a
display. A pure AOA system, again as I understand it, is a vane system
that indicates an aircraft's position to the relative wind, as can be seen
on commercial aircraft - hard to accomplish on single engine propeller
driven aircraft.
Brian, it is not possible for me to answer all of your questions all at
once, but here are a few comments:
1) The LRI is not a pure angle of attack indicator.
2) The LRI does NOT calibrate, as the PSS system does, at the critical
angle of attack. It calibrates at ZERO LIFT RESERVE. Zero Lift Reserve can
described in various ways - the point of minimum controlable airspeed; that
point where if the angle of attack is increased the aircraft will drop or
if the airspeed is decrease the aircraft will drop; that point where all
available lift being generated by the airfoil is being used to sustain
level flight - no excess lift being generated.
Another way of describing this is, if one is familiar with the curve for
lift as it proceeds upward and then curves over to the stall break - zero
lift reserve is at the top of the curve. That point, as I understand it,
is Vx, also minimum sink and absolute ceiling, and the point past which the
aircraft falls behind the power curve. So, in effect, the LRI allows a
pilot to see where 'behind the power curve' is for his aircraft for
existing weight and conditions.
I will respond further responding to your concerns about errors in LRI
indications, but not in this post. This is a matter of time, space,
consideration to others on this list and desire to get everything as
accurate as possible for you.
Two further items, Brian: - My partner, Bill Geipel, is very willing to
take you up with the LRI in his aircraft - unfortunately in Wisconson, not
California - for you to explore the entire range of the instrument.
1 (888) 310-4574.
- Did I understand you to say that your aircraft were used as the test
platforms for the PSS system, and therefore, you have a hand in the
development of that system?
I will do my best to work my way through the full range of your questions
and concerns. Allow a bit of time for this, but please continue with your
questions and concerns.
Jim Huntington
jimrhunt(at)wco.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eustace Bowhay" <ebowhay(at)shuswap.net> |
----------
> From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Starter
> Date: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 7:33 AM
>
>
> >
> >I have a buddy who's not on the list who ran into a problem with his
Occasionally these starters need to be shimmed out and shims are available
but this happens very rarely. My guess is that the problem is one of the
items already mentioned.
Eustace Bowhay
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Huntington <jimrhunt(at)wco.com> |
| Subject: | LRI - user reports (lengthy) |
Listers,
Among other things that have arisen over the past few days, there have been
requests for reports from pilots flying with the LRI. I am enclosing three
such reports. If there is a request for more material such as the ones
below, others can be posted as well. I have refrained from posting this
kind of material because it did not seem altogether appropriate to this
list, but here goes:
The Lift Reserve Indicator
By
Howard J. Fried
Not long ago I wrote a column for Avweb in which I pointed out that air
carrier aircraft, corporate jets, and military aircraft all have Angle of
Attack Indicators, and I forcefully stated that all aircraft, particularly
General Aviation light planes should also have them. When that column
appeared on Avweb I was contacted by one of the partners who produce the
LRI or Lift Reserve Indicator. He informed me that their product was an
angle of attack indicator, but not only that but much more and I was
invited to try a LRI and report on its effectiveness. After having the unit
installed and calibrated I went out yesterday to check out its performance
and see if it does everything the manufacturer claims.
I would say that it does more than claimed, but that's impossible because
the claims indicate that it does so much. It does, however, do everything
it is supposed to do, and it does it very well. It is extremely user
friendly, a necessity for a dummy like me. No fancy interpretation
required, one just glances at the indicator and learns whatever he is
seeking to know about the flight situation of his flyin' machine. As for
what it does, the name says it all. It tells you just how much lift is
being generated by the attitude and power of one's aircraft at any given
moment, and by that I mean to say that its response is immediate. The LRI
differs from the ordinary angle of attack indicator in that it becomes
effective as soon as the take-off roll is started. Thus it provides precise
information as to when the pilot should lift off for the best angle of
climb. Therefore, by using an LRI for your source of information, you can
get into the very tightest field your aircraft is capable of (and get out
as well).
I have repeatedly pointed out that the objective in landing an airplane
is
to be going just as slowly as you possibly can at the moment of touchdown.
Well, the LRI enables you to do just that safely with complete confidence.
A glance at the LRI lets the pilot know exactly where he stands with
respect to the critical (stall) angle of attack. Thus, he can safely
operate in the very slowest of slow flight regimes.
The critical angle is a fixed number of degrees, and it never changes.
However, that specific number is reached at a variety of airspeeds
depending on a number of external conditions, including weight, center of
gravity location, gustiness, flap position, landing gear position, and
others. The Lift Reserve Indicator is unaffected by these conditions
Whereas the airspeed indicator has a built-in lag in its response, the
response of the LRI is instantaneous.
In my column on Avweb, I pointed out that an angle of attack indicator
is
cheap. An ordinary angle of attack indicator is a rather primitive
instrument, and operates much like the stall warning device on our
airplanes. The stall warning device consists of a vane protruding forward
into the relative wind, aligned with the longitudinal axis of the airplane.
As the airplane pitches up, or banks, this vane moves upward until it
finally causes a contact, closing an electric circuit and sounding a buzzer
or flashing a light, advising the pilot that a stall is imminent. Somewhat
more sophisticated is the conventional angle of attack indicator, but it
works on the same principle, the difference being that the angle of attack
indicator powers an instrument, which gives the pilot a read-out telling
him just where he stands with respect to the critical angle of attack.
Unlike these devices which are electric-mechanical, the Lift Reserve
Indicator gets its information from the pneumatic differential between two
sources of air, the relative wind and still, undisturbed air. The only
electricity it uses is on the model that has a heated probe. Therefore, it
comes alive as soon as the take-off roll starts and it keeps giving useful
information as long as the aircraft is in motion. It tells the pilot just
how much lift is being generated at any given time, and more importantly,
just how much lift he has in the bank (the amount of his lift reserve).
When it gets to the point of zero lift reserve, the aircraft will no longer
be able to maintain altitude.
We all know that what keeps us up there in the sky is the excess of lift
over gravity. When we have either slowed down thus increasing the angle of
attack or increased the angle of attack with pitch to the point of zero
lift, the airplane will sink, perhaps imperceptibly, but increase the angle
of attack a bit more, and a stall will result. The LRI informs the pilot at
exactly what point he has "zero lift reserve." And it works under all
conditions of weight, center of gravity, flap position, density of the air,
angle of bank, and turbulence. Thus in wind shear conditions it
instantaneously advises the pilot of loss of lift and the immanence of a
stall condition and, most important, it tells the pilot what he must do to
recover.
An aircraft owner's investment in this life-saving device is $750.00, and
the heated probe model is $100.00 more. Installation time is something in
excess of four hours, plus approximately a half-hour flight for
calibration. The LRI is manufactured by the Lift Reserve Indicator Company,
Box 643 Occidental, CA 95465 and it can be ordered by phone, 1 888 310
4574. Or by E-mail:jimrhunt(at)wco.com. Or through their web site:
www.liftreserve.com.
I intend to equip my entire school fleet with them, and I urge every
aircraft owner to do likewise, or at the very least have some sort of angle
of attack indicator installed on his airplane.
************************************************************************
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 15:55:11 EDT
Subject: Received and had instrument installed
Dear Mr. Huntington,
We had met at the Oshkosh convention and I had handed you my old LRI gauge
which had faithfully served in my plane for almost 17 years. On the spot
you had promised that you would send me a replacement instrument. I was
happy to receive it three days later and had it meanwhile installed.(I did
not use the metal bracket which came with the unit due to the location of
the instrument within 6 inches of the compass, on the top of the glare
shield).
To my opinion, the new instrument appears of nicer quality than the old
one. Regardless of looks, though, it felt good to have the device up and
working again. My Cherokee 140 is a notoriously slow climber and the LRI
helps to squeeze out every bit of climb performance. I also use the LRI to
determine the power setting at cruise speed by indicating minimum lift
necessary vs. rpm to obtain best range (first quarter of green arc).
The third and most important reason I do not want to miss the LRI on my
panel is the fact, that it serves as a valuable backup for the ASI. A few
years ago on a flight through heavy rain, water clogged the pitot and the
speed indicator went south. The LRI saved the day as I was in IMC and was
able to deviate to a safe landing because the LRI display took the anxiety
factor out of the whole situation - it told me the margin above stall.
I would like to thank you for sending me the new unit. I appreciate that
you stand behind your product even though it was sold so many years
earlier. You can trust me that I will advocate this instrument wherever I
can.
Sincerely,
Michael Schupp
************************************************************************
The LRI was installed on our R/STOL equipped Piper Aztec and its
performance evaluated at a number of short fields throughout the Caribbean
area over the last sixty days. Special emphasis was
placed on the notorious and restricted airport of St. Barthelemy, which has
one of the world's most difficult and dangerous approaches, and for which I
am the designated check airman for the local authority.
Without exaggeration, I consider the LRI both astonishing and essential. In
my opinion, it is a must for any short field operation - so much so, I
would not like to be without it now that I have used such an invaluable
instrument.
Of course, the LRI should be monitored, along with the Airspeed Indicator,
as part of a continuous panel scan. Both instruments actually compliment
each other, each with a vital function. But it was consistently evident
that the LRI was far more sensitive - and instantly responsive - during the
critical stages of any STOL approach and landing. This was especially true
at St. Barths, where a minimum, yet safe approach speed must be maintained
at an unusually steep angle in order to control the aircraft in
ever-present wind shear conditions, clear a hill just before touchdown, and
to minimize the chances for an often fatal missed approach situation. The
same was true for approaches into theisland of Saba, which, I am told can
lay claim to the world's shortest commercially-used airstrip.
In conclusion, I consider the Lift Reserve Indicator essential for any
pilot, irrespective of experience level, who truly wishes to experience the
pleasures of safely flying any small aircraft to it maximum
precision.
E.M.L.
St. Barthelemy
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Heavy left wing |
| From: | n5lp <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net> |
>
>
>Does Every one have a Heavy left wing???? I tryed squeezing aileron , didn't
>work! Need more advice.
>
> Thanks Tom B.
>
The next step after squeezing the right wing as much as you dare is to
judiciously blunt the trailing edge of the left wing. I had to do this.
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP 100 Hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | GLPalinkas(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Instrument Panel Planning |
<<>>>
I second this idea Mike. I was able to visit Steve's shop in Memphis and was
impressed with the process, especially the acrylic panel that he supplies to
check the fit. He also uses .090 materail when making the actual panel with
the CNC machine. Makes for a stiffer panel (very slight weight penalty). The
backside engraved overlay looks great when attached to the panel.
Gary Palinkas
Parma, Ohio
RV6 QB control systems
N198RV reserved
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AOA/LRI - Brian Lloyd |
>
>Ok, but lets suppose that we calibrate our LRI so that stall occurs when
p1 is the same as p2. Then we get:
>
>d(VCos a)
2 /2 = d(VCos b)
2 /2
>
>and everything nicely drops out except:
>
>Cos a = Cos b
>
>and the LRI at our calibrated stall is independent of V, d, weitght etc...
>
>because of the angled faces of the probe, a and b are moving in different
directions with increasing AOA so it will always be able to be so colibrated.
Yes, that is the point I made. If it is calibrated at critical AoA, when
the needle reaches zero, the wing will stall. That is why I *think* that
the LRI is probably a useful instrument.
>You do seem to be correct with regard to dependance on airspeed at any AOA
other than stall may change the indicated 'closeness to stall'. But what
exactly do we mean by "closeness to stall?" Is it a percent of airspeed
away from stall? At markedly higher airspeeds this has a different meaning
for me than at low airspeeds. At a high airspeed "close to stall" seems to
mean 'dont pull much harder' while at low airspeeds it means - 'lookout,
you really are very close to stalling!'
>
>I suspect that the LRI is very effective and reliable. I suspect that
this deviation with airspeed would be intuitive. It would be nice to know
the numbers though.
That is the whole point.
And I would like to ask the rest of you to stop beating up on Jim
Huntington. He may not have answered me because he may not know the
answers. I want to treat this like an engineering question, i.e.
unemotionally, and find out what the LRI is really telling us in flight. A
lot of people fly with it and swear that it works really well. I just want
to quantify how well it works. I can pick up a number of books that will
tell me how to interpret the airspeed indicator. We all accept that the
ASI lies to us about stall speed except at one gross weight and one CG.
Even so we accept the ASI as a valid instrument and fly with it readily. I
just want to be able to do the same with the LRI.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6513 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Experimental AOA? |
>
>In fact, I have been wondering if it might be possible to fabricate one
out of
>an ASI. It would be easy to make a probe like the one used by the LRI. The
>lower port on the probe would be plumbed to the static side of an ASI while
>the upper port would plumb to the pitot side. As AOA increases pressure in
>the 'static' side increases relative the upper port and the ASI indication
>declines. With proper adjusting of the probe it should be possible to
>reproduce a stalling AOA that is at some positive (and fixed) indication on
>the ASI. Then simply replace the markings on the ASI to indicate where
stall
>occurs.
That is precisely how the LRI works. But remember that the LRI is patented
and to make an instrument that duplicates the LRI would surely be a patent
infringement unless you received permission from the holders of the patent.
>It should also be possible make a similar set-up with the lower drag ports
on
>an in-wing AOA indicator, only the upper/lower -- pitot/static orientation
>would be reversed.
If you did that you would probably be infringing on both the LRI patent and
on Jim Frantz' patent application (I don't know if his patent has been
granted yet).
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6513 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric.J.Henson(at)chase.com |
(Content Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with SMTP id
for" ;
Wed,
13 Oct 1999 14:05:28.-0400(at)matronics.com
| Subject: | Re: vertical fin offset |
scott gesele on 10/13/99 10:48:47 AM
Please respond to rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Gearleg fairings was: vertical fin offset
My hangar mate eyeballed the first set of fairings he got from Tracy Saylor.
Turns out he had one gear leg leading edge down a full inch from the other. This
one inch gave him a HUGE amount of yaw. He said he had a boot-full of rudder the
whole way in. He parked the plane cut em off and called Tracy again. So you are
definitely right on this, Scott.
Eric Henson
has anyone attempted to solve an out of rig condition by changing
the alignment of the gear leg fairing? The biggest benefit of this is that
one could wait until after the airplane is flying and experiment to determine
how much offset is needed.
Scott Gesele N506RV - Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JHeadric(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Painting Info |
For everyone's information, orangepeel is caused by too thick paint. You can
see it in the air with a test spray. Sometimes little dots of paint mean you
need to thin it more. Even lmron needs thinning even tho the label says none
is necessary for good flowout.
Jim RV6A N160JH
28hr on 3rd RV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JHeadric(at)aol.com |
You might want to check and see if the flywheel is spaced properly so the
starter teeth can engage properly.
Jim RV6A 28hr
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JHeadric(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Heavy left wing |
If the aileron squeezing doesn't work, try making a wedge about 6" long made
out of foam, 3/8" thick on the trailing edge and sharp on the leading edge.
Then, tape it onto the bottom of the aileron you want to raise. You can't
see it from above, but it sure works good. I even had to reduce the size of
mine because it was too efficient. It was a temporary fix on my RV4, but it
lasted the 8 years I had the -4.
Jim RV6A N160JH
28hr.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Browne <cebrowne(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Sensenich 72FM8S16 Prop RV-6A |
There are three pitches available for this prop. 81, 83, and 85. Van's
Catalog implies that the 81 pitch is the best choice for a 180 HP -6A.
Is anyone running the 83 pitch. If so, is it a good cruise prop?
Chris Browne
-6A Finish
Atlanta
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Experimental AOA? |
Check one of the prior posting on the link to the patent page...the patent has
expired on Jims' dads' device;. The Attorney in my office stated that
experimental development for educational or design variance, for non commercial
development is NOT patent infringement....nor is debating the relative merits of
one design over another..nor merging one or more patents to make a hybrid
product(s). Commercial development of a existing patented device with knowledge
& intent is most certainly not kosher.................Experiment away
guys........
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Zercher" <ez(at)sensenich.com> |
| Subject: | Sensenich 72FM8S16 Prop RV-6A |
Chris,
The Van's catalog is incorrect. They published the original propeller that
was tested as a 72FM8S( )-0-81 which was a 72 inch diameter with an 81
pitch. There was a resonance slightly above 2700 RPM. We shortened the
propeller to 71 inches to stiffen it and raise the resonance well above any
potential RPM problem. The propeller was also a little underpitched to begin
with. Therefore the final corrected propeller model is a 72FM8S( )-1-83 for
a standard RV-6/6A. The -1- signifies 1 inch diameter reduced and can be
reduced to 69 inches for reparability.
The propeller can be pitched anywhere between 80 and 87 inches of pitch. We
have a few 85's and an 86 on RV-8's.
Ed Zercher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | GStorey826(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Sensenich 72FM8S16 Prop RV-6A |
Running 83 pitch. Static 2150 RPM. Climb reasonable, at gross, 110 to 120
mph indicated 1500 fpm. Unloads real fast at level off. Have run it as high
as 2750, but backed off due to vibration, runs great at 2700, although, I
don't push it past 2450 cruise.
George
RV6A 140 hrs.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark McGee" <riveter(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Relocating from NY to Atlanta |
Listers,
I just accepted a job in Atlanta and will be transferring there from upstate
New York in January.
I will have to move my RV4 which consists of the completed tail section,
completed wings and fuselage and finishing kits still in pieces.
My major concern is moving the wings 1000 miles by truck. Has anyone on the
list done this? What is the best way to move the wings, flat or nose down
supported by the spar?
Mark McGee
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV8DRIVER(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Weight (Was lighting) |
BTW Bob, concerning your comments in the previous post relating the increase
in weight for a 0.090" panel to be 1.1lbs, I weighed a foot long piece of
5/8"x 0.032" angle (Van's home-rolled varitey) and found the weight to be
approximtely 3/4 0z. on my wife's cheapo diet scale. (reads to 1lb) At that
weight, I could use 22.8 feet of light angle stiffner (not counting rivet
weight) and be at the same weight as an 0.090" panel. I seriously doubt that
I'd use more than 5ft, so it seems to me that there is a weight saving
available with this approach. Not much, of course, but it all adds up, both
positive and negative. Andy Johnson, -8 wings
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gert Vandersanden <gert(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Experimental AOA? |
You know, I am looking at an old EAA magazine, which has an article just
exactly what you proposed.
A airspeed indicator and a mast under the wing. So how can this be
patented (asi and mast) when the idea has around way back in the 80's
Gert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | albertp(at)mail.smartchat.net.au |
| Subject: | Re: Heavy left wing |
I have a heavy right wing,only when I am the only POB in the left seat. When
there are 2 POB its fine. I fixed this with minor adjustment of my aileron trim
to the left with 1 POB. I wonder if this may be due to the slight unequal spring
tension of the aileron trim?I havent bothered to take the floor of the seats
off,too many screws!
regards
albert
rv6 44hrs
tasmania oz
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LRI/PSS - Brian Lloyd |
>
>That being said, I must admit certain questions arise for me concerning PSS
>and the discussions over the past few days. Why are they not being called
>to answer these same questions and others that might arise? What testing
>has been performed by what institutions and disinterested parties on that
>system.
I guess I am a disintrested third party in that I have no connection with
PSS other than I bought one of their instruments. It is up to you whether
you accept me as a valid third-party testing agency.
And the reason they are not being called upon to answer is that I was
asking the questions and I had already performed the tests on the PSS AoA
to my satisfaction. I don't need answers from PSS. I performed the tests
and I am satisfied that the results support PSS's assertation that their
instrument indeed indicates AoA. I need to devise other tests to verify
whether or not it truely identifies best L/D as they say it does so I will
not support their claim until I prove it to myself.
>I have raised certain questions concerning the PSS system that
>have been dismissed more or less out of hand. Where is the science in
>that?
Absolutely not true. I am the person who started this recent thread. (Yes
boys and girls, this is the Thread That Wouldn't Die! ) and
I have already raised the same questions you had. The difference is that I
have performed testing and have satisfied myself enough to, for myself,
dismiss your questions.
>Is PSS a pure AOA system? Not as I understand it. It is a presure
>differential system (much like the LRI, but getting its inputs from the
>wing surfaces rather than a probe) and transducing those inputs to a
>display. A pure AOA system, again as I understand it, is a vane system
>that indicates an aircraft's position to the relative wind, as can be seen
>on commercial aircraft - hard to accomplish on single engine propeller
>driven aircraft.
You are correct in stating that the vane type AoA indicator is the simplest
and you are correct in your assertion that a vane-type AoA sensor on the
fuselage of a tractor-type propellor driven aircraft will produce incorrect
results.
On the other hand, there are some very interesting AoA systems based on
differential pressure being developed today that have no moving parts yet
they still indicate AoA very accurately. NASA has come up with some very
interesting systems based on multiport differential pressure systems. They
needed that for testing aircraft at very large displacements of relative
wind from the centerline of the aircraft, i.e. big yaw and pitch (alpha)
displacements. The science seems very valid to me after reading the white
papers. (Shoot. I just went back to search for the docs and now I can't
find 'em. That'll teach me not to bookmark things when I first find them.)
The bottom line is, yes, the PSS AoA system appears to be a true AoA
indicator. The only question is how accurate is it? My independent
testing shows that it is very accurate at zero lift and from Vs to 1.15*Vs.
I don't have a good way to measure at other speeds and angles.
>Brian, it is not possible for me to answer all of your questions all at
>once, but here are a few comments:
>
>1) The LRI is not a pure angle of attack indicator.
>
>2) The LRI does NOT calibrate, as the PSS system does, at the critical
>angle of attack. It calibrates at ZERO LIFT RESERVE. Zero Lift Reserve can
>described in various ways - the point of minimum controlable airspeed; that
>point where if the angle of attack is increased the aircraft will drop or
>if the airspeed is decrease the aircraft will drop; that point where all
>available lift being generated by the airfoil is being used to sustain
>level flight - no excess lift being generated.
This information just feels funny. How do you determine where excess lift
is being generated? If the airplane is accelerating upward, it has excess
lift. If it is accelerating downward, there is insufficient lift. If the
airplane is not accelerating, the lift is equal to the downward force
(gravity plus, for want of a better word, centrifugal force). As you
increase AoA and the airspeed remains the same, the lift increases. If I
increase AoA and decrease AS proportionally, my lift remains the same.
Aha! This is where your AoA + airspeed begins to make sense. So your
instrument is some sort of lift indicator. The problem with that is that
you need more lift as you increase loading to maintain level flight. This
would also support my contention that, at higher loading the indicator
would still indicate lots of "lift reserve" even tho I may be a gnat's
whisker from stall. I am generating lots of lift, high airspeed plus high
AoA, but since AoA is very high, I am really close to a stall and the LRI
won't warn me of that. If true, this makes the LRI less useful in
determining the safe flight points if you are at anything other than
unaccelerated flight. This means that the LRI has errors caused by loading
but not as much as the airspeed indicator. OK, I'll buy that.
>Another way of describing this is, if one is familiar with the curve for
>lift as it proceeds upward and then curves over to the stall break - zero
>lift reserve is at the top of the curve.
Since I am not 100% sure of my next statement, I invite correction. That
said, I was under the impression that the "curve" at the top of the lift
graph is a function of the washout in the wing that produces progressive
stall spanwise on the wing and that a wing with no washout would not have
that curve, just a sharp disconinuity in lift right at critical AoA.
A wing produces lift until it stalls. As you increase AoA up to critical
AoA the lift of the wing increases. Induced drag also increases and you
need additional thrust to overcome the induced drag if you want to maintain
level flight. These forces are orthogonal and may be dealt with
separately. Thrust directly opposes drag but my lift control, pitch, which
has a direct effect on AoA, affects both lift and drag at the same time
(more lift and more drag).
>That point, as I understand it,
>is Vx, also minimum sink and absolute ceiling, and the point past which the
>aircraft falls behind the power curve.
Vx is the speed at which best angle of climb occurs.
Miminum sink is at best L/D.
It turns out that Vx and best L/D occur at the same speed at the absolute
ceiling of the airplane but you can spread them apart again just by
increasing thrust. Clearly there is a thrust (engine power) issue here and
your instrument does not take thrust into account since it doesn't have an
input to measure thrust.
Here is another statement where I may be in error and invite correction. I
am under the impression that best L/D for the airframe always occurs at the
same AoA. I am also under the impression that best rate of climb (Vy) does
not occur at best L/D because the thrust vector is not normal to the
direction of flight and because of airflow redirection over the wing (the
wing in in the propwash). Again we have an effect from the thrust that
does not figure into the indications of the LRI.
>So, in effect, the LRI allows a
>pilot to see where 'behind the power curve' is for his aircraft for
>existing weight and conditions.
Being behind the power curve is also a function of excess thrust available.
If you have more thrust available, the effect of increased drag has very
little effect on your flight and the onset of reversed authority, i.e.
where pulling back increases rate of descent instead of decreasing rate of
descent, is delayed.
>I will respond further responding to your concerns about errors in LRI
>indications, but not in this post. This is a matter of time, space,
>consideration to others on this list and desire to get everything as
>accurate as possible for you.
>
>Two further items, Brian: - My partner, Bill Geipel, is very willing to
>take you up with the LRI in his aircraft - unfortunately in Wisconson, not
>California - for you to explore the entire range of the instrument.
>1 (888) 310-4574.
Well, I am out in California so this doesn't help too much. Surely there
is someone out here with a LRI who would like to do some data collection
with their airplane.
>- Did I understand you to say that your aircraft were used as the test
>platforms for the PSS system, and therefore, you have a hand in the
>development of that system?
Absolutely not. I have no connection with Jim Frantz or PSS other than I
am a customer. What I did say is that I performed my own tests to
determine whether or not the PSS AoA instrument was doing what it was
advertised to do. So far, all the tests I have been able to devise have
supported PSS's claims. The unit does appear to truely indicate AoA within
my ability to measure it. The things I have not been able to verify are:
1. Is the PSS AoA indication linear with actual AoA?
2. Is the PSS indication of best L/D accurate for all aircraft and all
wing airfoil shapes when calibrated according to PSS's instructions?
>I will do my best to work my way through the full range of your questions
>and concerns. Allow a bit of time for this, but please continue with your
>questions and concerns.
Thanks Jim. I know that this has been a pain in your side but I am really
interested in understanding your instrument. The LRI is a simple and
interesting instrument and I really like things that are both simple and
useful.
>Jim Huntington
>jimrhunt(at)wco.com
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6513 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Sensenich 72FM8S16 Prop RV-6A |
| From: | n5lp <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net> |
>
>
>There are three pitches available for this prop. 81, 83, and 85. Van's
>Catalog implies that the 81 pitch is the best choice for a 180 HP -6A.
>Is anyone running the 83 pitch. If so, is it a good cruise prop?
>
>Chris Browne
>-6A Finish
>Atlanta
>
Chris,
I have posted quite a bit about my experiences with this prop in the past
but quite a bit or all of it is not archived.
Briefly, with the 83 inch pitch on my O-360 6 I am underpitched but I
like that pitch and plan to keep it. With the old style wheel pants I
had an RPM limited top cruise speed of about 171 knots at most altitudes.
My testing was done at density altitudes of around 8,000 and above.
I cannot use full throttle without redlining the engine till around
14,000 feet. I can, of course, use full throttle in the climb and the
underpitch should give me a better climb capability. I think it is a
good compromise. In my airplane I think the 81 inch would be annoyingly
underpitched. For someone willing to run over the 2700 rpm redline it
may be a different story.
I am in the process of installing the two-piece wheel pants. These pants
should make my prop even more underpitched.
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP 100 Hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Reece" <reece(at)rt66.com> |
| Subject: | Relocating from NY to Atlanta |
I moved my project 1500 miles in a rack we made from 2x4's and carpet
strips. If you're interested, contact me off list and I will send a sketch.
I turned the wings on the leading edges supported by the suspended carpet
strips that were located on ribs. The wings were then softly clamped
together with a cross 2x4 on top. From Fargo, ND to Albuquerque, NM, not a
single scratch or dent in a 12 ft u-haul trailer (with the aft fuselage
sticking 18" out the back!). I have since made a very sturdy wing rack with
the same principle that has locking castors, the works, it would works even
better.
Rob Reece
RV-3 SN 45
Socorro, NM
505-835-3644
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Sensenich 72FM8S16 Prop RV-6A |
In a message dated 10/13/1999 3:30:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
cebrowne(at)earthlink.net writes:
<<
There are three pitches available for this prop. 81, 83, and 85. Van's
Catalog implies that the 81 pitch is the best choice for a 180 HP -6A.
Is anyone running the 83 pitch. If so, is it a good cruise prop? >>
I just talked with Ed Zercher at Sensenich. He tells me that the 72FM8S9-1-83
is the prop you are going to use for the O 360 A1A Lycoming. It is actually
71" and 83 inches pitch. This is a change from what you will see in Van's
catalog. The propeller can be repitched after flying it. The suggestion from
Ed is to fly at 5000' full throttle (standard day) and see if you exceed 2700
RPM.
Ed was absolutely easy to talk to and very informative. I ordered my prop
from Van's and a spinner from Sensenich.
david faile, fairfield, ct
mcfii/a&p faa aviation safety counselor
eaa technical counselor/flight advisor
christen eagle ii since '82 (n13bf)
rv6 (n44df) started
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Experimental AOA? |
>
>
>Check one of the prior posting on the link to the patent page...the
patent has
>expired on Jims' dads' device;. The Attorney in my office stated that
>experimental development for educational or design variance, for non
commercial
>development is NOT patent infringement....nor is debating the relative
merits of
>one design over another..nor merging one or more patents to make a hybrid
>product(s). Commercial development of a existing patented device with
knowledge
>& intent is most certainly not kosher.................Experiment away
>guys........
Thank you. I stand corrected.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6513 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MRobert569(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Prepping skins without removing alclad |
Mark,
There are two trains of thought here. It has been a ongoing discussion here on
the list. There are several items in the archives for your further indulgance.
The way a lot of us (me included) is to prime the interior with a self-etching
primer. There are several out there but I used the Sherwin Williams one. it
does a good job of sticking.
If you want to go the long route then etch, alodine, and prime. When you apply
the etch you use a light scotch-brite pad then so don't get carried away prior
to then. For interior facing parts don't get carried away with scratches in
the alclad as these will be filled in with primer. On the outside it is a different
matter as that could show thru on the paint. You will have to blend that
out.
Mike Robertson
RV-8A QB still installing interior
In a message dated Mon, 11 Oct 1999 7:05:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Mark Schrimmer
writes:
>
> Before I prime the inside of the empennage, how do I prepare the skins
> without damaging the thin alclad coating? Do you just rub the skins very
> lightly with a gray scotchbrite pad? If so, what do you do with a deep
> scratch? Just prime over the scratch without removing it?
>
> If the alclad is so thin, would you be better off to skip the scotchbrite
> pads altogether and just etch, alodine and prime the parts? Perhaps I've
> just stumbled onto the reason the inside skins on many spam cans aren't
> primed at all.
>
> Thanks for the help. I spent a couple of hours in the archives but couldn't
> find the answer to these questions.
>
> Mark Schrimmer
> Irvine, CA
>
> Waiting for RV-9 tail kit
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DWENSING(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Relocating from NY to Atlanta |
to Mark Magee
When i picked up my 6A QB at Van's with a U-Haul truck to drive it back to
Chicago, Van's shipping people loaded it and tie it down for me. They placed
the wings on the leading edges, padded of course, and tied each wing to the
side of the truck. They did fine on the 1,000+ miles from Oregon to Chicago.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Olson <lolson(at)doitnow.com> |
| Subject: | RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
Has anyone heard of cutting down the seat back height on a RV6?
Got a local -6 pilot that swears if I don't do it now, I
will later.
I'm building a slider.
Any thoughts?
Larry Olson
Cave Creek, AZ
RV6 - Fuse out of the jig
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "riveter" <riveter(at)ix.netcom.com> |
Listers,
I need crates for shipping my fuselage and finishing kits from NY to
Atlanta. If anyone still has their crates in good condition, I would like to
have them, depending on how far away they are.
Mark McGee
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Denton Harjehausen <harje(at)proaxis.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
>
>Has anyone heard of cutting down the seat back height on a RV6?
>
>Got a local -6 pilot that swears if I don't do it now, I
>will later.
>
>I'm building a slider.
>
>Any thoughts?
**I did that! I rebuilt the backs because I found them to low. I would
wait until you have an opportunity sit in it.
Have a great Day!
Denny Harjehausen
Lebanon, OR
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dr Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.usyd.edu.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Cowl Attach-Vibration |
"Stucklen, Frederic IFC" wrote:
>
> Listers,
>
> I now have 1425 hrs on my RV and still have the original hinges. Only
> three eyelets have broken out in that time frame. The rest are getting
> rather worn out, and I am now considering replacing them with CamLocks....
> By the way, use of a lot of grease helps cut down on the wear.....
>
> Fred Stucklen
Fred,
You must fly that thing everyday!
What lubricant have you been using on the pins? I was worried that grease would
ooze down
the cowl?
Cheers,
Leo 6A (flying and loving it)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> |
| Subject: | Prepping skins without removing alclad |
I've been using the Sherwin-Williams GBP988 since the beginning of my
project. In general, it's worked great. However, when I dimpled some of
the wing ribs, the primer began to flake off where the dimple die made
contact. Has this happened to anyone else? Any idea why?
Larry Bowen
RV-8 wings
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> MRobert569(at)aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 6:33 PM
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Prepping skins without removing alclad
>
> Mark,
>
> There are two trains of thought here. It has been a ongoing
> discussion here on the list. There are several items in the
> archives for your further indulgance.
>
> The way a lot of us (me included) is to prime the interior with a
> self-etching primer. There are several out there but I used the
> Sherwin Williams one. it does a good job of sticking.
> [snip]
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | OrndorffG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Relocating from NY to Atlanta |
Mark,
We moved a plane from Maryland to Texas - about 1500 miles. We put the
wings in the back of the pickup with 2" of foam rubber under each wing (wings
were stacked flat). The control surfaces and empennage parts were wrapped in
blankets and other soft things and layed on top of the wings. The spars were
tied to each side of the bumper to make sure they didn't bounce out. The
truck had a cap on it so nothing could bounce out the top. The house plants
also went with this load - not that they added anything to the packing.
We also had a mostly finished fuselage that we wrapped in plastic and
tied the wheels to a flatbed trailer. Boy did I get some looks driving all
this down the road.
Becki Orndorff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mills, Trevor R" <MillsTR(at)az1.bp.com> |
| Subject: | vertical fin offset |
With all the talk about Vertical fin offset I must ask,
What would cause more drag, a horrible looking tab or a offset fin that most
people wouldn't even see.
(I have a 6 inch rudder tab on my RV6 bent at 30 to 40 degrees)
Thank you.
Trevor Mills
RV 6 flying
RV 8 left wing getting dusty.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary A. Sobek" <rv6flier(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
--- Larry Olson wrote:
>
>
> Has anyone heard of cutting down the seat back
> height on a RV6?
>
> Got a local -6 pilot that swears if I don't do it
> now, I
> will later.
>
> I'm building a slider.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Larry Olson
> Cave Creek, AZ
> RV6 - Fuse out of the jig
Larry:
I have 430+ hours on my -6 with slider and the
STANDARD height seat backs . I have one friend that
tried to talk me into doing this (cutting down the
back height) on mine and did not. I have flown in one
with the seat backs cut down and did not like it.
Some like the sliding canopy, some like the tilt up.
Same goes with the seat backs.
I know DJ makes "Drop in" seats for the standard back.
I think George & Becky do also. If you cut them
down, how much more will it cost for custom cushions?
====
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
So. CA, USA
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Charlie Oglesby" <coglesby(at)ithink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LRI/PSS - Brian Lloyd |
Listers,
Lets make this a little more confusing. I was looking through the yeller
pages for links to paint suppliers and ran across the E.M. Aviation website.
Their product is a vane type AOA. Anyone on the list have any eperience
with the product or company?
Charlie Oglesby
Preview Plans and Buying Tools
Winter Haven, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "H. Martin Sutter" <hmsutter(at)flash.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sensenich 72FM8S16 Prop RV-6A |
>
> There are three pitches available for this prop. 81, 83, and 85. Van's
> Catalog implies that the 81 pitch is the best choice for a 180 HP -6A.
> Is anyone running the 83 pitch. If so, is it a good cruise prop?
>
> Chris Browne
> -6A Finish
> Atlanta
>
Chris, I am running an 83 pitch 72FM8S on my fairly light (1,045lbs) RV6
and find it to be just right. Take-off is not too brisk but cruise climb
is excellent (the guys with constant speeds are telling me to slow down).
Cruise at 8500' is 170kts @ 9gph. I should add that my wife and I are quite
small and weigh 270lbs combined.
Martin Sutter RV6 N868CM 1500hrs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cowl Attach-Vibration |
Fred, out of curiosity, did you happen to radius the factory sharp corners
which are built into the hinges?
I don't know what the result will be as I'm not flying yet, but I took an
1/8" diameter file to each corner in the hinge, obliterating the original
sharp corner left from the stamping. These hinges are poster parts for
stress risers leading to fatigue in their supplied condition.
Additionally, I will be experimenting with covering the .090" steel pins
used on the top hinges with heat shrink tubing, to bring the outside
diameter up to about .125", to eliminate a lot of the slop without
increasing stiffness much (can't take credit for the idea). I'll report as
I learn...
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
----------
> From: Stucklen, Frederic IFC <stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com>
> To: 'RV-List'
> Subject: RV-List: Cowl Attach-Vibration
> Date: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 7:12 AM
>
>
> Listers,
>
> I now have 1425 hrs on my RV and still have the original hinges. Only
> three eyelets have broken out in that time frame. The rest are getting
> rather worn out, and I am now considering replacing them with
CamLocks....
> By the way, use of a lot of grease helps cut down on the wear.....
>
> Fred Stucklen
> N925RV RV-6A
> E. Windsor, Ct
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: vertical fin offset |
>
>With all the talk about Vertical fin offset I must ask,
>What would cause more drag, a horrible looking tab or a offset fin that most
>people wouldn't even see.
>(I have a 6 inch rudder tab on my RV6 bent at 30 to 40 degrees)
>
>Thank you.
>
>Trevor Mills
The rudder tab should cause slightly more drag than the VS offset,
but the difference would be so small that it should make no
measurable difference in performance.
Having an offset VS is a more elegant solution, but there is no way
to predict how much (if any) offset you will need until you fly. As
others have said, I would be really cranky if I put in a VS offset,
and then needed a rudder tab to cancel some of the offset out. That
would give even more drag than either case you described.
So, I'll go without any VS offset, and put some in after flying if
needed, and if I feel up to redoing the tail fairing.
Kevin Horton RV-8 (wings 85% done)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.cyberus.ca/~khorton/rv8.html
http://www.cyberus.ca/~khorton/nojpi.html - No JPI stuff in my aircraft!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Thompson <grobdriver(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
> >
> >
> > Has anyone heard of cutting down the seat back
> > height on a RV6?
> >
> > Got a local -6 pilot that swears if I don't do it
> > now, I will later.
> >
> > I'm building a slider.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
So.... would the reason to do this be easier access to the baggage
area?
Can't imagine how it would make a seat more comfortable...
Mike Thompson
Austin, TX
-6 N140RV (Reserved)
Wings
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dick Zander" <dzan(at)pacifier.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LRI/PSS - Brian Lloyd |
-----Original Message-----
From: Charlie Oglesby <coglesby(at)ithink.net>
Date: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: LRI/PSS - Brian Lloyd
>
>Listers,
>
>Lets make this a little more confusing. I was looking through the yeller
>pages for links to paint suppliers and ran across the E.M. Aviation
website.
>Their product is a vane type AOA. Anyone on the list have any eperience
>with the product or company?
>
>Charlie Oglesby
>Preview Plans and Buying Tools
>Winter Haven, FL
Brian:
I'm in Vancouver WA EAA Chap 782 past Pres. and Sec for several years also
during this time
Elbie M was a member of the Chapter. I am building an RV-6A, started in
spring of '94
but halted all work during '98 and early '99 as my wife had ovarion cancer
and was on hospice
begining the end of January til August and I was primary. I have an early
version of RiteAngle
but remember as this is electronic, changes in this area are rapidly
improving so also with RiteAngle. The accuracy of the flying wing driving
RiteAngle is extremely accurate. It is another
tool to help you stay out trouble, once you are familiar with the unit.
Contact EM Aviation on the webpage: www.riteangle.com
Dick Zander N747RZ EAA-782
Insturment Panel to Prop Spinner
Panel by Steve Davis
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eustace Bowhay" <ebowhay(at)shuswap.net> |
| Subject: | EAA Hall of Fame |
The following annoucement was in the latest issue of the COPA Flight news.
CONGRATULATIONS
Congratulations to Chris Heintz of Zenair in Midland, Ontario, who will
be inducted into EAA's Hall of Fame during a special ceremony at Oshkosh in
October, Richard Van Grunsven will also be inducted during the
ceremony,Henri Mignet, the third nominee, will be inducted into the EAA
Hall of Fame posthumously. More details will be presented in a future issue
of Sport Aviation.
While there have been many others who have also made contributiions to keep
general aviation and sport aviation in particular, alive and well during
the down turn of the past fifteen years, in thinking back over the past
sixty years I am hard pressed to think of anyone with the possible
exception of Mr. Piper that has done more for sport aviation than Van and
Chris, and in that order.
As I have said so many times since my first flight in my RV 6 "THANKS VAN
FOR A WONDERFUL AIRCRAFT" and congratulations from a fellow RVer.
My hat is of to you,
Eustace Bowhay RV 6 serial 20383
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Larry Olson <lolson(at)doitnow.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LRI/PSS - Brian Lloyd |
NO...
>
>Listers,
>
>Lets make this a little more confusing. I was looking through the yeller
>pages for links to paint suppliers and ran across the E.M. Aviation website.
>Their product is a vane type AOA. Anyone on the list have any eperience
>with the product or company?
>
>Charlie Oglesby
>Preview Plans and Buying Tools
>Winter Haven, FL
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Pardue" <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LRI/PSS - Brian Lloyd |
>
>
>
>Vx is the speed at which best angle of climb occurs.
>Miminum sink is at best L/D.
>It turns out that Vx and best L/D occur at the same speed at the absolute
>ceiling of the airplane but you can spread them apart again just by
>increasing thrust. Clearly there is a thrust (engine power) issue here and
>your instrument does not take thrust into account since it doesn't have an
>input to measure thrust.
>
Brian,
Most of this thread is over my head, but I can make one small correction.
As any glider pilot knows, minimum sink occurs at a slower speed than best
L/D speed which is the best glide angle speed. I don't know if it always
has to be that way, but in all gliders I have flown minimum sink speed is
quite close to stall speed and best L/D is at a higher speed.
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP 100 Hours/Gliders about 900 Hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
>
> Has anyone heard of cutting down the seat back height on a RV6?
>
> Got a local -6 pilot that swears if I don't do it now, I
> will later.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
My seat backs are full height, and I like them fine.
The only reason that I have heard for cutting them down is to make it
easier to reach things in the baggage compartment during flight. I have
found that instead of trying to reach over the seat backs, it is much
easier to reach between the seat backs. It is surprising how much of the
baggage compartment I can reach this way. I use the space between the
seat back and the flap torque tube to store items that I need during
flight (water bottles, lunch, AOPA airport directory, etc.). I can reach
this area behind either seat with ease, without any of the twisting and
turning (and resulting aerobatics) that is required to reach over the seat
back. Of course, this option is not available if you have electric flaps,
since the flap drive mechanism blocks the space between the seat backs.
Also, larger pilots with "Popeye" sized forearms may find this more
difficult.
Mark Nielsen
RV-6, 445 hours
Green Bay, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
In a message dated 10/13/99 5:39:21 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
lolson(at)doitnow.com writes:
<< Has anyone heard of cutting down the seat back height on a RV6?
Got a local -6 pilot that swears if I don't do it now, I
will later. >>
I don't agree. He must be a short s**t ;
). IMO only the vertically
challenged would be able to tolerate shorter than stock seat backs.
-GV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Bundy" <ebundy(at)access1.net> |
| Subject: | Re: test flying: RV6A |
Be aware that the timer only records time spent above 1300rpm, (at least
this is how the R-1 works) so it won't be recording ground time.
Ed Bundy - Eagle, ID - RV6-A First flight 11/20/96
ebundy@access1.net http://home.cwix.com/~ebundy@cwix.com/
> My electronics international tach is reading engine RPM perfectly but is
> recording tach time at half the real rate????. A question for customer
> support I guess.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LRI/PSS - Brian Lloyd |
>>Vx is the speed at which best angle of climb occurs.
>>Miminum sink is at best L/D.
>>It turns out that Vx and best L/D occur at the same speed at the absolute
>>ceiling of the airplane but you can spread them apart again just by
>>increasing thrust. Clearly there is a thrust (engine power) issue here and
>>your instrument does not take thrust into account since it doesn't have an
>>input to measure thrust.
>
>Most of this thread is over my head, but I can make one small correction.
>As any glider pilot knows, minimum sink occurs at a slower speed than best
>L/D speed which is the best glide angle speed. I don't know if it always
>has to be that way, but in all gliders I have flown minimum sink speed is
>quite close to stall speed and best L/D is at a higher speed.
Ouch! You are right. That is what I get for spending too much time flying
powered planes. Time for a refresher.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6513 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Thomas McIntyre <bogeybrother(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: vertical fin offset |
Sorry, I've been trying to stay out of this discussion but I cant. I offset my
vertical 3/8" off center and my Rv flys feet off at 190 indicated. Cool eh?
there's more, any speed below or above requires a little rudder input to center
the ball. Conclusion: any adjustment you make will be accurate only for a small
range of airspeeds. Good luck.
Tom
Kevin Horton wrote:
>
> >
> >With all the talk about Vertical fin offset I must ask,
> >What would cause more drag, a horrible looking tab or a offset fin that most
> >people wouldn't even see.
> >(I have a 6 inch rudder tab on my RV6 bent at 30 to 40 degrees)
> >
> >Thank you.
> >
> >Trevor Mills
>
> The rudder tab should cause slightly more drag than the VS offset,
> but the difference would be so small that it should make no
> measurable difference in performance.
>
> Having an offset VS is a more elegant solution, but there is no way
> to predict how much (if any) offset you will need until you fly. As
> others have said, I would be really cranky if I put in a VS offset,
> and then needed a rudder tab to cancel some of the offset out. That
> would give even more drag than either case you described.
>
> So, I'll go without any VS offset, and put some in after flying if
> needed, and if I feel up to redoing the tail fairing.
>
> Kevin Horton RV-8 (wings 85% done)
> Ottawa, Canada
> http://www.cyberus.ca/~khorton/rv8.html
> http://www.cyberus.ca/~khorton/nojpi.html - No JPI stuff in my aircraft!
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | sarg314(at)azstarnet.com (tom sargent) |
| Subject: | Re: Sensenich 72FM8S16 Prop RV-6A |
>
>There are three pitches available for this prop. 81, 83, and 85. Van's
>Catalog implies that the 81 pitch is the best choice for a 180 HP -6A.
>Is anyone running the 83 pitch. If so, is it a good cruise prop?
>
>Chris Browne
>-6A Finish
>Atlanta
>
Chris:
When I ordered my prop (I have the short cowl, so ordered the
FM8S9) I ordered the 81" pitch because that was in van's catalog. Sensenich
then called me to ask if that was what I REALLY wanted. They said the
very first such prop they experimented with was 81" pitch, but they
recommend 83" as a better compromise. They wish Van would change his
catalog to show the 83" prop instead. I changed my order to the 83". I
haven't flown with it yet, though. It's gonna be a while....
---
Tom Sargent, sarg314(at)azstarnet.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | VP4SkyDoc(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Experimental AOA? |
In a message dated 10/14/1999 7:40:59 AM Tokyo Standard Time, gert@exec
> You know, I am looking at an old EAA magazine, which has an article just
> exactly what you proposed.
>
> A airspeed indicator and a mast under the wing. So how can this be
> patented (asi and mast) when the idea has around way back in the 80's
>
> Gert
Well, I guess I should just let it die, but this is fun. Thanks Gert. Which
issue is that? More importantly, did it work? After thinking about it, with
an ASI used with an LRI type mast, this critical calibrated angle (either
stall or 'zero lift reserve' - which ever you calibrate it for) will occur
when the ASI drops to zero (ie both ports are at equal pressure). Since
ASI's are not very accurate less than 35-50 kts I am starting to wonder if
this is the best Idea. Besides, I didn't really like the idea of something
sticking out in the wind.
But I do like the flush port PSS type system and I think it will work even
better with an ASI. The lower wing port plumbs to the pitot side of the ASI,
the upper wing to the 'static' connection. As speed increases, low pressure
on the upper surface and higher pressure on the lower skin cause a positive
reading on the ASI. As AOA increases, so does the differiental pressure and
the ASI reading. At stall, back pressure floods the upper surface and the
AOA-come-lately drops down and becomes erratic, but by now you already know
your wing is stalling. Because of the success of the PSS I would bet that
the ASI can be read in 'units' of AOA and stall would be predictable and
independent (mostly) of density, weight, and g-load. The ASI should also be
solidly into the positive territory at stall. I'm not sure about the
internal structure of an ASI. It may be necessary to remove any flow
restrictors so the AOA reading will be more instantaneous. Anyone think it
might work?
As far as patent infringement, its not for commercial use. However, I would
like to patronize those who go the effort and investment of producing new
products for GA. Then again, charging $750 to $2000 for something I can make
from off the shelf stuff for less than $200 is going too far. Its kind of
like buying a Mooney, or putting together your own RV. :-)
Dave Leonard
6QB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tom Brandon <majortom(at)apex.net> |
| Subject: | Need fly-in info |
Does anyone know of a fly-in near Nashville this month? Not the one at Lebanon,
went
to that.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chris Browne <cebrowne(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sensenich 72FM8S16 Prop RV-6A |
Tom,
Ed at Sensenich E-mailed about that, too. Van's also has the "-0-" wrong in the
part number, it should be a "-1". So, I currently have the wrong prop on
order. sigh ...
Chris
tom sargent wrote:
>
> >
> >There are three pitches available for this prop. 81, 83, and 85. Van's
> >Catalog implies that the 81 pitch is the best choice for a 180 HP -6A.
> >Is anyone running the 83 pitch. If so, is it a good cruise prop?
> >
> >Chris Browne
> >-6A Finish
> >Atlanta
> >
>
> Chris:
> When I ordered my prop (I have the short cowl, so ordered the
> FM8S9) I ordered the 81" pitch because that was in van's catalog. Sensenich
> then called me to ask if that was what I REALLY wanted. They said the
> very first such prop they experimented with was 81" pitch, but they
> recommend 83" as a better compromise. They wish Van would change his
> catalog to show the 83" prop instead. I changed my order to the 83". I
> haven't flown with it yet, though. It's gonna be a while....
>
> ---
> Tom Sargent, sarg314(at)azstarnet.com
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com> |
Leo,
I fly in excess of 200 Hr's per year. (1425 TT / 6 yrs = 237.5/Yr.....)
I put regular axle grease on the pins when I insert them. The only time I
see anything ooze out is after flying into rain, usually in IFR conditions.
That usually leaves the traditional "gray" streaks running down the side of
the fuselage. When flying in sunny weather, nothing oozes out......
Fred Stucklen
N925RV RV-6A
E. Windsor, Ct
____
From: Dr Leo Davies <leo(at)icn.usyd.edu.au>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Cowl Attach-Vibration
Fred,
You must fly that thing everyday!
What lubricant have you been using on the pins? I was worried that
grease would ooze down
the cowl?
Cheers,
Leo 6A (flying and loving it)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JRoss10612(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Cowl Attach-Vibration |
I have been following the recent thread regarding cowl attach vibration and
considering alternate methods of attachment. In a recent conversation with
Ken Scott from Van's, he informed me that one of the factory RV-6 aircraft
has over 2200 hours time in service with no broken hinge loops. This is the
highest time RV I have been able to find without hinge loop problems, Fred
Stucklen is the second.
After talking to many builders and taking a hard look at the problem it would
seem that there are several contributing factors; such as vibration, strain
on hinges due to quality of installation, air pressure at speed, aerodynamic
loads and forces on the cowl due to engine air baffle seals. One other factor
that may need consideration is that of exit air turbulence. My own original
intent was to use the hinges with a plenum, thereby removing the engine
baffle seal stress factor, along with a Chadwick prop balance. This still
leaves aerodynamic loads as well as cowl air pressure at speed to contend
with. I am also not so sure that the engine/prop vibration can be
sufficiently reduced to a level that is conducive to the long life of the
hinges. With these thoughts on the above listed fixes in mind I felt that the
problem would only be partially solved.
For my own RV-8, I will attempt to attach the cowl with 1/4 turn flush DZUS
fasteners. I do not want to use nutplates and screws, (with the exception of
those at the air inlet) and the other fasteners on the market all sit proud
of the cowl surface. It will be necessary to build up the lip of the cowl
with epoxy lay-ups in order to obtain the thickness required to machine
countersink the cowl for the DZUS fastener. The lay-ups will also help keep
the cowl stiff in this area to reduce the "inflation" forces on the cowl due
to air pressure at speed. Also, proper spacing of the fasteners may be
critical for the same reason. The difficulties of this type of installation
are as follows:
1) More work
2) More weight
3) Will have to procure/make a special large machine countersink tool
4) More cost
5) Unknown long term effects of countersinking the fiberglass -- will cracks
appear?
6) Not as pretty as the look of no fasteners while using the hinge method
If it works out, it will be a a solution to the cowling hinge loop problem,
and cowling removal and replacement will be easy and still look good. I am
willing to take on all of these problems and attempt to provide a good
alternative to the hinges, but am interested in input from other builders
with similar thoughts and or experiences before I begin.
Jon Ross RV-80094 Finish kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lewis, Timothy H., ,SAF/AQII" <TimothyH.Lewis(at)pentagon.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Paint Spray Guns |
On 11 Oct 99, at 13:58, Emrath wrote:
> Also, there is a Devilbess Gravity Spray gun number 34775-1VGA for
> $169.99
> that says will spay upside down and has a 1 year warranty. Has anyone
> used a gravity feed gun and what their opinion is of such a gun?
>
I've about finishing painting my plane this wee. I have the Finish Line
(Conventional) Gravity Feed. Yes, you can spray with it upside down.
Be sure to buy an extra box of cup liners, as they are what allow it to
reliably paint upside down.
I'd recommend the HVLP vs the Conventional. I have the
Conventional, and I went thru a lot of Imron. I think the HVLP would
have paid for itself in the savings in paint.
Tim
******
Tim Lewis
timrv6a(at)iname.com
N47TD RV-6A, painting
Springfield VA
http://home.earthlink.net/~timrv6a
http://home.earthlink.net/~timrv6a/jpi.html
<http://home.earthlink.net/~timrv6a/jpi.html> - No JPI stuff in my airplane
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stucklen, Frederic IFC" <stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com> |
Alex,
Can't say that I remember doing anything special with the stock hinges
prior to riveting them into place. At the time, the prospect of cracks
forming in the sharp radius corners wasn't high on the priority list, or
even considered a problem. I would think that it wouldn't hurt to radius
these areas, but from my own personal experience, I'm not sure that it would
have help prevent what little breakage I've had. Most of my breakage has
occurred at the ends of the pin travel.....
Putting shrink tubing onto the top cowl .090" steel pins may work OK
initially, but I suspect that after very little use, the surface of the
shrink tubing will deform. This would result in a hard to remove pin, and
almost impossible to insert pin. The original promise of an undersized pin
was to enable the pin to form to both the straight run hinge sections as
well as the curved areas. I suspect that the increased diameter pin would be
very difficult to insert.
Fred Stucklen
N925RV RV-6A
E. Windsor, Ct
____
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Cowl Attach-Vibration
Fred, out of curiosity, did you happen to radius the factory sharp
corners
which are built into the hinges?
I don't know what the result will be as I'm not flying yet, but I
took an
1/8" diameter file to each corner in the hinge, obliterating the
original
sharp corner left from the stamping. These hinges are poster parts
for
stress risers leading to fatigue in their supplied condition.
Additionally, I will be experimenting with covering the .090" steel
pins
used on the top hinges with heat shrink tubing, to bring the outside
diameter up to about .125", to eliminate a lot of the slop without
increasing stiffness much (can't take credit for the idea). I'll
report as
I learn...
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BumFlyer(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: vertical fin offset |
In a message dated 10/13/99 23:58:21, bogeybrother(at)earthlink.net writes:
Sorry, I've been trying to stay out of this discussion but I cant. I offset my
vertical 3/8" off center and my Rv flys feet off at 190 indicated. Cool eh?
there's more, any speed below or above requires a little rudder input to
center
the ball. Conclusion: any adjustment you make will be accurate only for a
small
range of airspeeds. Good luck.
Tom >>
Shucks I have been trying to stay out too. But I have another question for
the aerodynamiologists.
It seems to me the offset would indeed only be good for one speed ( as would
a bias spring). On the other hand the tab would be seeing more air at a
greater speed and put in more rudder etc, so maybe would have a larger range
of effectiveness. If so it would be another plus for the tab.(ugly, one ea.)
My intuitive stabs are sometimes woefully wrong so let's hear from those less
aero challenged.
D Walsh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Use (of Nightsun lites) with an alternator power source |
I checked out this product on several websits . . . please don't
spend a lot of bux purchasing these things for adaptation to
airplanes.
The bulbs used in their fixtures are plain vanilla halogen
spot/flood devices not unlike the one you'll see at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/exh.jpg
These bulbs have built in reflectors and come in a wide
variety of wattages and beam spreads. The 12V rated lamps
are used by the thousands in product displays in stores
and are quite inexpensive. One might also consider using
a common automotive headlamp like the one I show at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/4352.jpg
This lamp is 55w, very compact, the right shape for leading
edge incorporation and a whold lot less expensive than the
Nightsun products.
The respondant's concerns about "regulation of the vehicle"
shows lack of knowledge of how things are supposed to work.
It's true that a bulb's life varies strongly with voltage.
For example, running a bulb a 95% of its rated value doubles
the life, 105% of rated value halves the life. HOWEVER,
given that these bulbs are designed for thousands of hours
service in high duty cycle service like storefronts should
mitigate the builder's concerns for service life . . . especially
since the 4509 lamp used in tens of thousands of certified
ships has a service life on the order of 10-20 hours!
Check out the light bulbs I've suggested above and do some
poking around on your own in the lighting sections of hardware
stores and automotive suppliers . . .
> FYI
> With regard to the recent post about the Nitesun biking lighting......I
>asked them if these type of lights could be used with an alternator as a
>power source. Their response is below.
>
>--------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: "Nightsun" <night-sun(at)mail.wman.com>
>To: Dana Hill
>Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 09:24:09 +0000
>Subject: Re: Use on a car?
>Message-ID: <199910101625.JAA07838(at)home.wman.com>
>
>Might work ok, but what wories me is the voltage regulation of the
>vehicle. Some alternators / voltage regulators but out upto 16 vdc,
>way too much for our bulbs. Upto about 14 will work, but the lamp
>life will be shortened, over 14 and the lamp life would be very
>short. Most airplanes are 28 volt.
> In any event we do not sell headlights without batteries.
>
>
>Regards,
>
>
>Nightsun
>
>To: info@night-sun.com
>Subject: Use on a car?
>From: Dana Hill <dhill36(at)juno.com>
>
>Hi Night-Sun,
> I would like to know if your lighting system could be hardwired into
> a
>14 Volt DC charging system, such as a car/airplane? Would this sort
>of mod be difficult? Any info in this regard would be appreciated.
>
>Thanks,
>Dana Hill
>
>Customer Service, Monday to Friday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Pacific time
>626-799-5074
>
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o========
< Independence Kansas: the >
< Jurassic Park of aviation. >
< Your source for brand new >
< 40 year old airplanes. >
================================
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Cowl Attach-Vibration |
Seems like a lot of effort to avoid a very slight protrusion with no net
aerodynamic gain. Countersunk washers are only .016" thick and flush
Camlocs can't protrude much more than that. Not much thicker than bug
splatters... at least here in Texas:-)
Regards,
Greg Young
RV-6 N6GY (reserved) finishing kit
>
> For my own RV-8, I will attempt to attach the cowl with 1/4 turn
> flush DZUS
> fasteners. I do not want to use nutplates and screws, (with the
> exception of
> those at the air inlet) and the other fasteners on the market all
> sit proud
> of the cowl surface. It will be necessary to build up the lip of the cowl
> with epoxy lay-ups in order to obtain the thickness required to machine
> countersink the cowl for the DZUS fastener. The lay-ups will also
> help keep
> the cowl stiff in this area to reduce the "inflation" forces on
> the cowl due
> to air pressure at speed. Also, proper spacing of the fasteners may be
> critical for the same reason. The difficulties of this type of
> installation
> are as follows:
>
> 1) More work
> 2) More weight
> 3) Will have to procure/make a special large machine countersink tool
> 4) More cost
> 5) Unknown long term effects of countersinking the fiberglass --
> will cracks
> appear?
> 6) Not as pretty as the look of no fasteners while using the hinge method
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bulky, unreadable files |
>Hi netters.
>
>I hate to be a whiner, but I got two files in the Vol 01, Number 509
>Glastarnet that flat filled up my bit bucket. I had to stop and empty it
>before the computer would work again. I could name names, but I won't. One
>was a WINMAIL.DAT file, and the other was MIME. Please, please look at what
>you are putting out to avoid this problem. I know, I know. I had trouble
>passing "Works and plays well with others" too.
>
>Bobbi & Ric Lasher
>#5648 BN954BR
>Cocoa, Fl.
I subscribe to about a dozen list-servers so it takes quite
a bit of time to download ordinary message traffic. If a couple
of folks attach a few hundred K-bytes of "information" it
really slows things down and increases the risk of problems
like Rich describes.
There is an EASY way to avoid this for most folks. If you have
a real internet access account with server hardrive space,
you can upload large files to your server and then give people
pointers on how to find them. For example, click on this:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/exh.jpg
You need an FTP program and little instruction which your ISP
provider should be able to provide. You'll gain a new skill,
a new tool for effective communications and avoid forcing
our friends to download data which may be of no interest.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o========
< Independence Kansas: the >
< Jurassic Park of aviation. >
< Your source for brand new >
< 40 year old airplanes. >
================================
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: vertical fin offset |
| From: | n5lp <n5lp(at)carlsbad.net> |
>
>
>
>It seems to me the offset would indeed only be good for one speed ( as would
>a bias spring). On the other hand the tab would be seeing more air at a
>greater speed and put in more rudder etc, so maybe would have a larger range
>of effectiveness. If so it would be another plus for the tab.(ugly, one
>ea.)
>
>My intuitive stabs are sometimes woefully wrong so let's hear from those
>less
>aero challenged.
>
>D Walsh
>
>
I have a rudder tab. It is only good for one speed but maybe it is close
over a wider speed range?
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rich Crosley" <dirtrider(at)qnet.com> |
Maybe things have changed since I was in the Navy (Vietnam) but we only used
AOA for landing, never take off. Use airspeed for take off. It helps to be
as slow as you can be coming aboard the "boat",but what is the point, under
normal circumstances, of lifting off as soon as you possible can off a
runway that is adequate for your airplane?
After all most of the time we fly out of runways long enough to get up to
take off speed plus a little for the grandkids. AOA is great but airplanes
have flown a long time with airspeed indicators just fine. If you really
want to be that close to the ragged edge don't give me a ride.
Additionally, if you are using the AOA to hold max rate of climb, to look
cool for the guys, think about what happens when the engine quits at 150
feet with your nose pitched up at 40 degrees. You can't recover!!! Next
time you see a Rocket guy getting 5000 FPM rate of climb off the deck, think
about it. If the engine quits before he gets high enough to recover you can
get a good deal on aluminum scrap and maybe a used "Lift Gauge". Go up to
5000 feet and try it.
Rich Crosley
Palmdale, CA
RV-8 wings, gas tanks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fesenbek, Gary" <fesenbek(at)marykay.com> |
| Subject: | Matronics List Idea |
Hey Matt
Can we get another list created for AOA? :
)
Gary Fesenbek
RV6A
Dallas
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fesenbek, Gary" <fesenbek(at)marykay.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Weight (Was lighting) |
There actually is a lot less difference in the weight of the
standard Van's panel and a .090 or .125 panel than the 1.1 pounds mentioned.
When you make all the cutouts you actually have a lot less material than
when you started especially for IFR birds like mine.
Gary Fesenbek
RV6A
Dallas, TX
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Huntington <jimrhunt(at)wco.com> |
Listers,
Of course during the last four days my digest version of the day's RV
traffic twice would not open. That never happened before, but I believe
that I have been able to follow the LRI conversation adequately enough
using the search engine.
We have not been challenged quite like this previously, to produce the
technical work underlaying the LRI. We will do our best to make everything
we have available to you. One idea is to send copies of flight test data
to Brian Lloyd rather than to weigh down the list with lengthy documents.
I hope to respond here to many of the questions that have been directed our
way, but give me a couple of days and then maybe we can have another go at
it. To the question of high wing loading and accelerated stalls, I can
only reply that in fact the LRI does give true readings - the best
explanation that I can give for that at the present time is, in one word -
magic.
Jim Huntington
jimrhunt(at)wco.com
1 (888) 310-4574
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Angle-of-Attack( Non recoverable corner) |
In a message dated 10/14/99 11:27:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
dirtrider(at)qnet.com writes:
<< Additionally, if you are using the AOA to hold max rate of climb, to look
cool for the guys, think about what happens when the engine quits at 150
feet with your nose pitched up at 40 degrees. You can't recover!!! Next
time you see a Rocket guy getting 5000 FPM rate of climb off the deck, think
about it. If the engine quits before he gets high enough to recover you can
get a good deal on aluminum scrap and maybe a used "Lift Gauge". Go up to
5000 feet and try it. >>
Been there done that except in an UL. I have preached to my students not to
climb out on the prop of high horsepower to weight vehicles and a 54HP Kolb
Firestar certainly falls in that category.( Don't laugh, It grosses at less
than 400 pounds with a lightweight pilot) and it has absolutely no momentum
and very high drag. I was demonstrating how you have to push over very hard
and hold it nose down to the very last minute to have enough velocity to
flare. Ops started just a wee bit early and there was not a darn thing I
could do when I pushed over I realised it was not going to get enough speed
before running out of that precious commodity called altitude. I did not feel
that going to power was a solution and rode it down till the last minute and
hauled back. It almost got the rate of decent slowed but not quite. It wiped
the gear legs off and I was not hurt, but was very embarassed. It was an
expensive $ demo to prove my point that there is a corner with no escape. AOA
is good, but useless in this situation.
Bernie Kerr
6A finishing
SE Fla
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Angle-of-Attack |
>time you see a Rocket guy getting 5000 FPM rate of climb off the deck, think
>about it. If the engine quits before he gets high enough to recover you can
>get a good deal on aluminum scrap and maybe a used "Lift Gauge". Go up to
>5000 feet and try it.
I did try it in my Tiger when I was trying to determine whether it was
possible to turn back to the runway after an engine failure. I was
climbing at Vx and I had to push *right now* and push hard (zero G at
least) to avoid a stall. Something like a rocket with that big prop
providing lots of drag might be a bit dicey even if you were at Vy.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6513 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DWENSING(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Prepping skins without removing alclad |
Flaking of the primer can be the result of too much dry film thichness. This
type of primer should be only 3 or 4 mils thick. Not more than 5 or 6 mils.
(or 1/2 of a thousandth of a inch.)
DaleEnsing
6A FWF
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | PhilipR920(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
In a message dated 10/13/99 8:30:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
lolson(at)doitnow.com writes:
<< Has anyone heard of cutting down the seat back height on a RV6?
Got a local -6 pilot that swears if I don't do it now, I
will later.
I'm building a slider.
Any thoughts?
>>
Your friend is right. I cut mine after a few hours. Makes access to baggage
compartment much easier and doesn't detract from seat comfort.
Phil Rogerson
6A flying
Fernandina Beach, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Matronics List Idea) |
>
>Hey Matt
>
>Can we get another list created for AOA? :
)
This is actually a good idea. There is a list dedicated to avionics that
our late Don Corbitt started. That is probably the place to discuss
aircraft instrumentation. We were all kibutzing with Don about his
super-duper engine monitor and talking about how to do glass cockpits for
GA aircraft when he met his untimely end. We have kept the list alive and
there is all sorts of avionics discussions there.
Recent discussions have been about AoA, including a very interesting
mathematical analysis of the LRI vs. the PSS AoA, and rewiring old spam
cans, just to give you an idea of the range of topics.
If anyone wants to subscribe over there I believe you send email to
majordomo(at)awpi.com and place the words "subscribe avionics" in the BODY of
the message. It isn't as nice and fancy as Matt's mail server but it works.
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6513 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brian(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Cornering speed (was: Non recoverable corner) |
>
> ... Ops started just a wee bit early and there was not a darn thing I
>could do when I pushed over I realised it was not going to get enough speed
>before running out of that precious commodity called altitude. I did not
feel
>that going to power was a solution and rode it down till the last minute and
>hauled back. It almost got the rate of decent slowed but not quite.
As strange as it may seem, sometimes adding power at low altitude when
pointed at the ground is the correct thing to do. You want to get the
airplane as quickly as possible to "cornering speed," that speed which will
produce the smallest radius turn or pullout.
BTW, it is a good idea to know what cornering speed is *BEFORE* you get
into this situation.
>It wiped
>the gear legs off and I was not hurt, but was very embarassed. It was an
>expensive $ demo to prove my point that there is a corner with no escape.
AOA
>is good, but useless in this situation.
It is certainly possible that you did put yourself into that unrecoverable
corner but it is also possible that a shot of power might have made the
difference.
Now that I have opened my mouth, does anyone know how to calculate
cornering speed without having to go out and try several turns/pull-ups to
determine the speed experimentally?
Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
brian(at)lloyd.com 3461 Robin Lane, Suite 1
http://www.livingston.com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.530.676.6513 - voice +1.530.676.3442 - fax
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman Hunger" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Metalic Paint |
>
>
> Hey Norman, what is Sunfire (Poly, Enamel)? I have always been a PPG guy
but the
> Sherwin Williams guys really impressed me at Sun N Fun.I didn't get
anything on
> Sunfire. Great info material available on Acry-Glo and Jet-Glow. If any of
you
> are new to the paint world it would be beneficial to call SW and get an
info
> packet on Jet-Glow. Takes you step by step through the paint process. I
learned
> from PPG by screwing it up, stripping it and doing it again.
Sherwin Williams Sunfire is an acrylic urethane. This is a single stage
paint which will give one of the lightest weight applications. In solid
colors it is very easy to wetsand for the perfect mirror finish. Metalics
are a what you see is what you get situation. A pro in a real spray booth
can make it look first class with two coats.
They have quite a selection of colors. I am using a pure bright white on all
of mt metal parts and my wings/fuselage while I am considering a metalic
dark blue for trim and lower fuselage. They let me play with their paint
code system and design my own color. I had them mix small quantities of it
to take home and try out. On the third try I did my car. I am very happy.
Soon my plane will probably match it.
Regards,
Norman Hunger
RV6A Delta, BC.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman Hunger" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Static System Ports |
I have the static system kit from Van.
How do the rivit ports mount? Do I just glue them in or do I pop the rivit?
Also, I am intending an alternate static source that is just a 1/4 inch fuel
on/off valve. I will "T" it into the system so that alternate cabin air is
on when it is opened.
I have heard that the instrument calibration guys love to have a place to
tap in their instruments when they calibrate the altimeter. What size and
type of fitting should I install to make these guys happy? If I did this at
the low point of the system would then my alternate static source also be a
drain point for the system? Is this a good way to do this?
Is my fuel valve a good idea?
Thanks,
Norman Hunger
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Caldwell" <racaldwell(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Static System Ports |
>Is my fuel valve a good idea?
>
>Thanks,
>Norman Hunger
Norman, I also put in an alternate static source that will be easy for the
technician to connect to. I used a plastic tube as the static line, tee off
at the low end behind the panel, and the end of the tube is pinched shut
with a plastic tube clamp. This is a nylon (?) clamp that pinches the tube
shut. It is held closed with serrations gripping the pawl. Very cheap and
weighs nothing. Available at plastics stores, believe I bought mine from
AIN Plastics, years ago. I have many left and will mail you one, if so
desires. I am not yet flying so I can't give a flight report.
Rick Caldwell
RV-6 #24187 wings on, fitting flap control rods
Melbourne, FL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <rv8er(at)home.com> |
I second Norman's advice on Sunfire paint...It is virtually bulletproof,
looks and sprays excellent. It is also available as a base/clear
application as well. You can get any color mixed that you like, based on
automotive formulas. They don't market it to aviation, but it is their
strongest paint that they make, and IMHO, should be marketed as their
aviation paint.
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://members.home.net/rv8er
Finish Kit
-----Original Message-----
From: Norman Hunger <nhunger(at)sprint.ca>
Date: Thursday, October 14, 1999 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Metalic Paint
>
>>
>>
>> Hey Norman, what is Sunfire (Poly, Enamel)? I have always been a PPG guy
>but the
>> Sherwin Williams guys really impressed me at Sun N Fun.I didn't get
>anything on
>> Sunfire. Great info material available on Acry-Glo and Jet-Glow. If any
of
>you
>> are new to the paint world it would be beneficial to call SW and get an
>info
>> packet on Jet-Glow. Takes you step by step through the paint process. I
>learned
>> from PPG by screwing it up, stripping it and doing it again.
>
>
>Sherwin Williams Sunfire is an acrylic urethane. This is a single stage
>paint which will give one of the lightest weight applications. In solid
>colors it is very easy to wetsand for the perfect mirror finish. Metalics
>are a what you see is what you get situation. A pro in a real spray booth
>can make it look first class with two coats.
>
>They have quite a selection of colors. I am using a pure bright white on
all
>of mt metal parts and my wings/fuselage while I am considering a metalic
>dark blue for trim and lower fuselage. They let me play with their paint
>code system and design my own color. I had them mix small quantities of it
>to take home and try out. On the third try I did my car. I am very happy.
>Soon my plane will probably match it.
>
>Regards,
>Norman Hunger
>RV6A Delta, BC.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman Hunger" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Static System Ports |
>
> Norman, I also put in an alternate static source that will be easy for
the
> technician to connect to. I used a plastic tube as the static line, tee
off
> at the low end behind the panel, and the end of the tube is pinched shut
> with a plastic tube clamp. This is a nylon (?) clamp that pinches the
tube
> shut. It is held closed with serrations gripping the pawl. Very cheap
and
> weighs nothing. Available at plastics stores, believe I bought mine from
> AIN Plastics, years ago. I have many left and will mail you one, if so
> desires. I am not yet flying so I can't give a flight report.
I'm planing on using the fuel valve because it has a nice handle. That way
it can be mounted and placarded properly and used in flight as an aletrnate
static source. I am quite sure (but not positive) that all of this is
required by Transport Canada for IFR flight. The valve must be visible,
functional, and placarded to be legal for IFR. It is one of numerous
examples of how our country demands stiff standards for homebuilts.
If the valve is "T'd" off the low point in the system, with the valve
pointing down, then it should serve as a drain during pre-flight. If the
aircraft is ever parked outside in the rain with the wind hitting the side
is there a possiblity of rain entering the port on the upwind side? It rains
alot here on the West Coast.
Regards,
Norman
PS - Rick, thanks for the offer anyway.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gert <gert(at)execpc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Experimental AOA? |
The 'offending' issue is January 1979, page 43.
article is Craftman's Corner by Ron 'Scotty' Scott. And that refers back
to a publication of the chapter 124.
In essence, it mounts, rather cleverly I think, a piece horizontally to
a pitot tube. The tube is horizontally divided in half.
Gert
VP4SkyDoc(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 10/14/1999 7:40:59 AM Tokyo Standard Time, gert@exec
> > You know, I am looking at an old EAA magazine, which has an article just
> > exactly what you proposed.
> >
> > A airspeed indicator and a mast under the wing. So how can this be
> > patented (asi and mast) when the idea has around way back in the 80's
> >
> > Gert
>
> Well, I guess I should just let it die, but this is fun. Thanks Gert. Which
> issue is that? More importantly, did it work? After thinking about it, with
> an ASI used with an LRI type mast, this critical calibrated angle (either
> stall or 'zero lift reserve' - which ever you calibrate it for) will occur
> when the ASI drops to zero (ie both ports are at equal pressure). Since
> ASI's are not very accurate less than 35-50 kts I am starting to wonder if
> this is the best Idea. Besides, I didn't really like the idea of something
> sticking out in the wind.
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, '227,
any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address
is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
US. E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Cornering speed (was: Non recoverable corner) |
>
>Now that I have opened my mouth, does anyone know how to calculate
>cornering speed without having to go out and try several turns/pull-ups to
>determine the speed experimentally?
>
>Brian Lloyd Lucent Technologies
Simple answer - Multiply the one g stall speed by the square root of
the max allowable g loading.
Complicated answer - You really need to be dealing with calibrated
airspeed, not indicated airspeed. And it varies with weight too.
CS=VS*sqrt(n*W/(max W))
CS = corner speed at a given weight, in calibrated airspeed
VS = stall speed at gross weight, in calibrated airspeed
n = load factor
W = weight
Bring that CJ-6 up here and we'll do a flight test program :-)
Kevin Horton RV-8 (wings 85% done)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.cyberus.ca/~khorton/rv8.html
http://www.cyberus.ca/~khorton/nojpi.html - No JPI stuff in my aircraft!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: Sunfire Paint |
>
>I second Norman's advice on Sunfire paint...It is virtually bulletproof,
>looks and sprays excellent. It is also available as a base/clear
>application as well. You can get any color mixed that you like, based on
>automotive formulas. They don't market it to aviation, but it is their
>strongest paint that they make, and IMHO, should be marketed as their
>aviation paint.
>
>Paul Besing
>RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
>http://members.home.net/rv8er
>Finish Kit
I assume that Sunfire is comparable to PPG Concept? Are there any painters
on the list who have sprayed both and can compare the two? Ive sprayed some
Concept and found it relatively easy to deal with. However as a novice
painter I'm willing to accept any crutch that I can. If there is an
advantage to using the Sunfire in the ease of use or recovery from error
department I would switch.
Mike Wills
RV-4 canopy
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "christopher huey" <clhuey(at)sprynet.com> |
Sherwin Williams also makes Acry Glo anybody with experience with it.
Almost sounds the same as the Sunfire.
Chris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Hamer <shamer(at)mscomm.com> |
| Subject: | [Fwd: Tail wheels] |
Received the following from Owen at Andair regarding the tailwheel
problem.
Steve Hamer
MBOX-Line: From andair.co.uk!andair Thu Oct 14 17:20:26 1999 remote from mail
via smail with P:smtp/R:bind_hosts/T:smtp-filter
(sender: )
(Smail-3.2.0.105 1999-Mar-3 #3 built 1999-Mar-26)
From: "andair" <andair(at)andair.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Tail wheels
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 17:21:21 +0100
Dear Steve,
I am sorry to hear you have had a problem with your tail
wheel. We have approx.., 60 wheels in the field now.
We want to offer a solution. We are prepared to do what it takes to help
customers that have had problems with the tailwheels. Could you please post
this on the RV-List and we will respond as quickly as possible to any
further problems. Below is a brief description of our testing/conclusions to
date.
On the test aeroplanes here in the UK (we have 4 aeroplanes
that are carrying the pneumatic tyre tailwheel 2, with 7in and 2 with 6 in..
Sometimes all run with 6 in for a certain experiment) so far we have logged
about 20 hours on each.
My own aeroplane has almost 100 hours now on various pneumatic tailwheels.
Now the problems we have had:
The tyre first used was only 4 ply and this was found
to be unsuitable,it was too light in construction,
Tyre manufacturers were consulted and a 6 ply tyre was
produced. The static loading on the tyre was tested to over 200 lbs. and the
working pressure was raised to between 60 and 90 psi on the test aeroplanes.
The difference between to two pressure is preference to 'ride'.
We have had several failures on the test aeroplanes, all have
been investigated and I list them below for you to see.
1. RV6 (7in) rolled off the rim ( rim design changed)
2. RV6 (6in) 3 flights all the tread pattern destroyed down to
the canvass but this did not deflate. The cause was, the tailwheel assembly
was (out of line) and caused the tailwheel to shimmy, this seems to be a
common problem, to produce a tailwheel assembly where the pivot pin is
truly vertical, and carries the wheel assembly at 90 deg. to the ground.
This is very important because it offers the wheel to the ground at the
correct angle to prevent shimmy and makes turning easy. If the tail spring
has been accidentally bent in a possible firm landing and is not returned
to its former angles then a completely new set of rules take over, this is
not
generally noticed when the solid tyre is in use.
3. RV4 ( 6in) the aeroplane was pushed at speed over a steel
channel at the entrance to the hanger, the tail pitched up and landed back
down on the rib of the other channel. It was found to have pinched the tyre
between the cover and the rim. This tyre was inflated to approx.. 40 psi
4 (RV6) (7in and 6in) I have destroyed two 7in and one 6in
tyres in tests on my own RV and the conclusions, drawn from my experiences
and all of the test aircraft pilots are as follows:
The tailwheel assembly has to be in good condition, by that I
mean it has to be at the correct angle (90 deg.) to the ground. If free
castoring then the detent for the forward lock needs to be working correctly
i.e. to put the wheel in the centre position and hold it there during
takeoff and landing. The same applies to tailwheel assy with rudder springs
the wheel must not be allow to scoot or shimmy' (apply an increase loading
to the nut, to stiffen the resistance to turning of the wheel)
Finally the inflation of the tyre. The most failures of the
pneumatic tyre seem to be the pressure that was in the tyre prior to
destruction. My own conclusions are on the tyres I was running, as the
pressure was reduced ( to decrease the bumps, to smooth out the taxi
ride) from 60 psi or 80 psi down to 30 psi there became a point when the
side walls could no longer sustain the weight of sudden changes in loading.
>From our tests (and they are continuous, we are all running pneumatic
tyres) the most important point is to maintain a pressure at approx. 60 to
80 psi This we feel is close to the optimum pressure.
With the conclusions that we have drawn from the above, if the tyre is
inflated to a pressure below 60 PSI there is a strong risk of failure. We
see no reason that the rubber tyres have been made to an unsatisfactory
standard as our tests here in England have been VERY brutal (i.e. hard
landing on all sorts of different surfaces). The total hours on
As to the failures that have happened if the field, we will supply all parts
ie tyres and tubes and also wheel hubs where they have been damaged due to
punctures, free of charge. We would like to see the damaged wheels returned
to us, for us to take what ever action is needed for the future.
It has been brought to our attention that there are 4-5 failures out in the
field.
Yours Sincerely
Owen Phillips.
andair(at)andair.co.uk --- www.andair.co.uk
Andair Ltd.
Unit 3
25c Brockhampton Lane,
Havant
Hampshire
PO9 1JT
England
Fax +44 1705 473946 --- Tel +44 1705 473945
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Hamer <shamer(at)mscomm.com>
Date: 13 October 1999 05:33
Subject: Tail wheels
>Owen,
>
>I recently purchased your tail wheel for my RV-4. It's a very nice
>product both in looks and performance. The quiet ride is nice.
>However, after a half dozen flights it went flat and will not hold
>air. I don't know if you moniter the RV list, but there are three or
>four others who have had the same experience with bad tubes.
>I thought you would want to be aware of this so you could respond before
>your tail wheel gets a bad reputation. If you aren't on the RV list, I
>would be happy to post your response to the masses.
>Are you aware of other tube failures and if so, do you have a fix in the
>works? Will you provide new tubes to those of us who have had short
>term failures?
>I hope to hear from you soon.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Steve Hamer
>shamer(at)mscomm.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Bristol" <bj034(at)lafn.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Painting Info |
The mottling effect when shooting metalic paints is caused by the paint not
being mixed throughly. If you put a couple of marbles in the gun and give it
a little shake at the end of every couple of passes the paint will stay
pretty well mixed. Some professional guns have a mixing arm built in to take
care of this problem.
Dave Bristol, RV6 finishing paint and upholstry, Los Angeles area
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric.J.Henson(at)chase.com(Content Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with SMTP
; 13 Oct 1999 08:51:48.-0400(at)matronics.com <13 Oct
1999 08:51:48.-0400(at)matronics.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 5:54 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Painting Info
Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with SMTP id
for ;
>
>
>Sam Buchanan on 10/12/99 08:00:55 PM
>
>Please respond to rv-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Painting Info
>
>
>Sounds like mottling (dark color stripes in the spray pattern near the
center of
>the pattern). Not enough pressure or too cold a temp. for the paint
reducer. I
>fought a hell of a battle with this with PPG Delstar (Acry Enamel). Finally
>found that if you choke down your guns needle somewhere between a fog/tack
coat
>and a light coat and drop your normal pattern to only 1/3 your normal pass,
you
>can eliminate this problem. Takes some trial and error. Helps to hold a
strong
>light with your other hand so you can see the moment the paint flows, since
it
>takes a few passes for this to happen. I don't know why, but this leave no
>orange peel. I thought it was a neat trick that might help someone out in
the
>future.
>
>Eric Henson
>Installing Tail Wheel Mount
>
>
> However, I wonder if the truly
>novice painter has any business using metallic paints. A local RV'er
>used metallic single stage paint and it was very difficult to keep the
>metallic application uniform.
>
>Sam Buchanan
>
>----------------
>
>Norman Hunger wrote:
>>
>>
>> > However, I soon discovered that it really didn't matter because there
is
>> > something available to every painter that will take care of dust
>> > specks..............1500 grit sand paper.
>> >
>>
>> > There are almost no paint flaws that can't be sanded out with 1500
paper
>> > and buffing compound. If you use a single stage paint, then get the
>> > paint on the best you can and resolve to perfect the finish after the
>> > fact.
>>
>> CAUTION - Most single stage metallic paints cannot be sanded at all
without
>> exposing the metallic flakes as little silver spots. Looks terrible. If
you
>> must have a metallic, basecoat clearcoat is easier to apply. You can
wetsand
>> the clearcoat for a perfect finish. There are differences between the
many
>> different brands of paints though.
>>
>> The original post refers to solid colors and is very good information on
>> that topic. Check out his webpage to see the fine paintjob he now has.
>>
>> Single stage metallic paints require good booths. Wet down the walls and
>> floor just before pushing in your project. Never wet down the roof, just
>> blow it off with high pressure air before the wetdown. Paint the wings
one
>> at a time. Build racks for them with wheels on the bottom.
>>
>> The new HVLP sprayers do much nicer work because they have a much higher
>> percentage of the paint applying to the surface than the old styles of
spray
>> guns. It is the overspray that is the dust problem. The old guns make
tons
>> of it. HVLP sprayers use less paint as a result. They are more efficient.
>> You will not need as much paint. If you invest in a good name brand
system
>> you should be able to sell it when you are done for at least half of what
>> you paid for it.
>>
>> Norman Hunger
>> RV6A Delta,BC
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | flyhars(at)attglobal.net |
| Subject: | Re: vertical fin offset |
D. Walsh: I had a 1/4" offset in my last RV-6, which I liked very much.
But as you said it is only good for one speed. Mine worked very well for
about 65% to 70%. I am at a dilemma as too offset my present project or
not. I might just offset 1/8" for experimental purposes.
Harvey Sigmon - RV-6AQB- Vertical Stab install.
----- Original Message -----
From: <BumFlyer(at)aol.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 1999 9:42 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: vertical fin offset
>
>
> In a message dated 10/13/99 23:58:21, bogeybrother(at)earthlink.net writes:
>
>
> Sorry, I've been trying to stay out of this discussion but I cant. I
offset my
> vertical 3/8" off center and my Rv flys feet off at 190 indicated. Cool
eh?
> there's more, any speed below or above requires a little rudder input to
> center
> the ball. Conclusion: any adjustment you make will be accurate only for a
> small
> range of airspeeds. Good luck.
> Tom >>
>
> Shucks I have been trying to stay out too. But I have another question
for
> the aerodynamiologists.
>
> It seems to me the offset would indeed only be good for one speed ( as
would
> a bias spring). On the other hand the tab would be seeing more air at a
> greater speed and put in more rudder etc, so maybe would have a larger
range
> of effectiveness. If so it would be another plus for the tab.(ugly, one
ea.)
>
> My intuitive stabs are sometimes woefully wrong so let's hear from those
less
> aero challenged.
>
> D Walsh
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cornering speed (was: Non recoverable corner) |
In a message dated 10/14/99 3:48:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time, brian(at)lloyd.com
writes:
<< It is certainly possible that you did put yourself into that unrecoverable
corner but it is also possible that a shot of power might have made the
difference. >>
Maybe soo!!! But have you ever flown an UL, try this at altitude and see how
steep the attitude is. UL's of this nature will not even lose altitude at
full throttle and the stick full aft. They will stall and recover on the prop
with positive attitude so I preach power out of bad situations and it might
have been the proper thing but my gonads were not that large at the time.
Bernie Kerr, 6A finishing details, SE Fla
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeremy Benedict <jwb(at)europa.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sensenich 72FM8S16 Prop |
When the Van's catalog was published, it DID contain the most current
information on props; the info changed after 10,000 copies were printed.
D'oh! A new edition, now well underway, will contain the correct
information from Sensenich.
BTW: The new catalog is only 1 (one) of 3 (three) things that are "Coming
to the Web...it's what you've been waiting for," only it looks like they've
been pushed back to Nov 15 instead of the 1st. Sorry :-(
Have a great day,
~Jeremy
jwb(at)europa.com
Disclaimer: I speak for myself only, not my clients. "D'oh!" as said by
Homer Simpson, is probably trademarked, copyrighted, and patented by Fox. :-)
>> They said the
>> very first such prop they experimented with was 81" pitch, but they
>> recommend 83" as a better compromise. They wish Van would change his
>> catalog to show the 83" prop instead.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MRawls3896(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Prepping skins without removing alclad |
In a message dated 10/13/99 7:57:42 PM Central Daylight Time,
Larry(at)bowenaero.com writes:
<<
I've been using the Sherwin-Williams GBP988 since the beginning of my
project. In general, it's worked great. However, when I dimpled some of
the wing ribs, the primer began to flake off where the dimple die made
contact. Has this happened to anyone else? Any idea why?
>>
You didn't say if you where using Scotch Brite to treat the skin. Always
use the Scotch Brite and use lacquer thinner to clean the oil (from your
hands) off.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BumFlyer(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Rear Pins on Sliding Canopy |
In a message dated 10/5/99 7:12:12, smcdaniels(at)juno.com writes:
<< I always listen very carefully to what Tom says, but, I do enlarge these
holes slightly.
One of the problems with machining/drilling UHMW plastic is that it can
creap/distort. Drilling a hole with a 1/4 " drill doesn't usually leave
you with a 1/4 " hole (try and slip the drill bit in to the hole after
drilling it and you will see what I mean).
I use a drill index of number and letter indexed drill bits to go up
slightly in size to get a slip fit as required.
I then use a tapered reamer or a counter sink cutter and counter bore the
outer portion of the hole to give the pins something bigger to aim at
(the canopy can move around quite a bit when it is opened because of prop
blast / gusty winds / etc.)when it is being closed. You will still have
a close fit on the pin in the lower portion of the hole (still meeting
Tom's recommendation).
Scott McDaniels >>
P. P. S.
1. Always listen to what Tom says.
2. Always do what Scott McD says.
D. Walsh
________________________________________________________________________________
all flyers-please try to come to the fly-in at pineville la.municipal on
oct.23.for more info call terry myers at 318-448-3934.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
Thanks, Fred. You are probably right, but I have been humbled before by
things I didn't think would work that did. What I really don't like about
the .090" pins is that the hinges have a LOT of slop, and hence the stress
is distributed mostly at the ends. I have FEP heat shrink, which is almost
as slippery as teflon, and fairly abrasion resistant. Ask me in a few
years...
Alex
----------
> From: Stucklen, Frederic IFC <stuckle(at)ifc.utc.com>
> To: 'RV-List'
> Subject:
> Date: Thursday, October 14, 1999 8:06 AM
>
>
> Alex,
>
> Can't say that I remember doing anything special with the stock hinges
> prior to riveting them into place. At the time, the prospect of cracks
> forming in the sharp radius corners wasn't high on the priority list, or
> even considered a problem. I would think that it wouldn't hurt to radius
> these areas, but from my own personal experience, I'm not sure that it
would
> have help prevent what little breakage I've had. Most of my breakage has
> occurred at the ends of the pin travel.....
>
> Putting shrink tubing onto the top cowl .090" steel pins may work OK
> initially, but I suspect that after very little use, the surface of the
> shrink tubing will deform. This would result in a hard to remove pin, and
> almost impossible to insert pin. The original promise of an undersized
pin
> was to enable the pin to form to both the straight run hinge sections as
> well as the curved areas. I suspect that the increased diameter pin would
be
> very difficult to insert.
>
> Fred Stucklen
> N925RV RV-6A
> E. Windsor, Ct
>
>
>
> ____
> From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net>
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Cowl Attach-Vibration
>
>
>
> Fred, out of curiosity, did you happen to radius the factory
sharp
> corners
> which are built into the hinges?
>
> I don't know what the result will be as I'm not flying yet, but I
> took an
> 1/8" diameter file to each corner in the hinge, obliterating the
> original
> sharp corner left from the stamping. These hinges are poster
parts
> for
> stress risers leading to fatigue in their supplied condition.
>
> Additionally, I will be experimenting with covering the .090"
steel
> pins
> used on the top hinges with heat shrink tubing, to bring the
outside
> diameter up to about .125", to eliminate a lot of the slop
without
> increasing stiffness much (can't take credit for the idea). I'll
> report as
> I learn...
>
> Alex Peterson
> Maple Grove, MN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SALNED2131(at)cs.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV8-List Digest: 10/13/99 |
i'm just starting to think and plan my elec. sys. for the rv-8. right now it
seems to be overwhelming. is there a step by step process of where to put
this or that and whatever. i want to start with the battery and the ground
bloc, but are they going to be in the way of something else later on? is
there a simple plan? i've always believed in the kiss plan and i just don't
see it yet.
thanks for your help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.............ed 80127
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | plumb line holes in wing spars-help- |
rv-6 i understand the crosswise measurements for the holes.could someone
explain the lengthwise measurements.are the holes drilled thru the main spar
web and the tank mount web also? how do you end up with equal lengthwise
holes on both spars? tcrv6(at)aol.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | fly-in-please read |
all flyers please try to come to the fly in at the pineville la. municapal
airport on oct. 23.for more info call terry myers at 318-448-3934.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe Czachorowski <midnight(at)UDel.Edu> |
| Subject: | Re: RV8-List: Re: RV8-List Digest: 10/13/99 |
Ed,
I felt the same way when I was at that point. I first concentrated on
my
instrument panel. If you have vacuum instruments, this will take up alot of room
with hoses and regulators and such. Wiring can be planned around these items.
I have the battery in the forward location as per Van's plans. Van's has
a wiring schematic for the RV-8 but they don't advertise it. It comes with the
wiring kit they sell. The wiring schematic shows many wire runs and answers
questions like where to cut a hole in the F-806 web. It helped me.
Joe Czachorowski
#80125
SALNED2131(at)cs.com wrote:
> --> RV8-List message posted by: SALNED2131(at)cs.com
>
> i'm just starting to think and plan my elec. sys. for the rv-8. right now it
> seems to be overwhelming. is there a step by step process of where to put
> this or that and whatever. i want to start with the battery and the ground
> bloc, but are they going to be in the way of something else later on? is
> there a simple plan? i've always believed in the kiss plan and i just don't
> see it yet.
>
> thanks for your help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.............ed 80127
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | GLPalinkas(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Metalic Paint |
Sherwin Williams Sunfire is also "almost" bullet proof. I did my engine mount
in a light gray. It goes on easy (as easy as it can when doing tubing) and
has a great looking finish. You have to buy Sunfire from the Sherwin Williams
Automotive stores. The local SW home paint stores don't carry it. I also used
their acid etch two part primer (I think it is also on my QB6) and an
adhesion promoter (UltraFil II). The primer and promoter went on with 30
minutes dry time each and then I shot the Sunfire. I was also considering it
for the entire aircraft. I know Norman Hunger will get his done first and I
hope he posts the results.
Gary Palinkas
QB6 control systems (wanted to paint a few things before winter in Ohio sets
in)
Parma, Ohio
In a message dated 10/14/99 3:29:59 PM, nhunger(at)sprint.ca writes:
<<>
> Hey Norman, what is Sunfire (Poly, Enamel)? I have always been a PPG guy
but the
> Sherwin Williams guys really impressed me at Sun N Fun.I didn't get
anything on
> Sunfire. Great info material available on Acry-Glo and Jet-Glow. If any of
you
> are new to the paint world it would be beneficial to call SW and get an
info
> packet on Jet-Glow. Takes you step by step through the paint process. I
learned
> from PPG by screwing it up, stripping it and doing it again.
Sherwin Williams Sunfire is an acrylic urethane. This is a single stage
paint which will give one of the lightest weight applications. In solid
colors it is very easy to wetsand for the perfect mirror finish. Metalics
are a what you see is what you get situation. A pro in a real spray booth
can make it look first class with two coats.
They have quite a selection of colors. I am using a pure bright white on all
of mt metal parts and my wings/fuselage while I am considering a metalic
dark blue for trim and lower fuselage. They let me play with their paint
code system and design my own color. I had them mix small quantities of it
to take home and try out. On the third try I did my car. I am very happy.
Soon my plane will probably match it.
Regards,
Norman Hunger
RV6A Delta, BC.
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JVanLaak(at)aol.com |
By definition cornering speed is the speed at which you generate the highest
turn rate, which happens to be the lowest speed at which you can generate the
limit load your airplane can take. So for an RV, the stall speed at 6 G's is
~2.4 times clean stall or about 135 mph. It is hard to generalize about the
best tactic for low airspeed, low altitude recoveries except don't get
yourself into that fix. Back in my youth I flew airplanes and maneuvers
where it was important to not rush raising the nose, sometimes using
afterburner to maintain speed even going straight down. But other than not
pulling into an accelerated stall on the backside a loop, it is hard to
imagine getting myself into that kind of a hole the way I fly now.
BTW, a local pilot, young and very talented, killed himself doing a loop in a
Midget Mustang about 8 years ago by stalling on the backside of a loop begun
at about 100 feet. Maybe I am just getting old, but large pitch attitudes
and low altitudes just don't go together anymore.
Jim Van Laak
RV6 N1KJ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <rv8er(at)home.com> |
I second Norman's advice on Sunfire paint...It is virtually bulletproof,
looks and sprays excellent. It is also available as a base/clear
application as well. You can get any color mixed that you like, based on
automotive formulas. They don't market it to aviation, but it is their
strongest paint that they make, and IMHO, should be marketed as their
aviation paint.
Paul Besing
RV-6A (197AB) Arizona
http://members.home.net/rv8er
Finish Kit
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com> |
| Subject: | SW products (was: Prepping skins without removing alclad) |
I usually don't scotchbrite, as I take "self-etching" to mean just that. Am
I assuming too much? Also, I clean thoroughly with the SW product
recommended on the primer can - I don't recall it's name off the top of my
head.
I was in the SW store this afternoon and posed this question to the help
there. He said it sounded like inadequate cleaning. Next time I'll more
diligent and change the cloth more often; we'll see if that helps. They did
have a new cleaning product in the store. It was a package of presoaked
cloths sort of like baby-wipes. Just wipe and toss. I decided against them
for the time being. They were $18 for a pkg of 50 cloths.
I also asked about Sunfire. He reiterated all that has been said here
recently, except there is an even stronger, newer product called Genesis, I
think, that is even better. I didn't get the details.
Cheers,
Larry Bowen
RV-8 wings
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> MRawls3896(at)aol.com
> Sent: Thursday, October 14, 1999 8:15 PM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV-List: Prepping skins without removing alclad
>
>
> In a message dated 10/13/99 7:57:42 PM Central Daylight Time,
> Larry(at)bowenaero.com writes:
>
> <<
> I've been using the Sherwin-Williams GBP988 since the beginning of my
> project. In general, it's worked great. However, when I dimpled some of
> the wing ribs, the primer began to flake off where the dimple die made
> contact. Has this happened to anyone else? Any idea why?
> >>
> You didn't say if you where using Scotch Brite to treat the
> skin. Always
> use the Scotch Brite and use lacquer thinner to clean the oil (from your
> hands) off.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: MAC Trim Phone Not Working |
| From: | Bob Hall <robjhall(at)juno.com> |
> How are builders running the wires back to the tail? Do I need to
> use a run of that black conduit or can I strap the bundle to a J
stringer
> every five inches?
Because the only wire I had to run aft was to the Mac trim servo, I used
the 6-conductor cable I got from Van's (p.32 in the catalog) and no black
conduit. I used small plastic grommets to go through the bulkheads and
plastic adhesive clips attached to the side skin above the J-channel to
hold the cable in place. I'll see how the adhesive is holding up when I
do my condition inspection in a few weeks.
Bob Hall,
RV-6, Colorado Springs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV6BLDR <calverjl(at)flash.net> |
| Subject: | Re: plumb line holes in wing spars-help- |
TCRV6(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> rv-6 i understand the crosswise measurements for the holes.could someone
> explain the lengthwise measurements.are the holes drilled thru the main spar
> web and the tank mount web also? how do you end up with equal lengthwise
> holes on both spars? tcrv6(at)aol.com
>
>
The hole goes through the both spar webs in the root end. I drilled
through the main and rear spar with a 3/64" bit at both ends. On the
rear spar I made a cross-hair "+" on both holes. Each line of the "+"
was 1/2" long. Then I drilled the rear spar holes to 3/16". I was more
concerned with jigging the twist out of the wing using the "+" marks and
then using a carpenter square to make sure the ribs were perpendicular
to both spars. Also the skins help jig the wing lengthwise. If the
skin is perfect on the 1" spar line and you can see the rib centers
through the skins, the wing should be fairly jigged lengthwise. I used
thread with a tiny washer tied to it on the top spar and a heavier
washer on the bottom of the thread. Place the plumb weights in glasses
of water and they won't swing in the breeze and drive you nuts!
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok -6
(leaving for SW regional "Big Country" fly-in Friday morn)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vanremog(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RV8-List Digest: 10/13/99 |
In a message dated 10/14/99 7:04:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
SALNED2131(at)cs.com writes:
<< i'm just starting to think and plan my elec. sys. for the rv-8. right now
it
seems to be overwhelming. is there a step by step process of where to put
this or that and whatever. i want to start with the battery and the ground
bloc, but are they going to be in the way of something else later on? is
there a simple plan? i've always believed in the kiss plan and i just don't
see it yet. >>
I've got an AutoCAD file that's got everything in my loaded 6A. It is easier
to delete things that you don't need than add things. Let me know if you
want it.
-GV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
I saw an RV6A in Nashville TN this summer where the builder had located the
electric flap mechanism over to the right side (passenger side) of the
plane. He said you can do this, but only on the right side. I do not
remember this gentleman's name, but if he on this list, maybe he can comment
and tell us how he did it. Thanks.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Nielsen <Mark.Nielsen@fiedler-lp.com>
Date: Thursday, October 14, 1999 1:14 AM
Subject: RE: RV-List: RV6 - Cut down seat backs
>
>>
>> Has anyone heard of cutting down the seat back height on a RV6?
>>
>> Got a local -6 pilot that swears if I don't do it now, I
>> will later.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>
>My seat backs are full height, and I like them fine.
>
>The only reason that I have heard for cutting them down is to make it
>easier to reach things in the baggage compartment during flight. I have
>found that instead of trying to reach over the seat backs, it is much
>easier to reach between the seat backs. It is surprising how much of the
>baggage compartment I can reach this way. I use the space between the
>seat back and the flap torque tube to store items that I need during
>flight (water bottles, lunch, AOPA airport directory, etc.). I can reach
>this area behind either seat with ease, without any of the twisting and
>turning (and resulting aerobatics) that is required to reach over the seat
>back. Of course, this option is not available if you have electric flaps,
>since the flap drive mechanism blocks the space between the seat backs.
>Also, larger pilots with "Popeye" sized forearms may find this more
>difficult.
>
>Mark Nielsen
>RV-6, 445 hours
>Green Bay, WI
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
And silly me, I was thinking of putting in head restraints in my RV6!
Marty in Brentwood TN
-----Original Message-----
From: PhilipR920(at)aol.com <PhilipR920(at)aol.com>
Date: Thursday, October 14, 1999 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV6 - Cut down seat backs
>
>In a message dated 10/13/99 8:30:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>lolson(at)doitnow.com writes:
>
><< Has anyone heard of cutting down the seat back height on a RV6?
>
> Got a local -6 pilot that swears if I don't do it now, I
> will later.
>
> I'm building a slider.
>
> Any thoughts?
> >>
>Your friend is right. I cut mine after a few hours. Makes access to baggage
>compartment much easier and doesn't detract from seat comfort.
>
>Phil Rogerson
>6A flying
>Fernandina Beach, FL
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: plumb line holes in wing spars-help- |
For what its worth, I made a drill jig out of typical construction angle
long enough to be able to span the rear spar length. That way I know the
holes in the main and rear spar are exactly the same distance lengthwise. I
then drilled some more holes in this measuring jig based upon the wing skin
holes and use that to line up all my ribs. The main spar plumb bob holes
were drilled with a #60 drill and lower holes drilled #30. I hot glued the
thread in the main spar holes and also used the "cross hairs" approach on
the rear spar (drill the rear spar #60 and put the cross hairs on before
opening up the hole to #30). I like the idea of using large nuts for plumb
bobs in cans of water. I work in an enclosed garage but the breeze does
blow, even in TN once in a while.
Marty in Brentwood TN, RV6 wings
-----Original Message-----
From: TCRV6(at)aol.com <TCRV6(at)aol.com>
Date: Thursday, October 14, 1999 8:13 PM
Subject: RV-List: plumb line holes in wing spars-help-
>
>rv-6 i understand the crosswise measurements for the holes.could someone
>explain the lengthwise measurements.are the holes drilled thru the main
spar
>web and the tank mount web also? how do you end up with equal lengthwise
>holes on both spars? tcrv6(at)aol.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sensenich 72FM8S16 Prop RV-6A |
My understanding is your prop will be full length at 72". The -1- means
that the length is one inch less than the full prop diameter. If I am
correct, maybe you will have the right prop afterall - Yipee. One can
always cut the prop down, but I'm not sure of the limit for this prop.
Sensenich can tell you.
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Browne <cebrowne(at)earthlink.net>
Date: Thursday, October 14, 1999 7:28 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Sensenich 72FM8S16 Prop RV-6A
>
>Tom,
>
>Ed at Sensenich E-mailed about that, too. Van's also has the "-0-" wrong
in the
>part number, it should be a "-1". So, I currently have the wrong prop on
>order. sigh ...
>
>Chris
>
>tom sargent wrote:
>
>>
>> >
>> >There are three pitches available for this prop. 81, 83, and 85. Van's
>> >Catalog implies that the 81 pitch is the best choice for a 180 HP -6A.
>> >Is anyone running the 83 pitch. If so, is it a good cruise prop?
>> >
>> >Chris Browne
>> >-6A Finish
>> >Atlanta
>> >
>>
>> Chris:
>> When I ordered my prop (I have the short cowl, so ordered the
>> FM8S9) I ordered the 81" pitch because that was in van's catalog.
Sensenich
>> then called me to ask if that was what I REALLY wanted. They said the
>> very first such prop they experimented with was 81" pitch, but they
>> recommend 83" as a better compromise. They wish Van would change his
>> catalog to show the 83" prop instead. I changed my order to the 83". I
>> haven't flown with it yet, though. It's gonna be a while....
>>
>> ---
>> Tom Sargent, sarg314(at)azstarnet.com
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Tank leak testing |
I haven't seen this one on the list. In attempting to seal the fuel cap from
leaking during your test, unscrew the bottom nut on the cap and then heat
the cap to about 120 degrees - used my wife's hair dryer. Put lots of axle
grease on the bolt under the nut and let sit. When cooled to room temp.,
tighten the nut. Make a filet of grease around the nut at the joint with
the plate and around the threads to nut joint. Grease the "O" ring really
well and insert in full neck. Lock down, and tape over.
I was not able to get 3" tape and the 2" kept leaking, but final taping was
by using a but joint with the first two with a third over the top on the
butt joint. The heating allows the grease to flow and seal/stick better.
Good Luck, your mileage may vary. For Me, NO LEAKS in one tank so far,
Yippee!!!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Huntington <jimrhunt(at)wco.com> |
| Subject: | LRI - a bit of back ground with more to come |
"The Lift Reserve Indicator is designed so that:
DP = q[Sin F - Sin B], where
DP is the differential signal pressure,
q is the dynamic presure of the relative wind,
Sin F is the natural sine of the wind's impingement angle against the
probe's vented plane surface 'F'.
Sin B is the natural sine of the wind's angular incidence against the
probe's vented surface 'B'.
The angular input function is [Sin F - Sin B], which is arithmetically
identical to DP/q."
F is the forward face of the probe.
B is the bottom surface of the probe.
If I understand correctly what has gone on in previous discussions, this
much has already been covered.
"I think it is relatively easy to use and it is based upon sound
engineering. It's a little different from an angle of attack indicator
because what it does is indicate the proximity to the depletion of kinetic
energy." I" found that I was able to land pretty precisely with it."
Fenelon Taylor, Chief of Aerodynamics and Performance, Mooney Aircraft
Corporation
Jim Huntington
jimrhunt(at)wco.com
1(888) 310-4574
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman Hunger" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
> >
> ><< Has anyone heard of cutting down the seat back height on a RV6?
>
The reason not to cut the seat back down in the RV6 RV9 series is that it
lowers the height of the shoulder straps. Canadian builders doing this will
fail their final inspection if they have a sharp inspector who knows these
airplanes. Can't speak for any one else but I have done alot of research on
this topic as I have made changes to my luggage compartment that forced me
to.
The result of lower shoulder straps on an average height pilot is that in a
collision involving deceleration the occupants vertebrae will get a
compression force down because the shoulder straps are anchored on the
longeron. This point is actually low for an ideal situation but those
longerons are simply the strongest point in the rear fuselage. Van has
engineered the solution by having the seat back at a certain height. This
protects the occupants to a certain point.
Tony talks about this in one of his books. Some one mentioned it on this
list just a few months ago.
Norman Hunger RV6A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman Hunger" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
> I saw an RV6A in Nashville TN this summer where the builder had located
the
> electric flap mechanism over to the right side (passenger side) of the
> plane. He said you can do this, but only on the right side. I do not
> remember this gentleman's name, but if he on this list, maybe he can
comment
> and tell us how he did it. Thanks.
Second the notion. This sounds like a worthy idea.
Norman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | VP4SkyDoc(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: AOA/LRI - Brian Lloyd |
>
> Nice try Dave, but in fact all you have proved is that for equal
> pressure at the ports (p1=p2) the two ports are at the same angle
> to the relative airstream (cos a = cos b). As this is one of our
> starting assumptions anyway one would hope it would prove so!
>
> Please keep trying. We need to find out why this thing seems to
> work at least a lot of the time.
>
Well, right, I wasn't fooling myself. The point is that if we accept the
assumption that the pressure in the ports varies proportional to that ports
incident angle (an assumption that we have not proven but everyone accepts),
then there will be a particular AOA where p1 and p2 are equal regardless of
airspeed. I suppose this is obvious but it had been neglected in the
discussion I was responding to.
> The $39 solution is available from http://www.dwyer-inst.com . The
> Minihelic II Differential Pressure Gages (model 2-5002 or 2-5003)
> should do the trick.
Tim, thanks for the info! I will be glad to do some testing - but it will
take a couple of years :-)
> The 'offending' issue is January 1979, page 43.
> article is Craftman's Corner by Ron 'Scotty' Scott. And that refers back
> to a publication of the chapter 124.
And thank you too, Gert.
Is anyone going to comment on the PSS style of flush wing installation so we
can get that probe out of the wind? :-)
Dave Leonard
6QB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric.J.Henson(at)chase.com |
(Content Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with SMTP id
for" ;
Fri,
15 Oct 1999 08:11:09.-0400(at)matronics.com
Something I was wondering about flying with the LRI. If someone has a
"sweetspot" on the guage, lets call it the approach to flare mark, wouldn't your
landings become more consistant since you are carrying the same amount of lift
into the flare each time. Seems reasonable to me.
Although long, this has been a very interesting thread, and good publicity. Of
course being featured on the cover of the August Sport Aviation doesn't hurt
either.
Eric Henson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Al Mojzisik <prober(at)iwaynet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sensenich 72FM8S16 Prop RV-6A |
Well this isn't exactly correct. It is my understanding that the "-1" means
you can shorten the prop *up to* one inch from the as delivered (new)
length. That means if you ding the tips and everything else about the prop
is okay, you can cut up to 1" off to correct the problem. What is not
clear, is the 1" in total from both tips or from each tip making the total
from the prop 2"? I would think it's in total but I don't know. ( ie:
Shorten the prop 1" Vs. shorten each blade 1".) Anyone know? AL
>
>My understanding is your prop will be full length at 72". The -1- means
>that the length is one inch less than the full prop diameter. If I am
>correct, maybe you will have the right prop afterall - Yipee. One can
>always cut the prop down, but I'm not sure of the limit for this prop.
>Sensenich can tell you.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RV6BLDR <calverjl(at)flash.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Tank leak testing |
Emrath wrote:
>
>
> I haven't seen this one on the list. In attempting to seal the fuel cap from
> leaking during your test, unscrew the bottom nut on the cap and then heat
> the cap to about 120 degrees - used my wife's hair dryer. Put lots of axle
> grease on the bolt under the nut and let sit. When cooled to room temp.,
> tighten the nut. Make a filet of grease around the nut at the joint with
> the plate and around the threads to nut joint. Grease the "O" ring really
> well and insert in full neck. Lock down, and tape over.
>
> I was not able to get 3" tape and the 2" kept leaking, but final taping was
> by using a but joint with the first two with a third over the top on the
> butt joint. The heating allows the grease to flow and seal/stick better.
> Good Luck, your mileage may vary. For Me, NO LEAKS in one tank so far,
> Yippee!!!
>
The trick I used was to take one of the rubber gloves and cut a piece
out of it large enough to tightly stretch over the part of the cap that
has the o-ring in it. Sealed it right up!
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok -6
"head'n to SW Regional Fly-in this morning!"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Zercher" <ez(at)sensenich.com> |
| Subject: | Sensenich 72FM8S16 Prop RV-6A |
Al and all,
The 72FM8S( )-1 means the diameter is 71 inches when you receive it. If you
have a tip strike, the propeller can be reduced a full 2 inches (who else
can give you that in an aluminum prop?) to a 69 inch diameter and is still
safe to fly. If a propeller shop were to reduce the diameter to 69 inches
they should restamp the propeller as a 72FM8S( )-3- much the same way if
they changed the pitch.
Ed Zercher
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Silverstein, Chuck" <chuck.silverstein(at)lmco.com> |
| Subject: | plumb line holes in wing spars-help- |
Check the length of the spars. When I built my wings, the rear spar was
about 3/16 longer than the plans call for. Had some alignment problems and
it took some head scratching to figure out what was wrong.
Chuck S. RV6 fuse
-----Original Message-----
From: Emrath [mailto:emrath(at)home.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 1999 11:34 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: plumb line holes in wing spars-help-
For what its worth, I made a drill jig out of typical construction angle
long enough to be able to span the rear spar length. That way I know the
holes in the main and rear spar are exactly the same distance lengthwise. I
then drilled some more holes in this measuring jig based upon the wing skin
holes and use that to line up all my ribs. The main spar plumb bob holes
were drilled with a #60 drill and lower holes drilled #30. I hot glued the
thread in the main spar holes and also used the "cross hairs" approach on
the rear spar (drill the rear spar #60 and put the cross hairs on before
opening up the hole to #30). I like the idea of using large nuts for plumb
bobs in cans of water. I work in an enclosed garage but the breeze does
blow, even in TN once in a while.
Marty in Brentwood TN, RV6 wings
-----Original Message-----
From: TCRV6(at)aol.com <TCRV6(at)aol.com>
Date: Thursday, October 14, 1999 8:13 PM
Subject: RV-List: plumb line holes in wing spars-help-
>
>rv-6 i understand the crosswise measurements for the holes.could someone
>explain the lengthwise measurements.are the holes drilled thru the main
spar
>web and the tank mount web also? how do you end up with equal lengthwise
>holes on both spars? tcrv6(at)aol.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TRAASHMAN(at)webtv.net (Joe Waltz) |
| Subject: | Re: Cornering speed (was: Non recoverable corner) |
Corner speed is Va. Read Vans recent article showing the V-G (velocity
- G's) envelope.
Restated; Va is the speed where the maximum design G is available. You
are getting maximum turn only if you are pulling maximum G.
Speeds below Va you stall before attaining max design G.
Speeds above Va you exceed max design G before stalling.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | scott gesele <sgesele(at)usa.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
>The reason not to cut the seat back down in the RV6 RV9 series is that it
>lowers the height of the shoulder straps. Canadian builders doing this will
>fail their final inspection if they have a sharp inspector who knows these
>airplanes. Can't speak for any one else but I have done alot of research on
>this topic as I have made changes to my luggage compartment that forced me
>to.
>
>The result of lower shoulder straps on an average height pilot is that in a
>collision involving deceleration the occupants vertebrae will get a
>compression force down because the shoulder straps are anchored on the
>longeron. This point is actually low for an ideal situation but those
>longerons are simply the strongest point in the rear fuselage. Van has
>engineered the solution by having the seat back at a certain height. This
>protects the occupants to a certain point.
Norman,
When you sit in an RV-6(A) your shoulders are above the seat back. The height
of the seat will have no effect on the angle that you reference. I'd be
curious to find out what changes you made to the baggage compartment and why
they were needed. There are alot of RVs flying in Canada.
Take care,
Scott Gesele N506RV -Flying
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Al Mojzisik <prober(at)iwaynet.net> |
Eric,
That is exactly how the gauge is supposed to work. You calibrate it so that
when the needle meets the red/white juncture, you want your wheels to be
about touching the runway. Here is what the calibration instructions say:
"The WHITE arc is the area where most takeoff, pattern and landing flying
is done. We have heard the term, "Behind The Power Curve." The RED arc is
that infamous place where the pilot doesn't want to be caught. The RED area
is behind the power curve. No matter how much power you have, if you are in
the RED, the airplane is sinking. Stay out of the RED. One of the most
important locations on the gauge is called the RED/WHITE juncture. You will
notice that there is a white line at the RED/WHITE juncture. This is calle
"ZERO LIFT RESERVE." What that indicates to the pilot is that everything
the wing is producing is being used to maintain level flight. If flying on
the white line, any increase in pitch results in a decent, any decrease in
power results in a descent. If you keep the needle in the WHITE arc you
will have excess lift available. Excess lift is good to have during
turbulence, down drafts, and wind-shear......"
Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with SMTP id
for
>
>
>Something I was wondering about flying with the LRI. If someone has a
>"sweetspot" on the guage, lets call it the approach to flare mark,
wouldn't your
>landings become more consistant since you are carrying the same amount of
lift
>into the flare each time. Seems reasonable to me.
>
>Although long, this has been a very interesting thread, and good
publicity. Of
>course being featured on the cover of the August Sport Aviation doesn't hurt
>either.
>
>Eric Henson
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Huntington <jimrhunt(at)wco.com> |
_______
From: "Rich Crosley" <dirtrider(at)qnet.com>
Subject: RV-List: Angle-of-Attack
"Maybe things have changed since I was in the Navy (Vietnam) but we only
used AOA for landing, never take off. Use airspeed for take off. It helps
to be as slow as you can be coming aboard the "boat",but what is the point,
under normal circumstances, of lifting off as soon as you possible can off
a runway that is adequate for your airplane?
After all most of the time we fly out of runways long enough to get up to
take off speed plus a little for the grandkids."
Airspeed for take off - true enough, except for short fields, grass strips,
bush flying. Then sufficient lift for rotation and take off is useful
information. Check this week's AVweb: "Short- and Soft-Field Takeoffs, FAA
vs. Reality" by John Deakin for some interesting comments on this.
Granted, these are not the kinds of conditions that are typical for RVs.
Also, the airspeed indicator will not provide readouts that are density
altitude correct during take off or at any time.
Jim Huntington
jimrhunt(at)wco.com
1(888)310-4574
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: vertical fin offset |
>Sorry, I've been trying to stay out of this discussion but I cant.
Tom
>Shucks I have been trying to stay out too. But I have another question
for
>the aerodynamiologists.
>D Walsh
I think I may have found a solution to this, if one can see it as a
problem.
The tab is not so unsightly to me but it will be good for one speed.
Well, that's
not so big a problem,but, maybe I want more. So I've been fooling around
and
gluing cardboard and trying things and have come up with this. The .016X
2 1/2 X 4 1/4 sheet will lie flush in the hole cut in the rudder. The
.050 ( slightly smaller) will nest nicely into the .050 backing/mounting
plate. A special hinge I picked up at my local carpenter supply store
will lift the plates outward while pivoting it into the wind. This lash
up will be driven by a Mac servo. And there
you go. A variable pitch precision damper.
Larry Mac Donald lm4(at)juno.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dgmurray" <dgmurray(at)telusplanet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LRI & Landings |
Subject: RV-List: LRI & Landings
>
>Something I was wondering about flying with the LRI. If someone has a
>"sweetspot" on the guage, lets call it the approach to flare mark, wouldn't
your
>landings become more consistant since you are carrying the same amount of
lift into the flare each time. Seems reasonable to me.
>Eric Henson
This thread is great information but I just have to ask --Who is staring at
a guage while flaring? Don't most of your inputs at that point in the flight
come from outside the cockpit? It seems to me that the only point that the
instrument would be of any assistance is when you set up on final - the part
far before the fence. Then to I am not sure who would want to fly at that
accute angle of attack knowing that winds can change abruptly and leave you
without enough airspeed to make changes quick enough to land safely.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Todd <tmrv6(at)webcombo.net> |
Listers,
Does anybody have a Commanche sump(or equivalent) that they are interested in
selling?
Thanks.
--
Todd tmrv6(at)webcombo.net RV-6 N92TM Flying in Southern MD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Rozendaal" <dougr(at)petroblend.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cornering speed (was: Non recoverable corner) 12:00:16 |
-0700
I have sat on my fingers as long as I can! Joe is on the mark here, but
fails to go far enough. Does anybody realize what a Max performance turn
is?????
I want all the flyers on this list who have the guts to do a maximum
performance turn to step up here. I won't be in that line! When was the
last time anybody did a 6 G turn at the buffet? How long do you think the
160 hp lyc will maintain 135 mph (or what ever cornering velocity is) at 6
Gs??? When was the last time ANYONE on this list did an accelerated stall
at 6 G's??? We are talking about FAR OUT flying. I would doubt that there
are many, if any, of us who have the training or the guts, to fly our
airplane that close to the edge. That is a GOOD thing. None of us should
ever allow ourselves anywhere near a situation that requires a Maximum
performance turn to save our tail feathers!
These are good discussions to provoke thought and understanding of
aeronautical concepts, but lets not get that confused with our everyday
flying.
Experienced pilots use superior judgment to avoid situations requiring
superior skill.
Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
dougr(at)petroblend.com
www.petroblend.com/dougr
>
> Corner speed is Va. Read Vans recent article showing the V-G (velocity
> - G's) envelope.
>
> Restated; Va is the speed where the maximum design G is available. You
> are getting maximum turn only if you are pulling maximum G.
>
> Speeds below Va you stall before attaining max design G.
> Speeds above Va you exceed max design G before stalling.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Consultant3, Cmtsd" <cmtsd.consultant3(at)cmtsd.mea.com> |
| Subject: | MAC Trim Phone Not Working |
Norman,
They changed the area code in that part of San Diego county a few years
ago.
Their phone number is now (760) 598-0592.
Ken Brown
-----Original Message-----
From: Norman Hunger [mailto:nhunger(at)sprint.ca]
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 1999 3:19 PM
Subject: RV-List: MAC Trim Phone Not Working
The phone number (619-598-0592) listed in the Yeller Pages and on MAC's
brochure is not working. The website doesn't list an email address. Any
one
got any new info on how to talk to these guys?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Thompson <grobdriver(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
-
> And silly me, I was thinking of putting in head restraints in my RV6!
>
> Marty in Brentwood TN
:)
for all those times you get rear-ended?
:)
- mike
====
Michael E. Thompson (Grobdriver(at)yahoo.com)
Austin, TX, USA
RV-6 in progress, N140RV (Reserved)
EX-AX1 Sub Hunter, P-3 (B/B-TACMOD/C) Orion Aircrew,
PP-G,ASEL, Motorglider Driver and Unlimited Air Race Nut!
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mike Wills <willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: Power failure in max performance climb and, |
yes... AoA
>
>Yes, I am an AoA fan (probably hard to tell...). Other fans, peek at this
>for a vane-driven AoA which, incidentally, is less expensive than any we've
>been talking about here lately:
>
>http://www.riteangle.com
>
>Johnny Johnson
>49MM -3A
The guys who complain about the aesthetics of the LRI probe are gonna have
a field day with this! This system looks like it would be far more
susceptible to damage and wear than the LRI or PSS systems that dont rely
on moving parts. That vane looks like an ideal toy for a kid on a fly-in
flight line and its at his altitude too. Maybe this explains the 1 year
warranty as opposed to the LRI lifetime warranty. Not meant to be a flame
but something to consider.
To answer the question about who is gonna be staring at a gauge during
final approach that was posed by another lister. I plan to mount mine on
the glare shield so it should be in my field of view during final approach.
And of course all of the systems discussed have some form of audio warning
to wake you up if you get into trouble.
Mike Wills
RV-4 canopy skirts ruined; new ones on order
willsm(at)manta.spawar.navy.mil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Weiler" <dougweil(at)pressenter.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tank leak testing |
Go down to your local hardware store and by a "Test Plug" for about 3 bucks.
You can find the appropriate diameter for the fuel tank filler opening.
Seals perfect for testing.
Doug
Hudson, WI
> >
> > I haven't seen this one on the list. In attempting to seal the fuel cap
from
> > leaking during your test, unscrew the bottom nut on the cap and then
heat
> > the cap to about 120 degrees - used my wife's hair dryer. Put lots of
axle
> > grease on the bolt under the nut and let sit. When cooled to room
temp.,
> > tighten the nut. Make a filet of grease around the nut at the joint
with
> > the plate and around the threads to nut joint. Grease the "O" ring
really
> > well and insert in full neck. Lock down, and tape over.
> >
> > I was not able to get 3" tape and the 2" kept leaking, but final taping
was
> > by using a but joint with the first two with a third over the top on the
> > butt joint. The heating allows the grease to flow and seal/stick better.
> > Good Luck, your mileage may vary. For Me, NO LEAKS in one tank so far,
> > Yippee!!!
> >
>
> The trick I used was to take one of the rubber gloves and cut a piece
> out of it large enough to tightly stretch over the part of the cap that
> has the o-ring in it. Sealed it right up!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Norman Hunger" <nhunger(at)sprint.ca> |
| Subject: | RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
----- Original Message -----
From: scott gesele <sgesele(at)usa.net>
Sent: Friday, October 15, 1999 6:26 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: RV6 - Cut down seat backs
>
> >The reason not to cut the seat back down in the RV6 RV9 series is that
it
> >lowers the height of the shoulder straps. Canadian builders doing this
will
> >fail their final inspection if they have a sharp inspector who knows
these
> >airplanes. Can't speak for any one else but I have done alot of research
on
> >this topic as I have made changes to my luggage compartment that forced
me
> >to.
> >
> >The result of lower shoulder straps on an average height pilot is that in
a
> >collision involving deceleration the occupants vertebrae will get a
> >compression force down because the shoulder straps are anchored on the
> >longeron. This point is actually low for an ideal situation but those
> >longerons are simply the strongest point in the rear fuselage. Van has
> >engineered the solution by having the seat back at a certain height. This
> >protects the occupants to a certain point.
>
> Norman,
>
> When you sit in an RV-6(A) your shoulders are above the seat back. The
height
> of the seat will have no effect on the angle that you reference.
Yes the angle will remain the same in normal flight but in an accident the
standard height of seatback will prevent the shoulder straps from travelling
down as the occupant is thrown forward. The cut down seatback allows the
occupant to be thrown forward further while at the same time compressing the
occupant's spine down. This is the reason not to cut the seatback.
I'd be
> curious to find out what changes you made to the baggage compartment and
why
> they were needed.
I've been working out a way of carrying skis, snowboards, or golf bags
without protruding into the pasenger compartment. My current thinking has
this cargo being hauled above the longerons as they are the strongest area
to work from. This would also be the easiest to load/unload. The problem I
had to overcome was that the shoulder harness cable passes throught the rear
baggage compartment bulkhead at a point slightly higher than the longerons.
This would put the cable in the middle of my cargo. Once I did some research
on the topic I learned that it would be a very bad idea to change this
relationship. So now I plan on building a pedistal for the cable that holds
it up where it needs to be and provides a strong point for tyeing down skis.
The skis will have to sit on either side of the pedistal. The lower part
will have a slot in it that will allow me to use one of those funky small
ratcheting straps from the auto parts store to secure my cargo. The weight
penalty is very small for all that I plan on adding. The benifit is all of
the mountians that I will be able to hit within one day of travel. Jackson
Hole, Vail, Mammoth, Aspen.......
Regards,
Norman Hunger
Delta, BC
Whistler two hours by road, snows coming soon!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ripsteel(at)edge.net (Mark Phillips) |
| Subject: | Re: Prepping skins without removing alclad |
Also- BEFORE you scuff with Scotchbrite, wipe parts (I use naphtha on
paper towels) to remove oils- It took me a while to figure out those
spots the pads just skimmed over had my thumbprints in 'em! And priming
it the last thing I do before the rivets go in... (not that I'm doin' it
right of course!) ;
)
From the PossumWorks in TN
Mark Phillips -6A wings
MRawls3896(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 10/13/99 7:57:42 PM Central Daylight Time,
> Larry(at)bowenaero.com writes:
>
> <<
> I've been using the Sherwin-Williams GBP988 since the beginning of my
> project. In general, it's worked great. However, when I dimpled some of
> the wing ribs, the primer began to flake off where the dimple die made
> contact. Has this happened to anyone else? Any idea why?
> >>
> You didn't say if you where using Scotch Brite to treat the skin. Always
> use the Scotch Brite and use lacquer thinner to clean the oil (from your
> hands) off.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tedd McHenry" <tedd(at)idacom.hp.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cornering speed (was: Non recoverable corner) |
>
> As strange as it may seem, sometimes adding power at low altitude when
> pointed at the ground is the correct thing to do. You want to get the
> airplane as quickly as possible to "cornering speed," that speed which
will
> produce the smallest radius turn or pullout.
SOP for some jets (F-5, F-104) is to go full burner in a nose-low unusual
attitude.
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
-----Original Message-----
From: Norman Hunger <nhunger(at)sprint.ca>
Date: Friday, October 15, 1999 2:24 AM
Subject: RV-List: RV6 - Cut down seat backs
>
>> >
>> ><< Has anyone heard of cutting down the seat back height on a RV6?
>>
>
>The reason not to cut the seat back down in the RV6 RV9 series is that it
>lowers the height of the shoulder straps. Canadian builders doing this will
>fail their final inspection if they have a sharp inspector who knows these
>airplanes. Can't speak for any one else but I have done alot of research on
>this topic as I have made changes to my luggage compartment that forced me
>to.
>
>The result of lower shoulder straps on an average height pilot is that in a
>collision involving deceleration the occupants vertebrae will get a
>compression force down because the shoulder straps are anchored on the
>longeron. This point is actually low for an ideal situation but those
>longerons are simply the strongest point in the rear fuselage. Van has
>engineered the solution by having the seat back at a certain height. This
>protects the occupants to a certain point.
>
>Tony talks about this in one of his books. Some one mentioned it on this
>list just a few months ago.
>
>Norman Hunger RV6A
>
Norman,
You certainly raise a valid point. I thought I had worked this out when I
decided to cut down my seats. I am 5'9" and when I sit in 6As with normal
height seat backs ( three that I can remember) the shoulder belts bear on my
shoulders anyway, so cutting down the seat backs did not seem to be a safety
issue. Do other pilots have the belts bearing on the seat backs when they
are strapped in? Some feedback, please!
In David B. Thurston's book, "Design for Safety" (ISBN 0-07-064554-x), p88,
he says the angle between the thrust line and the shoulder belt tangency
when resting upon the pilot's shoulder should be zero to ten degrees up.
That is indeed impossible in a 6 or 6A. I calculate an angle (my seats are
removed at the moment, so this is an approximation) of approximately 5.6
degrees (7 inches rise over 72 inches horizontally), so the compressional
force is about 10% -- that's 400 pounds for a 40g crash and 100 lb upper
torso.
You guys with stock seat height and seats adjusted for padding height: Where
does the shoulder belt rest -- seat back or you shoulder?
Dennis Persyk 6A finishing kit
Hampshire, IL C38
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dennis Persyk" <dpersyk(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV6 - Cut down seat backs |
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Olson <lolson(at)doitnow.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 13, 1999 6:43 PM
Subject: RV-List: RV6 - Cut down seat backs
>
>Has anyone heard of cutting down the seat back height on a RV6?
>
>Got a local -6 pilot that swears if I don't do it now, I
>will later.
>
>I'm building a slider.
>
>Any thoughts?
>
>Larry Olson
>Cave Creek, AZ
>RV6 - Fuse out of the jig
>
It is commonly done on 6es and 6As to allow easier reaching into the baggage
area to get things while in flight or just seated in position. Seats cut
nearly flush with horizontal channel (allowing for tilt adjustment) offer
nearly the same support as full length seats.
Dennis Persyk 6A finishing kit
Hampshire, IL C38
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie and Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LIVING with aircraft batteries |
>
> >How
> >would you propose using this in the architecture you describe above? Also,
> >would you have zero battery backup for electric instruments because of the
> >dual alternators?
>
> you betcha! no need to carry lots of lead around if you have
> two engine driven power sources.
>
> Bob . . .
>
of course, in the case of engine failure, it would be nice if the flight
instruments operated long enough to get out of the clouds.....
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Nellis, Mike" <mike.nellis(at)mcd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LIVING with aircraft batteries |
I'm sure the battery will last long enough to get you safely to the
ground in the event of an engine malfunction, even with full IFR stuff
humming along.
Mike
RV6 - 699BM (reserved)
From: Charlie and Tupper England@cengland on 10/15/99 12:51 PM
To: rv-list(at)rv-list@matronics.com@SMTP@McGate
cc:
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: LIVING with aircraft batteries
>
> >How
> >would you propose using this in the architecture you describe
above? Also,
> >would you have zero battery backup for electric instruments
because of the
> >dual alternators?
>
> you betcha! no need to carry lots of lead around if you have
> two engine driven power sources.
>
> Bob . . .
>
of course, in the case of engine failure, it would be nice if the
flight
instruments operated long enough to get out of the clouds.....
Charlie
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Hamer <shamer(at)mscomm.com> |
| Subject: | [Fwd: Tail wheels] |
Here's the latest response from Owen at Andair regarding the tailwheel
situation. He's obviously going to stand behind his product which is
really no surprise.
MBOX-Line: From andair.co.uk!andair Fri Oct 15 08:47:18 1999 remote from mail
via smail with P:smtp/R:bind_hosts/T:smtp-filter
(sender: )
(Smail-3.2.0.105 1999-Mar-3 #3 built 1999-Mar-26)
From: "andair" <andair(at)andair.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Tail wheels
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 08:43:47 +0100
Dear Steve,
Thanks for doing that for us.
I'll get the tube shipped out today. As for splitting the hubs, the
first batch of 50 that we sold had white silicon to prevent water or any
other dirt getting between the rims and into the tyre. However we found that
to be unnecessary as the fit between the two rims was good enough to prevent
this anyway. So assuming that yours has been bonded with the silicon I have
found that the best way is to take all three bolts out lent insert a strong
bar of diameter of about 5/32" (4.00mm) and apply a force to the bar so that
is shears the two halves. It may take some 'wiggling' to separate them but i
have found that it works in the end. You can then carefully clean the
silicon off with a knife or just peel it off.
I hope this info helps Steve and if there's any more I can help you with
please don't hesitate to contact me.
Best Regards
Owen Phillips.
andair(at)andair.co.uk --- www.andair.co.uk
Andair Ltd.
Unit 3
25c Brockhampton Lane,
Havant
Hampshire
PO9 1JT
October 11, 1999 - October 15, 1999
RV-Archive.digest.vol-hc